So What is a Roleplaying Game? Forked Thread: Clark Peterson on 4E

[jdrakeh]

Because Diaglo presents his criticisms with some style and panache rather than as rather blatant "your doing it wrong" crap.

Actually, I think it's because diaglo makes productive contributions to the site despite his rare, tongue-in-cheek, "d02 sucks!" post (he's even an ENnies judge by golly). I'm sure that if diaglo were a former WotC freelancer who posted nothing but vitriol-laden screeds aimed at his former employer, their products, and anybody who purchases those products, he'd be just as unpopular as Darrin is.

 

[Umbran]

Actually...

... I would have expected one moderator warning to be sufficient to keep people from getting personal and insulting. Apparently it was not.

Do not go farther down this road. We expect folks here to be on their best behavior from this point on. Consider this the final warning.

 

[BryonD]

In my opinion, there are simply two things that make up a roleplaying game, and they have both been mentioned above:

I completely agree with you that these two elements are all that is needed to meet the minimum definition of a role playing game.

But, personally, I want a hell of a lot more than minimum.

 

[jdrakeh]

... I would have expected one moderator warning to be sufficient to keep people from getting personal and insulting. Apparently it was not.

Do not go farther down this road. We expect folks here to be on their best behavior from this point on. Consider this the final warning.

In fairness, Darrin did very specifically ask why he was the target of intense dislike while diaglo was not.

Have I insulted you or anyone else here personally? I think the only thing I'm saying is that a game system, in my opinion, sucks. Why all the ire? I don't seem to remember the same rage aimed at Diaglo?

If Darrin doesn't want questions answered, he shouldn't ask them.

 

[Darrin Drader]

In fairness, Darrin did very specifically ask why he was the target of intense dislike while diaglo was not.


If Darrin doesn't want questions answered, he shouldn't ask them.

For what it's worth, I take no offense to your comments, nor do I see any point in continuing to offer my opinion on the game. What's the point in fighting something that's not going to change? I've picked my system of choice and there are a lot of other RPGs out there that I find fun. It's simply time for me to leave D&D in the rearview mirror.

A favor to the mods, if there are any future outbursts of opinion from me on this subject, please feel free to ban me from those threads with prejudice.

 

[Simon Atavax]

Because Diaglo presents his criticisms with some style and panache rather than as rather blatant "your doing it wrong" crap.

You know, no one loves Diaglo more than me, but typing "OD&D is the one true game. All the others are pale imitations of the real thing" over and over and over isn't exactly "style and panache."

EDIT: Given some of the tension in this thread, I thought I'd add a few more

 

[cangrejoide]

Well trying to get back on topic:

This is definition from a Wiki-

A role-playing game (RPG; often roleplaying game) is a game in which the participants assume the roles of fictional characters. Participants determine the actions of their characters based on their characterization, and the actions succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines. Within the rules, players can improvise freely; their choices shape the direction and outcome of the games.

I like this one and I think it satisfies everything I know about RPGs.


Rpgs have a very broad definition of rules , heck there was an RPG designed under de D02 system.

Under this is 4E an RPG?

Yes it is.

 

[xechnao]

my answer is here:

http://www.enworld.org/forum/genera...players-not-characters-stats.html#post4498843

I believe grognards are missing a point here. The answer to this problem with one word is exploration. Of course the things you want to explore while playing with your friends a roleplaying game have to not be decidable in the game world through the rules and only -thus things that relate on the players' decisions.
Skill abilities are what needs to be decidable in the game world to describe possible paths of exploration in that game world. You either have an ability or a level of an ability or you do not. If you do not you can still explore but through a different path which eventualy will lead to a different exporation. So, eventually the only thing skills do is help you create paths in the game world. Without them you will still have to create these paths and that might be problematic if not established before gameplay.

 

[GlaziusF]

I do not understand how your dismissal above links to what you are saying about the rules of roleplaying games.
What I was trying to say is that more realistic game rules than d&d could be made without being more complex by a game designer that wants to do it and has the bit of imagination and patience needed to develop such a system.

More options mean more complexity. And you've said that a more realistic game would involve having different options for your attack based on what kind of enemy you were fighting, instead of the two options for everything that we have now.

There's really no way around it. It might be possible to make the options so "natural" that they might easily jump to mind, not that much harder than the two options we have now. But still harder.

 

[xechnao]

More options mean more complexity.

Nope. More options do not mean more complexity. One can have an infinite set of options to pick up from yet no operations to do at all.

And you've said that a more realistic game would involve having different options for your attack based on what kind of enemy you were fighting, instead of the two options for everything that we have now.

Hmm, you are thinking d&d. I am thinking in a more generic fashion. Anyway I am not sure about what two options you are talking about.
Options may very well be two per character but still realistically connect (for example fight or flight). The important thing for the success of connection is the analysis of these options. Analysis for example of what may happen when you face a big guy or a small guy or something else. Options available for choice may still be only two though. I am not saying they should, I am just saying they could and still manage to depict a system that realistically connects. So it is not just a matter of the number of options. A system OTOH may have infinite options to chose from and yet not connect at all.

There's really no way around it. It might be possible to make the options so "natural" that they might easily jump to mind, not that much harder than the two options we have now. But still harder.

I really do not know what exactly you are talking about. I think the problem is that you are constructing your ideas using tools or materials you have known from d&d. You have to forget about these tools, see what you want to construct, then create the most appropriate tools which may be a totaly different thing.