D&D General Styles of Roleplaying and Characters

[Desdichado]

I didn't claim you said it was generally superior. Your choice of strong words to indicate that you think it's superior is the same problem -- you've strongly indicated that you're going to reject the concepts outright, so any discussion that's trying to look at a difference in approach isn't going to be fruitful because your answer will be no -- one approach isn't valid in your mind so why bother with differences.

eh, don't read too much into that. My wife complains about this about me a lot too. Strong words is just how I talk. Everything is dramatic and extreme and superlative. Except it's not really. I just talk that way, and I have for almost fifty years now, so I think the behavior patterns are too scarred into place to be changed at this point.

For what it's worth, I also prefer really strong flavors in my food, really strong sounds in my music, really strong action in my movies, etc. Go big or go home is just hardwired into my perception of the world.

I did say, however, that after that long of a time, I also am not very excited or fazed by novelty mechanics, among other things. Occasionally I find one that really does something really agreeable that I really like, and I look for ways to incorporate it into my other games. But mostly, I'm the kind of person who has been "over" system and mechanics for quite a long time. Decades, even, at this point. So in the sense that I'm unlikely to be "convinced"... yes, you're right. Unlikely to find the discussion interesting for people who have different perceptions of system than I do, and want different things from the game than I do? No, not at all. I like mulling over why people play the way that they do and what it does for them. Sometimes, yes—the answer is that offers me nothing at all that I would want. Most of the time, even. But not always.

 

[hawkeyefan]

@pemerton I think this is usually how my group handles these kinds of discussions. We don’t formally sit down to critique play or the game, but we do have discussions about the game and that kind of thing comes up.

In a non-D&D campaiggn I ran (for Blades in the Dark) we had a crew that was torn between two members for leadership. One was the PC Whisper (an occultist, sorcerer type) and a PC Spider (a behind the scenes mastermind). One was pushing the crew into very occult related things, and the other wanted to avoid the occult at all costs. The other PCs…and by extension all the related NPC cohorts and allies…started kind of forming sides.

We were clearly heading for some kind of confrontation or fallout. It was a lot of fun, and everyone seemed cool with how things were going….but I worried if we would cross some kind of line, and then things wouldn’t be fun for one side or the other.

So at the start of the session, I brought it up and asked everyone how they felt, what they hoped to see, what they didn’t want to see, and so on. It was a good conversation, and it allowed us to proceed from that point on firmer ground. Things were still uncertain in the fiction, but not uncertain among the players.

That’s the most significant example of such a conversation I can recall having in a while. Most of the time, this kind of stuff is just stuff discussed in small doses, usually before we start a session, or by text/chat in between sessions.

I think we’d only have a formal “meeting” if there’s a compelling reason to do so.

 

[Maxperson]

Ok, then either I'm still not understanding your answer, or you misinterpreted my last attempt to translate. (I'm not being disingenuous...I think this is interesting and I want to figure it out.)

Because the character is entirely fictitious, and in your head, I've been struggling to understand what you mean by "learn" about it. What you can learn about is where the traits you've chosen might lead in the fiction, if you commit to them and try to keep more gamist desires of you, the player, out of the equation. That it in turn might lead to an interesting and genuinely surprising portrayal of the character. Which, I suppose, must be what you mean by "learn about the character".

Is that correct?

Speaking personally I come up with somewhat detailed personalities, but those details don't nearly cover every situation. Sometimes a situation comes up in game that I hadn't really considered and doesn't fit into the traits and such that I've already come up with for my character, but if I take two or more of those set traits it sort of lends itself to a new trait or response from my PC which I had no idea about until that moment. To me that's learning about my character. I now know something new about it that I had no idea about a few moments before.

 

[Bill Zebub]

You seem to be fixated on the secret bit, but I'll try to work around it.

You asked me to engage with your examples instead of speaking in generalities, so I engaged with one of your two examples. :-(

First, I didn't say that the lifepath system was or wasn't anything, I said I didn't like it, and I don't. It is the exact disconnected random die roll telling you about your character that is often complained about, for one, and for two I really dislike how disconnected it is from anything else about the character or any other character at the table. That's how it's different for me -- it never engages with the character, it just directs. But then, paradoxically for how many think of my preferences, I dislike systems with lots of random in them.

Yeah, ok, that's what I thought and I agree. The problem with random tables is that they're...random.

I think we're getting further and further into the weeds here so I won't keep pushing. I'll just add one more thing:

I'm talking about discovering things I did not create about my character and you're talking about listing ways things are created.

Yes, there is some kind of disconnect here. I guess what I'm struggling with is that, as I see it, you can't actually discover anything about your character because your character doesn't exist. Nothing about your character is true until somebody makes it true. The only things "there" are things that are somehow created. But...so much of what you post I agree with completely, so I find it perplexing that you've completely lost me on this one aspect. And so I was trying to enumerate the ways things about your character could get created, thinking that from there we could more clearly define what you mean when you say you discover things, by starting with a common framework.

 

[Ovinomancer]

You asked me to engage with your examples instead of speaking in generalities, so I engaged with one of your two examples. :-(

Sure, I guess I see that -- kinda felt like more generalizations because you were asking questions not about how those examples worked but about something that just involved one of the bits from the examples. Also, the idea of getting a secret from a roll on a table wasn't part of my suggestions. I guess I missed this.

Yeah, ok, that's what I thought and I agree. The problem with random tables is that they're...random.

I think we're getting further and further into the weeds here so I won't keep pushing. I'll just add one more thing:



Yes, there is some kind of disconnect here. I guess what I'm struggling with is that, as I see it, you can't actually discover anything about your character because your character doesn't exist. Nothing about your character is true until somebody makes it true. The only things "there" are things that are somehow created. But...so much of what you post I agree with completely, so I find it perplexing that you've completely lost me on this one aspect. And so I was trying to enumerate the ways things about your character could get created, thinking that from there we could more clearly define what you mean when you say you discover things, by starting with a common framework.

Okay, yes, characters don't exist. But this is rather a banal point when we're talking about pretending to be elves -- hopefully we all understand they don't actually exist and instead are talking about the ways we pretend they do. And here, in this pretend land, I'm staking the claim that there's a difference between straight authorship -- where you 100% define and control your character -- and play where character is risked -- you do not always define and/or control your character. And further, that there's a distinction between expression and definition/control -- you can express something you don't have authority to control or define (this is one of the things an actor does).

So, when we get down to talking about being pretend elves, that it's make believe is given. I'm looking at how we do the pretend part.

 

[Oofta]

Sure, I guess I see that -- kinda felt like more generalizations because you were asking questions not about how those examples worked but about something that just involved one of the bits from the examples. Also, the idea of getting a secret from a roll on a table wasn't part of my suggestions. I guess I missed this.

Okay, yes, characters don't exist. But this is rather a banal point when we're talking about pretending to be elves -- hopefully we all understand they don't actually exist and instead are talking about the ways we pretend they do. And here, in this pretend land, I'm staking the claim that there's a difference between straight authorship -- where you 100% define and control your character -- and play where character is risked -- you do not always define and/or control your character. And further, that there's a distinction between expression and definition/control -- you can express something you don't have authority to control or define (this is one of the things an actor does).

So, when we get down to talking about being pretend elves, that it's make believe is given. I'm looking at how we do the pretend part.

But for a lot of us, a randomly decided reaction of what my character would think or do is not "discovering" anything other then potentially a new entry on a list. It's kind of like when you're playing a video game RPG and the cut scene comes up. It can be entertaining, annoying, exciting or boring. Sometimes the cut scene will be affected by what my PC has done, sometimes everything up to that point has no impact whatsoever. I don't know enough details about the games you've referred to, but it sounds more like the latter. In either case, having a decision of who my PC is is not why I play D&D.

I don't usually think through "how would my character react" to much of anything. I think of their background, where they came from, what happened before the campaign started, why they're risking life and limb to do stupid things like trying to stop the BBEG. Frequently that background and who the PC is will just be a starting point, the personality gets fleshed out through play.

You may not call that growth of a PC from an outline to a more filled-in person discovery, but it is one of the more rewarding parts of RP for me. Going back to Mr B, my current vengeance paladin PC, part of his background before the campaign is that he lost is (pregnant) wife and young daughter. He feels guilt because he was not there to protect them, anger because while the people that killed them were hunted down and killed - by someone else. He never had a chance to personally extract vengeance.

So let's say at some point he finds someone that has his daughter's necklace. The only way the NPC could have gotten it would have been to take it - this was someone responsible for his families death. But ... as far as Mr B can tell, the NPC has turned over a new leaf. He doesn't know who Mr B is, but truly seems remorseful and is trying to atone for past sins.

How does this get resolved? By the roll of a dice that references some chart? That to me wouldn't be "discovery". It would just be some random s**t from a chart that doesn't take into account the somewhat complex situation. It would have no meaning, no impact. On the other hand, since I've been playing Mr B, I might just react without even thinking it through, it would not be a conscious decision. I might ponder it, try to put myself in his shoes to decide how to react.

Is that "discovery"? Maybe not. But a random reaction wouldn't feel like much of anything other than a random reaction to me. Deciding what my PC would do given his background and previous actions? It's exercising my empathy muscles and creativity. It can even be somewhat revelatory. It's doing more for me than a random reaction ever could.

On the other hand if random works for you, great. I don't see how, but I'm not you. Just like you don't know what goes through the minds of other people when they're role playing their character. If "the character takes a direction I didn't expect" is the best way I can describe it, it's not up to you to dismiss it as meaningless.

 

[Campbell]

@Oofta

I have zero idea where you getting the impression that any of the games we mention have some sort of roll random mood tables. Where have you seen anything that indicates that's how this sort of stuff functions?

 

[prabe]

I think it's possible to look at a mechanic like the Stress Dice and Panic table in Alien, or the (I think) Steel check in Burning Wheel that @pemerton mentioned upthread, and see that as the dice potentially saying your character won't do that.

I think it's possible to see that as being as much authorship as deciding for yourself that your character won't do that, but it's like authorship after consulting with an oracle, like Philip K. Dick (The Man in the High Castle) or arguably some of John Cage's later stuff where he didn't so much compose music as develop systems that composed music based on variable inputs. Figuring out what it means that you failed that Steel check and won't kill the shopkeeper, or figuring out what it means that you froze and dropped your gun in the middle of a firefight, seems as though it could feel a little post hoc or rectonnish.

But no, those are not systems that involve literally randomly generating a PC's mood.

 

[pemerton]

Off the top of my head, the only system I can think of that comes close to random moods is Wuthering Heights. It's a pretty good system that is available free on line in a couple of versions (three if you can read French) and I recommend it.

 

[Desdichado]

I have zero idea where you getting the impression that any of the games we mention have some sort of roll random mood tables. Where have you seen anything that indicates that's how this sort of stuff functions?

I suppose now we get to the point where we get to hear about how the word "mood" isn't actually being used in the way that it's normally used. I was starting to miss that phase of the discussion.

Look, nobody thinks that in the kinds of games y'all are describing that your character wakes up every day, makes a roll against a mood table, the table tells him that he feels blue, so he grumbles about the sunlight, pulls the blankets over his head and goes back to sleep until noon. We all get that its specific application is more limited and specific than that. And yes, "mood table" as a label is obviously a bit flippant. But you're—literally—giving us specific examples of mechanics where you consult a table in certain circumstances to see how your character feels about something that he's trying to do to see if he's in the right mood to go through with it. Saying you have zero idea where that comes from seems like deliberate obtuseness at this point. You literally. Described a specific table. That tells you how your character feels. Based on a die roll, i.e., a random variable. It's a random mood table. (caveat: for certain uses of the word you that I can no longer remember if it refers specifically to you, or to one of the other two or three people who are advocating specifically for these kinds of mechanics in this thread.)