Suggestions for a "what are RPGs"/"how to play RPGs" resources

[gorice]

Another quick comment: you can see my influences pretty directly when I write about the conversation. That's the main way you play my game. It's honestly how I play almost every RPG both as a player and as a GM. I didn't think this was a controversial point, but I was involved in a thread where this style of play was antithetical to how that GM ran their games. Learn something every day.

Wait, there are people who roleplay without talking to each other? Or even writing messages?

 

[SteveC]

Wait, there are people who roleplay without talking to each other? Or even writing messages?

I was never able to actually determine how this worked, but I think it was largely the GM would tell players things and direct them about what was happening. Questions, and back and forth conversation, were discouraged. I ... let's just leave it at that's not how I like to play RPGs, and I never really got a good explanation about it, so I don't want to be too much of an unreliable narrator.

 

[pemerton]

@SteveC

Another voice in favour of telling people how to play your game

In trying to write that, you'll probably discover that you haven't actually specified all the procedures and principles for your game - there'll be stuff that you've taken for granted. So the discipline of trying to write clear instructional text is likely to help you actually improve your design.

Also, and a bit related: if you don't know it, I think Baker's stuff on "boxes, clouds and arrows" is pretty fundamental, and also his stuff on "character sheets". Here are some links (not exhaustive):

anyway: 3 Resolution Systems

anyway: Things on Character Sheets

anyway: Things on Character Sheets (2)

 

[kenada]

I’m not actually planning to do this in my game. I plan to explain how to play it, and that should be sufficient. If not, then I shall clarify until it is.

 

[SteveC]

In trying to write that, you'll probably discover that you haven't actually specified all the procedures and principles for your game - there'll be stuff that you've taken for granted. So the discipline of trying to write clear instructional text is likely to help you actually improve your design.

This is a really good point! For me, I'm doing my own RPG because I think I have something to contribute to gaming, that I haven't seen before. With this section, I don't want to put it in the game unless it's something I can bring to the table that's interesting. But of course, when you describe a thing, you tell people what you think that thing is. And then they get to determine if your game actually does the stuff it's talking about doing. So along those lines, it is important.

 

[aramis erak]

This is a really good point! For me, I'm doing my own RPG because I think I have something to contribute to gaming, that I haven't seen before. With this section, I don't want to put it in the game unless it's something I can bring to the table that's interesting. But of course, when you describe a thing, you tell people what you think that thing is. And then they get to determine if your game actually does the stuff it's talking about doing. So along those lines, it is important.

Just be warned: there are over 11,000. RPGs in existence, of which maybe 1000 to 2500 are new editions of older ones (based upon the RPGG database). The odds are really strong that someone else put those same concepts together before you.

Most of those have been in the "beer money" level of success.

Not saying you shouldn't go forward; just understand that there's a good chance you're not the only one with that combination, and someone will note the similarity to some game maybe a thousand have played... So don't take it personal if that happens.

 

[Emberashh]

Has one ever wondered why boardgames don't go out of their way to explain what boardgames are in every rulebook? Thats a rhetorical question, as they don't because people understand that common knowledge.

Hence the general advice that this kind of page space is better spent defining the object of your specific game.

 

[SteveC]

Just be warned: there are over 11,000. RPGs in existence, of which maybe 1000 to 2500 are new editions of older ones (based upon the RPGG database). The odds are really strong that someone else put those same concepts together before you.

I think I definitely misspoke if I gave the impression that I was going to do anything genuinely new, or that I was going to set the world on fire. I am firmly of the belief that there's nothing new under the sun as far as RPGs go. What can be different is how you assemble the different components, and how you present it. I'm putting my inspirations directly in the game for everyone to see so that you can go and look at other games for a different take on things if you like something I do but not everything.

And I'm not quitting my day job. I'm quite fortunate in being in a stable job with a great boss and I can do this for fun. I think there will be some folks on Enworld who would like what I'm doing and many who wouldn't, so I'll definitely be sharing here but also not expecting anyone to want to abandon 5E or something.

It's funny. My dad was an economist who told me that the vast majority of writers live below poverty. He told me that they didn't even have a category for game designers. But he also encouraged me to write and design.

 

[GMMichael]

Has one ever wondered why boardgames don't go out of their way to explain what boardgames are in every rulebook? Thats a rhetorical question, as they don't because people understand that common knowledge.

That's a good point, but my copyright-1980 dictionary uses pages to describe what it is and how to use it, and knowledge of how to use a dictionary was much more common back then than it is now. Plus, dictionaries had been around for centuries.

Let's add: some other books in the 1980s had what-is-role-playing sections. That didn't stop bored house parents from thinking that the books were cult recruitment tools. Had (when?) the issue gone in front of a judge, I expect the what-is-role-playing section would be an important part in establishing an author's case that she's not out to turn the nation's reading youth into Satan-worshipping, spasmic-dancing, midriff-baring, empty-air-conversing . . . oh no! It's happening!

 

[Emberashh]

That's a good point, but my copyright-1980 dictionary uses pages to describe what it is and how to use it, and knowledge of how to use a dictionary was much more common back then than it is now. Plus, dictionaries had been around for centuries.

Let's add: some other books in the 1980s had what-is-role-playing sections. That didn't stop bored house parents from thinking that the books were cult recruitment tools. Had (when?) the issue gone in front of a judge, I expect the what-is-role-playing section would be an important part in establishing an author's case that she's not out to turn the nation's reading youth into Satan-worshipping, spasmic-dancing, midriff-baring, empty-air-conversing . . . oh no! It's happening!

Well, I think the dictionary comparison is weak given its explicit purpose as an educational tool, and RPGs in the 80s were only 7 years out from the genesis of the hobby as we know it.

Chances are, given the state of the hobby, unless you know your book is going to be available on a shelf at Walmart or Target, anybody picking it up already understands what RPGs are in the broad strokes.

But even then, its probably still wise to spend these pages contextualizing that explanation to the game rather than trying to speak broadly about the hobby before you introduce your game.

Plus, the Satanic Panic wouldn't have been prevented by the inclusion of these sections anyway because that assumes the people driving those panics could read. In 2024, over half of Americans are barely literate, and half of them are functionally illiterate.

I'd be surprised if this wasn't worse in the 80s despite a cultural memory otherwise.