D&D General The adventure game vs the role-playing game

[payn]

The groups I run are much more on the Roleplaying side rather than the Adventure side because I find character comes out of personality, needs, wants, desires, rather than numbers. That's part of the reason why 3E and Pathfinder's "options" are to me the biggest misnomer there is. "Options" I can select to make my numbers bigger are not helping me to "define" my character or "play" my character.

My Pathfinder character I'm currently playing has selected as his last four feats Dodge, Toughness, Iron Will, and Arcane Strike. Thus... my ability to "create the character I wanted" raised my AC by 1, my HP by a half-dozen, my Fortitude save by 2, and my weapon damage by 1. That's it. A bunch of numbers got bumped up. But now that I've written these numbers down on my sheet... I completely forget while I'm playing that my character is supposedly tougher and can dodge, and his weapon is slightly magical. Why? Because all of those bigger numbers could have come from dozens of different sources, so there's literally no difference between me taking the Dodge feat or me just using a larger shield. No matter which way I went, my "character" is in no ways different as a person, just the number is higher.

And since so much of the Adventure part of the game is just adding and subtracting numbers, that "board game" aspect of D&D certainly has a place, but I just don't hang my hat on it. Because I find there to be dozens of better "board games" out there that I could play instead if the Adventure was all I cared about... and it's only the Roleplaying layered on top of the board game that makes D&D what it is.

Depending on how you look at it, one of the biggest issues with 3E/PF was taking background, skills, and combat options and putting them all in the same bucket to compete (feats). This put the adventure game and the role playing game against each other instead of allowing them to live in tandem. PF2 separated the buckets, but then turned background and skills into a gamey system like combat so it might work better for some than others as an answer to the perceived problem.

This is what I was getting at as to the impact of system on the gamers at the table. I know some folks have been at this for a very long time and their group all gets exactly what they want, but in my experience thats rare and you should be super thankful.

 

[werecorpse]

I have noticed this as well. I still basically play with the same people I played with back in the day. I acknowledge that our games are more adventure games than roleplay. That’s our style. I’m one of the group who would prefer a bit more roleplay stuff but am still no more that 60/40 adventure vs roleplay style.

I think the D&D system, and level based systems generally, are designed to lean more towards an adventure style game rather than some other systems, particularly skill based systems.

Having said that some of the more popular online games like critical role play d&d in a more roleplay heavy style than almost any table I’ve been at so the level based system certainly doesn’t prevent heavy roleplay.

 

[payn]

I have noticed this as well. I still basically play with the same people I played with back in the day. I acknowledge that our games are more adventure games than roleplay. That’s our style. I’m one of the group who would prefer a bit more roleplay stuff but am still no more that 60/40 adventure vs roleplay style.

I think the D&D system, and level based systems generally, are designed to lean more towards an adventure style game rather than some other systems, particularly skill based systems.

Having said that some of the more popular online games like critical role play d&d in a more roleplay heavy style than almost any table I’ve been at so the level based system certainly doesn’t prevent heavy roleplay.

Yes, this exactly. Just because a system leans towards one style over another doesn't mean it cant facilitate both.

 

[Oofta]

I prefer a healthy mix as well. Depending on my mood it might lean a little bit to the adventure game side of things, but it really depends on the quality of the RP. I don't want to have to bargain for every loaf of bread my PC buys. At the same time even in games that are more adventure based (I'm looking at you AL) I tend to compensate a bit by having more outgoing PCs and try to "find" RP opportunities.

While the rules of the game are not be heavily RP based, that just means that the RP aspects are left more free-form and up to the group.

 

[Charlaquin]

I don't think there's really any trade-off here. One really can have a good "adventure game" with plenty of acting and portrayal of the adventurers' personal characteristics. There's no need to choose one or the other.

I don’t disagree, but I suspect what @pumasleeve is calling “roleplaying” you would call “interviewing quirky, cagey NPCs” and agree conflicts with adventuring.

 

[DemoMonkey]

The real question is not what to do when you have groups interested in A and bored by B, and another group interested in B and bored by A. The most practical solution to that is to organize your groups so that they are homogenously one type or the other.

No, the REAL question is ... what has happened to all the players that enjoy both equally? Is the polarization getting more extreme, and if so, why?

 

[Charlaquin]

The real question is not what to do when you have groups interested in A and bored by B, and another group interested in B and bored by A. The most practical solution to that is to organize your groups so that they are homogenously one type or the other.

No, the REAL question is ... what has happened to all the players that enjoy both equally? Is the polarization getting more extreme, and if so, why?

I don’t think it is. I think D&D is reaching a wider audience with more diverse tastes, and we are finding it easier to connect with that larger audience and find people whose tastes are similar to our own. I also think most people would say they enjoy both equally, but everyone has a different idea of what “both equally” would look like.

 

[Oofta]

The real question is not what to do when you have groups interested in A and bored by B, and another group interested in B and bored by A. The most practical solution to that is to organize your groups so that they are homogenously one type or the other.

No, the REAL question is ... what has happened to all the players that enjoy both equally? Is the polarization getting more extreme, and if so, why?

I think there are extremes at either end, but it's likely a typical bell curve with most people wanting a middle ground. Of course, the people I play with are selected from people that were into the RP aspects of the game.

After I last moved and had to find a new group I specifically stated that I ran a game with a healthy mix and wasn't into hack-and-slash. It took no time to get a group together.

 

[iserith]

I don’t disagree, but I suspect what @pumasleeve is calling “roleplaying” you would call “interviewing quirky, cagey NPCs” and agree conflicts with adventuring.

That may well be the case.

I think ultimately there are a couple of issues that are at play. For players that seem to want to eschew combat, it's often because the combats have no compelling stakes and are otherwise boring due to how the DM runs them and how sluggishly the players resolve their turns. I've said this before, but the DM really needs to pay attention to the play loop during play and especially during combat. If the DM doesn't do that, it is very much like ordering at a deli - "Number 43, you're up!" - followed by the player asking 20 questions to stall because he or she wasn't paying attention then finally getting around to attacking (and missing, because of course), followed by the DM calling for Number 44.

Contrast that with a DM who is following the play loop, describing pithily at the start of the turn any changes to the unfolding drama, then asking with a sense of urgency "What do you do?" Combine that with players who know that the faster they resolve their own turns, the faster their next turn comes back around and suddenly combat isn't boring. Particularly if the players actually care about the stakes.

For players that seem to want to eschew "roleplaying," which as you suggest is not a good word for what they're likely actually wanting to avoid, it's often because there are no stakes to the scene. How many awkward "Gettin' Ta Know Ya" scenes or scenes involving ordering breakfast in a tavern while trying to have a conversation with the edgelord PC is a person expected to endure before they are fully justified in burning the whole place down just to get to something interesting? How many quirky, cagey NPCs do we have to interview to find the damn adventure? A lot of DMs don't know when to move on from these scenes, just like a lot of people don't know when a conversation is over. Those that do know these things can have fun interactions in their games in which players can portray their characterizations while getting the necessary flavor and exposition without it dragging on forever, plus they can present compelling exploration or social interaction challenges that would have even the combat-centric players wanting to engage. Particularly if there's an incentive like Inspiration for portraying personal characteristics.

This isn't hard to do, but admittedly, it may be difficult for some folks to change. We really can have it all though.

 

[payn]

No, the REAL question is ... what has happened to all the players that enjoy both equally? Is the polarization getting more extreme, and if so, why?

Looking back, I dont think there ever was a majority in any direction. It was less obvious because the player who didnt like the balance of the game would either, stick with it because they enjoy the company, or they would derail the game through character play. Folks just learned to adapt to their available player pool.

Now, there is online and organized play that has expanded everyone's player pool. Its more obvious that style difference are there, folks spend less time on adaption and compromise, and more time jumping ship until they find the right fit.