Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mustrum_Ridcully" data-source="post: 4327307" data-attributes="member: 710">I had similar thoughts. "Hmm, each game session is  loads of fun and entertainment. But we focus pretty much on combat. There is an interesting story around, but in the end, isn't it just there to motivate the combats?Is that really role-playing what I do? Is that how it's supposed to be played?And well, it hit me that it doesn't matter. Am I having fun? Oh yes, I do. Could some more "role-playing" be added. Sure, but don't over do it - the combat parts is fun, after all!And on the discussions around the 4E release, other posters quoted some excerpts from Gygax and older editions, and it appeared to me that yes, the role-playing part of RPGs is not just the "social interaction", it is also the combat part. A Fighter was supposed to lead his allies in combat, and if he didn't do that, he's not role-played well. The "deep immersion" thing of role-playing is something people added later. Maybe it is a refinement of what RPGs are, but maybe it's just a shift of focus, and nobody has to justify himself for not going there, and enjoy a combat heavy game. As long as the game offers a motivation and characterization for NPCs and PCs, and tells a story in the process, it's a role-playing game. It might be an "action movie" your describing and not a mystery novel or a romance, but it's still a role-playing game you play.</blockquote>