D&D General What do you want out of your D&D/RPG games?

[Micah Sweet]

For me it's almost entirely RP. Combat is fine if the story calls for it, but to do it all the time is just wasting time.

To me it's the difference between World of Warcraft and Red Dead Redemption. In WoW if you go out in the world to get to various locations in order to find the quests (IE stories) to do... you get stopped every 50 feet by some mob running up to you and attacking for no reason other than you cared to explore off the "safe zone" of the roads.

Whereas in RDR you can go wherever the hell you want, explore the land in every direction, and never once get harassed by randos out in the wild-- up until you purposefully either attack things because you choose to, or you accept quests that have a fight as part of that quest's narrative.

Given the two... I 100% prefer the latter. If I wanted to fight combats merely for the sake of fighting combats and because combat was the raison d'etre of the game, I'd play Warhammer or Axis & Allies-- not a roleplaying game. It's in the name after all. It's called a roleplaying game for a reason, and a tactical miniatures combat simulator with a bit of 'in-character' talking game.

Roleplaying and combat are not IME mutually exclusive. Getting into a fight is what your PC is doing after all.

 

[payn]

One thing I have noticed is there is more RP in a sandbox style game then running an adventure book.

I guess the linear aspect of a published adventure causes this where as the “do whatever” in a sandbox gets them to be more in the world

I’ve actually seen quite the opposite. Sandboxes are very nebulous and folks tend to just focus on what’s immediately happening in front of them. APs are often directly tied to settings with players guides and character options that lead naturally into RP opportunities. YMMV

 

[Theory of Games]

It's never really been an issue until just recently when I had a new player express that they were unhappy that there wasn't far more RP in the sessions. Which as the DM I can accommodate but I cant make other players RP. I wouldn't want to as that reeks of forcing people to move out of a bubble they might not be comfortable in.

By the by I found that young players are more apt to just RP and RP and RP it's the adults who just want to play out a story/adventure with minimal actual RP.

I wonder if this may be influence from online games like Critical Role. I know this has been discussed before but I've never actually experienced it.

It's a playstyle thing: certain players come to the table with certain expectations of what "fun" is.

WotC identified the playstyles years ago (1999) with a player survey that opened some eyes and of course triggered a lot of debate in the ttrpg community. IME most players are a mix of playstyles rather than just being dedicated to one style of play. The survey even inspired a (very good IMO) book by Robin Laws, Robin's Laws of Good Game Mastering, which can help GMs identify players' preferred playstyles and better craft their adventures around those playstyles to enhance player enjoyment.

Robin's Laws of Good Game Mastering

Has your game got the blahs? Are your players spending more time thumbing through your book collection than hunting down clues, more energy heckling one another than in crushing their cruel foes? Never fear, o beleaguered Game Masters, for Robin D. Laws, noted game designer (Feng Shui, Hero...

warehouse23.com

So, in most groups we have had (for decades) players who prefer combat or prefer social interaction or prefer acquiring gear and treasure or prefer puzzles and planning or whatever. I've learned to incorporate a good mix (like many experienced GMs) to keep the group engaged, but there's days where players who normally enjoy social interaction "just wanna smash monsters" so of course we GMs have to be flexible - session-by-session.

I've also learned to lean on sometimes splitting the party, so players striving for different experience can have what they want simultaneously with different scenes. It's tricky because the GM has to ensure each PC faction gets their "spotlight time", but done well, it pays off. Like anything, party splits get easier with experience. I game online primarily where it's very easy to do, but managing F2F party splits aren't as difficult as some would suggest.

Random GM Tip: Splitting the Party

“Never split the party.”It’s a maxim of the roleplaying hobby.There are two primary reasons why it’s a good idea not to split the party. First, it divides the party’s strength, mak

thealexandrian.net

Personally, the rare chances I get to play, I'm looking for a faster pace adventure/campaign where my Barbie® can get the meta loadout and build their ship entourage

 

[Willie the Duck]

What do you want out of your D&D/RPG games?

Splitting it between D&D and RPGs is rather prescient. I have different goals with D&D vs. other RPGs. D&D is my 'beer and pretzel' game, and I will have a game where the goal is just to play the adventure... or just fart around as a dwarven skald... or just find out how the DM populated their valley of the Western Heffalumps... or try out a new shield & spear build...

I think the role-playing vs. combat dichotomy is a false one.

I just wish for once my players would have a conversation with each other in character. They sometimes converse in character, but only one-on-one with NPCs.

Interestingly, for me I think the in-character/first-person bit is the false dichotomy, at least with what I've observed. I've seen several players (and honestly entire groups) spend a lot of time 'roleplaying' in that they engage strongly at the 'what this character knows/feels/is-motivated-by' level, but not do so in first person/saying what the character says. Lot of "I ask the shopkeeper about getting my doublet embossed," or "my character is saving up to buy his momma a house with glass windows and (given what we did to the last town) a fireproof roof," but not a lot of in-character speaking. It might have something to do with ones comfort 'performing' -- as in, did you do any acting in high school, etc.? Other players will state out the words their characters say, but always framed with "I/my character says, '[statement]' " (or sometimes "my character goes, '[statement]' ").

 

[overgeeked]

What do you want out of your D&D/RPG games?

I want to get on with playing the game. Interacting with the environment, solving puzzles and mysteries, fighting monsters, toppling kings, taking over kingdoms, the challenge of surviving lower levels, shenanigans, earned big-damn hero moments, gonzo science-fantasy setting nonsense, random dangerous magic, to be surprised, overcoming obstacles, facing challenges, rolling dice with friends, exploring worlds, etc.

I have zero interest in RP for RP’s sake, funny voices, or shopping episodes.

 

[billd91]

I wonder if this may be influence from online games like Critical Role. I know this has been discussed before but I've never actually experienced it.

There's probably some influence of Critical Role and other streamed play games affecting the amount of roleplaying younger players want to do. But my daughter and her friends were doing it on chat servers years before Critical Role debuted. No rules, they'd just get on and role play. They were also into fanfic and other creative nerdisms, so I think that's another influence driving things.

 

[DEFCON 1]

Roleplaying and combat are not IME mutually exclusive. Getting into a fight is what your PC is doing after all.

Very true. My point is really that I prefer when combat comes out of how the roleplaying is going, not to be an activity to do in and of itself. Things happen in the narrative that might necessitate violence... that's perfectly fine... I'm down with that. But what I don't play RPGs for though is to just walk around in the world getting into fights for the sake of using game mechanics and doing fights. You know me... you know I don't give a whit about game mechanics. And that goes hand-in-hand with the idea of "character builds"... where people design their characters strictly for how best to accomplish the combat mini-game in the manner they wish to try out. I've got no interest in that either, LOL.

 

[el-remmen]

Interestingly, for me I think the in-character/first-person bit is the false dichotomy, at least with what I've observed. I've seen several players (and honestly entire groups) spend a lot of time 'roleplaying' in that they engage strongly at the 'what this character knows/feels/is-motivated-by' level, but not do so in first person/saying what the character says. Lot of "I ask the shopkeeper about getting my doublet embossed," or "my character is saving up to buy his momma a house with glass windows and (given what we did to the last town) a fireproof roof," but not a lot of in-character speaking. It might have something to do with ones comfort 'performing' -- as in, did you do any acting in high school, etc.? Other players will state out the words their characters say, but always framed with "I/my character says, '[statement]' " (or sometimes "my character goes, '[statement]' ").

I don't get why you quoted what I said, which had nothing to do with 1st vs. 3rd person role-playing/expression.

 

[Willie the Duck]

I don't get why you quoted what I said, which had nothing to do with 1st vs. 3rd person role-playing/expression.

In the end, just the term 'false dichotomy.'

I was going to say more about combat vs. RP, but ran out of time.

 

[BruceWright]

Interestingly, for me I think the in-character/first-person bit is the false dichotomy, at least with what I've observed.

for me it’s not the first person vs third person thing. That would be great if they’d third person any interaction with each other outside of game mechanics.

I’d love it if one character merely had something they wanted, liked or disliked about another character. It’s not about the funny voices or even the first vs third person.

It’s that the characters as characters only interact with the world as characters, and never each other as characters.