Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Simon T. Vesper" data-source="post: 7402052" data-attributes="member: 6949304">This may have already been addressed ~ there being 2,048 posts in the past three months ~ and if it has, my apologies for adding to the noise.My take is a bit different.The contemporary take on the game is... well, I don't want to say 'misguided,' but I'm struggling to find a less controversial way to put it.Yes, players aren't necessarily playing for the sole purpose of exploring a dungeon. No, there isn't a clear win condition like there used to be. I agree with these things because they are self-evident in nearly all versions of the game. Where I diverge is the view that players are &quot;expected to develop&quot; their characters, in terms of motivation, personality, likes/dislikes, etc.In other words, I understand the contemporary view to be that we're playing a story-telling game and the players are expected to perform as actors, adopting the role of their character's personality, as though on a stage or something.I don't think this is the purpose of the game. The purpose is to adopt a role ~ typically one that can be summed up in a few words, like &quot;elven wizard,&quot; or &quot;deposed dwarven noble&quot; ~ to identify goals for one's self and one's adventuring party, and then to try and achieve those goals in the context of the game's setting (with the DM serving as both arbiter and adversary). Role-playing in the sense of acting, character development and identification with your character are things that happen naturally as a byproduct of being human; and they are a compelling draw to the game because of how that identification makes us feel when we take risks and either succeed or fail; but the purpose of the game is to challenge ourselves and take those risks in the first place.In that context, world-building provides the DM with a pool of resources to draw upon in order to present an engaging and challenging environment to the players.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Simon T. Vesper, post: 7402052, member: 6949304"] This may have already been addressed ~ there being 2,048 posts in the past three months ~ and if it has, my apologies for adding to the noise. My take is a bit different. The contemporary take on the game is... well, I don't want to say 'misguided,' but I'm struggling to find a less controversial way to put it. Yes, players aren't necessarily playing [I]for the sole purpose[/I] of exploring a dungeon. No, there isn't a clear win condition like there used to be. I agree with these things because they are self-evident in nearly all versions of the game. Where I diverge is the view that players are "expected to develop" their characters, in terms of motivation, personality, likes/dislikes, etc. In other words, I understand the contemporary view to be that we're playing a story-telling game and the players are expected to perform as actors, adopting the role of their character's personality, as though on a stage or something. I don't think this is the purpose of the game. The purpose is to adopt a role ~ typically one that can be summed up in a few words, like "elven wizard," or "deposed dwarven noble" ~ to identify goals for one's self and one's adventuring party, and then to try and achieve those goals in the context of the game's setting (with the DM serving as both arbiter and adversary). Role-playing in the sense of acting, character development and identification with your character are things that happen naturally as a byproduct of being human; and they are a compelling draw to the game because of how that identification makes us feel when we take risks and either succeed or fail; but the [I]purpose[/I] of the game is to challenge ourselves and take those risks in the first place. In that context, world-building provides the DM with a pool of resources to draw upon in order to present an engaging and challenging environment to the players. [/QUOTE]

Verification