When the system gets in the way

[Wik]

So, I've been in the dumps lately concerning RPG's. It seems like I spend so much time worrying about character builds and monster books, and other stat-related aspects of the game, that there isn't a whole lot of role-playing going on. Our group consists of two people who will use the rules to make strong characters (one uses whatever feats look best; the other tends to just focus on things that are "cool" but often just a bit broken), and two who are more into just playing the game.

Which makes for a character inbalance in power, and generally just leads to all sorts of trouble.

Anyways, I keep finding that everytime I play the d20 system, things digress more into stats and "give me a spot check" over anything else. My "let's wing it" style has given way to making stat block after stat block, etc...

So, in the hope of fixing things, I switched systems this week. As of this week, our group started playing in West End Games' d6 system.

Within minutes we had created characters, and I was able to explain the rules basics to the group quickly and painlessly. Everyone got the gist of it, after we ran a "mock combat" that got everyone understanding the game's (incredibly easy) dice mechanics.

Since I was eager to get more into role-playing, I made a conscious effort to get people creating interesting characters who were logically connected to one another, and the group was more than willing to do this. Within about five minutes we had "Flak" - a redneck mechanic who likes his guns and explosions; "joe the hitman", a quiet and brooding man with a quirky name who pretty much oozes evil; "Taint", an escaped mental patient who is deadly with his knives, although he's something of a drug addict; and "Julianna", a 15-year old hacker chick who grew up on the streets (and is, curiously enough, the group's unofficial leader).

Within the first session, players were talking in character, taking crazy actions that they would never attempt in D&D (mostly because I think they know there would be a rule or skill check to cover it that deters them from taking the chance), and doing bad things simply because "it's what my character would do".

In short, they were role-playing a HELLUVA LOT MORE.

Now, my question here: do you people find that some systems allow for role-playing better than others? Do you find that D&D gets in the way of role-playing, that you have to pay conscious attention to the rules of the game, and that this gets in the way of your role-playing experience? And, if you do find some systems work really well for role-playing, what systems?

I'm a little curious. This has been a huge eye-opening experience, and I'm still incredibly excited about role-playing again after wednesday night's game, which is something I haven't felt in years.

 

[Wik]

P.S. I'm not here to bad mouth D&D. I like D&D, and I'm hoping that after playing d6 for a few months, it will make me feel more comfortable with RPing in a D&D world. But as it stands now, when I'm running in D&D, things get a lot more difficult for me, and my players tend to look at their characters as a collection of numbers. Fact of the matter is, wednesday, everyone was referring to their characters by their character's names; when we play D&D, most people can't even remember their own characters name.

 

[Treebore]

Its why I play C&C.

 

[Lord Ipplepop]

I can see how people might feel that the d20 system inhibits role playing; however our group had absolutely no challenge with it at all. Within our group, we have three main players who grew up role playing as opposed to roll playing, and practically insist on opportunities for it. We have two other players who also enjoy the role playing aspect of the game. Added in to the mix are three kids who are just getting comfortable with the system, and are beginning to see how not killing things can be fun, another kid who has no challenge with role playing as long as it doesn't keep us from engaging in combat for more than 5 minutes, and an adult who- last weekend- played her first session, and has absolutely no clue as to what the hell is going on.
We recently started a DM converted Temple of Elelmental Evil campaign, and have done relatively few die rolls in the first two sessions. My character is a bard/thief, who also happens to own a few of the caravans that are being ambushed in and around Hommlet. Most of my time is spent attempting to get information as to just what in the name of Odin's Left Kneecap happened to my money. We tend to play Saturdays from 4 until ?, and occasionally Sunday from 12 until ?, every other week. Both sessions of the new campaign, we have had a grand total of one combat situation each session (not including the barfight that a drunk town member started with one of our players that was over too quickly). The rest of the time was spent interacting with the people of Hommlet.
I guess this rant is basically saying that if you want to act ,then the D&D system allows you that opportunity. If you want to kick butt and chew bubble gum (whether you are out of bubble gum or not), then you can also accomplish that. It all depends on how the DM runs the game.

 

[Hussar]

Wut Lord Ipplepop said.

I've run three campaigns under 3.5 rules and played in two more. I've had pretty heavy hack campaigns like my current World's Largest Dungeon (actually, as an asside, I've been surprised at how much rp there actually is) all the way to an almost entirely rp game where the party advanced three levels in about a year of play.

It's really what you make of it. If a different system worked for you, then, by all means, spread the love.

 

[Philotomy Jurament]

I think the system makes a difference. That's not to say you can't have satisfying role-playing with d20, because obviously you can. However, some systems seem to encourage one style of play or another for a given group, and if you find a system that works well for your group and makes the game more fun, then by all means stick with it.

I've recently shifted away from d20 and towards lighter systems, for pretty much the same reasons you give. We tried out True20, Castles & Crusades, Lejendary Adventure, and Savage Worlds. Both C&C and LA hit the sweet spot, for us, and we've switched our main game over to C&C, with a secondary campaign (used when some people can't make it, et cetera) in Lejendary Adventure. It's revitalized our gaming: we get more done during the session, prep time is quicker for me, and the players have been enjoying the freedom they have. It took them a little bit to adjust; at first they kept looking at their sheets to "see what they could do," but it didn't take them long to pull their thinking away from the lists and numbers on the sheet (since there just isn't that much there, compared to d20).

Might not be the same (or necessary) for every group, but our group benefitted from the change.

 

[Herobizkit]

I hear ya.

Something happened to me when I switched up from AD&D2 to 3; I suddenly became much more concerned with stupid things like "challenge rating", "game balance", "move five feet and shoot", and countless other minutiae that I just handwaived in the previous version. Try as I might, I'm locked into needing to know the stats of every monster and NPC my player will encounter, and I'm painfully checking to make sure I'm using creatures that aren't too tough for his level...

Somewhere, I've forgotten how to tell stories in a dynamic, fun way with little to no worrie s about "the Rules".

I've considered trying on True20/Blue Rose, but I think I'm planning a shift to d20 Modern. I may still go True20/Mutants and Masterminds for that route, but for the amount of time I actually play, it's not worth learning or trying to teach a new system.

Bleh.

 

[Deuce Traveler]

It is the way the game is designed. The 3.5 skills system adds an extra flavor to the game, but also limits role-playing by design. Instead of putting the player on the spot to come up with a clever dialogue to bluff past the guards, the player now can say "I bluff past the guards by saying I'm a messenger from the king", then rolls the dice.

Also, the characters are extremely more powerful than in past versions of DnD. This causes the players to spend less time coming up with a complicated plan to even the score, and more time buffing themselves with magic before wading in for the kill.

There less of a focus in these core books on characters training to gain the abilities of the next level, investigating clues for a quest, finding sages to identify magical items, building strongholds, social standing in their country of residence, etc. This is addressed in books other than the core, however.

To create characters and monsters the computation has gotten so complex that you need a computer program to help now, which reduces DM time for role-play creativity when preparing a game.

Although I love the flexibility and detail that 3.5 brings to the table, it is definitely designed more for the power gamer than for the role-player.

 

[Nebulous]

Although I love the flexibility and detail that 3.5 brings to the table, it is definitely designed more for the power gamer than for the role-player.

I agree completely, and this is also why i prefer to run relatively low level 3.5 games. You're already powerful, and by 10th level you are wading in an ocean of your fallen foes. Taking it slow and sure at lower levels, is for me anyway, more satisfying before the number crunching gets totally out of control.

But the myriad "numbers" in D&D IS part of the appeal to people. Gaining control and understanding over that system is more fun to some people that roleplaying. I'm sort of in the middle myself.

 

[Jürgen Hubert]

I think D&D, by itself, works reasonably well at low level.

But at higher levels, it becomes cumbersome, especially for spellcasters. There is just too much to keep track of. Which type of bonus does what? What 50 spells am I going to prepare today? In the end, it becomes more of a chore than fun.

Another problem are all those additional rule books out there. New prestige classes, new feats, new types of stackable bonuses, new types of spells. Who has time for all these, really? Not the DM, in all likelihood.

I think D&D has been trying to hard to cover every possibly niche and character concept with its rules - and that's not something it was designed for. No, D&D works best and easiest when you concentrate on a few strong character archetypes, like the classes in the Core Rules. If you want to play a game with which you can truly create any possible character concept, then play a game that was designed for that from the ground up, like Mutants & Masterminds or GURPS.

D&D is a very fine role-playing game. But it doesn't work for everything, and I think it is important that people realize that.