Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 9611289" data-attributes="member: 7006">Oh absolutely!&nbsp; I do not dispute the notion that many players enjoy RPGs (and D&amp;D and its derivatives especially) as ostensibly just as board games with a bit of player imagination thrown in for flavor.&nbsp; RPGs sit on the number line between &quot;board game&quot; at one end and &quot;free-form improvisation&quot; at the other.&nbsp; And depending on one's interest... you can play games that fall anywhere on that line.&nbsp; Heck, people will sometimes play Monopoly or Clue as a &quot;roleplaying game&quot; by taking on a character and acting as that character as they play.&nbsp; When I ran an online Diplomacy game, all the negotiation was done between players talking &quot;in character&quot; the entire time.&nbsp; So these games ostensibly became one-shot RPGs.And D&amp;D absolutely can be played in that way too.&nbsp; That's why there have been several attempts in years/editions past at translating the combat portion of D&amp;D into actual tactical miniature games and authentic board games... by removing the whole &quot;in-character&quot; part of it and just offering the dice rolling mechanics as the premise of play.But from that point, one can slowly move down that number line by beginning to add bits and pieces of &quot;free form improv&quot;.&nbsp; Players narrating ideas of where their character is walking, rather than merely counting squares on a board.&nbsp; Players coming up with and saying dialogue that hasn't been pre-written by the rules of the game for them to &quot;say&quot;.&nbsp;&nbsp; So on and so forth, heading to the far end when everything is entirely made up by individual participant and there's no &quot;rules&quot; to speak of (other than standard &quot;rules of agreement&quot; for cohesive adult interaction.)I just happen to be of the belief that of the two ends-- boards games and free-form improvisation-- that when kids and/or adults get together as a group at someone's house to entertain themselves for the evening... it is a much easier sell to suggest and accomplish playing a board game than it is to do free-form improvisation.&nbsp; Which means for most people, RPGs are really the only way to even come close to moving even slightly down that number line.&nbsp; And thus my argument has always been &quot;If a person wanted to play a board game they could easily just get together with friends to play any number of&nbsp; board games.&nbsp; So if they instead have chosen to play an RPG instead of a board game... to me it's because they want to move down the number line.&quot;&nbsp; So at that point, why bother keeping one hand gripped so tightly on the board game end, rather than just letting go of it and then start gently sliding further and further down the line towards the other end just to see how it goes?&nbsp; And there are any number of RPGs that can lead you and guide you forward down that line.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="DEFCON 1, post: 9611289, member: 7006"] Oh absolutely! I do not dispute the notion that many players enjoy RPGs (and D&D and its derivatives especially) as ostensibly just as board games with a bit of player imagination thrown in for flavor. RPGs sit on the number line between "board game" at one end and "free-form improvisation" at the other. And depending on one's interest... you can play games that fall anywhere on that line. Heck, people will sometimes play [I]Monopoly[/I] or [I]Clue[/I] as a "roleplaying game" by taking on a character and acting as that character as they play. When I ran an online [I]Diplomacy[/I] game, all the negotiation was done between players talking "in character" the entire time. So these games ostensibly became one-shot RPGs. And D&D absolutely can be played in that way too. That's why there have been several attempts in years/editions past at translating the combat portion of D&D into actual tactical miniature games and authentic board games... by removing the whole "in-character" part of it and just offering the dice rolling mechanics as the premise of play. But from that point, one can slowly move down that number line by beginning to add bits and pieces of "free form improv". Players narrating ideas of where their character is walking, rather than merely counting squares on a board. Players coming up with and saying dialogue that hasn't been pre-written by the rules of the game for them to "say". So on and so forth, heading to the far end when everything is entirely made up by individual participant and there's no "rules" to speak of (other than standard "rules of agreement" for cohesive adult interaction.) I just happen to be of the belief that of the two ends-- boards games and free-form improvisation-- that when kids and/or adults get together as a group at someone's house to entertain themselves for the evening... it is a much easier sell to suggest and accomplish playing a board game than it is to do free-form improvisation. Which means for most people, RPGs are really the only way to even come close to moving even slightly down that number line. And thus my argument has always been "If a person wanted to play a board game they could easily just get together with friends to play any number of board games. So if they instead have chosen to play an RPG [I]instead[/I] of a board game... to me it's because they [I]want[/I] to move down the number line." So at that point, why bother keeping one hand gripped so tightly on the board game end, rather than just letting go of it and then start gently sliding further and further down the line towards the other end just to see how it goes? And there are any number of RPGs that can lead you and guide you forward down that line. [/QUOTE]

Verification