Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="robertsconley" data-source="post: 9040159" data-attributes="member: 13383">As a general description of all RPGs sure. To be clear when I say all RPG I means anything that focuses on player playing individual characters.  This includes computer RPGs, LARPS and so on. My assumption is that the focus of this thread was on tabletop RPGs, the subcategory that started with the release of OD&D in 1974. That the OP by [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER] was about why you need to have rules for tabletop RPGs.  Hence why I included what I feel is the central mechanic that all tabletop RPGs share. One of the defining characteristics of tabletop is the role of the human referee. Two things set RPGs apart with they first popped up in the 70s. The use of the human referee and the assumption that unlike wargames and boardgame, anything that the character could do in a setting could be an attempt whether there was a rule to cover it or not. This is why OD&D, Classic Traveller, and others emphasized coming up with rulings when the players wanted to do something as their character that wasn't covered by the system. My thesis has been criticized by [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER] and others for not accounting for group consensus. And my basic reply was that referees can choose to delegate this if they want.  But I admit that basically a sidestep of the larger issue which is what if steps 1 to 5 didn't involve a human referee at all. What if it they all were handled by a set of mechanics based on group consensus? Well like CRPG and LARP that would be a distinct form of Roleplaying different than what I call tabletop roleplaying.But to be clear hybrids are the norm, not the exception. So if a system mixes group consensus, group mechanics, and a human referee then likely it is a tabletop Roleplaying like D&D, Traveller, and so on. There is a reason why the authors of Blades in Dark, Dungeon World, Fate, etc. created a special referee role as part of the system rather than jettisoning it altogether.  Namely, like more traditional systems the author found that having a referee to handle certain aspects of the system and setting makes the campaign more fun and doable in the time one has for a hobby.So what you wrote is fine as a general summary of what all RPGs share. But what I wrote originally is a summary of what all tabletop RPGs share. Hope that makes sense.</blockquote>

Verification