Worlds of Design: Doing it All Over Again

Do overs are common in video games. But can they work in role-playing games?

How often has your group declared a "do over" for a game?


Do overs are common in video games. But can they work in role-playing games?

rewind.jpg

Do Overs in TV & Film​

I recently watched a featurette on the excellent TV show “Elementary” (Sherlock Holmes in modern day, Dr. Watson a woman). They mentioned that inexperienced directors sometimes shoot too many takes. What are those directors looking for?

Consider how professional actors do things in TV and film. They are used to multiple takes. During the Lord of the Rings movie shooting, Ian Holm (Bilbo) taught Ian McKellan (then a famous stage actor) to do the scene differently each time, so the director could choose the one he preferred. Evidently, it isn’t always done this way. Sylvester Stallone was surprised that Jean Claude Van Damme (evidently a better actor than he’s often given credit for) did a scene very differently each take in Expendables 2.

Directors are effectively doing the scene over and over to find the best result. A director who works quickly, like Clint Eastwood, does fewer takes than most, but everyone does multiple takes. Yet multiple takes - do-overs - aren’t available on stage or in writing.

Do Overs in Board and Card Games​

Go back far enough in history and prehistory, and the only games in existence were athletic events, and board games. There were no do-overs there! (Yes, you can play a board game again, or run a race again, but that’s not a do-over, that’s playing another time starting from scratch.) When playing cards became durable enough to become widespread, there were still no do-overs. And this continued until very recently.

Do Overs in Video Games​

Now we have video games with their much greater influence than tabletop games, in numbers of players and time spent playing. I polled two college tabletop game clubs some years ago, and found that even those club members played video games more than they played tabletop games. In particular, video RPGs are much bigger than tabletop RPGs. For example, video RPG Skyrim alone has sold far more (in $$$) than all US tabletop RPG sales for more than a dozen years.

Going back to saved games is the norm in video game play. So it’s unsurprising that the idea of do-overs has become more common in tabletop RPGs as the influence of video games (and TV/films, for that matter) has increased.

This comes back to that major dichotomy of “RPG as game” vs “RPG as storytelling mechanism.” In film, novels, plays, the auteur (usually the author, in movies the director) can control what happens; not so in games. So in order to give the auteur more control, you must move away from the ways games do things, to something quite different.

Do Overs in D&D​

There are in-game and out-of-game ways a game can rewind itself. In game, divine intervention or powerful magic might reset events. I recall early D&D where a wish was used only to wish away the fatal result of an entire adventure. Yet even if a wish was used, some GMs (including me) didn’t allow players to play the adventure over again, because there was no way to make the players forget what had happened the first time. Time travel can have a similar effect.

But it’s also possible that sometimes the game doesn’t work out such that players and game master may want to throw it out and start over. The problem is that any experiences during a do over may be new to the characters, but it’s not new to the players, so there’s no easy way to separate the experience out. This is not to say the game might play out differently, but the end result is that even when replaying, there’s still some player knowledge of how things turned out previously.

And that’s because role-playing games are dynamic creations created by a group. Save game and respawn are major reasons most video games are really puzzles, not games, but that's a topic for another article.

Your turn: Our poll is an imprecise attempt to ask how much you allow rewinds in your games. I'm sure you can be much more specific if you wish.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Lewis Pulsipher

Lewis Pulsipher

Dragon, White Dwarf, Fiend Folio
Blue moon. I retcon stuff if I made some glaring mistake, but I've only restarted a whole campaign once (due to a massive falling-out with one of the players) and even then I took the opportunity to retool the campaign so it wasn't just treading old ground.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I don't recall ever having done it beyond a single combat turn because we forgot/misremembered a rule - but even that's rare and I think not what OP is asking.

It's not even a "we would never do this" thing, it was just never seriously suggested.
 

In the context of the OP's discussion of video games, then absolutely never. Do-overs in the sense of "we need to redo this turn, we got a rule wrong or forgot a key piece of relevant info" happens on occasion....but I don't consider those equivalent to respawning as happens in video games.

Video games can do this because their narrative structure and effort of design requires it, but even video games have a subgenre of titles (roguelikes mostly) which either bake into the narrative a protagonist who can respawn for an in-game reason, or effectively start you with a new character every time. An in-game reason for respawning could work in an RPG if it was so desired. An easy example would be a Cyberpunk or SF rpg in which "resleeving" technology existed. Just tell the player to make a copy of their character sheet at the date their PC is gentically and mentally copied and put in to storage, for example. Or we have the most infamous of in-world respawn examples in Paranoia RPG with actual clone families.

It's not that respawns are antithetical to RPGs, but rather that they work fine if given proper context. For example: a Destiny RPG for tabletop would easily allow for it, with the guardians of the setting being brought back to life by their ghost companions.

Take-backs, on the other hand, always tend to come up when people realize they made an error, and might more closely relate to the way video games used to handle this stuff 10-20 years ago when that meant reloading an old save.
 


Hussar

Legend
Thinking about this, I am kinda struck with what is meant by a "do over"?

Is going back a turn because someone forgot to do something or we flubbed a rule a do over? What if that flub resulted in a dead PC? Is it still a do over? Obviously it's a pretty big change to the game.

Do over as in completely rewinding the entire session or sessions of play? I doubt that ever happens. Then again, it almost never happens in video games either. You rarely wind back significant elements of the story - although that might happen. It's typically rewinding back to a single event usually because progress in the game requires a successful outcome (something that generally isn't an issue in RPG's).

And, as was mentioned, in theater (outside of improv theater) or in writing, there are thousands and thousands of do-overs. So, the comparison isn't really apt there either.

So, before I can really answer, I think we need to pin down a little more clearly what a "do-over" entails.

Is an interrupt action a do over? This is generally seen as one of the biggest innovations in tabletop games in the past few decades. Breaking the turn order is a huge element in many, many games. Being able to act on someone else's turn is a very big deal. But, does it count as a "do over"?
 

I use a "do over" often in one situation - when I am running a one on one game for my wife (or she for me). The focus is on inhabiting the character and the story. So solo gaming has weaknesses that group games don't - and one of those is bad dice leading to death; in a group game you create a new character, but if the entire game is predicated on that one character that doesn't do so well. So in a surprise "Total Party Kill" - we treat it like old pulp serial, with the next session showing how the character didn't really die and move on.
 



aco175

Legend
Matt Colville did a video of this and I found it had a lot of good points. If there is a rule problem or a player thinking a spell works one way and the DM thinks another. I think he called it 'friendly game'. He gave an example on the jump spell where a player thought it was jump 3x your movement and then Matt the DM told him that you are still restricted by the 30ft movement of your PC, the player said he would never had taken it then. In this case it does not hurt anything to allow the player to take another spell on the spot.

We tend to have a lot of PC actions out of initiative and need to jump back to allow a PC to go before the other one. Most of the time it does not affect much, but once in a while a monster is killed and then other PC would be able to do something else. Once in a while I allow things like forgetting you have a fire sword and then telling me that last round I would have dealt an additional 5 points of fire damage. I tend to allow it on that turn only and tell the player that my job is not to know the PC's powers- that is his job.

I remember only once completely rewinding for a do over. It was the AP Age of Worms and our 2nd level PCs picked a fight in a bar with a ogre that we were not supposed to fight until 5-6th level and we all died. The DM asked if we wanted to start over or have a do-over to when we walked into the tavern. Typically there is always a way to save the game without the do-over like being taken prisoner or such, but it may only work sometimes.
 

Unlike almost all video games, a tabletop campaign can explore the afterlife, making death a meaningful adventure in of itself, and a death can affect the world in unpredictable ways by what has been set up in the relationships and interactions of the dead character.

In a videogame, death is usually a setback.

In a tabletop RPG, death can be a new path forward.
 

Related Articles

Remove ads

Remove ads

Top