Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 8179733" data-attributes="member: 42582">You can't play with Lego out of the box either - someone has to build something, and (typically) imbue it with some sort of meaning.But that doesn't make Lego an RPG.Your definition is also true of some wargaming - it's not enough to have painted your figures and read your copy of the rules, someone actually has to frame a battle, set up the terrain, etc. But wargames aren't RPGs. (Though RPGs have an important historical derivation from wargaming.)Your definition would also mean that an intro/demo module with pre-gens doesn't count as a RPG, when I think it obviously is.[USER=30518]@lewpuls[/USER] is right to fasten on the avatar as pretty key - that's the inheritance, much changed as it is in many ways, from single-soldier-per-figure wargaming.It's the other aspects - which build in assumptions about participant roles (players as cooperating, GM as opposition) and play goal (ie advancement) - that are contentious because they are true of (most) D&amp;D play and true of play in many D&amp;D-influenced games (eg Rolemaster or RuneQuest as played in their default modes) but are not true of all the other RPGs that have been designed over the years since D&amp;D was invented.What keeps those other games within the general parameters of the type of gaming that D&amp;D pioneered is (i) the role of the fiction in adjudication, which is different from nearly every other game type (except some wargaming), and (ii) the continued use of the single-person avatar as a primary locus of participation in the game by most if not all of the participants (ie the &quot;players&quot;).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 8179733, member: 42582"] You can't play with Lego out of the box either - someone has to build something, and (typically) imbue it with some sort of meaning. But that doesn't make Lego an RPG. Your definition is also true of some wargaming - it's not enough to have painted your figures and read your copy of the rules, someone actually has to frame a battle, set up the terrain, etc. But wargames aren't RPGs. (Though RPGs have an important historical derivation from wargaming.) Your definition would also mean that an intro/demo module with pre-gens doesn't count as a RPG, when I think it obviously is. [USER=30518]@lewpuls[/USER] is right to fasten on the [I]avatar[/I] as pretty key - that's the inheritance, much changed as it is in many ways, from single-soldier-per-figure wargaming. It's the other aspects - which build in assumptions about participant roles (players as cooperating, GM as opposition) and play goal (ie advancement) - that are contentious because they are true of (most) D&D play and true of play in many D&D-influenced games (eg Rolemaster or RuneQuest as played in their default modes) but are not true of all the other RPGs that have been designed over the years since D&D was invented. What keeps those other games within the general parameters of the type of gaming that D&D pioneered is (i) the role of the fiction in adjudication, which is different from nearly every other game type (except some wargaming), and (ii) the continued use of the single-person avatar as a primary locus of participation in the game by most if not all of the participants (ie the "players"). [/QUOTE]

Verification