Worlds of Design: What Makes an RPG a Tabletop Hobby RPG?

What makes an RPG a tabletop hobby RPG? An RPG, as we talk about them in the hobby, is a human‑opposed co‑operative game. I describe some characteristics.

View attachment 102280Picture sourced from Pixabay.​

I must be crazy to try to define/characterize a segment as large and diverse as this one in a few words. But here goes.

There are two ways to define something: 1) specific (as in a dictionary), but this usually leads to dispute even when what’s being defined is a single word; or 2) describe typical characteristics at length, even though not all of the group will have all of those characteristics. I’m trying the latter, but keeping it simple.

What makes an RPG a tabletop hobby RPG? An RPG, as we talk about them in the hobby, is a human‑opposed co‑operative game. There are four characteristics:

• avatars,
• progressive improvement,
• co-operation, and
• GMed adventure.

Not Just Role‑Playing

Technically, a role-playing game may be any game where you play a role – which is a LOT of games, tabletop and (especially) video. It includes some business and other training/education simulations. I’m interested in what makes a game a hobby RPG, a game played frequently by hobby game players.

What’s a “Pure” or “Real” Avatar?

• A single thing that represents the individual player, most commonly a humanoid
• All the player’s actions in the game emanate from the avatar
• The “real” avatar is fully subject to risk: if it dies/is destroyed, the player loses (at least temporarily)

An avatar could be a spaceship, a tank (World of Tanks) or other vehicle, even a pizza‑shape (Pac‑Man). In video games, the avatar typically respawns. In hobby RPGs, the avatar is a creature, usually human or humanoid. (For more detail, read "The most important design aspect of hobby RPGs is the Pure Avatar")

Avatars sometimes have a separate developer‑provided “history” and personality (Mario, Sonic). Sometimes an avatar is a blank slate so that the player can more easily infuse his/her own personality into the avatar.

Many board games use a sort-of avatar that is not the source of all action, nor does the game end if the avatar is killed or captured. That’s not an RPG.

“Life is either a daring adventure or nothing.” Helen Keller​

Progressive Improvement

This can happen in many kinds of games. But in what we call RPGs, it’s some variety of:

• Gaining experience to rise in levels, and the levels give more capability (though the term “level” might not be used)
• Gaining skills/feats (which give more capability)
• Collecting magic items (which provide extra options, defense, offense, detection, etc.)
• Acquiring money (which can be used for lots of things)
• No doubt there are some RPGs with other ways to improve, for example if social standing is formally tracked

Does it need levels? No, but that's typically (conveniently) how increase in capability “without using loot” is expressed.

So a game where the hero(es) don’t progress in capability – or only a little – might be an interesting game, but it’s not an RPG. Many of you can think of board, card, or video games of this kind. Well-known heroes in a series of stand-alone novels rarely progress significantly in capability, for example James Bond.

You can have avatars without progression, you can have roles without “pure” avatars, you can have progression without avatars, but those are not what we categorize as RPGs.

“Adventure is worthwhile in itself.” Amelia Earhart​

Co-operation, Adventure, and a Gamemaster who Controls the Opposition

• Yes, opposition. It’s not a game (traditional sense) without opposition, though it might be a puzzle or a storytelling engine
• I don’t see how there can be significant opposition without a GM/referee
• If there’s no co-operation, if it’s player vs player, it’s more or less a board/card game
• Or it’s a storytelling aid

The GM also allows the players to try to do “anything” that could be done in the current situation. Some regard this freedom-of-action as the defining aspect of RPGs, and it’s certainly vital; but think of an imposed-story RPG where the linear plot (typical of such stories) forces players to do just what the story calls for. That’s not freedom of action. Yet many still call this an RPG.

Where does this leave computer RPGs? There’s not exactly a GM, though the computer tries to be. There’s certainly not as much freedom of action as with a human GM.

I include adventure, because the stories generated by the original RPGs would be called adventures. In the 21^st century we do have novels that don’t seem to have any particular point other than describing everyday life, and I think that’s leaked over into so-called RPGs as well. Whether adventure is necessary is a debatable point, though *I’m* certainly not interested in RPGs without adventure.

Some people won’t agree with this characterization. That’s inevitable. The purpose of such exercises (aside from encouraging people to think) is to narrow down something so that we can talk about it intelligibly. If the question “what’s an RPG?” tends to be answered with “whatever I think it is,” discussions become difficult.

This article was contributed by Lewis Pulsipher (lewpuls) as part of EN World's Columnist (ENWC) program. You can follow Lew on his web site and his Udemy course landing page. We are always on the lookout for freelance columnists! If you have a pitch, please contact us!

 

[Jay Verkuilen]

AFAIK, you have this backward. They played the adventures then wrote the story. The tropes, like wizards getting tired, were a way to try to get around the derivative nature of Vancian casting. Funnily enough, in Raistlin's D&D stats, his Con was average. The whole "Sick Raistlin" thing was from how the player played the character. As is usually the case, the player basically ignored the character sheet.

I haven't seen Raistlin's stats in a long time. That's pretty amusing, though. I don't think I had it backwards, but may have said it in a confusing way. Dragonlance started as a D&D setting and they added the stories. Vancian casting really doesn't describe well in fiction. I've read Vance and mages don't actually cast all that many spells so it's hard to tell how it affects them. It's been a while since I read it, though, so I con'd recall how consistent Vance is.