tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4754170279177021419.post1268871987087561926..comments2024-03-25T19:47:36.154-07:00Comments on Goblin Punch: Definition of RPG, Mechanically Encouraging Roleplaying, and Types of Player SkillArnold Khttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12603155377769597516noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4754170279177021419.post-46564990353080754182019-11-07T14:21:44.509-08:002019-11-07T14:21:44.509-08:00My take on it:
There is one big rule, and this is...My take on it:<br /><br />There is one big rule, and this is that the game is to make fun. If a game has the "right" to call itself an RPG or not is kind of irrelevant.<br />If some guys have fun grinding down numbers and to write mathematical papers on how to optimize characters in some game using phd level algebra, fine with me.<br /><br />Now of course there is always the question on what I like to do. Which varies, as I both enjoy pure narrative and gamistic D&D dungeoncrawling.<br /><br />There are two things I dislike in this context:<br />1. The rules make me do stuff I don't care about. Example: a D&D 3.5 or Pathfinder character can often at some point in time make lots of successive attacks at once, or summon dozens of creatures that have to be managed or you are supposed to read through very detailed (but not necessarily in the regard of what is important) rulesets, costing me time, which I could also spend fighting dragons or seducing bar wenches.<br />2. The rules punish taking a choice they should not punish. Like, I want to play a dwarf who mastered magical powers over stone, only to find out that due to a -2 CHA malus, dwarves suck at being sorcerers. For some choice, I might have luck of there being some exception (like some new stone sorcerer alternative class that uses WIS as caster stat), or I might play another race and act as if this was a dwarf, but the fact remains that the game says what I originally want to do is bad.<br /><br />Other than that, I heavily disagree with John Wick in regard to weapon tables. Okay, I don't need stats for two very similiar types of revolvers. But I need stats for revolvers versus rifles. Those create a part of game reality which have direct effect on tactics, which are similar to how real world properties create real world tactics. Now, revolvers and rifles exist in the real world, and I could take the real world properties, but first I don't have those present all the time and it is easier to look at the rulebook than to do a research on rifle range, and second, I need to compare them to fictive items, like the range of a wand of lightning.<br />The resultings tactics and applications of game reality rules can create parts of the setting.Ksorkraxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14894878976445908250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4754170279177021419.post-26100233704360215452014-10-09T01:35:17.334-07:002014-10-09T01:35:17.334-07:00If you define a roleplaying game as Wick does, as ...If you define a roleplaying game as Wick does, as a game with the goal of telling a story (which, I should add, is not a definition I accept, since my goals when playing a roleplaying game are quite different), then obviously you can play one that does not have rules. Authors have been doing so for as long as there have been stories to tell and someone else to tell the story with. Every novel is the result of a rules-free roleplaying game that takes place largely in a single author's head - again, assuming that "telling a story" is the "real" goal of a roleplaying game.<br /><br />Of course, even if we take that assumption away and exchange it for another, for example if we were to define a roleplaying game as one in which the goal is to play a role, it still seems like it should be possible to have a roleplaying game without any rules at all, that consists entirely of rulings by a Referee. The earliest roleplaying games seem to have almost fallen into this category, such as Braunstein or Blackmoor, which at the very least had few rules that were related to the nature of assuming a role (or telling a story).<br /><br />I wonder if it might be possible to define a roleplaying game as a game which allows the creation of a potentially unique role (conventionally known as a "character") for a player to take, and then indicates how that role should interface with the events of the game world?faoladhhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03691952430041394614noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4754170279177021419.post-16783839158849424572014-10-08T21:39:19.677-07:002014-10-08T21:39:19.677-07:00I might misunderstand his point, but while reading...I might misunderstand his point, but while reading your post a simple thought experiment came to mind. Can you play a role-playing game without mechanics? I think you can. Amber has precious few, it wouldn't be a stretch to take them away. And so, let's add one rule back in. Does it require role-playing? Let's say it's a rule about encumbrance or something, which doesn't. Are we suddenly now not playing a role-playing game?Michael Prescotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04704966067758312492noreply@blogger.com