D&D 4th edition rules and what we can learn from them...

[AikiGhost]

Originally Posted by frogspawner

So what would a game properly designed for roleplaying be like, then?

FATE is a good example of a game built completely around the premise of playing a character IMHO. The system is built in such a way as to be good for telling just about any kind of story with a focus on character rather than fighting or investigation.

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by frogspawner

So what would a game properly designed for roleplaying be like, then?

There are plenty of them. They either involve mechanics that interact with the actual roleplay process (a lot of games that award something like hero points do this to some degree) or are rules-light and deemphasize mechanical processes (often making that part of the process boring, sometimes deliberately).

The truth is, game mechanics can vaguely enhance or get in the way of roleplaying; but they don't have anything much to do with it for the most part, and a game that spends much time on mechanics (depending on whether it tries to do mechanical encouragement of roleplaying and whether you feel that's useful to do) isn't spending its attention on making the "roleplaying" part of "roleplaying game" better; its making the "game" part better. And its a continuum where the emphasis is on which part can vary considerably.

The truth is that for people interested in roleplaying and only roleplaying, mechanics are either largely irrelevant, or at best, not an impediment; there are such people, and many of them get by without any mechanics at all (freeform roleplaying on webboards and, at least a number of years back, many MUSHes and the like were like that) and often only minimal hard-edged character definition.

What most people who are talking about when they talk about a game being "not about roleplaying anymore" are really saying is that the balance point has swung farther over to the game end then suits their particular taste, but as I said, its a continuum, and there's plenty of people who'd already consider whatever game they think of as being "about roleplaying" as too "gamey". Its just a question of where you like your admixture.

[Harshax]

Originally Posted by frogspawner

So what would a game properly designed for roleplaying be like, then?

I can think of a few already, and my criteria is fairly simple: A ROLE playing game is designed to interact with the mental (both psychological and emotional) state of its characters.

eg: CoC, Dying Earth, and Pendragon.

All three of these feature mechanics that force players to accept a role in a scene.

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by Harshax

I can think of a few already, and my criteria is fairly simple: A ROLE playing game is designed to interact with the mental (both psychological and emotional) state of its characters.

eg: CoC, Dying Earth, and Pendragon.

All three of these feature mechanics that force players to accept a role in a scene.

And many people consider those to be exactly the opposite, because to one degree or the other, they take control of the appropriate reactions of characters out of the hands of their players.

And yes, its an old argument.

[Harshax]

Originally Posted by Nightshade

And yes, its an old argument.

And a flawed one.

[frogspawner]

Originally Posted by Harshax

All three of these feature mechanics that force players to accept a role in a scene.

Originally Posted by Nightshade

And many people consider those to be exactly the opposite, because to one degree or the other, they take control of the appropriate reactions of characters out of the hands of their players.

Thanks, gents. I'm interested to hear that, because I've just come around to a mechanism which lets players choose a couple of traits (as skills) and gives them minor one-off bonus if they act accordingly and make a 'skill'-roll. Hopefully it helps them play their chosen personality role, but avoids being controlling.

I don't suppose we can learn anything about roleplaying from 4E, though... except, they may tell us, that the "R" in RPG really means those "defender, controller,... etc" roles!

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by Harshax

And a flawed one.

If some people didn't think so, it wouldn't be an argument, would it?

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by frogspawner

Thanks, gents. I'm interested to hear that, because I've just come around to a mechanism which lets players choose a couple of traits (as skills) and gives them minor one-off bonus if they act accordingly and make a 'skill'-roll. Hopefully it helps them play their chosen personality role, but avoids being controlling.

I'm not against some personality mechanics myself, but I know of people who are adamantly against them. Like the above mentioned game/roleplay spectrum, its a continuum of attitude.

[Harshax]

If your intention is to play a role playing game, where role, motivation, and mental state is featured, then the game should manipulates those qualities. Emotion and Motivation, for example, replace Hit Points. As a gamist, I feel such a game should treat such things the way other games treat combat. Else why call it a game? Right? Why not just call it acting, and go LARP it up?

I love adding bits to games that influence how a character behavings, and reward players for roleplaying.

Originally Posted by Nightshade

If some people didn't think so, it wouldn't be an argument, would it?

[Nightshade]

Originally Posted by Harshax

If your intention is to play a role playing game, where role, motivation, and mental state is featured, then the game should manipulates those qualities. Emotion and Motivation, for example, replace Hit Points. As a gamist, I feel such a game should treat such things the way other games treat combat. Else why call it a game? Right? Why not just call it acting, and go LARP it up?

Effectively, that's exactly what some people want. And for many people the roleplaying and game are two separate activities; they'd no more apply mechanics to the roleplaying end than they'd ask someone at the mechanical end to detail how they're doing the process of the mechanic. In effect, they're two separate things that don't relate directly.

Or put another way, to some people mechanics are about physical process and roleplaying is about emotional connection, and never the twain should meet.

You're welcome to not agree with that, but flatly, it makes no difference; because that's what they want and if that's not what you offer, they'll go somewhere else and use some other system.