Prosper The weekly/yearly what is a RPG discussion DISCUSS!!!

[Ninjerk]

I give up.

Exactly. The only winning move is not to play.

 

[Bruma Hobo]

The most elegant description I've seen is from Craig Stern:

A game is a computer RPG if it features player-driven development of a persistent character or characters via the making of consequential choices.

Yet that means that stuff that no one ever debates, like early Wizardry games, aren't RPGs since there's no choice.

This is why the codex definition of C&C is just retarded. Making a custom character or party IS choice, and the consequence is how the game unfolds. Also, the decision to fight or flee is a very important one with life or death consequences if we're talking about games with autosave and permadeath like Wizardry.

 

[Servo]

I've had a couple important experiences lately that I want to share.

You need to slow down. You can't bite off what is a roleplaying game when you have such a shitty definition of "role" in the first place.

First, I've been playing World of Darkness with some friends. This taught me that, indeed, I had a shitty definition of role playing. I realized that playing a role in a game is not akin to the way an actor plays a role in a movie. In this game, I was making decisions like "I'm going to get clobbered if I confront this NPC, so I'm going to poison him instead." If it were a movie, I'd be thinking "My character is a bad guy, so I'm going to do bad things. And I'm going to talk with an accent, and dress up like Gandalf." The latter is what I guess many people are thinking when they go into an RPG, but it doesn't lend itself very well to games. On the other hand, the former is very much compatible with games because it's based on rules. Playing "in character" doesn't mean talking funny, dressing up and generally acting like a child - it means making decisions based on the rules as defined by your character, the campaign setting and the GM. I still think the terminology is confusing, but I don't know what else we would call it if not role playing. Also I discovered that I really enjoy this type of gaming (especially because the GM was a pro). Now I can see why folks would enjoy games like Fallout or PST that emulate that experience with some success. It also kind of redefined what I think of as a sandbox game.

Second, I beat Ultima IV. It was a bit painful and tedious at times, but it also felt like a major accomplishment. There is no hand holding in that game; it's like the polar opposite of Mass Effect. I immediately loaded up Ultima V and was amazed at how superior it is to its predecessor - not just the shiny new graphics, but in every way. I love the way OSI set up the story in this one; the intro felt like something straight out of a D&D campaign, whereas U4 was basically "Go become the avatar because Lord British said to!" The magic system is improved with more spells, the weapons actually have stats (!) which are actually printed in the manual (!), random encounters are reduced (at least during day)... I can't wait to get into it. (And I was thinking during U4 that I might never want to play another Ultima...) I definitely think I would have been robbing myself by starting with U5. Now I can see myself enjoying later games that I might not have the first time around, learning how they improved and built upon their predecessors each time.

My advice then to any other newcomers to the genre that want to learn to appreciate it: start with tabletop RPGs. D&D is great but don't limit yourself to just that. Then work your way up to CRPGs starting with the oldest one you can possibly stomach (but don't rule out U4 right away - it's really not that bad once you get used to it).

 

[Humppaleka]

"What is an RPG?" is a stupid question/discussion

 

[Pantalones]

I've had a couple important experiences lately that I want to share.

You need to slow down. You can't bite off what is a roleplaying game when you have such a shitty definition of "role" in the first place.

First, I've been playing World of Darkness with some friends. This taught me that, indeed, I had a shitty definition of role playing. I realized that playing a role in a game is not akin to the way an actor plays a role in a movie. In this game, I was making decisions like "I'm going to get clobbered if I confront this NPC, so I'm going to poison him instead." If it were a movie, I'd be thinking "My character is a bad guy, so I'm going to do bad things. And I'm going to talk with an accent, and dress up like Gandalf." The latter is what I guess many people are thinking when they go into an RPG, but it doesn't lend itself very well to games. On the other hand, the former is very much compatible with games because it's based on rules. Playing "in character" doesn't mean talking funny, dressing up and generally acting like a child - it means making decisions based on the rules as defined by your character, the campaign setting and the GM. I still think the terminology is confusing, but I don't know what else we would call it if not role playing. Also I discovered that I really enjoy this type of gaming (especially because the GM was a pro). Now I can see why folks would enjoy games like Fallout or PST that emulate that experience with some success. It also kind of redefined what I think of as a sandbox game.

Second, I beat Ultima IV. It was a bit painful and tedious at times, but it also felt like a major accomplishment. There is no hand holding in that game; it's like the polar opposite of Mass Effect. I immediately loaded up Ultima V and was amazed at how superior it is to its predecessor - not just the shiny new graphics, but in every way. I love the way OSI set up the story in this one; the intro felt like something straight out of a D&D campaign, whereas U4 was basically "Go become the avatar because Lord British said to!" The magic system is improved with more spells, the weapons actually have stats (!) which are actually printed in the manual (!), random encounters are reduced (at least during day)... I can't wait to get into it. (And I was thinking during U4 that I might never want to play another Ultima...) I definitely think I would have been robbing myself by starting with U5. Now I can see myself enjoying later games that I might not have the first time around, learning how they improved and built upon their predecessors each time.

My advice then to any other newcomers to the genre that want to learn to appreciate it: start with tabletop RPGs. D&D is great but don't limit yourself to just that. Then work your way up to CRPGs starting with the oldest one you can possibly stomach (but don't rule out U4 right away - it's really not that bad once you get used to it).

The latter didn't exist in early PnP anyway. That is relatively new despite what some people say. That is where confusion comes from, but screw those people, I am sick to death of them.

It's not that hard to define an RPG so long as you don't get confused by more modern nonsense.

 

[Servo]

I'm still not trying to define an RPG here. Just trying to figure out what I like, and why other people like what it is they like, and how to appreciate these things, etc.

But if I were to take a stab at it I'd have to say at this point it's any game that tries to emulate a P&P game

Of course no computer can ever replace a GM. Just as long as it tries and succeeds to some degree.

 

[tuluse]

Congratulations Servo, it only took 9 months on the codex to figure out why Fallout is good.

I would agree that cRPGs are emulating PNP experiences though, any more than movies are meant to emulate someone reading a book to you. The end goal should be the same both movies and books should tell a good story, and both cRPGs and pnp RPGs should have good roleplaying, but they go about it in different ways.

 

[Servo]

I am much smart. Great fast with learning.

 

[tuluse]

Don't feel bad Servo. Many here have yet to figure it out.

 

[Abelian]

If it were a movie, I'd be thinking "My character is a bad guy, so I'm going to do bad things. And I'm going to talk with an accent, and dress up like Saruman."

Lore fix

 

[Lhynn]

You dont need stats for something to be called RPG.

 

[dryan]

You dont need stats for something to be called RPG.

yes you do

 

[Lilura]

By "laptop guy" do you mean the player-created I.M.P? You must have missed the attribute sliders in chargen, the personality test, and the fact your skills increase as you use them.

I guess you mean the player, who acts like a commander, tactician and strategist over the squad. Well then, are IWD and Storm of Zehir not RPGs?

 

[Lhynn]

You dont need stats for something to be called RPG.

yes you do

Dont be retarded, where in the acronym does it say "stat based game"?

 

[dryan]

You dont need stats for something to be called RPG.

yes you do

Dont be retarded, where in the acronym does it say "stat based game"?

Why do you drive in the parkway but park in the driveway?

 

[Bubbles]

I guess you mean the player, who acts like a commander, tactician and strategist over the squad. Well then, are IWD and Storm of Zehir not RPGs?

No, they're roguelikes with below average randomization and full save and reload features.

 

[SCO]

It's almost like most rpgs are actually bad tactical games that are pretending not to be so they won't be humiliated in comparison.

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

It's almost like most rpgs are actually bad tactical games that are pretending not to be so they won't be humiliated in comparison.

Skirmish, not tactical. In tactical scale you'd give commands to whole small units, not individuals.

 

[Lhynn]

You dont need stats for something to be called RPG.

yes you do

Dont be retarded, where in the acronym does it say "stat based game"?

Why do you drive in the parkway but park in the driveway?

Stats are certainly a way to represent your characters personality, growth and changes , but not the only one, you can have an rpg without stats in the same way you can larp or even play a whole PnP session without so much as the character sheets or a dice roll.

 

[Jagged Appliance]

You dont need stats for something to be called RPG.

yes you do

Dont be retarded, where in the acronym does it say "stat based game"?

Why do you drive in the parkway but park in the driveway?

Stats are certainly a way to represent your characters personality, growth and changes , but not the only one, you can have an rpg without stats in the same way you can larp or even play a whole PnP session without so much as the character sheets or a dice roll.

It's happening again.

Stahp

 

[dryan]

You dont need stats for something to be called RPG.

yes you do

Dont be retarded, where in the acronym does it say "stat based game"?

Why do you drive in the parkway but park in the driveway?

Stats are certainly a way to represent your characters personality, growth and changes , but not the only one, you can have an rpg without stats in the same way you can larp or even play a whole PnP session without so much as the character sheets or a dice roll.

no

 

[Awor Szurkrarz]

It always feels weird to me to see JA2 treated as a RPG. I think we should have a fresh and never done before debate : "What is a RPG ?".
I'll start : JA2 is not a RPG since laptop guy has no stats.

Laptop guy has stats. One can create an avatar of the laptop guy through answering the I.M.P. test. The test is done by the laptop guy. The problem is that someone forgot to code game ending when I.M.P. dies.

Still, there are cRPG that don't have a protagonist like Wasteland and ID1-2, so JA2 should still count as a cRPG.
It just doesn't suck when it comes to implementation of concepts from PnP RPGs like henchmen recruitment and has a decent combat system which confuses most of players into thinking its not a real RPG.

 

[Lhynn]

Stats are certainly a way to represent your characters personality, growth and changes , but not the only one, you can have an rpg without stats in the same way you can larp or even play a whole PnP session without so much as the character sheets or a dice roll.

no

Yes, PnP is the very thing RPGs try to emulate, it is a completely valid argument that you are failing to adress.

 

[tuluse]

You dont need stats for something to be called RPG.

yes you do

Dont be retarded, where in the acronym does it say "stat based game"?

Why do you drive in the parkway but park in the driveway?

Stats are certainly a way to represent your characters personality, growth and changes , but not the only one, you can have an rpg without stats in the same way you can larp or even play a whole PnP session without so much as the character sheets or a dice roll.

cRPGs are played on computers. Computers only understand numbers. If there are no stats you are not playing the game you are doing something else.

 

[Lhynn]

You dont need stats for something to be called RPG.

yes you do

Dont be retarded, where in the acronym does it say "stat based game"?

Why do you drive in the parkway but park in the driveway?

Stats are certainly a way to represent your characters personality, growth and changes , but not the only one, you can have an rpg without stats in the same way you can larp or even play a whole PnP session without so much as the character sheets or a dice roll.

cRPGs are played on computers. Computers only understand numbers. If there are no stats you are not playing the game you are doing something else.

Why do you equate numbers with stats? they can be flags.