Diogo Ribeiro
Erudite
Role-Player's RPG Roundtable #1: The role and the play
First i'd like to state what this thread is about. My gaming habits usually throw me more at various types of RPGs than any other game type. Consequently i've played many types of RPGs before (even if not all types, such as MUDs, unfortunately), and am constantly trying to re-evaluate them, what they are and what they mean, to me and other gamers. I'd like this to be one of (possible) future threads about role-playing in our CRPGs (or even console RPGs, im not discriminating, as i also play and enjoy them). Second i'd like to say thanks, in advance, to anyone who can bring good coments, ideas and/or their overall gaming expertise into this thread. And with that out of the way, let me explain the purposed of this thread:
This thread's purpose (RPG Roundtable #1), is, like the sub-title indicates, about roles, and how they come into play, in RPGs. I'd like to discuss primarily what you think is the best way you've seen (or would have liked to see) a role being displayed or played. So lets just forget the already established rule that RPGs cannot emulate (for now) the same level of freedom a PnP system can, and lets try and draw some points about what is currently possible. I'd like to throw in a little wood into the fire, first. I believe the common conception of our "role" in roleplay has degenerated over the fact of multiple interpretations of it. To the large target audience of, say, console gamers, the roleplay in their usual types of RPGs is a pre-made role. Consequently, they do not play their own role, but instead, play their games to have a role played to them, presenting them with very little character development choices (its a given that we all have a specific role in most RPGs - in Arcanum we will always be the sole survivor of the IFS Zephyr, and we will, in contrast, always be Cloud in FF7, for example; but while my role of survivor of the blimp crash will be completely different from your survivor, Cloud, in FF7, will always be the same Cloud for everyone else). This, regardless, leads them to accept a console RPG character to talk by itself trough most (96%, roughly) of the game, and enjoy it. I enjoy it as means of story-telling, though not as means of roleplay. Incidentally, other console games, such as, say, Shenmue, present greater levels of exploration and decision-making akin to a freeform RPG (and above what other console RPGs present), while the game itself is not one. You could also look at The Sims, which presents a good deal of strategy in handing us a character creation system thingie, then tossing it into a world where we must have our character(s) survive - in the Sims, one could say we're playing the role (even if it's as mute as the main characters of Diablo 2) of a character, and deciding things that will insure its success (and the game while giving us something similar to playing a role, is not an RPG). Meanwhile CRPGs usually give all the decision-making to us, trying its best to give us a role we can develop. Personally i prefer the CRPG way of doing this, but moving on... Sometimes when you look at a game, you can see a level of role-playing in it, but then you do not consider it an RPG. Why? Most people only consider an RPG as an RPG if it has the typical character spreadsheet, or if it has archaic formulas as classes (again, different interpretations). The point i'm trying to develop here is, how do we exactly look at a game with roleplaying abilities in it, and how do we look at a game with roleplaying abilities in it and a statistical spreadsheet? Do we only associate roleplaying if our character has a chart with numerical figures? Or, to an extent, can we appreciate a game that deviates from the usual CRPG by giving more decision-making and less statistical management? Example: i personally liked the idea of Planescape: Torment of changing the Nameless One's alignment (his view of himself) according to what he did. Now imagine the game would develop more on that issue by extending means and outcomes of role-playing, but removed any D&Desque influences, and, consequently, dumped its character sheets, combat rules, level-ups and whatnots - would you still consider it an RPG? Or is the term RPG still exclusively associated with character development + statitical development? Can you enjoy a game with more actual roleplaying than statistical tracking, or do you consider it to be more of a means to an end, or simply a necessary byproduct that goes hand in hand? Would you still call it an RPG even if roleplaying existed in a 100% basis and statistics were non-existant?
Correct, post and/or flame. Just remember, be gentle - its my first time... today
First i'd like to state what this thread is about. My gaming habits usually throw me more at various types of RPGs than any other game type. Consequently i've played many types of RPGs before (even if not all types, such as MUDs, unfortunately), and am constantly trying to re-evaluate them, what they are and what they mean, to me and other gamers. I'd like this to be one of (possible) future threads about role-playing in our CRPGs (or even console RPGs, im not discriminating, as i also play and enjoy them). Second i'd like to say thanks, in advance, to anyone who can bring good coments, ideas and/or their overall gaming expertise into this thread. And with that out of the way, let me explain the purposed of this thread:
This thread's purpose (RPG Roundtable #1), is, like the sub-title indicates, about roles, and how they come into play, in RPGs. I'd like to discuss primarily what you think is the best way you've seen (or would have liked to see) a role being displayed or played. So lets just forget the already established rule that RPGs cannot emulate (for now) the same level of freedom a PnP system can, and lets try and draw some points about what is currently possible. I'd like to throw in a little wood into the fire, first. I believe the common conception of our "role" in roleplay has degenerated over the fact of multiple interpretations of it. To the large target audience of, say, console gamers, the roleplay in their usual types of RPGs is a pre-made role. Consequently, they do not play their own role, but instead, play their games to have a role played to them, presenting them with very little character development choices (its a given that we all have a specific role in most RPGs - in Arcanum we will always be the sole survivor of the IFS Zephyr, and we will, in contrast, always be Cloud in FF7, for example; but while my role of survivor of the blimp crash will be completely different from your survivor, Cloud, in FF7, will always be the same Cloud for everyone else). This, regardless, leads them to accept a console RPG character to talk by itself trough most (96%, roughly) of the game, and enjoy it. I enjoy it as means of story-telling, though not as means of roleplay. Incidentally, other console games, such as, say, Shenmue, present greater levels of exploration and decision-making akin to a freeform RPG (and above what other console RPGs present), while the game itself is not one. You could also look at The Sims, which presents a good deal of strategy in handing us a character creation system thingie, then tossing it into a world where we must have our character(s) survive - in the Sims, one could say we're playing the role (even if it's as mute as the main characters of Diablo 2) of a character, and deciding things that will insure its success (and the game while giving us something similar to playing a role, is not an RPG). Meanwhile CRPGs usually give all the decision-making to us, trying its best to give us a role we can develop. Personally i prefer the CRPG way of doing this, but moving on... Sometimes when you look at a game, you can see a level of role-playing in it, but then you do not consider it an RPG. Why? Most people only consider an RPG as an RPG if it has the typical character spreadsheet, or if it has archaic formulas as classes (again, different interpretations). The point i'm trying to develop here is, how do we exactly look at a game with roleplaying abilities in it, and how do we look at a game with roleplaying abilities in it and a statistical spreadsheet? Do we only associate roleplaying if our character has a chart with numerical figures? Or, to an extent, can we appreciate a game that deviates from the usual CRPG by giving more decision-making and less statistical management? Example: i personally liked the idea of Planescape: Torment of changing the Nameless One's alignment (his view of himself) according to what he did. Now imagine the game would develop more on that issue by extending means and outcomes of role-playing, but removed any D&Desque influences, and, consequently, dumped its character sheets, combat rules, level-ups and whatnots - would you still consider it an RPG? Or is the term RPG still exclusively associated with character development + statitical development? Can you enjoy a game with more actual roleplaying than statistical tracking, or do you consider it to be more of a means to an end, or simply a necessary byproduct that goes hand in hand? Would you still call it an RPG even if roleplaying existed in a 100% basis and statistics were non-existant?
Correct, post and/or flame. Just remember, be gentle - its my first time... today