Lack of affinity for players when creating a Farmer Traveller?

[Limpin Legin]

@MasterGwydion , I would agree with roll play vs roleplay, only I assume "game mechanic" to be purely about the former not the latter.

@Vormaerin Oh?! How odd. Games usually have a competitive mission. Some games are also cooperative or team-based. If you use the Board Gamming Geeks categories, "cooperative" is different to "team based". Players would talk indirectly about their "values", rather than directly about "winning." But subconsciously, the principle is there.

 

[Vormaerin]

Wanting to win and wanting to have a pushover like 2+ rollsn and infinite wealth are two entirely different things. If I brought out a game where the players could just curbstomp at will, they'd maybe play once and never be interested again.

 

[Limpin Legin]

Wanting to win and wanting to have a pushover like 2+ rollsn and infinite wealth are two entirely different things. If I brought out a game where the players could just curbstomp at will, they'd maybe play once and never be interested again.

Well. It is notable practice in computer games. Some websites even specialize in providing **cheat codes** for gamers, so they can cruise their way to victory. But you can just do computer games for eye candy. Pencil-and-paper games require more cerebral imagination, and using imagination is part of the game's appeal.

 

[Condottiere]

I like playing an overpowered character, on occasion.

I also like playing an underpowered character.

Depends on the mood.

 

[MasterGwydion]

@MasterGwydion , I would agree with roll play vs roleplay, only I assume "game mechanic" to be purely about the former not the latter.

Nope. "Game Mechanic" is simply the rules of the game, not how the game is played. I doubt I have the correct words to explain this properly, but I will try. Game mechanics are simply the rules of the game. This is the same for all games be they RPGs, card games, board games, etc. What is different about RPGs from all of these other types of games is Role-play. It is collective storytelling. None of these other games involve collectively telling a story around a table. All of these other types are games have winners and losers. Role-playing does not. In roleplaying, the goal is to collectively have fun, so by definition, everyone wins in every game as long as everyone has fun. No other game on the planet is like that. It is one way that roleplaying games are unique, because We are basically all writers telling a collective story. The only reason for dice rolling in RPGs is to add a level of uncertainty. I have played RPGs that have no dice rolls and are more improvisational theater than an actual game with rules. Heck, even Traveller says to not bother rolling dice unless there is a dramatic need for it. Otherwise, We'd be crashing into the Starport many times in each campaign. I have even been in games where players fail dice rolls on purpose, without ever rolling the dice, because it would add something to the story. Just told the DM, I failed that roll. The DM will usually ask, regular fail or spectacular fail? I'll pick whichever one I think adds the most fun to the story and take the failure. If the goal was to "win" that would never happen.

@Vormaerin Oh?! How odd. Games usually have a competitive mission. Some games are also cooperative or team-based. If you use the Board Gamming Geeks categories, "cooperative" is different to "team based". Players would talk indirectly about their "values", rather than directly about "winning." But subconsciously, the principle is there.

An RPG is always cooperative and never competitive. If you think otherwise, you are roll-playing. Even a game like the Vampire LARP where everyone in game is your enemy, I still work with the players cooperatively to shape a fun game. Their character is My character's enemy, not the player. Players work together to have fun. If your fun requires being competitive and beating the other people around the table, go to a casino, because what you are doing is not role-playing.

 

[Limpin Legin]

Nope. "Game Mechanic" is ...

Whelp, you've disagreed syntactically but agreed with me semantically, and I was only quoting you in the first place. So I don't get the opening syntax.

None of these other games involve collectively telling a story around a table. All of these other types are games have winners and losers. Role-playing does not. In roleplaying, the goal is to collectively have fun, so by definition, everyone wins in every game as long as everyone has fun. No other game on the planet is like that. It is one way that roleplaying games are unique, because We are basically all writers telling a collective story.

Yes. IK. But the fun is to succeed and success is a measure of winning. Might not be the same kind of gruelling winning as in Olympics, school sport, Nascar, ... or even 'less gruelling' Chess, Dominoes, etc. To communicate to a referee and be completely understood is another kind of success and therefore it is a little win of some description. Party games are purely about having frolicking fun, rather than winning. But, with experience, it is noticeable that losing in RPGs is "fun" when it is a comical error or when the party is strong enough to be resilient to the incurred damage. Over time, players become quite fond of the characters in the adventuring party, so much so, when a character dies, everyone in the party becomes visibly upset. It is quite emotional.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Whelp, you've disagreed syntactically but agreed with me semantically, and I was only quoting you in the first place. So I don't get the opening syntax.


Yes. IK. But the fun is to succeed and success is a measure of winning.

Fun is the goal. Our whole party can be wiped out and We may be talking about how it was the coolest death ever for decades to come. That does not meet your definition of "success", but it does Mine. Everyone smiling is the only win in RPGs.

Might not be the same kind of gruelling winning as in Olympics, school sport, Nascar, ... or even 'less gruelling' Chess, Dominoes, etc. To communicate to a referee and be completely understood is another kind of success and therefore it is a little win of some description. Party games are purely about having frolicking fun, rather than winning. But, with experience, it is noticeable that losing in RPGs is "fun" when it is a comical error or when the party is strong enough to be resilient to the incurred damage. Over time, players become quite fond of the characters in the adventuring party, so much so, when a character dies, everyone in the party becomes visibly upset. It is quite emotional.

Agreed. Role-playing requires a level of emotional maturity that many do not possess. Problem players will be helped to learn better that it is not about "winning", but if after some time, they refuse to learn, they won't be invited back to play.

 

[Limpin Legin]

Our whole party can be wiped out and We may be talking about how it was the coolest death ever for decades to come. That does not meet your definition of "success", but it does Mine.

Your way death => coolest => smiling => decades
My way, death => coolest => success => decades

There isn't difference about that other than the flavour of our nomenculture.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Your way death => coolest => smiling => decades
My way, death => coolest => success => decades

There isn't difference about that other than the flavour of our nomenculture.

and yet, happiness (smiling) isn't in yours.

 

[Limpin Legin]

FYI, I am happy and smiling