Role-playing vs. Roll Playing

[afro-slav]

I personally prefer the former to the latter. I don't care about leveling etc...I just wish to have a good time with my friends and act out a fictional persona.

Roll playing to me is like playing a video game rpg. I do not find them enjoyable.

I recall on the Decipher LOTR board some players were griping about the races not being balance. Calaquendi Elves had various racial features that power gamers would love yet Hobbits and Middle men were not the great.
Those who did not complain simply said it's about playing a role. The greatest Hobbit would never come close to a Calaquendi. But that did not stop the Nine Walkers that went from Merry and Pippin to The Heir of Elendil.

In MERP Eowyn gained something outrageous like 15 or so levels with a sword swing when she downed the Witch-King ( with Merry's help)

So one hit and I go from 7 to 21 level.

For you what do you prefer?

Role or Roll?[/u]

 

[Ichabod]

The funny thing, at least if you read my posts to forums, is that I don't care much for numbers. I routinely play underpowered characters out of choice. What I want for my characters is some sort of unique "design" space, unique schticks, even if they suck. To me, effective is fun but not numbers effective, decision based effectiveness. So, if characters go beyond numbers, then I don't really care about the mechanics.

I do care about numbers, though. I care about them because RPGs aren't about making unique characters. RPGs, as sets of rules, lend themselves to creating sets of numbers that are passed off as characters. Because characters aren't defined by what makes them cool but what makes them effective, I want balance so that my characters aren't useless. Balance produces diversity so that at least you can try to have a different character. Systems like d20 tend to produce boring characters because players don't seem to make an effort to go beyond the numbers and because nothing in the numbers has any flavor.

When the numbers are not so egregious, I can ignore them and just play a character. But, when you have obvious stupidity, like starting skill ranks, 2H fighting, the plethora of classes that have no need to exist, then I can't help but think about the numbers because the numbers are so overbearing in how they affect the play of the game and I have less fun playing my character.

I never understand anyone arguing against balance. I never see the downside in balance. At worst, it has no effect on what people do. At best, it means you can play a concept that you want to play and not be an idiot.

Did I mention that I often don't enjoy rolling dice? That I hate d20 resolution? As a GM, I pretty much hate rules all together, basically going for "roll a die and I'll tell you what happens". The next game I want to run is planned to be diceless where I'm hoping the players, assuming I get any players, take to heart my comments about not worrying about numbers but pitch me on what makes the character cool.

Now, there are problems when people choose a bad role and take it too seriously. It's incredibly easy to have a character who should be played in such a way that hurts the party doing stuff or just shouldn't be with the party at all. Played correctly, the game might grind to a halt. Some compromise of having a character be an actual character and not just a set of numbers yet finding a way to work with other characters seems optimal.

 

[Spongly]

Got to love people who would play a roleplaying game based on Tolkien and then complain that Hobbits weren't quite equal to Elves on the scale of power!

 

[DigitalMage]

For you what do you prefer?
Role or Roll?[/u]

Its a false dichotomy - they are not mutually exclusive. I like to get into character and act out scenes, but I can also enjoy breaking out the miniatures and the excitement of levelling up and choosing new powers (i.e. the "game" aspect).

 

[afro-slav]

Got to love people who would play a roleplaying game based on Tolkien and then complain that Hobbits weren't quite equal to Elves on the scale of power!

Exactly

 

[afro-slav]

For you what do you prefer?
Role or Roll?[/u]

Its a false dichotomy - they are not mutually exclusive. I like to get into character and act out scenes, but I can also enjoy breaking out the miniatures and the excitement of levelling up and choosing new powers (i.e. the "game" aspect).

I failed to clarify. It have been better if if I had stated the query as...

given the choice between the two options which would you prefer?"

 

[The King]

Gary Gygax was the first to declare that dices were just used to make noise behind the screen.

 

[DigitalMage]

given the choice between the two options which would you prefer?"

I am still not particularly clear - are you asking which area I prefer to receive more emphasis in a game? If so I am really not sure, I guess "role-playing" but I would still want some game mechanics, a bit of action, and I want my character's stats to mean something.

However, if you mean an "either / or" then you are really asking do I prefer board games or freeform storytelling, to which I would probably reply "board games".

 

[Diabolus]

However, if you mean an "either / or" then you are really asking do I prefer board games or freeform storytelling, to which I would probably reply "board games".

Precisely! I love RPGs, but I'm more of a beer-and-pretzels gamer than a LARPer. If there weren't dice and hard rules, I'd play a boardgame.

 

[Hervé]

Spongly wrote:

Got to love people who would play a roleplaying game based on Tolkien and then complain that Hobbits weren't quite equal to Elves on the scale of power!

Yes, I agree. Hobbits are far more stronger than any elvish sucker. It's hobbits that save the day in The Lord of the Rings, not elves. Elves spend their time fleeing Middle Earth, hiding themselves and look how so superior while hobbits do all the job, fighting Nazguls and giant spiders, destroying the One Ring and so on...

Hobbits are broken...

 

[Majestic7]

I like rules, because it gives a feeling of simulationism and doesn't make me as a GM seem as a despot that makes things happen just because I want things to happen. Rolling dice gives illusion of chance. Having rules as guidelines for various situations takes away some responsibility from my shoulders and puts it on the rules instead. This is especially good in the cases where player characters get their ass kicked in one way or another. It is must better to have the dice to blame than my one-sided decision.

However, I prefer those rolls to be result of roleplaying, the rules to be a way for will and personality of the character to manifest their effect on the game world. So both are needed, but it is role that is supreme over roll - but roll must have effect on the role. Like was pointed out already, otherwise the game becomes a board game or a freeform storytelling competition. I don't want either.

 

[Der Rote Baron]

Gimmee de dice an' swing dat bucket full of 'em, man! And kill da Che-cheatin' mun!

So much from Hunnish Jamaica. No dice, no game. Then it is pure and simple story-telling. I enjoy hearing stories and telling them, but not if I was invited or am inviting for a game. And i don't like to pretend that we play a game when we are just telling and/ or listening to stories about times undreamed of ...

 

[GamerDude]

I don't have any problem with the dice part of an RPG... I tried Amber diceless after hearing the countless arguments that "it's ROLE playing" and "you can still do anything in it like that dice-based one"...

Yeah, and it does come down to who has the biggest stats. "My warfare is higher than yours, then I'm always going to hit you if we're fighting" kind of thing. No chance for the weaker guy to get a shot in etc.

So, for me the dice are a way to allow for stuff to happen. Yep, that guy with a 10 strength and who barely knows which end of the short sword to hold can get a lucky shot it, my training and greater experiance can't counter just plain dumb luck (or my over confidence)... But, I reflect that training/experiance with bonuses to the die roll, making me more likely to hit, etc.

As for Role playing, I like my characters to have a background, a basic belief set, to have goals and to make decisions based on those things. When combat is not going on I'll take on the mannerisms, way of speaking etc. of my character (which some people just don't get) trying to give something to my character. I also speak as the character in the FIRST person.. not as saying to the GM "Grunt turns to the cleric and says 'why didn't you heal me dude, cmon give a guy a break"

One time, I was in a mid-level 3rd ed game and the host (over time) had ended up with three characters... but everything they did was stated in the third-person, no personality between the two... etc. So in addition to my character I start playing the kobold whatever he was (14th level something). I gave him a personality, a voice etc... and all I got was dirty looks for acting like I was stupid. I didn't stay in my friend's game long.

There is a middle ground too... let the players try to negotiate, give it their best shot, and if they make an effort give them their full skill modifier. If they do something totally stupid then some negs on the roll or just tell them they royally screwed up. Something great, give them a bonus or automatic success... BUT, the modifiers and die roll allow for the character who is really talented to occasionally screw up... and the very shy awkward player to still succeed.

We had a guy in one of my games, basically played his own personality all the time. So they finish an adventure where they were told to bring back everything they find so the items which were stolen could be returned. They get back and he tells the Mayor "ok, so just have everyone come to us and describe what they're missing and we'll give it to them c'uz we don't want anyone taking something not theirs and we want to make sure this is on the up-and-up"...

They instantly became persona-non-grata and found out they weren't wanted... suddenly people were short with them, stuff cost 50 to 90 percent more than before, anything they bought and (while still in the store) realized they didn't need couldn't be returned, etc. Two game days later they were busy heading out to find a new start... ROLE playing at it's finest.