Quote from: Dirk Remmecke;342256Yes and no. I have played with a GM who would not allow any action that was not covered by the (abstracted) combat rules.

When I said I want my character to run past the temple guard, maybe exchanging a blow or outright trying to dodge him, he didn't invent a rule, a modifier or similar, he said "make an attack roll".
"Success."
"Roll damage."
" I didn't try to hurt him."
"The only consequence an attack roll can have is damage. Roll. Now he hits back."

Did the game stop being an RPG at that point?

Yes, I would have had a lengthy discussion with the GM either then or later that he was missing the point of an RPG, especially if the RPG you were playing included options like skills and maneuvers.

I guess more accurately I would say, "The game is still an RPG. But your GM stopped playing it like one."

Quote from: aramis;342086Nope, sorry, dead wrong on that. If a story doesn't emerge, then the play is usually not being any good.

Story emerges from good play. Period. A story resulting is almost the axiomatic symptom of good play.

A story can emerge from good play. However, bad play can emerge from telling a story rather than creating one. Confusing RPG story-telling with literary story-telling is an error of equivocation.

Using my definition of an RPG:

- Monopoly is not an RPG because you do not play "As-if" your token, and because you cannot adjudicate any conceivable action. For instance, in Monopoly, you cannot stage a jail break, commit arson, or assassinate your fellow tokens.
- Capes is not an RPG because you do not play "as-if" the character you begin with. In fact, you may control several characters and the process of play is to control the outcome of the story, not to control "your" character. Capes is a story-telling game that involves tactical contests  for the authorial privilege.
- Baron Munchausen is not an RPG, but a storytelling game, because play is constrained to telling anecdotes and challenging each other to duels. You cannot, for instance, suddenly decide it's time to embark on a new adventure and then adjudicate the results.
- Fantasy wargames, in the technical sense I use the term, are RPGs. Fantasy wargames are games that involve a lot of traditional simulation, but I don't want to get into Forgeian discussions of what simulation is. Essentially, these are games that create systems for resolving any conceivable action. D&D, Champions/Hero, GURPS, and so forth.
- Dramatic or storytelling RPGs are RPGs. I think it's pretty clear how Vampire, whether played in a fairly free-form manner or by the dice, fits the traditional criteria.
- CRPGs are not RPGs, because the computer will not resolve any conceivable action. For instance, in City of Heroes, it is not possible to use your fire powers to burn away the obstructing trees in Perez Park, indeed, you cannot target them. In an RPG it is possible to succeed or fail at burning through trees with your superpowers.
- Immersive, freeform roleplaying games are RPGs, provided there is some mechanism in place for deciding who gets to decide.

Quote- Monopoly is not an RPG because you do not play "As-if" your token, and because you cannot adjudicate any conceivable action. For instance, in Monopoly, you cannot stage a jail break[...].

What are you talking about? If you want to stage a jailbreak in Monopoly, you can do so in any number of ways. According to the official rules,

QuoteA player gets out of Jail by(1.) throwing doubles on any of his next three turns. (If he succeeds in doing this he immediately moves forward the number of spaces shown by his doubles throw. Even though he has thrown doubles he does not take another turn.); (2.) using the "Get Out of Jail Free" card if he has it; (3.) purchasing the "Get Out of Jail Free" card from another player and playing it; (4.) paying a fine of $50 before he rolls the dice on either of his next two turns.

If a player does not throw doubles by his third turn he must pay the $50 fine. He then gets out of Jail and immediately moves forward the number of spaces shown by his throw.

Only by paying a fine are you absolutely not staging a jailbreak. A player who is in jail has every right to declare how they are attempting to get out on their turn, whether it be by digging through a wall, hiding in the laundry, carving a gun out of soap, appealing for clemency, etc. To resolve the attempt, the player may either roll dice or expend a fate point in the form of a "Get out of Jail Free" card. If they narrate an attempted jailbreak and the resolution says they get out of jail, then they break out.

(Yes, this post is facetious but it has a point.)

Quote from: pawsplay;342498A story can emerge from good play. However, bad play can emerge from telling a story rather than creating one. Confusing RPG story-telling with literary story-telling is an error of equivocation.

Good play results in a story, and good GMing has prepared for a number of potential story developments...

But yes, telling a fixed story generally isn't good play. It's non-play, one of several forms... but there are times when a fixed story is useful: exposition of past events that have bearing on present state and future events. But even then, moderation is requisite.

@Pundit: I often go in with intent of story in broad brush strokes; a Villain, his goal, and his plan of action. Once the players go in, he may or may not get to proceed as planned. The players may or may not figure out he's the power behind the events that are happening. It makes my players far happier to be able to figure out it's a cohesive whole that they are in fact disrupting, rather than suspecting that they simply linked random elements together.

Quote from: aramis;342536@Pundit: I often go in with intent of story in broad brush strokes; a Villain, his goal, and his plan of action. Once the players go in, he may or may not get to proceed as planned. The players may or may not figure out he's the power behind the events that are happening. It makes my players far happier to be able to figure out it's a cohesive whole that they are in fact disrupting, rather than suspecting that they simply linked random elements together.

I generally do the same thing, actually. But that's not "creating a story". That is, at best, creating a "setup".

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;342579I generally do the same thing, actually. But that's not "creating a story". That is, at best, creating a "setup".

RPGPundit

The intent is, however, that story continues from the interaction of it and the players.

Just like a good novel shows that the world existed before we came to view the characters in it, a good RPG campaign has story before play, and the play continues that story.

That's part of why G123 worked for me... there's more going on than meets the eye, and in D123, you get into the why... but the story begins well before G1.

The intent is that some kind of ACTIVITY will happen, and that activity may then be turned into some kind of a story. Some may be better than others, you may end up with the brave heroes killing the orcs and rescuing the princess or you may end up with the brave heroes spending 7 hours of game time wandering through wilderness hexes without notable encounter or you may end up with the brave heroes all murdered by an Owlbear, game over.
The point is that "story" is INCIDENTAL. It happens as a By-product. The point of the whole thing is not "story", its adventure.

When you make the "setup" mentioned earlier, you do not already know how things will go. If you do, you're not playing an RPG. If you don't, you're not telling a story.
Its that fucking simple.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;342685When you make the "setup" mentioned earlier, you do not already know how things will go. If you do, you're not playing an RPG. If you don't, you're not telling a story.
Its that fucking simple.

RPGPundit

No it's not.

If you do know you could be railroading but you're still playing an RPG, not a very good one, IMO, but there you go. If you don't know, you could be telling a "story" in an improv manner, making it up as you go along.

Personally, I don't care if the so-called "story" happens before, during or after. I'm not too fond of aramis's "good play results in a story" but that's another sto...tale.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: RPGPundit;342685The point is that "story" is INCIDENTAL. It happens as a By-product. The point of the whole thing is not "story", its adventure.

RPGPundit

Sorry, but that's the real disconnect: I want story as the primary product of the process. One of my better campaigns never got into anything even close to "adventure" but wound up being an engaging and powerful story... told from the standpoint of the board of directors of a corporation.

The goal was to put characters into a situation where a story would result... and it did. Heated debates, plans made, actions taken by remote...

It was collaborative story creation, 5 players and the game, jointly all six contributing to make the setup into a story.

Quote from: aramis;342699Sorry, but that's the real disconnect: I want story as the primary product of the process...

Far be it from me to tell you to stop doing what you enjoy.

However, historically speaking, that isn't the purpose of playing an RPG, just as telling the story of a battle isn't the purpose of a wargame.

Quote from: Hieronymous Rex;342701However, historically speaking, that isn't the purpose of playing an RPG, just as telling the story of a battle isn't the purpose of a wargame.

Could you talk more about this? It's completely baffling to me, so we must be crossing some definitional stream somewhere (probably at "story") and I want to know why this is so obviously true to you and obviously false to me. Thanks!

Quote from: Halfjack;342705Could you talk more about this? It's completely baffling to me, so we must be crossing some definitional stream somewhere (probably at "story") and I want to know why this is so obviously true to you and obviously false to me. Thanks!

Since it was several pages ago, I'll just repost it:

QuoteThis definition [of "RPG"] can be found by tracing the history that lead up to the first published game unanimously agreed to be an RPG, D&D:

The Prussian wargame Kriegspiel, which originated about 1811, had a variant called Free Kriegspiel, in which a referee was allowed to change the rules to accommodate any unusual tactics the players might attempt. However, this game would probably not be considered an RPG.

To my knowledge, the first true RPG was Braunstein, a game based on wargame rules in which each player took control of a single character, and the referee (Major David Wesely) adjudicated their actions. Dave Arneson, coauthor of the original Dungeons & Dragons, was a player in the 4th session of this game (it wasn't really a campaign, just separate confrontations). You can read more about Braunstein here.

The first published RPG (and thus the archetype for purpose of definition) was titled and subtitled Dungeons & Dragons: Rules for Fantastic Medieval Wargames Campaigns Playable with Paper and Pencil and Miniature Figures. The books don't directly give a definition of the game; they assume that you understand what a wargame is. It presents itself as a variation on wargaming.

I would say, then, that the GM (who can alter the rules and scenario in order to simulate a game world) is what makes a game an RPG.

For example: if you were to play Monopoly, but added a GM, who could create economic situations, adjudicate one player's protection racket, and another player's Forex investment, then it would be an RPG.

Also, I'll repost Major Wesely's comment on the term:

Quote...I did not like the term "role-playing game" when it appeared, as "role playing games" that had nothing to do with what we were doing, already existed: The term was already being used for (1) a tool used to train actors for improvisation (an example being the Cheese Shop Game since imortalized by Monty Python) and (2) a tool used for group therapy and psychiatric analysis ("Pretend you are an animal. What kind of an animal do you want to be? How does your aniimal feel about Janet?") And using this already overloaded name did not help us look less nutty. I favored "Adventure Game" but that was siezed-upon at the time as a replacement for "Hobby Game" or "Adult Game", and now we are stuck with "RPG".

Quote from: Hieronymous Rex;342734Since it was several pages ago, I'll just repost it:

I would say, then, that the GM (who can alter the rules and scenario in order to simulate a game world) is what makes a game an RPG.

For example: if you were to play Monopoly, but added a GM, who could create economic situations, adjudicate one player's protection racket, and another player's Forex investment, then it would be an RPG.

That is not a bad definition but you are assuming a GM and youu are assuming said GM will allow you to act outside of the rules. Looking at MMORPGs I do think these are RPGs I don't like them for a lot of reasons but I think there is a space within them that players, not all players but some, use to role play.
For example when I played Wow one character I played was an Orcish Inventor that made whatever dodad it was that I had access to. I also used him as a mule for my main character to sell the stuff the other guy collected and posted to him. I could have done this sans roleplay of course but you can take the boy out of Manhattan and all that so rather than walk to the auction house I would stand on a stump and regale passers-by with tales of my wares. 'Roll-up Roll -up, one day only lovely Hunters leggin's I aint asking 3 gold Shit I aint even asking 4 gold, 3 gold and their yours and I'm cutting me own throat.' The Orc also skimmed an extra 20% off the top of any profit he made on the stuff he sold for my other character, bloody crook. Now to my mind that is roleplaying and WoW is definitely a game so ...

I really think there are ways of sucessfully removing the GM from a game and it still being an RGP. Maybe not a great RPG but fuck it there are lots of those. There might be already be games out there that use a card system or a virtual GM, I have no idea.

I think that a computer RPG  is properly a different thing. That is to say, while a traditional RPG is "a game with a GM", a computer RPG is "a computer game that resembles a traditional RPG".

For instance, a computer game is usually called an RPG when it has classes, levels, and the like. However, these things are not required for a pen and paper RPG.

Sorry, HR, I was more interested in your assertion that the purpose of a wargame is *not* to wind up telling a story about a battle.