Gabriel what is really amusing about your original post is that Hasbro/WOTC/ Lucasfilm was trying to get gamers to do EXACTLY that about 4 or 5 years ago.

 At Gen*Con all of the demos of the STAR WARS roleplaying game that were "official" were using the  SW action figures and NOT 25mm figures.  Many of us thought this was funny because wer knew that the majority of gamers tended to prefer 25mm figures for their RPGs.

 So...all you guys needed were the SW RPG rules - and it would have looked like an official WOTC demo game from about 5 years ago.

- E.W.C.

Quote from: flyingmiceI have maintained for years that roleplaying is a natural skill, not a learned one. Kids roleplay all the time, spontaneously, without ever being taught.

[SNIP]

What has happened is that most adults have forgotten how to roleplay, and forgotten they ever did it. It's like they got re-programmed at the Middle School level. That is why I contend we don't need "How to roleplay" junk. "Relax and just do it" is all that's really needed. It's the game part that's odd, not the roleplaying.

This is really interesting. If that's the case, could it be that roleplaying theory should be concerned with what needs to be unlearned? Like de=programming all that Middle School (or wherever the hell it comes from) conditioning? I wonder what guidelines for that sort of thing would look like?

Offhand, I'd maybe start with some basic improv principles, like "there are no bad ideas," and "work with what people throw out there." (Though it occurs to me that kids roleplaying don't tend to embrace the "no Blocking" principle; at least whenever I play "pretend" with a kid they're bossy as hell.) I dunno, what do you guys think? I'm not sure if Theater Improv is the way to go, but something about shedding inhibitions and giving input confidently without overthinking would be central, I think.

Peace,
-Joel

PS A "Me too," Gabriel, in asserting that you rock and are awesome.

Quote from: MelinglorThis is really interesting. If that's the case, could it be that roleplaying theory should be concerned with what needs to be unlearned? Like de=programming all that Middle School (or wherever the hell it comes from) conditioning? I wonder what guidelines for that sort of thing would look like?

Offhand, I'd maybe start with some basic improv principles, like "there are no bad ideas," and "work with what people throw out there." (Though it occurs to me that kids roleplaying don't tend to embrace the "no Blocking" principle; at least whenever I play "pretend" with a kid they're bossy as hell.) I dunno, what do you guys think? I'm not sure if Theater Improv is the way to go, but something about shedding inhibitions and giving input confidently without overthinking would be central, I think.

Peace,
-Joel



PS A "Me too," Gabriel, in asserting that you rock and are awesome.

I think that's it in a nutshell - give them confidence in themselves, de-inhibit them, get them to let their imaginations loose. It's UN-learning, not learning. This seems to work great for me - I have half a dozen high-school age kids playing in my game, and they all had to un-learn this way. The only kid who never had to un-learn was my son, who never seemed to pick up the stiffness most kids attain in middle school.

-clash

Quote from: MelinglorOffhand, I'd maybe start with some basic improv principles, like "there are no bad ideas," and "work with what people throw out there." (Though it occurs to me that kids roleplaying don't tend to embrace the "no Blocking" principle; at least whenever I play "pretend" with a kid they're bossy as hell.) I dunno, what do you guys think? I'm not sure if Theater Improv is the way to go, but something about shedding inhibitions and giving input confidently without overthinking would be central, I think.

I don't disagree with you at a meta-level.  I think you have to be careful about how you express the unlearning.  If you start by saying something like "it's like Improv" you turn people off.  If you keep it strictly about the unlearning process and don't tie it into "it's like..." you can avoid certain flame wars. I know you weren't saying it's the way.  It's an interesting enough possibility that I'm hoping you can avoid those flame wars in your search.

Quote from: Michael MWhen we get uppity about which rules are better or the way things are supposed to be we should remember that at the heart of it we want the roles not the rules when we play. The rules serve the roles or they're out. Because we can just grab a couple action figures and get by without any rules thank you very much.

I don't think that the rules serve the Role Play anymore than Role Play serves the rules.  They are different aspects of the RPG as a whole. Role Play does not equal RPG, and Rule Set does not equal RPG.  RPG + Rule Set = RPG. The trick is in finding the balance that's right for you. I'm fine with action figures with my kids. But when I want to play an RPG, I have different expectations.

For you, the Roles are more important (at least that's what I infer from your statements). For mean, it's more balance – Rules and Roles. For others, it's more Rules, less Roles.  So saying you can just toos the rules and play the roles is, well, a bit uppity.

Quote from: James J SkachI don't think that the rules serve the Role Play anymore than Role Play serves the rules.  They are different aspects of the RPG as a whole. Role Play does not equal RPG, and Rule Set does not equal RPG.  RPG + Rule Set = RPG. The trick is in finding the balance that's right for you. I'm fine with action figures with my kids. But when I want to play an RPG, I have different expectations.

For you, the Roles are more important (at least that's what I infer from your statements). For mean, it's more balance – Rules and Roles. For others, it's more Rules, less Roles.  So saying you can just toos the rules and play the roles is, well, a bit uppity.

I guess i did come off as a bit uppity. It wasn't my intention. I was just waving the flag a bit for the idea of embracing that child-like notion of make-believe as part of the hobby. I think that is where a lot of the magic happens. I didn't mean to make it sound like a campaign that everyone should play that way, but I can see it very much came across that way. What I am campaigning for is that if people are after the roleplay and are having trouble finding it they need to tap into that same attitude when they had when they were kids playing make-believe.

In the end I agree with you that an RPG is roleplay + ruleset. In fact, that is what I was saying that without the ruleset you just have a roleplaying activity but not necessarily a game. So, if you want to improve roleplay do not look to the rules, look to pure roleplay activities, like action figure playing. And what I was trying to say when I mentioned 'tossing' the rules(which is admittedly heavy-handed, like in a book-burning crusade kind of heavy-handed) was that you may find some rulesets actually hamper getting yourself into the roleplay frame of mind. In which case, feel free to let roleplay trump ruleset when the two disagree. =)

Quote from: Michael MI guess i did come off as a bit uppity. It wasn't my intention. I was just waving the flag a bit for the idea of embracing that child-like notion of make-believe as part of the hobby. I think that is where a lot of the magic happens. I didn't mean to make it sound like a campaign that everyone should play that way, but I can see it very much came across that way. What I am campaigning for is that if people are after the roleplay and are having trouble finding it they need to tap into that same attitude when they had when they were kids playing make-believe.

In the end I agree with you that an RPG is roleplay + ruleset. In fact, that is what I was saying that without the ruleset you just have a roleplaying activity but not necessarily a game. So, if you want to improve roleplay do not look to the rules, look to pure roleplay activities, like action figure playing. And what I was trying to say when I mentioned 'tossing' the rules(which is admittedly heavy-handed, like in a book-burning crusade kind of heavy-handed) was that you may find some rulesets actually hamper getting yourself into the roleplay frame of mind. In which case, feel free to let roleplay trump ruleset when the two disagree. =)

Then we are, as far as I can tell, in agreement.

Quote from: GabrielOne thing is that the figures were sort of the "character sheets."  Their representations, as well as our shared knowledge of the Star Wars movies and the characters in them, provided the definitions of the characters terms of personality and capabilities.  Another thing is that we each played more than one character.  We controlled a wide range of figures in our play, and these characters were mixed heroes, villains, NPCs, and mooks distributed between the two of us.  Finally, there was no GM.  We played adversarial roles against our own characters and each others'.  Things happened merely because we wanted them to happen.  Each player had equal authorial power.

I went pretty much right from playing with toy cars and action figures into role-playing and, in fact, my earliest homebrew rules were for Star Wars action figures and my earliest role-playing games had no GM,the players played multiple characters, and we played  adversarial roles for each other.  As such, I have a pretty good idea of what I got from using a rule system and playing using the conventional GM/player structure.  Can all you describe be done in an RPG?  Yes.  I've done it.  It's how my earliest Traveller games were played.  But, personally, I've been there, done that, clearly remember what I used to do and like what I do now better.

In fact, one of the reasons why I've never seen role-playing as competative or about getting stuff is that despite playing tons of board games as well as a kid, I quickly associated RPGs more closely with the cooperative imaginative play with action figures, toy cars, and Legos and not competitive board games.

Quote from: GabrielThe only goal was entertainment.  Immersion was not a goal, and may not have been attainable in the circumstances.

I would think it would be difficult.  What I did see, with both action figures and those early RPGs, was players who would essentially create themselves (or a version of themselves) to stick into the game for avatar play.  This was less common with Star Wars figures but more common with things like Legos, Action Jacksons, MAC figures, toy cars, and other generic character toys that weren't linked to specific TV or movie properties.

Quote from: GabrielIt struck me that this is what the Forge is after, exactly this style of play.  However, instead of starting with two people who want the same goal and merely want to play a story, they seem to start with the concept of two people who can't agree, who have some desire for oneupsmanship and need an outside arbitrating force of rules and a GM to then force them through those rules and arbitration to tell an appropriate story.

I sometimes wonder if I'm the only one who remembers doing this as a kid because they make it sound like they've never seen or done anything like that before.

Quote from: GabrielAnother thing to think of: Is playing with action figures an RPG or not?  Why so?  My attitude is that it is not.  Playing with the figures is about play.  It isn't about competition, which is why RPGs need a GM to arbitrate matters (sometimes to provide outside competition to the players) and rules to facilitate things and provide a framework and boundary for the competition.

I've never looked at the GM as being in a competitive role or the objective being competition.  Like I said, I've always seen role-playing games to be a close cousin to the sort of action figure play you described.  As such, I think they can be a form of role-playing game, though I think they differ from what we normally mean by that term in some very important ways.