Doctor, they're turning on each other!

Quote from: WeeklyOf course, the line is a bit arbitrary and can be easily blurred...

And I would argue it always has been blurred, ever since people have sat around and traded stories. RPGs have been doing this for as long as people have played RPGs.

Quote from: droogDoctor, they're turning on each other!

That's a good thing, it means people are having real discussion from a shared basis of interest.

Elliot, sometimes I think you need a holiday. Or a hot affair or something.

Quote from: CabMaybe you misunderstood my first point...

Yep. It seems that you're talking about choices made in-game while I'm mostly talking about builds and optimization.

Quote from: CabAre you just in a mood or something?

Theres nothing wrong with doing the 'wrong' thing, tactically, if its in character. Why should there be? Just like theres nothing wrong with a character weighting up his chances and doing what he things is the surest thing. Neither is powergaming, both are valid roleplaying.

The difference is that some people want to be mechanically rewarded for inefficient choices.  If I choose to have my fighter beat up a demon with his bare hands rather than his magic sword, the reward is that my guy is awesome.  To alter the game so that a punch is equal to a magic sword takes that awesome-osity away.  This example is from an actual game.  I chose the suboptimal route as a way of demonstrating how stonecold badass my PC was.  That would not have worked if the game had rewarded me mechanically.

Quote from: J ArcaneBelieve it or not, there is a vocal set amongst the "true roleplayer" crownd who seem to believe they should be able to do deliberately inefficient or suboptimal things, and be rewarded for it, and that if a game or GM does not do so, or if the other players in the group do not follow their example, then they're "powergaming".

Well, every crowd has its fanatics, of course. But there's definitely something to be said for not (or not at all) overly contemplating optimization when you're building your character or making detrimental choices in game because they're in character. Such behaviors shouldn't be punished and can even be rewarded (as good roleplaying, if nothing else).

One of the problems with "rewarding good roleplaying" is that it's highly subjective.  Are you rewarding effort?  Performance?  Entertainment?  Does the GM decide?  The person doing the roleplaying?  What if you think it's a great performance, but the other players aren't enjoying it?  

How I'm handling this in my game is to let the group decide what constitutes good roleplaying, and who should be rewarded for it.  This means some groups and games could reward long, emotive performances, while others could reward short but descriptive narration.

Quote from: StuartOne of the problems with "rewarding good roleplaying" is that it's highly subjective.  Are you rewarding effort?  Performance?  Entertainment?  Does the GM decide?  The person doing the roleplaying?  What if you think it's a great performance, but the other players aren't enjoying it?  

How I'm handling this in my game is to let the group decide what constitutes good roleplaying, and who should be rewarded for it.  This means some groups and games could reward long, emotive performances, while others could reward short but descriptive narration.

Well, aren't all rewards in the game pretty much based on the subjective whim of the GM?  Why should role-playing rewards be any different?

Quote from: jgantsWell, aren't all rewards in the game pretty much based on the subjective whim of the GM?  Why should role-playing rewards be any different?

Not true.  Any system will have optimal choices, for one, which inherently results in mechanically rewarding certain actions by making them more efficient.

In the more specific case, D&D in particular, has specific, predefined XP awards based on challenge rating, as well as a fairly guided progression of treasure rewards.  

It is certainly possible for a given group to houserule that, but the rules as actually written offer some fairly specific rewards.

Quote from: droogElliot, sometimes I think you need a holiday. Or a hot affair or something.

Thanks for the suggestion, I'm looking forward to a holiday in December. Now what does this have to do with the topic?

For myself, I'm looking forward to Ryan Dancey's efforts at RPG design. Given he has no creds in that department whatsoever, it should be an exciting read.

Quote from: CabThere really isn't a difference. In either game the DM starts with a premis, the players find that and then the PCs do what the players choose. The distinction between interractive storeytelling and roleplaying is entirely artificial.

People forget the wargame roots of RPGs. The idea is that you have the rules, create the scenario, and DM adjudicates the players actions, and the results of the dice stands for both alike. Players and the DM don't get to make up stuff to the scenario that isn't there.

A problem results when you move from the dungeon to the outdoors. A DM doesn't have the time to make up every single detail of a world so have to "wing" it. The rule then alters to be once a DM makes up something that how it is.

Creativity for the players comes in the responses to the challenges that are encountered given the limitations of the character, rules, or situation.

Creativity for the DM comes in playing the various roles both in terms of acting out the NPCs, figuring out the best strategy for the NPCs via the rules if some type of combat results, and finally the biggest challenge is how to move the scenario dynamically forward in time during play in response to player's action.

The DM is NOT an adversary he is a referee. There is a big difference.

The sum result of everyone doing this is the "story" of the session.

Interactive Storytelling makes the scenario fuzzy as all hell. The rule that the "world" in which the player move in is "fixed" gets thrown out the window. This is detrimental to overcoming challenges as they are tailored to fit the situation or story people are trying to create.

The only part that Ryan has right in all this is that DM is hard. You are a little "God" simulating this world for your player. This is a "hard" thing and there is a lot of prep involved to pull it off. The whole storytelling line of games is a reaction to how hard it is to DM. It is by far easier to sit around with a group of friend and bullshit a story and run a few combat with a rule-lite system.

The choice of the dungeon in OD&D was an EXCELLENT way of jump starting RPGS. It was a focused environment with a lot of conventions that made it easy for novice DMs to get into. This is probably one reason why a lot of "old school" games are being created or revitalized.

Because Storytelling games ditch the wargame parts, they are very different than RPGs.

Ryan Dancey makes me sad.
He shows everyone what it´s like to be a salesman in a creative hobby/working field.

With high stakes, he´d be rich.

But with the stakes so low, the salesman is now down to imitating the creative people via "market analysis" while being removed from current data.

Really, a sad thing to watch.

Ok. I am really not going to make any judgements right now. I want to see the product. If it has any value for me, I hell care not who wrote it or what marketing bullshit he accompanies it with. Otherwise, I care not as well.