What are RPG's really about: Characters or situations?
Which is more important?
 
If you take the fully detailed characters with epic hopes and dreams and put them in a suvivable vacuum by themselves, can it still be a fulfilling experience?
 
If you have mute, identical, non-sentient robot characters that are weapons in a war against all life itself, where the Princes of the Galactic Alien Federation who created them are constatntly fighting with the Allied Earth Robotic Reprogramming Agency. Would they be able to have fun?
 
Or take D&D for example. What if you build characters with no names or player classes only to fight them in an arena, are you still Role-Playing?
 
What if two players build characters with back historys and only talk in a room alone? Are they still gaming?
 
Just something I've been pondering lately. Thoughts?

i think RPGs are all about characters IN situations. Not just one or the other. Characters are more important than the situations, but characters cannot be heros without situations.

The players are very important, but not necessarily so the characters.
I've played with a lot of people who don't really invest a lot in their characters, but still have a blast playing. You know, they're the folks who say, "My guy goes and checks out that sound down the hall." However, without a dramatic situation to put these same players in, there's just no way to have a good time.
Neither life nor entertainment may exist in a vacuum.

Characters: situations inevitably follow.

Quote from: Mcrowi think RPGs are all about characters IN situations. Not just one or the other. Characters are more important than the situations, but characters cannot be heros without situations.

What if the charatcers already ARE heroes?

Quote from: KrakaJakWhat if the charatcers already ARE heroes?

then there are no worries because there is an equal balance between characters and situaional importance.

by nature heros who are important wouldn't be in unimportant situations.

Quote from: KrakaJakIf you take the fully detailed characters with epic hopes and dreams and put them in a suvivable vacuum by themselves, can it still be a fulfilling experience?

Their hopes and dreams don't exist in that vacuum, because there'[s nothing for them to fix onto.  Likewise, their desires, frustrations, and so on.

For those characters to be complete, they must be somewhere.

Quote from: GrimGentCharacters: situations inevitably follow.

Situations: characters inevitably follow.

Quote from: beejazzSituations: characters inevitably follow.

A tree falls down in the forest, but there is no one around to hear it.

Say wha!? Anyway, to me at least, character is defined by ACTION. In all caps.

Quote from: GrimGentA tree falls down in the forest, but there is no one around to hear it.

A tree falls in the forest and hits a Mime, does anyone care?

Situations. Characters are defined by goals which can only come about/be resolved by situations. I think.

Quote from: SpikeA tree falls in the forest and hits a Mime, does anyone care?

Well, there you'd have a character in a situation, so yes. A matter of life and death: the thrilling saga of an injured mime's desperate struggle to escape the savage wilderness! Or perhaps it symbolizes the natural world striking back at the artifice and pretension of civilization! Oh, the possibilities.

Quote from: GrimGentWell, there you'd have a character in a situation, so yes. A matter of life and death: the thrilling saga of an injured mime's desperate struggle to escape the savage wilderness! Or perhaps it symbolizes the natural world striking back at the artifice and pretension of civilization! Oh, the possibilities.

Ah, but what were you planning to use for mechanics? I was thinking something involving Charades coupled with non-euclidean dice...

Quote from: Simon OwenSituations. Characters are defined by goals which can only come about/be resolved by situations. I think.

I think you are right on.

Welcome to the boards Simon!