Over in the Mongtrav2 thread, there was mention of adventure games and rpg's and some sort of difference between them. What would people here consider to be an adventure game? What would the difference be between an adventure game and an rpg? Are they just the same thing with a different focus?
To me, the difference between RPGs and adventure games are best qualified by comparing Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay (http://warhammerfantasyroleplay.com) (a RPG) to Warhammer Quest (https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1634/warhammer-quest) (an adventure game).
Adventure games are hybrid board games with light RPG elements, adding random elements of danger to the game. An RPG, on the other hand, is the evolution beyond the board.
Shawn Driscoll is the one who was pushing this distinction in the MgT2 thread, though I confess I only have the haziest idea what he is talking about.
So far as I can tell, he believes that immersive roleplaying with the players making decisions from an in-character perspective based on what their characters would know and feel about a situation was basically not known in the early hobby - certainly it must be a post-1977 innovation, by his reckoning, since he classes Classic Traveller as an adventure game.
Presumably he sees adventure gaming as playing a tabletop RPG (or whatever you call the genre of games that includes adventure games and RPGs in Driscollworld) with no more identification with your PC than you'd have with a pawn in chess. I don't know anyone who takes that approach to RPGs who actually stuck with the hobby for long.
I don't know what Shawn Discroll is talking about in AG versus RPGs.
What I do know is that we have SPI's Freedom in the Galaxy on one hand and West End's Star Wars the RPG on the other. Both pretty much address the same type of setting yet Freedom is considered a wargame and Star Wars the RPG is considered of course an RPG.
Or better yet why is Melee and Wizards are wargames but Fantasy Trip is a RPG?
My opinion is that what makes an RPG an RPG is focus not mechanics. A game with individual characters with different levels of abilities is a wargame if it focuses on a competition between two or more sides. That the game progresses to some type of definite end.
RPGs in contrast are focused on players interacting with a setting as their characters with the action adjudicated by a human referee. It typically but not always organized as a campaign with interlinked session with some type of character progression.
So you can't look at a rulebook and just say it is a wargame, RPGs, (storygame, etc). You have to look at what you are meant to do with it. What does the author say the ultimate purpose of this set of rules.
People make arbitrary bullshit distinctions all the time.
"Role playing game" is a term somebody pulled out of his ass in 1976 and we all said "sounds good."
There never was a precise taxonomic analysis.
I see "Adventure Game" mostly used to sell an RPG to a wider non-RPG audience, given that the term "Roleplaying Game" is often associated with computer games these days. Its purely for marketing and there is no real distinction.
Examples include Mistborn, Lone Wolf and Pokémon Jr.
Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;875560People make arbitrary bullshit distinctions all the time.
"Role playing game" is a term somebody pulled out of his ass in 1976 and we all said "sounds good."
There never was a precise taxonomic analysis.
Which is funny - because it might also be a sub-culture reference based on where you're from. In the 70's and even today, when I was living in LA, if you said "role-playing" it meant kinky role-play... I still get that occasionally when adults ask me "what is roleplaying - is it that stuff where your wife pretends to be a cop or a nurse or something?"
Next time that happens, I'm going say "No, that's Adventure Gaming."
And of course in a videogame context just about anything with a plot and an identifiable main character is referred to as an adventure game these days, regardless of how unlike the old text adventures or point-and-click adventures it is.
It's a near-meaningless term by this point, applied to so many things that have nothing in common beyond being games with which some manner of adventure is associated.
In board gaming circles an Adventure game usually has a board of some sort and usually more rigid and focused rules and scope. Dungeoncrawling devoid, or darn close to, of role playing would be the best example. Melee/Wizard, Warhammer Quest, HeroQuest, Arkham Horror and Descent come to mind. Solo Gamebooks fall into this as well.
But there are board games that drift more and more into actual RPGs.
And some publishers will of course label something as an RPG when it obviously is not. Looking at you Games Workshop!
Quote from: Warthur;875569And of course in a videogame context just about anything with a plot and an identifiable main character is referred to as an adventure game these days, regardless of how unlike the old text adventures or point-and-click adventures it is.
I'm out of the loop. I thought they were still calling them 'RPGs'.
Quote from: Omega;875575And some publishers will of course label something as an RPG when it obviously is not. Looking at you Games Workshop!
Just curious, which game(s) did they do that with?
Quote from: Simlasa;875577Just curious, which game(s) did they do that with?
Space Hulk the board game. Says RPG on the original version. Reprints dropped it.
Divisive bullshit. Nerds trying to pass themselves off as smarter than other nerds by dint of their superior taste in elfgames. No difference from Pundit's anti-storygame tirades, or John Wick's Tomb of Horrors screed.
There might be something to the distinction, but it's up to SD to define his terms. Note there's a difference between whether a distinction is conceptually meaningful or rigorous, and whether it uses accessible terminology. Or here, "not an RPG" can be perfectly meaningful and useful if you define your terms, but still piss people off. Sometimes that's the point--but sometimes not.
Anyway, IIRC "adventure gaming" is what Weseley wanted to call the hobby such as it was in the Braunstein/Ananab/Blackmoor/Greyhawk days, but RPG is what stuck.
Also, as suggested by some of the comments above, Adventure was an early text-based computer game that spawned a genre, which cross-pollinated with TTRPGs. Not sure when "RPG" or "CRPG" started being used for some computer games--was Apshai called that?
I reiterate what I said before on the matter, having been the initial person in conflict with Shawn: this was a straw man argument with no root to it beyond condescension.
The point being initially argued against was the introduction of boon/bane dice in the Traveller 2nd edition, which I suggested was a vague ruling. His response was then to suggest, in a convoluted and condescending fashion, that I didn't understand what 'real' roleplaying was.
Figure that one out for yourselves.
For me, the only real distinction between RPGs, outside of obvious things like genre and system, is between immersive games (where long term campaigns become possible) and novelty games (essentially, one shots). However, I'm not trying to be an authority on these matters.
Quote from: Arminius;875596Also, as suggested by some of the comments above, Adventure was an early text-based computer game that spawned a genre, which cross-pollinated with TTRPGs. Not sure when "RPG" or "CRPG" started being used for some computer games--was Apshai called that?
Chris Crawford in The Art of Computer Game Design (1982) gave a taxonomy of computer games, distinguishing "adventure games" (descended from the text based games you mention) and "D&D games" (more combat oriented and inspired by D&D) and then describes the "merging of these two genres into a new class of games, the fantasy role-playing ("FRP") games". (He mentions Temple of Apshai as a "D&D game".)
:confused:
Not that it matters at all, but when it comes to computer/videogames I always thought of the old text-based Infogram games, and newer stuff like Kings Quest, Kyrandia and the Monkey Island games as 'adventure games'... they're not much about combat and more about searching and choices. AFAIK your character doesn't 'level up' in those games they way they do in RPGs like Final Fantasy and such. So combat and character improvement seem to be what I associate with CRPGs.
No, I think you're onto something. It sounds like backwards taxonomy creep (totally a thing, too ;-) ). That is, computer game taxonomists often distinguish computer Adventure Games from computer Role Playing Games. I wonder if the dude in question was trying to extend that to tabletop games.
Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;875560People make arbitrary bullshit distinctions all the time.
"Role playing game" is a term somebody pulled out of his ass in 1976 and we all said "sounds good."
There never was a precise taxonomic analysis.
Right here.
We waste far too much energy and breath trying to invent labels, and then foam at the mouth for decades defending our inventions. To a large degree, this is the root of my hatred for GNS: knowing that a certain game is "simulationist" -- or, far more correctly, that someone
claims that it's "simulationist" -- does jack shit to help me run it or play it.
Gronan, just out of curiosity, what did Gary call D&D coming out of the gate? A wargame, or some other appellation?
Quote from: Ravenswing;875635We waste far too much energy and breath trying to invent labels, and then foam at the mouth for decades defending our inventions.
I've got a degree in botany and so much energy was spent identifying/classifying plants by their morphology... I could see the use but always knew it was imaginary language... so I was secretly joyful when DNA evidence started coming out that a good bit of the old relationships were wrong.
Quote from: Warthur;875549Shawn Driscoll is the one who was pushing this distinction in the MgT2 thread, though I confess I only have the haziest idea what he is talking about.
So far as I can tell, he believes that immersive roleplaying with the players making decisions from an in-character perspective based on what their characters would know and feel about a situation was basically not known in the early hobby - certainly it must be a post-1977 innovation, by his reckoning, since he classes Classic Traveller as an adventure game.
Which is not true to the point of being funny:).
Gronan has told the tale how in pre-publication OD&D games, they were playing without knowing what the rules were.
Quote from: Ravenswing;875635Right here.
We waste far too much energy and breath trying to invent labels, and then foam at the mouth for decades defending our inventions. To a large degree, this is the root of my hatred for GNS: knowing that a certain game is "simulationist" -- or, far more correctly, that someone claims that it's "simulationist" -- does jack shit to help me run it or play it.
Gronan, just out of curiosity, what did Gary call D&D coming out of the gate? A wargame, or some other appellation?
Isn't the answer to that on the OD&D's cover, and in TSR's name;)?
For people who missed the thread that birthed this one, here's some context:
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;875491They are different game styles is all. I prefer only one of them. Most people prefer only one of them. No one plays both styles.
There is a world of difference between the Classic rules and the Mongoose rules. They are not compatible with each other. Players that don't role-play go for the Classic rules and are more than happy with them. The rules cater to their adventure gaming style. If you know of a Classic Traveller player group that role-plays, I would love to hear about it. I have not heard of any since '77.
And when I called him on that bullshit, this is the reply I got:
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;875505No problem, Nathan. I'm used to non-role-players getting upset with me. I would think that strength in numbers would make you feel better on your side. It's nice to be in bigger group where others play your style. But no, that never seems to be the case, adventure gamers are not happy as long as there are still role-players in much smaller groups.
As you can see, it's the typical ego driven nonsense you find on the internet when someone decides they get to be the gate keeper of who is a real participant in their hobby.
My own approach is actually an extreme minority position where the players don't have any rules on their character sheets and as much of the game mechanics as possible are held behind the screen. Players only have description to make decision making off of and can only do things by describing what their character does and having dialogue. I also get to play in a game like that another friend runs about once a month.
However, since I expressed a positive initial impression of Classic Traveller (and more importantly, disagreed with Shawn Driscoll) I immediately lost my role-player status and became one of the teeming masses of adventure gamers who just can't be happy as long as real role-players are doing their thing out there some where. Woe is me. :rotfl:
It was both ludicrous and hilarious.
Quote from: Ravenswing;875635Gronan, just out of curiosity, what did Gary call D&D coming out of the gate? A wargame, or some other appellation?
He called it a "Fantastic Medieval Wargame" on the cover.
The original rules don't call it a Roleplaying game, but they do say that it's a game where you play a role:
QuoteBefore they begin, players must decide what role they will play in the campaign, human or otherwise, fighter, cleric, or magic-user.
I think "playing a role" morphed into "role-playing", and that this is a description of the game, not a name applied later to describe optional extra elements. That is, the term describes the central conceit of D&D - the referee tells you what your character sees / hears / experiences, you ask questions about this information and say what your character does. The rules are used to resolve situations, as opposed to driving gameplay.
Quote from: ZWEIHÄNDER;875539To me, the difference between RPGs and adventure games are best qualified by comparing Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay (http://warhammerfantasyroleplay.com) (a RPG) to Warhammer Quest (https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1634/warhammer-quest) (an adventure game).
Adventure games are hybrid board games with light RPG elements, adding random elements of danger to the game. An RPG, on the other hand, is the evolution beyond the board.
Quote from: Omega;875575In board gaming circles an Adventure game usually has a board of some sort and usually more rigid and focused rules and scope. Dungeoncrawling devoid, or darn close to, of role playing would be the best example. Melee/Wizard, Warhammer Quest, HeroQuest, Arkham Horror and Descent come to mind. Solo Gamebooks fall into this as well.
This is roughly my understanding of the terms as normally used.
Quote from: TrippyHippy;875597I reiterate what I said before on the matter, having been the initial person in conflict with Shawn: this was a straw man argument with no root to it beyond condescension.
In this particular case, given the context and how he hurled the "not-roleplay" epithet around, I'm quite convinced that this is how Shawn was using the terms. He is, however, more than welcome to refute this conclusion.
Quote from: NathanIW;875654My own approach is actually an extreme minority position where the players don't have any rules on their character sheets and as much of the game mechanics as possible are held behind the screen. Players only have description to make decision making off of and can only do things by describing what their character does and having dialogue.
We experimented with that style in my last ACKS campaign and it went quite well, despite initial skepticism from many of those involved (including myself). Having tried it, I think I prefer it, since it so handily cuts min-maxing, charop, and other approaches focused more on rules mastery than on interaction off at the knees. Not to mention that it's much friendlier to players who are new to the game and/or the hobby.
Quote from: nDervish;875661We experimented with that style in my last ACKS campaign and it went quite well, despite initial skepticism from many of those involved (including myself). Having tried it, I think I prefer it, since it so handily cuts min-maxing, charop, and other approaches focused more on rules mastery than on interaction off at the knees. Not to mention that it's much friendlier to players who are new to the game and/or the hobby.
In my group it stuck for all those reasons. I had to talk a couple people into trying it. People occasionally ask to sit in on a session to learn how to play first and I just tell them they don't have anything really to learn. Just describe what they want to do. Ask other player's for advice. Go from there.
Every so often I go around the table at the beginning of a session and ask people questions about their character and what they are good at and so on to make sure I'm on the same page as them and it's never come up that they've developed a radically different set of expectations.
Quote from: Skarg;875628No, I think you're onto something. It sounds like backwards taxonomy creep (totally a thing, too ;-) ). That is, computer game taxonomists often distinguish computer Adventure Games from computer Role Playing Games. I wonder if the dude in question was trying to extend that to tabletop games.
Boardgamers use this distinction too.
Its useful too to sort out types of play.
If someone says they are setting up an adventure game then I can reasonably guess its going to be something like Arkham Horror, Descent, Doom, Gears of War, HeroQuest or the 3 D&D Adventure Board Games for example.
Its most often used synonymously with pure hack-n-slash dungeoncrawlers.
If they say they are running an RPG then I would not expect any of the above.
Drifting the term Adventure Game back into RPGs just doesnt work. The term is used differently.
If someone says they are setting up an adventure RPG session that could mean alot of things. But it does not usually bring to mind a pure hack-n-slash dungeoncrawl. For that theyd say they are setting up a dungeoncrawl or hack-n-slash session.
Roleplaying is what Shawn Driscoll does by himself in his solo roleplaying games. Adventure gaming is what everyone else does because we lack his intellectual ability to obfuscate, deviate, hem, and haw.
Quote from: nDervish;875661We experimented with that style in my last ACKS campaign and it went quite well, despite initial skepticism from many of those involved (including myself). Having tried it, I think I prefer it, since it so handily cuts min-maxing, charop, and other approaches focused more on rules mastery than on interaction off at the knees. Not to mention that it's much friendlier to players who are new to the game and/or the hobby.
Most people like it once they try it, though it takes a bit to get them weaned off attribute modifiers.
I am having a much harder time getting people weaned on "adventure paths" and modules to learn to find their own adventures.
RPG's? Adventure Games? Pfft. Plebes. I play FMW's.
Fantastic Medieval Wargames!
/gong!
SO mote it be! /devilhorns!
and thus... a new tribe was born.
Quote from: tenbones;875753RPG's? Adventure Games? Pfft. Plebes. I play FMW's.
Fantastic Medieval Wargames!
/gong!
SO mote it be! /devilhorns!
and thus... a new tribe was born.
We prefer to be known as "Board Challenged" now-a-days. :hmm:
I prefer calling mine Math Garage House Games, and I was playing the 12" adventures when it was only available on acetate. Poseurs... :hand:
/returns to my "Echoes of the Afternoon" cold brew coffee.
Quote from: Matt;875692Roleplaying is what Shawn Driscoll does by himself in his solo roleplaying games.
I've never heard it called that before.
Quote from: Skywalker;875566I see "Adventure Game" mostly used to sell an RPG to a wider non-RPG audience.
Right - or as a form of branding for an intro box set that's particularly complete in itself (with preset characters, stand ups, dice, etc), but doesn't require anything else.
But I believe the origin of "adventure game" predates the explosion of computer RPGs into the mainstream and more so was trying to ditch the term "role-playing game".
"Adventure Game" seems like a meaningless term to me. And I would suspect it is rooted in anti-regular-RPG sentiment.
Quote from: RPGPundit;876435"Adventure Game" seems like a meaningless term to me. And I would suspect it is rooted in anti-regular-RPG sentiment.
Probably. Personally, I think it's a lot more rooted in the Satanic Panic, when if you played RPGs you were
EVIL. Mike Stackpole first started using the term 'Adventure Games' at this time, at the first GAMA meeting (I'm a founding member, by the way), and was supported in this by Rick Loomis and Dave Arneson. (And it was also the name of Dave's little publishing company, too.) I haven't heard it being used in years, especially after the panic died down for lack of interest in the media.
I think I recall Ryan Dancy trying to change the terminology of the D&D game to being an 'adventure game' as opposed to labelling it an 'RPG' in the early D20 days.
But yes, I generally think it's a pretty meaningless distinction.
Quote from: Warthur;875549Shawn Driscoll is the one who was pushing this distinction in the MgT2 thread, though I confess I only have the haziest idea what he is talking about.
So far as I can tell, he believes that immersive roleplaying with the players making decisions from an in-character perspective based on what their characters would know and feel about a situation was basically not known in the early hobby - certainly it must be a post-1977 innovation, by his reckoning, since he classes Classic Traveller as an adventure game.
Presumably he sees adventure gaming as playing a tabletop RPG (or whatever you call the genre of games that includes adventure games and RPGs in Driscollworld) with no more identification with your PC than you'd have with a pawn in chess. I don't know anyone who takes that approach to RPGs who actually stuck with the hobby for long.
Discussions of immersion in the wargames community predate D&D by at least a few decades.
Quote from: RPGPundit;876435"Adventure Game" seems like a meaningless term to me. And I would suspect it is rooted in anti-regular-RPG sentiment.
Its meaningless to RPGs because its a term from outside RPGs. And terms within RPGs allready existed to cover the things Adventure Game supposedly is referring to in RPGs. And they mean different things outside of RPGs. The opposite thing even.
Quote from: TristramEvans;876517Discussions of immersion in the wargames community predate D&D by at least a few decades.
Does Shawn know this?
Considering how RPG is completely co-opted by the video game world, I don't see a reason why Adventure Games would not be a more useful title moving forward for our hobby.
We tried to push the RPG vs. CRPG terms for a while, but the video game companies won and now RPG is their term and, at best, we have pen and paper RPG.
CRPG is still in use. Problem is that with most any popular term there are people who will misuse it. MMO is one I see misused alot. Ive seen people slap "RPG" on PC games little more than tetris.
Eventually someone will brand their TTRPG as a MMO...
Quote from: estar;875551I don't know what Shawn Driscoll is talking about in AG versus RPGs.
These guys are adventure gaming. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGVV4CCzFuY
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;876587These guys are adventure gaming. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGVV4CCzFuY
I don't think thats terminology that's going to catch on.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;876587These guys are adventure gaming. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kGVV4CCzFuY
What
specific features of what they are doing brings you to that conclusion? What
specific things would they need to do to be roleplaying, in your eyes?