Lately I've seen a lot of comments about simple, rules light systems and how they "get out of the way" of roleplaying.

I'll grant that games with extensive metagaming aspects, either gamist or narrativist can definitely get in the way of roleplaying, but most of the time people use that phrase, I think they're referring to the level of crunch.

Could someone give me some example of games that have systems that "get in the way" of roleplaying and how they get in the way?

I think the attitude towards rules that D&D has cultivated over the last decade has absolutely had a negative impact on roleplaying in game, as they discourage players from engaging in actions not prescribed in the rules.

I would say that reports from friends about one of the western games that used cards (Dust Devils) took people out of their character thinking space, and put them into worrying about their card hands. While I like Marvel Saga, its simple enough that it seems not to have done this, yet that may not be true about other games.

I'm one of those people who want people thinking about character actions in the context of their character, rather the context of their hand of cards, or dice rolls.

High levels in 3E/3.5E D&D with the nightmarish bookkeeping and slow combat.

More fundamentally, a system which is easily abusable that munchkin powergamers take over completely and find every way to veto the DM with respect to the ruleset.  This same mindset can probably be brought to just about any rpg, by the same munchkin powergamer types.

High level Exalted, with its multi-Charm/Essence/Limit Breaks tracking.  Of course, that pretty much describes Exalted from the get-go.  I always thought it was a neat game hobbled by its mechanics.

!i!

I guess it depends on if you are talking about role playing or immersion.  Role Playing I find only breaks down in combat generally when the combat itself really breaks out of the narrative mode and flips to a table top battle.  D&D I find to be one of the worst for this personally, IMO.    A good rule of them for me is when I start describing an action as "I'll move my character and attack" vs "I move and attack".  Even if the later still may be visually demonstrated with some kind of counter.

kryyst makes a good distinction between combat and the rest.

The abstractions necessary for combat can make any game seem like a wargame.

The rest of the time is a bit different.

But in all cases, it's largely a question of playstyle, especially GMing style. If every time a player says, "I do so-and-so," the GM looks up the rule for it, or says, "oh but you have another option, let's look it up!" that gets in the way of the roleplaying.

So to avoid systems getting in the way of the roleplaying, you have to have a GM who either knows the rules very well, or who is willing to just make a ruling and stick to it. Sure, some systems are more prone to this - if there are only 8 pages to the thing, the GM can't waste much time looking things up, if there are 800, well... But in the end it's down to the people at the table.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;359292So to avoid systems getting in the way of the roleplaying, you have to have a GM who either knows the rules very well, or who is willing to just make a ruling and stick to it.

"Intuitive improvisation is the secret of genius." - Max Zorin explains what makes a Great GM in A View to a Kill

Regards,
David R

I think you get this problem when on one hand you have a clear picture of what your character would want to do in a specific situation and what the system allows you to do (with any reasonable hope of success).

A typical case is non-lethal combat. A lot of systems do not handle that non-lethal combat very well. This tends to encourage the player to use lethal force even the situation it would not necessarily be call for it simply because the alternatives are too awkward and unreliable.

I also think systems that are very crunchy can tend to drive you towards playing the system rather than playing that character. Instead of just doing what feels right for the character, you are encouraged to think in terms of how the rules work and make the rules work for you. This tends to happen mostly in combat and, for a lot of people, I don't think a that is much of a problem; there is a long established tradition among roleplayers to treat combat as a largely ooc activity - something separate from the rest of the roleplaying game. I am not sure I agree, but I've seen plenty of games played that way.

A lot is also what you are used to. Mechanics which you've used a lot in one form or another in time tend fade into the background whereas more appear gimmicky the first few times we play them.

It has a lot to do with your style of roleplaying, I think. Personally, I find FATE and similar rules-light systems totally deadening to creativity because they lack the complex system of rules that empower PCs and turn all tactical decision-making into a metagame of "Pander to the DM".

On the other hand, I find games like HERO or GURPS nearly unplayable in practice (personally; I know many people like them quite a lot). They possess such a great complexity that combat (especially) totally bogs down.

For me, the rules 'get in the way' whenever I'm tempted/forced, by the rules, to do something that doesn't make sense for my character.
In Deadlands the cards and chips yank me out of immersion and attempt to structure my play in ways I don't like.
Last game my character got shot up a bit and despite having a stack of chips I let my character bleed into unconsciousness (he's a kind of unlucky sad sack sort of guy). Everyone else was chipping away damage quite freely. So having the chips there kind of sets me up as a malcontent or something. I'm 'not playing right'.
Our Earthdawn GM has actually lectured me about this a few times... because I refuse to optimize my character's skills or tactics... and go out of my way to avoid using player knowledge.

I guess any set of rules can 'get in the way' if they don't facilitate/encourage your preferred play style.

Quote from: Simlasa;359471For me, the rules 'get in the way' whenever I'm tempted/forced, by the rules, to do something that doesn't make sense for my character.

Ooh, that's a very good one.  Normally, I think of "getting in the way" as a forced sub-routine, like mathematical calculations or repetitive sequences of die-rolling, but you've hit on a subtle one.  Especially the notion that the structure of a game may tempt players to do something in character that their characters wouldn't.

!i!

Quote from: Simlasa;359471I guess any set of rules can 'get in the way' if they don't facilitate/encourage your preferred play style.

It's always amusing to watch hardcore munchkin powergamers trying to play rpg games which do not facilitate their preferred play style of creating overpowered characters that kill every NPC/monster in sight and taking all their stuff.  

Quote from: Ian Absentia;359473but you've hit on a subtle one.  Especially the notion that the structure of a game may tempt players to do something in character that their characters wouldn't.

!i!

Is it off topic to mention that some players might, sometimes, be a little too inflexible about "what their character would do"? If a system offers potential to make characters evolve in a direction that wasn't foreseen, it's not always bad. Or is it?

For me complexity of mechanics isn't factor -- I can roleplay and immerse in systems like GURPS and Hero.

Rules that govern social or psychological interactions can cause problems. I'm okay with those things effecting NPCs (although it can damage immersion for me), but having mechanics effect how my PC believes or behaves is, in most cases, a no-go.

Note: Thinks like mind-control, panic (especially panic induced by something like psychic powers or Fear Gas or whatever), or loss of Sanity from seeing Cthulhu aren't what I'm talking about -- in those extreme states there's no assumption of self-control, so leaving it to the mechanics seems reasonable.

But any kind of social mechanic which would determine how my character would react in a non-extreme, normal social situation would definitionally interfere with my roleplaying experience.

Cheers,
-E.