Roleplaying “Outside the Box”
by Paolo on Jun.11, 2009, under Meanderings
In gamer terms, “Roleplaying Games” can mean many things. For some, it means games like “Fallout 3” or “The Witcher.” For others, it means something like “Final Fantasy” or “Blue Dragon.” And then, for the select few, it means something like “Dungeons and Dragons.”
I have been playing table-top roleplaying games like “Dungeons and Dragons” for over 16 years. I even owned a first edition copy of AD&D (Advanced Dungeons & Dragons) which was passed to me from my brother. I do have a certain level of pedigree for my geekdom and I’m very thankful that my wife indulges them.
If you haven’t sat around a table with some of your best friends with sheets of paper and some polyhedral dice as your only tools to fuel your imagination, you have missed out on something special.
A friend of mine once said that games like “World of Warcraft” will make table-top gaming obsolete. And I will emphatically say that this is far from the truth.
Dwarven Metal Dice
For those who have never played a table-top game before, the “gamemaster” takes the place of the computer. It is the “gamemaster” who tells the players the scenario, comes up with challenges and story plot points for the session. And the players play within a certain restriction of rules and chances which is represented by the paper and dice. And because it is a human being who is running the game, there is no way that a computer can ever beat what a live human storyteller can do.
In the first podcast of “Shakespeare and Dragons” the speaker talks about the situation where the beginning gamemaster creates a really neat and elaborate dungeon where the players are supposed to have their adventure. This can also represent a whole team of developers creating a computer game who have a lot more time, skill and programming talent than the single teenage gamemaster. But then it poses the question of, “What if the players decide never to go in the dungeon and instead go start robbing villagers instead?”
Now… The beginning gamemaster is often at a loss because he has no idea how to bring the players to the story that he wants to tell. So the podcast goes on to tell how a more seasoned gamemaster can easily bend to the thieving players and tell a new kind of story, of freedom and of power, than the heroic adventuring that he initially set them upon. But the computer programmer and game designer is simply at a loss. The only way to really take into account plot derailment is simply to disallow it to “railroad” the plot.
No matter how hard you try, your computer won't let you kill this guy
How many times in a game have you wanted to wander around the city scape, only to be limited by an arbitrary map that “magically” blocks taking alternate paths? Sometimes it blocked by a structure or debris. Sometimes it is instant death. And sometimes, it is literally an invisible wall. But those are only physical blocks that prevent movement. Even in so-called “sandbox” games like Grand Theft Auto, you can’t kill important plot characters whenever and however you want to. But if it was a human who was running the story, you could.
One of the major issues in “sandbox” games is the idea of consequence. I’ve run roleplaying games of dark nihilism like “Cyberpunk 2.0.2.0.” which is a game in which the setting is a society like Grand Theft Auto except applied on a massive social scale. Players can murder strangers on the street with little consequence (or so it can be played.)
But as a gamemaster, I don’t let the players simply use the “services” of a nameless prostitute. I know her name. I create her story. And I can show her humanity by what I describe in their encounter. I describe the scars on her body from past abuses. I describe the drugs she takes to numb the emptiness she feels inside while she performs degrading acts simply to make money. I can tell the story so the players feel the the consequences of their actions, whereas a computer program is not able to custom tailor the story it tells.
Computer games will never make table-top roleplaying games obsolete. If anything, I think more people should play them and realize what they are missing and the stories they could be creating by thinking “outside the box.”
June 12th, 2009 on 7:48 am
Very interesting. I’ve never played D&D, but every now and then I come across a post like yours that makes me want to try it out.
I have to wonder, though: with wikis and user-generated content and all the other Web 2.0 buzzwords, do you think we could create a Massively Told Online Playable Story? (I expect this has been tried already, actually.)
June 12th, 2009 on 4:48 pm
There has been attempts using Forum technologies, using highly free-form round-robin storytelling. Wikis are usually supplemental information used to create a library of game logs, and extra errata for the game that players could use.
I’ve yet to see something done with Twitter or Facebook-like API. It may be something worth examining.
June 15th, 2009 on 4:19 am
MMORPGs will not make Tabletop gaming obsolete, what it’ll do is marginalize and make it even more of a niche product.
The main issue is barrier to entry. MMORPGs require you to pay 50 bucks upfront, 15/month; and then any time you want to play you can.
Table Top RPGs require you to gather friends, and set aside a regular (generally speaking) set time for gaming; plus you have to (generally speaking) be in the same general area. D&D is pushing this with the online gaming environment/whiteboard that it is pushing and I’ve heard good things about it.
I doubt I’ll give up gaming; I enjoy it, but I understand that for a lot of other people MMORPGs scratch a similar itch with a lot less outlay of time and/or money.
June 16th, 2009 on 2:27 pm
Done right, MMORPGs could actually be a gateway for table-top games and vice versa.
June 17th, 2009 on 4:36 am
Depends on what “done right” means – WoW has what 10 million+ subscribers – even if assuming 50% are regular players, you run into a case of need small little micro-worlds (similar to what WoW did with the Deathknight area) if the players are going to have lasting impact.
Your basic assumption is that most people WANT to tell stories – an assumption that I’d argue. At my table now I have 6 folks around my table now; two-three are fairly comfortable with whatever narrative control that I give them, the other two are happy to just move within the tales that other weave, and would just as happily socially game. Thankfully, I have no “stats and power” gamers, but I’ve seen plenty of them as well, where the game is power accumulation and wish fulfillment.
But yes, I do feel that they could be designed to go more hand-in-hand, but I don’t think they can quite be the gateway that you are looking for except by providing an alternative to the disaffected.
June 17th, 2009 on 8:00 pm
I’m not arguing that most people want to *tell* stories. Telling stories is very difficult and many people suffer from public speaking issues. It’s not about “telling stories,” but being “part of the story.”
It’s not about being disaffected, but drawing people in deeper into the world – into the story. Merchandising is one such way that this happens. And so is table-top roleplaying games.