PnP RPGs: videogames will never come close

[Saskwach]

I feel like saying controversial today so here goes.

Videogames are the most popular interactive medium of today- but they are not the best at what the medium uniquely offers; that title goes to pen and paper rpgs. In terms of pure interactivity- the central goal of any good game- pnp rpgs (hereafter simply RPGs) will always be the closest to the holy grail of pure simulated choice and consequence. RPGs present not only the tactical choices of who to shoot, who to disembowel, what spell to cast, but the type of choices missing from videogames altogether: actual story altering decisions.
In a videogame any meaningful choice that can be made has been mapped out months or years before by a its designers. Even the shining examples of the medium dazzle only with the mass of well-presented conundrums, and the number of responses- always various but always finite, and often misunderstanding the personal reason for the player's choice. Videogames thus have two different types of choice- interactivity- in them: planned choices in which the player is as important to the process as a coin toss or dice roll; and choices that change the game world, story, and characters in no significant way. You can shoot the bad guy or stab him, but you can't negotiate with him, run away, blow a hole in the wall beside him, ignore him totally and do something else meaningful, or tackle him and throw both of you off the balcony in a bittersweet ending.
RPGs though, offer all these choices and more: you have all the interactivity that another living person-the DM- can offer. A good DM will react to any choice you make unless it's truly stupid- and sometimes even then. This is real interactivity: a player having the power to totally change the story of the game he's playing.
There are some things videogames can't be challenged at- graphics, computing power, sound effects- all of these are besides the point of gaming: interactivity.

 

[Logan Westbrook]

You can shoot the bad guy or stab him, but you can't negotiate with him, run away, blow a hole in the wall beside him, ignore him totally and do something else meaningful, or tackle him and throw both of you off the balcony in a bittersweet ending.

Yet.

 

[Juan Regular]

I love PnP RPG's for the exact reasons you mentioned, but I also love videogames for a hell lot of things PnP could never offer (And I'm not talking about visuals).

 

[Frapple]

Yet.

Development time is far too long already for any company to take up a project, back to the graphics of UO and BGII tbh, then we could have massive amounts of content due to the short development time.

 

[Credge]

You can shoot the bad guy or stab him, but you can't negotiate with him, run away, blow a hole in the wall beside him, ignore him totally and do something else meaningful, or tackle him and throw both of you off the balcony in a bittersweet ending.

You can do all of those, however, you'll find them all in different games. Red Faction allowed you to blow holes in walls to get past whatever you wanted. The majority of RPG games now allow you to attempt to negotiate with the enemy. Almost all games allow you to run away. You can also ignore encounters in some games as well, although it usually isn't advisable. In Dark Messiah of Might and Magic you can kick people off of ledges and be knocked off with them because you took a running start to kick them.

All in all, though, PnP RPG's have the same restrictions that games do. What I mean is this:

Despite PnP being touted as a "Do anything you want" experience, it actually isn't. You still have to follow the rules of the game. Video games, generally, simply have a larger set of rules to follow. Most people don't understand that almost all video games are simply RPG's with a larger ruleset.

Those rulesets are getting smaller and smaller every few months.

Development time is far too long already for any company to take up a project, back to the graphics of UO and BGII tbh, then we could have massive amounts of content due to the short development time.

You don't need to take the graphics back in order to create an open-ended world with fewer and fewer rulesets. Take a look at Spore as an example. Within the rules of the game, you can do whatever you want... much more so than what the majority of PnP RPG's offer.

It's all up to the devs.

 

[Saskwach]

You can shoot the bad guy or stab him, but you can't negotiate with him, run away, blow a hole in the wall beside him, ignore him totally and do something else meaningful, or tackle him and throw both of you off the balcony in a bittersweet ending.

You can do all of those, however, you'll find them all in different games. Red Faction allowed you to blow holes in walls to get past whatever you wanted. The majority of RPG games now allow you to attempt to negotiate with the enemy. Almost all games allow you to run away. You can also ignore encounters in some games as well, although it usually isn't advisable. In Dark Messiah of Might and Magic you can kick people off of ledges and be knocked off with them because you took a running start to kick them.

All in all, though, PnP RPG's have the same restrictions that games do. What I mean is this:

Despite PnP being touted as a "Do anything you want" experience, it actually isn't. You still have to follow the rules of the game. Video games, generally, simply have a larger set of rules to follow. Most people don't understand that almost all video games are simply RPG's with a larger ruleset.

Those rulesets are getting smaller and smaller every few months.

Rule 0 of all RPGs: Any and all rules can be changed or disregarded as the DM sees fit. New rules can be attached and situations can even be resolved informally. If you're playing PnPs without Rule 0 then you're playing wrong.
That's beside the point, though: having rules=/=non-interactivity. This isn't even debatable.

"You can do all of those, however, you'll find them in different games".
This is exactly the problem. If you can't do anything in a game and have accurate results then it's not properly interactive. Since no one videogame does allow you to none of them are interactive in the same way an RPG is with a good DM. In an RPG, if you can convince a DM that what you're planning is plausible and reasonable he will figure out a way to do it, with or without the rules as written.

What I'm saying is that RPG's interactivity stems from there being a person behind the wheel, ready to turn onto any side street the players in the back seat ask for. Videogames are cars driven by computers; sometimes you're asked which way to turn, but you never leave the path the computer was told to take.

 

[Kermi]

The problem with PnP RPGs is that it relies on you or your friends being good storytellers. This is not always going to be the case and in the hands of a limited storyteller you're probably still going to be set on a linear path from introduction to conclusion with only how your character reacts to a given situation making any difference. While videogames have harsher adherence to rules and are more likely to be structured this way than a PnP game, the overall experience is generally more fulfilling.

They're also more convenient: I can pick up my 360 controller and play something whenever I feel like it. PnP games mean organising a day when my friends are available, clearing it with my fiancee who thinks PnP games are the most boring game ever conceived of after Warhammer (usually I have to aim for a day when she'll be out with friends or family to keep her from getting bored or feeling left out) then hope that someone actually prepared their next chapter.

 

[Saskwach]

The problem with PnP RPGs is that it relies on you or your friends being good storytellers. This is not always going to be the case and in the hands of a limited storyteller you're probably still going to be set on a linear path from introduction to conclusion with only how your character reacts to a given situation making any difference. While videogames have harsher adherence to rules and are more likely to be structured this way than a PnP game, the overall experience is generally more fulfilling.

They're also more convenient: I can pick up my 360 controller and play something whenever I feel like it. PnP games mean organising a day when my friends are available, clearing it with my fiancee who thinks PnP games are the most boring game ever conceived of after Warhammer (usually I have to aim for a day when she'll be out with friends or family to keep her from getting bored or feeling left out) then hope that someone actually prepared their next chapter.

Your first point could be aimed just as easily at videogames: bad game designers make a bad game just as bad DMs and players make a bad RPG session.
Your second is right, though. My quick gaming fixes are always of the electric kind, but my hearty gaming meals are my long-awaited, more complicated bouts of RPGs.

 

[Kermi]

Your first point could be aimed just as easily at videogames: bad game designers make a bad game just as bad DMs and players make a bad RPG session.

True, but I can read reviews for a game and find out more about it before I make the decision to play - or return it if I'm not enjoying it. If you have a regular RP group you're more or less stuck with them for better or worse. As in my second point, some people barely have time for one group let alone bouncing from one game to another.
Besides which, game designers are paid to writ for games and most of them are good at what they do. The chances of my PnP buddies providing the same quality of story and NPC characters are generally lower.

 

[Break]

Your second is right, though. My quick gaming fixes are always of the electric kind, but my hearty gaming meals are my long-awaited, more complicated bouts of RPGs.

Don't be silly. The proper response to "I don't have the time to organise it all" is, to use just one example, the internet [http://www.dndonlinegames.com/cmps_index.php].

There are some things videogames can't be challenged at- graphics, computing power, sound effects- all of these are besides the point of gaming: interactivity.

This is also a really silly thing to say. Why are all those things beside the point of gaming? Because you say so? Mind providing some reasons why we should believe you?

Even if we accept that "interactivity" is the sole purpose of gaming on your word, your initial conceit makes no sense at all. Who cares if PnPRPGs offers a more versatile experience? Choice =/= fun.

You're right, videogames will never come close to PnpRPGs. They're not trying to. Potatoes are better than crisps because you can do more with them? Please.

 

[zen5887]

Yeah I like PnP games more that video games nowdays..

 

[Fenixius]

There are some things videogames can't be challenged at- graphics, computing power, sound effects- all of these are besides the point of gaming: interactivity.

This is also a really silly thing to say. Why are all those things beside the point of gaming? Because you say so? Mind providing some reasons why we should believe you?

You're right, videogames will never come close to PnpRPGs. They're not trying to. Potatoes are better than crisps because you can do more with them? Please.

Because if interactivity isn't the point, go watch a movie. If they're not going for interactivity, what the hell are they going for? The stories are better in books, and often in films. I can get better graphics in a movie. They have real actors who don't sound like voice actors who've got no idea what their character is even supposed to look like. They're shorter, sure, but they're cheaper to go and rent/buy.

Even if we accept that "interactivity" is the sole purpose of gaming on your word, your initial conceit makes no sense at all. Who cares if PnPRPGs offers a more versatile experience? Choice =/= fun.

Choice != Fun? Compare the fun of playing a game with the fun of watching someone play a game. Not talking to them, just watching them play. It's not nearly as fun to watch a video of someone make a headshot as it is to have a try at making that shot yourself, is it? If you think it is, well... all I can say is that your idea of "fun" is completely different than mine. Videogames are all about the choices. Without the choices, it's a movie. Even if the choice is "shoot soldier A" versus "shoot soldier B", that's still a choice. It's up to the player to choose and do what he/she wants, and that's where the fun stems from. Pen and Paper just takes that to the extreme by dropping all the unnecessary bells and whistles, but providing a rules set so you can do anything. It lets you make any choice you want, not just the choices the devs have prepared for you.

Yes, there are rules, but they provide a framework, not a set of limits. I was playing an RPG-like game where people told me what to do next in an instant messaging system a while ago, and you know what the guy telling me what to do did? He told me to polish the doorknob. So I grabbed my coat, huffed and puffed on the doorknob, and polished it. Nothing could stop me from polishing it except me, and I chose not to. And once I'd polished that doorknob to a mirror shine, despite the fact that I very clearly wanted him to have me open the door so I could advance the plot, no, he insisted that I turn around, and polish the doorknob of the other door. I got to spend hours in the hidden subterranean base polishing the doors. Show me one single videogame where I could do that if I wanted. Just one.

 

[Leorex]

i always thought, that what some one needs to do is make a game that says what you cant do, as opposed to what you can do.

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

I kind of agree, as do most of my friends, many of whom have basically given up videogames but still enjoy PnP Roleplaying a lot. But PnP RPG's aren't for everyone, a bad group can wreck the experience, they take more time and effort to put together than playing a Videogame. Also... you can't PnP Roleplay alone, you need a group, usually of at least 2 or 3 people.

But on the plus side, PnP roleplaying can allow for some truly brilliant moments and a lot of interactive fun that videogames may NEVER be able to equal.

 

[Alex_P]

Video games will never do everything pen-and-paper games could possibly do, but they can do a lot of it. (No one pen-and-paper game can possibly do everything that pen-and-paper games could possibly do, either.)

Do you like wading through a dungeon as a tactical exercise or a way to let off some steam? Video games do that a lot better than pen-and-paper. They're faster, they're shinier, and the tactical choices are often richer (specifically because they more effectively apply constraints).

Do you like sitting through a story crafted by the GM, who might provide some illusion of choice but basically treats you like an audience more than a co-creator? Video games let you do that, and often with better storylines than some amateur can whip up with a few hours and a notebook.

Those two playstyles right there cover at least 50% of pen-and-paper RPG play, and current video games do both really, really well.
 


How about something less trivial?

Do you like to cultivate the illusion that the game world is "real" (in the sense of being detailed, consistent, and believable rather than the "I'm an elf in real life!" sense), perhaps? Do you try to "immerse" yourself in a character? Well, pen-and-paper RPGs and video-game RPGs can both fulfill that, just in different ways.

Sure, the human GM is most likely going to be much better at making stuff up on the fly to respond to player decisions, meaning that she can make your immediate world much more reactive. But, due to the basic nature of the medium, you're also stuck in something that's very transparently not a "world". The life you're trying to "immerse" into is a set of scenes, and it's pretty common to get situations where you imagine one thing and then minutes later have to modify it because of a detail someone else introduced.

Video games give you stable space and time for free. What you see is what you see. You're more constrained in your interactions with it, but the "world" is also more concrete. Even if the game artfully deletes its little people when they're out of view, it can still capably present the illusion of a virtual world that lives on around it.

So, it's really a trade-off there. More interactivity on the one hand, but a more tangible world on the other.
 


How about the big cool one: actually participating in the creation of a great story? Pen-and-paper games definitely do this better at the moment. But most of them still don't do it well, either. Too many -- blind to the nature of their own medium -- try to help you tell a story by giving you the tools to simulate a world (a fool's errand to begin with), and thereby end up giving you hundreds of pages of rules for getting shot and fighting monsters and basket-weaving at the expense of any kind of real structure you can craft a story around. Hell, many games don't even give you much good advice for making the "story" thing happen on your own!
 

-- Alex

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

Supposidly the Whitewolf games do a better job at making the "story" happen than the myriad of crunchy ruled D20 products, unfortunately most of their books are about pasty goths seducing pasty goths in an angsty angst fest.

 

[Saskwach]

Supposidly the Whitewolf games do a better job at making the "story" happen than the myriad of crunchy ruled D20 products, unfortunately most of their books are about pasty goths seducing pasty goths in an angsty angst fest.

I don't see how any system of rules for an RPG can affect the story of a session. That's down to the DM and the players.
(I get that you said supposedly, and I'm also turned off by the emo 'tude.)

 

[IridRadiant]

Video and/or computer games will never be the equal of PnP for the reason of spontaneity. I don't think that gaming will ever evolve to the point where you can pick up the game before it's finished (and I don't mean beta testing), do something original, and have a programmer respond to it real-time. Look at Spaceball's joke on renting itself before it was finished and ending with them looking at the backs of their own heads.

For example, my D&D group just stormed a castle. The DM expected us to use the front door, where all the NPC action was, but ad-libbed a kitchen waste chute when it was blatently apparent that we weren't going anywhere near the main concentration of defense and we were bound and determined to find another entrance (preferably where we could jump the guards without them initially aware of us).

 

[Alex_P]

Supposidly the Whitewolf games do a better job at making the "story" happen than the myriad of crunchy ruled D20 products, unfortunately most of their books are about pasty goths seducing pasty goths in an angsty angst fest.

They do a slightly better job of coaching the GM for "story" play (as opposed to tactical skirmish play).

The rules? Not really. They're a bit lighter and they have a few extras that set the tone a bit, but you're still locked into the same kind of basic structure. Their new system is a bit better, perhaps, but the one that most people probably remember playing -- "old" WoD (used by Vampire: the Masquerade) -- basically gave you the same thing as D&D: a basic system for success or failure on skills, detailed-yet-abstract rules for fighting, special rules for magical powers, and a few extra bits here and there, like a mildly controversial and not-that-great morality mechanic (D&D has one of those, too).

"New" WoD (used by games like Vampire: the Requiem) is significantly lighter but seems to still basically subscribe to the "get out of the way of the story" school of rules design.

... Which isn't necessarily bad, but I believe that effective storytelling games really need good constraints to make them shine.

-- Alex

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

I don't see how any system of rules for an RPG can affect the story of a session. That's down to the DM and the players.
(I get that you said supposedly, and I'm also turned off by the emo 'tude.)

They do have one product without Emo-Tude, ADVENTURE! but they hate it and never released suppliments.