PnP RPGs: videogames will never come close

[Alex_P]

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.

Well, among pen-and-paper games, I can think of a few that work like that...

Polaris. You can narrate whatever. Like, seriously whatever. It's freer than a lot of "freeform" games. The only thing that's sacred and special is the protagonist's demise. Another player can contest things you say to make you take them back or allow some kind of concession.

Wushu. You can pretty much narrate whatever as long as it doesn't contradict somebody else, doesn't resolve the big issue in a scene, and doesn't make someone else at the table go "That sucks! Make up something else!" (I'm mostly basing this on Wushu Open Reloaded, which is a more generic and more Creative-Commons-y version of the system.)

-- Alex

 

[Zemalac]

I agree with Saskwach. Pen and paper role-playing games really give you the most creative experience possible. Video games might give you the option to do some really cool stuff, but--and here is the key--only if the delevopers decide to put it in. If they don't allow you to do a certain thing, then you simply cannot do it. Whereas in a PnP you can do anything. I'll give you an example. I've heard a lot about how Whitewolf is emo and gothic, but the one time I played one of their games (WoD) the mood was more noir than anything else. This was because our GM looked at the emo stuff and decided to do something else with it. He took a game famed for being a gothic emo anst-fest and turned it into a supernatural noir game. Does any video game allow you that sort of creative control over it? If there is one, then I'd like to get it.

Not saying PnP games are better than their digital counterparts, just that they give you a greater variety of choice.

 

[Fenixius]

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

You're absolutely right, Alex. I argued above that PnP games can do things Videogames cannot. And I'm right, they can. What I explicitly chose not to mentioned was that Videogames can cater to different experiences and do certain other things better than PnP games do. So you're absolutely right, it's a tradeoff. If all you want to do is go make some headshots, don't think I'm suggesting that you should get out a dice and roll to see if you hit. I'm not. But in terms of story, theoretically, at least, PnP is superior right now at freeform stories and emergent gameplay than videogames as a whole.

I do of course acknowledge that it's very dependant on the DM you have and the sort of game he wants to play and the sort of story he wants to tell. But is that necessarily a problem? As long as the players know their DM, they can figure out the sort of story he's running, and choose intelligently whether or not to join them for that session.

I was just annoyed before that someone decided to say that "choice != fun", which I must disagree with. I fully acknoweldge the prowess of videogames at instant fun, without need to gather the party in one place.

 

[Alex_P]

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.

Simple counterexamples:

In one system, killing people gives a character cool powers and shiny treasure. In another, killing people gives a character lasting psychological trauma. How many players do you know who would make the exact same decisions in both games?

Most RPG systems tell you the consequences of an action, and that directly affects which actions you're going to choose. (Some games do more or do something else instead.)
 

The key thing to understand is that the system as used in play matters, and that isn't necessarily the same as the system as written in the book. (Hell, I have yet to see an pen-and-paper RPG book that actually tells you everything you need to know to play a good game. You always have to fill in a ton of procedural holes yourself.)

Nevertheless, for most games and most groups, even if you're just making everything up as you go along, the stuff in the game book -- rules, "fluff," art, advice -- is a very big influence on what you do in play.

-- Alex

 

[Alex_P]

If all you want to do is go make some headshots, don't think I'm suggesting that you should get out a dice and roll to see if you hit. I'm not. But in terms of story, theoretically, at least, PnP is superior right now at freeform stories and emergent gameplay than videogames as a whole.

Sure thing.

In my opinion, most pen-and-paper games are critically flawed because they don't really focus on the stuff the medium does well -- like that story thing we keep mentioning. Instead they give you rules for rolling dice to see if you got a headshot!

-- Alex

 

[Fenixius]

In my opinion, most pen-and-paper games are critically flawed because they don't really focus on the stuff the medium does well -- like that story thing we keep mentioning. Instead they give you rules for rolling dice to see if you got a headshot!

What do you mean? How would it support storytelling in a way more meaningful than providing a framework for pretty much any kind of challenge?

 

[EvilEngineNumberNine]

Actually, if the devs keep going in the same direction as the original series. Fallout 3 might have all of the features of PnP minus playing with others.
High hopes? Yes.
Impossible? No.

 

[whitemidget]

The interesting thing is that even though it's easier to play a video game, and it's annoying scheduling time to get your friends together to play a PnP game, we do something like merging the ideas of scheduling and instant gratification by setting a regular day of the week to raid on WoW, or to play Counterstrike.

The problem is that there is a much more negative opinion of the PnP games because it uses imagination rather than blatantly telling you what you look like, what you're carrying, and what you're supposed to do.

Choice is fun, and that's true for both types of game. For example, you can CHOOSE to go through Metal Gear Solid 2 without killing anyone, or you can kill everyone, even if they don't see you. My friend (a long time buddy and a D&D partner) actually decided to kill everyone in MGS3 because he DECIDED that it would be in Big Boss's character to do something like that. I don't agree with him, but I see what he's doing - immersing himself in the character. The limit that is with video games is that the character is not your own, in a PnP game or even on an RP server in an MMO, the character is more yours, and the decisions are more readily made.

Another problem people have with PnP games is that they believe the rules are complicated, which is also not true. They just don't want to look at one page of a book. If you have a good GM, he will teach you in a way that you will always remember how to play the game. I've passed the way I learned on to other people, and it's great.

So I think PnP games are just as good as video games, just a little misconstrued in this "OMGWTFBBL HALO IS GHEY LOLOL COD IZ BETTAR U R A NERD 4 PLAYIN DUNEGS N DRAGONS" world we have. Because aren't you the nerd too for fanboying one game over another? I'm done. Time for bed.

 

[Rack]

A good game is much easier to find than a good GM. Mostly RPGs surpass computer games because of the face to face social aspect.

 

[Fenixius]

A good game is much easier to find than a good GM.

You bring up an interesting dilemma there. We need some sort of GM store. Or at least some sort of online course.

 

[Telperion]

You bring up an interesting dilemma there. We need some sort of GM store. Or at least some sort of online course.

While you are at it: could we have a Player store as well? Because I need players come September for a Changeling: the Lost game.

 

[Fenixius]

You bring up an interesting dilemma there. We need some sort of GM store. Or at least some sort of online course.

While you are at it: could we have a Player store as well? Because I need players come September for a Changeling: the Lost game.

Sure, why not? In fact, let's go and open the People store, for all your people needs!

...wait, isn't that slavery?

Quiet you! Store opening in July! Just have to go round up some slaves, er, some staff. Does anyone have a net, by the way?

 

[Break]

Because if interactivity isn't the point, go watch a movie...

I hadn't yet gotten to why he's wrong. I was asking him to explain his stance. Making an assumption as controversial as "computing power is pointless" without backing it up, is extremely one-sided.

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.

Choice =/= fun, because it's not just a simple sliding scale. Having more choices does not equate having a better time. When you just want to go shoot some aliens, who the fuck cares if you have the option of stopping in the middle of a fight, making a cup of tea, and conversing with them at length on the true duties of a soldier? Screw that, I'm going to shoot them in the face. And if I'm shooting them in the face, I'd much rather stare down the barrel of a gun, than roll a die.

I'd recommend to the OP that he stops making broad, sweeping assumptions, and refine the word "videogames" to whatever genre Morrowind is in. Which certainly isn't just plain RPGs, because classic RPGs are as freeform and choice-bound as Halo.

 

[Saskwach]

Because if interactivity isn't the point, go watch a movie...

I hadn't yet gotten to why he's wrong. I was asking him to explain his stance. Making an assumption as controversial as "computing power is pointless" without backing it up, is extremely one-sided.

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.

Choice =/= fun, because it's not just a simple sliding scale. Having more choices does not equate having a better time. When you just want to go shoot some aliens, who the fuck cares if you have the option of stopping in the middle of a fight, making a cup of tea, and conversing with them at length on the true duties of a soldier? Screw that, I'm going to shoot them in the face. And if I'm shooting them in the face, I'd much rather stare down the barrel of a gun, than roll a die.

I'd recommend to the OP that he stops making broad, sweeping assumptions, and refine the word "videogames" to whatever genre Morrowind is in. Which certainly isn't just plain RPGs, because classic RPGs are as freeform and choice-bound as Halo.

By computing power I was referring to the power of PCs to do oodles of calculations to ascertain the flight path of a bullet which, though very nice, has nothing to do with the core interactivity of a game.
As to your last contention I kept the term "videogames" broad-though applied it as much to Fallout as to Morrowind- because every videogame, that is, a game whose entire world is simulated by a computer of some sort, are fundamentally held back by this problem. I explained that problem in my OP.

 

[Break]

Oodles of calculations to ascertain the flight path of a bullet has a hell of a lot to do with the core interactivity of games that focus on realistic gunplay.

Right, look. More choices are great. If you had as much control over your actions in a standard shooter as you do in a PnPRPG, then that shooter would be all kinds of godly. I agree with that. I fail to see a reason why you wouldn't agree with that.

But that's not what you tried to prove. Your central point was that "PnPRPGs are superior to all types of videogaming because of the increased element of choice". Which is bullshit. PnPRPGs are superior to something like Kotor, which essentially is an attempt at bringing PnPRPGs to the electronic world. But by the very fact that PnPRPGs are played with a pen and paper, it's impossible to compare one with a straightforward FPS.

 

[Saskwach]

Oodles of calculations to ascertain the flight path of a bullet has a hell of a lot to do with the core interactivity of games that focus on realistic gunplay.

Right, look. More choices are great. If you had as much control over your actions in a standard shooter as you do in a PnPRPG, then that shooter would be all kinds of godly. I agree with that. I fail to see a reason why you wouldn't agree with that.

But that's not what you tried to prove. Your central point was that "PnPRPGs are superior to all types of videogaming because of the increased element of choice". Which is bullshit. PnPRPGs are superior to something like Kotor, which essentially is an attempt at bringing PnPRPGs to the electronic world. But by the very fact that PnPRPGs are played with a pen and paper, it's impossible to compare one with a straightforward FPS.

You've seen a hole in my reasoning that I was too stubborn to correct: calculations can be used for certain types of interaction that RPGs are incapable of. Importantly though, PCs are still not capable of any real type of interactivity; the type in which any plausible solution can and will be allowed by the game. You can shoot any pixel on the enemy's body but it's rare that you can reason with his brain pixels, and it's impossible that you can use your own reasoning- not pre-determined choices- to do so. Interactivity and choice in videogames are mirages. They're very pretty ones, though.
When I've been comparing RPGs with "videogames" it has been in the sense of different mediums, not genres. You're right that FPSes can't be directly compared with RPGs in their kind of interactivity but I never said that they should be. I defined the type of interactivity- arguable true interactivity- I meant: the interactivity that allows you to choose any solution that seems plausible.

 

[SamuraiAndPig]

I've been playing D&D for years now (and I mean years, I'm 25 and started in 5th or 6th grade - do the math), generally as my group's default DM, and I will agree that PnP games don't always give you more choices. In fact, alot of the PnP games I play on the non-DM side are pretty damn linear. It comes down to who you've got writing the narrative and how well they can run the game on the fly. Also there is the social aspect of being in front of another person, which you don't really need with video games, even multiplayer, and there are rules to learn. When I taught my little sister to play D&D 2nd edition it took her months of reading the rulebooks and playing with my friends and I to get it down.

And really, it depends on what you want. I love D&D because I enjoy manipulating the rules and writing, but sometimes I like to fire up Counterstrike or whatever and blast away. Video games offer more instant gratification and you don't need to use your imagination or hammer out the equation(s) to see if your bullet hits the intended target. You can't get that in a PnP game unless your brain can process that math in a millionth of a second and your eyes can project the visuals on a wall like that museum guy in Ghostbusters 2.

And that would just be weird.

 

[tobyornottoby]

both videogames and pnprpg's offer the same thing: a simulation. rules. how things work.

the difference however, as you're pointing at it, is where the 'content creation' comes from. In the case of videogames, it has to be build by the designers, which takes up a lot of resources. In the case of pnprpgs, all that hard work is done by your own imagination, which makes them very work-light and manageable

This is real interactivity: a player having the power to totally change the story of the game he's playing.

first of all, like others said, there is more to games than story. actually the ludologic movement that directly opposes story in games (as it brings linearity and less interaction).

next to that, what is the value of more choice? yes, in a game that wants to simulate the 'real world', like an pnprpg, everything should be as realistic as possible. but a lot of meaningful play is generated from a few interesting choices, and less can be more.

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.

Very true, linear storyheavy videogames fall short on the interactive part.

However, this isn't neccessarily a bad thing. I for one enjoy them. I'd rather have a strong narrative than more freedom/options/interactivity.

 

[Break]

You've seen a hole in my reasoning that I was too stubborn to correct: calculations can be used for certain types of interaction that RPGs are incapable of. Importantly though, PCs are still not capable of any real type of interactivity; the type in which any plausible solution can and will be allowed by the game. You can shoot any pixel on the enemy's body but it's rare that you can reason with his brain pixels, and it's impossible that you can use your own reasoning- not pre-determined choices- to do so. Interactivity and choice in videogames are mirages. They're very pretty ones, though.
When I've been comparing RPGs with "videogames" it has been in the sense of different mediums, not genres. You're right that FPSes can't be directly compared with RPGs in their kind of interactivity but I never said that they should be. I defined the type of interactivity- arguable true interactivity- I meant: the interactivity that allows you to choose any solution that seems plausible.

Oh, right, so it's just that you made a preposterous comparison. You may as well be touting the fact that a professional game of DnD offers a more involved playing experience than reading The Warlock of Firetop Mountain. What's stopping people from replacing dice-rolls and stats with actual skill, and playing out a PnPRPG-style castle-defense scenario in a big Halo LAN session?

 

[PedroSteckecilo]

A good game is much easier to find than a good GM. Mostly RPGs surpass computer games because of the face to face social aspect.

This is a great truism and a good clarifier of the fact that while PnP Roleplaying is, at its best, much better than videogames... good GM's who run those magic games are hard to come by. Thankfully, my group is lucky, we have 3 possibly 4 very good GM's out of a group of 7.