One of my biggest hobbies is playing in role-playing games. Many people outside the hobby have only a vague idea of what that entails. As a Christian, I'm aware of some of the highly negative attitudes towards it that have existed in some quarters in the past and linger into the present day. Since I'm going to be talking about these games a lot on here, I might as well start with a description of the hobby as I see it.
A role-playing game is a collaborative story-telling exercise, using a combination of improvisational acting and task resolution rules. Unlike most acting, it is intended for the benefit of the participants rather than an outside audience. One person controls the setting and performs all incidental characters (known as NPCs). Each other player defines, controls and performs as one of the principal characters in the story (known as PCs). All events are narrated from the perspectives of the PCs.
When a character attempts to do something with multiple possible outcomes (such as jump across a gap) the rules come into play. Some form of randomiser is used (usually dice) and the result will either be the good outcome (make the jump) or the bad outcome (fall and die). The game rules determine the relative odds. In most cases the specific characteristics of the character will affect their odds of success.
Most games assume that all characters are bad at everything. When the character is created, players are issued with a standard number of points. These are used to gain competence in a chosen selection of key skills and abilities. If different selections are made by each player, different characters will be needed at different places in the story. Because every player experiences the game through the eyes of their own character, the story told has no single 'leading role'. Each PC must therefore have equal time in the spotlight if everyone is going to enjoy playing.
This is what role-playing is. This is ALL that role-playing is. Different games have wildly different content, but this is not necessarily related to the content of any other game. 'Paddington Bear: the RPG' would be a perfectly functional role-playing game (though likely too devoid of peril and drama to sustain the interest of the average adult gamer).
A wide variety of commercially published games – consisting of a rules set and expansive descriptions of a single fictional setting – are on the market today. Some of these DO contain material that I find unpleasant as a Christian and I refuse to play them for this reason. However, there is no reason to boycott the hobby as a whole on account of these - any more than there is reason to boycott all cinema or literature on account of some of the materials that have been published in these media. The only constants are the creation of fiction and the process of acting – neither of which are bad in my view.
It might seem appropriate to end this article with an explanation of why I play these games, rather than simply defining why I don't avoid them. In truth player motivation is a complex issue that I will explain more fully in a future article. However the simplest explanation for me comes from an old advert for the Dungeons and Dragons Player's Guide. “If you've ever been watching a film or reading a book and thought 'I wouldn't do that' when the hero does something stupid, this book is for you.”
Everyone enjoys stories, but at some point you end up disagreeing with the hero or wishing that the story had moved in anther direction. RPGs answer that feeling, permitting players to test themselves against the heroes of literature or to explore narrative paths that were left untouched by the franchise that they love. When a game goes well, the new stories they make are just as entertaining as the ones that inspired them.
I'd argue that the definition of a role play game is much broader than KingSpikeArcher suggests (he has personally run most examples of these exceptions).
ReplyDeleteLive Action Roleplay replaces the narrative with action and is usually organised by a team rather than an individual.
Troupe games have no single set story-teller but can instead the role can switch between players.
Computer RPGs are very different in their format but try to capture the "feel" of a truly interactive story with varying degrees of success.
There are plenty of other variations besides these that break the basic structure laid out above.
In fact I would simplify the definition into the idea that a role play game is any activity which involves one or more people portraying a character for purposes of mutual entertainment.
However I fully agree that a role play game is simply a medium in the same way that music, film or books are. The content of any medium fluctuates wildly (Here I quote Sturgeons Law : ninety percent of everything is crud http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon's_Law )
There are good games and poor quality ones. (Honestly there's some utterly dire stuff out there if you look hard enough, it would make 4Chan nauseous) but at the same time it is an insight into to wonderful things as well. I've started work helping to prepare aid workers for travelling overseas to disaster zones as a result of people I met and skills I developed from role play games. It's how I met a good many friends and learnt some important lessons about what it is like to be in another man's shoes..
For every genre of fiction or style of art there are games that reflect that style in wonderfully diverse ways.
Role play games have some stereotypes about them. Aside from the Chick tracts (which are unintentionally hilarious to read) there is the widely perpetrated stereotype that all Role Play games are cheap imitations of J.R.R. Tolkein's Middle Earth or the Conan serials in which brave heroes kill various non-humans and cackling evil stereotypes. However some of the great games are political dramas or period romances or high concept science fiction and these wonderful settings rarely get the same screen time because it's much easier to laugh at the orc killers.
I've run off on a tangent haven't I? Sorry