Are you a Roll-player or a Role-player?

[insmouth]

Sorry Logan - I also meant Long Campaign. I tend to term a game as a campaign and each time you sit down to play a session. Just my twisted terminology!

[logan9a]

Originally Posted by insmouth

Sorry Logan - I also meant Long Campaign. I tend to term a game as a campaign and each time you sit down to play a session. Just my twisted terminology!

Oh - OK. My terminology:

Session - when you sit down to play a game.
Campaign - interconnected series of adventures.

[ReaperSmurf]

Role-player here... but haven't played for over twelve months, and have at least one friend who'd be interested in playing something again.

I've also written my own system, however it's not quite finished. The basic mechanics are done, but the magic system isn't complete so it only works in a no-magic genre at the moment. If I had people to play with I'd probably get the inspiration to sit down and finish it off...

[TickledBlue]

Interesting question roll vs role and I think one that can be a little problematic. Personally I prefer story over rules - which is why one of my favourite games of all time is Tribe 8. If you love a rich, detailed and thought provoking backstory I can heartily recommend this one (if you can still find it).

What it boils down to though, I think, is play style and group expectations. Fantomas mentioned earlier in the thread that I ran a very rules light game where people didn't even have character sheets till many sessions into the game. That was a lot of fun for me, but it is hard to keep going especially as some players started to feel directionless and uncertain of where they wanted to take their characters and the game as a whole. The problem there I think was that I didn't provide a rigid enough plot structure and the lack of rules didn't give the players a clear understanding of what they could and couldn't do. Instead they relied upon me to 'adjudicate' - and I'm sure that in some instances they felt I may have been unfair. But what this did give us was a greater feel for the characters and the plot. The players really owned who they were and the world that they were in.

At the moment I'm running Shadowrun and sticking as closely as I can to the rules (though not the background). I'd had a request for a greater level of character chance of death as some of my players felt that I was too easy on them and they didn't feel a sense of danger in encounters. Sticking to the combat rules makes it easy for me to kill off a character without being seen as arbitrary - I'm very careful to roll everything in the open and explain all adds/subtracts as I go. This helps them feel like their playing against the game as opposed to against me (it also helps that I don't cheer when the bad guys hurt them).

Mind you the only character to have been 'killed off' was actually handed to a slave trader as the group felt the character was too dangerous to have around . What I'm finding with the more focused 'roll' playing is that the game has become more strategic and tactical in nature and more focused on the combat (which is now taking a lot longer to complete - sometimes multiple sessions) than the plot. Oh the plot is still there but it doesn't consume the same ratio of time that it did in my more open game.

I guess what I'm saying is that I can see the benefits of both types of games, I prefer one but injecting the other type is always good value and the real goal should be to achieve a balance that works for the group as a whole. At the end of the day the object is to have fun. I'll always lean towards the 'role' style of gameplay, but having a good mix of 'roll' in there can change up the gameplay and inject some spice as well.

When this becomes a problem is when you have a player or players who prefer rules based play, in a game where the GM is rules light and story focused. And vice versa of course. I've been in a few of these and it really comes down to how the GM and to a lesser extent the rest of the players handle the situation. As I said before, the aim is to have fun, and there's the old adage of a plan never surviving first contact with the enemy. Its like that with a game as well. The GM needs to adapt the game to suit the players and the players need to adapt to suit the GM and other players. Its when one or the other becomes inflexible that the game becomes unpleasant and not worth playing. Great advice? If only I could stick to it myself

[Hildulf]

Role player, definitely.

We do a lot of D20 Modern, mixed with lots of other stuff, and lots of resource material for inspiration. But we are definitely role-players.
Comes with the drama geek territory, and all of us portrayed various characters for many years at Renaissance Faires.

[Lythe]

Originally Posted by fantomas

What sort of game do you prefer, one that is rules heavy or one where the rules are light?

Personally I've been leaning towards more rules light games lately. For example a few months ago a game I was involved in (run by TickledBlue) started with no character sheets. We played for a couple of months only making the occasional dice roll and did not have any stats or skills etc noted down. It went quite well. Part of it being because everyone had come up with a character concept & background which allowed for having a basic idea of what we could & couldn't do.

All the RPGs I've played in the last couple of years it's been the setting/the background/the story and journey that I've enjoyed. The rules are just something to assist. If the rules get in the way of this then the rules go out the door.

The people who have run the games I've played have handled this quite well & not gotten bogged down in the rules.

Wow! what a great question!

I'd have to say I'm a bit of both, probably leaning a bit more to roll than role 60/40.

I love to research and plan my characters development so that I don't end up gimped, playing a character I hate, but I also love to get into the feel of the character and role play.

[cougar75]

Gee Roll or Role playing.... as I rolling dice is a part of most RPGs (most) these two kinda gp hand in hand so I guess I do both although I prefer the Role playing side of my games.

A bigger problem to my way of thinking is the stat keeping that can go into some games, I've seen DMs who expect you to have paper representations of scrolls and potions on your person when you turn up to play otherwise you can't use them also when swimming a river or on fire expect you to roll to see how much equipment you loose. Worse game for this IMO is Traveller where the game itself seems to attract people who know exactly how many nuts, screws and nails are in each jar in the she and when they bough them and what the weather was like. Apologies to all you Traveller fans out there but I'm sure you know what I mean, or maybe I've just been unlucky. Anyway although stats are important you need to know how hard you can squish Goblins or agents of Pentax you can take things to far and to my way of thinking this just slows down the game and leads to table talk which leads to Simpsons quotes, Conan quotes, singing the theme to Conan (the Barbarian and the Destroyer, someone deciding that they have to watch Conan now... as you can see the guys I role play with are easily distracted so a fast game concentrating on chest thumping and silly voices is your best plan as a GM.

[Lichbane]

It depends on how I'm feeling actually.

I remember circumventing an entire section of a mates intricately planned campaign because I sat down and have a chat with a crucial NPC. Ok so the dragon was nasty and angry and very pissed off ... but it didn't mean that I couldn't have "a good old fashioned dragon to halfling chat" and figure out a comprimise to the dilemma.

And on other occasions I just want to hit things and make them go ouch.

[Yrsa]

Originally Posted by Hildulf

But we are definitely role-players.
Comes with the drama geek territory, and all of us portrayed various characters for many years at Renaissance Faires.

I resemble that remark

Of course, considering I'm part of that "we" you're talking about, I guess that all makes a certain amount of sense.

I was lucky enough to be spoon-fed by role players (notice the e ) when I first started playing - so it stuck. As for the drama geek/Renaissance Faire thing mentioned above - it's the chicken-and-the-egg for me... I'm just doomed to carry the "e"

[Zhul]

I love both. I like to get into a character, think up his background, his motivation for adventuring, and so on - concentrating on "the fluff" of a character to make them fun to play. However, I also like tweaking "the crunch' of a character so I'm effective (but I don't do munchkining, that leads to no fun for everyone).