D&D General The adventure game vs the role-playing game

[robus]

They just sit around talking in character the majority of the time. For Campaign 1 that's about 76% of the time and for Campaign 2 that's about 79% of the time. They just sit around talking in character a lot. Like a lot a lot.

I’ll push back on that a bit. I think CR actually balances all three pillars very well. I’d say 30% is exploration, Matt really gives them a lot of mysteries and environments to interact with. 30% is the players interacting and engaging with their characters (and NPCs) and 30% is combat.

 

[overgeeked]

I’ll push back on that a bit. I think CR actually balances all three pillars very well. I’d say 30% is exploration, Matt really gives them a lot of mysteries and environments to interact with. 30% is the players interacting and engaging with their characters (and NPCs) and 30% is combat.

You can disagree all you’d like. But the people at critrolestats have the actual numbers, down to the second. Those percentages are how much combat is in CR. How the remainder is divided up isn’t clear. But neither campaign gets near 30% combat. They’re 24% and 21% respectively.

 

[Greg K]

I've always found that Robin Laws quiz an interesting activity, but I'm a little stumped by what it means exactly, given that my results appear on the face of it to be kind of paradoxical. I tend to get highest in Storytelling, whatever exactly that means (although usually when people describe what they think that activity means in game, it's not really what I like) and then as close second, I'm tied between method actor and butt-kicker... which kind of seem to be almost opposite ends on the spectrum from each other. In third place, I have a near tie between specialist and tactician, although I disagree that I'm any sort of either. And then tied for last place with very little coverage I get casual gamer and power gamer. That might be more or less correct there, at least.

I don't look too much at the final classification as it is simply where you scored highest and, sometimes, if two or three have identical scores, one question got more weight based on the priority you gave it. Plus, on certain days, we may give certain questions slightly different weight in our answer or how we interpret a given question (which led not only to slight differences resulitng in my being rated a Method Actor or Storyteller, but also was reflected in slightt differences in other scores).

Instead, I look at the various playstyles and, from the quiz, note that they are neither binary nor, generally, exclusive of one another. Instead, I take from it1) there are different reasons for playing; 2) often, we are a combination of player types (motivations); 3) people place different importance on different areas (sometimes to the exculsion of others); 4) with regards to 3, it provides understanding that some preferences are so different that they can lead to incompatiblity and issues at specific tables.

In general. Iook at each as follows:

• If you enjoy at least feeling that you part of a story or creating a story when you play (rather than having random combats or just kicking down doors, fighting, and taking loot) and, maybe, giving throught to your character's background and how her or she fits into the world, you have some storyteller in you.
• Do you at all try to base your character's actions by how you think they would act based upon the background and motivations you gave them? If yes, you have a bit of method actor.
• If you enjoy having at least some combat now and then, you have some some butt-kicker.
• If you enjoy playing to be a powerful character (however a game/campaign defines power), to see your character growth reflected mechanically (e.g. better numbers and/or gaining new abilities) and/or gaining magic items, you have some degre of power gamer?
• A person has some degree of Specialist if they usually play a particular type of character (e.g. stealthy rogue, outdoorsman, or ninja; a spell-caster, a warrior).
• A person that enjoys problem solving and thinking their way out of challenges will be some degree asome tactician
• If someone plays in part to hangout and enjoy time with friends? You have some casual game

Adding two additonal types from 4e

• If someone at all enjoys the character travelling and learning new things about the world, they are in part an Explorer.
• If someone enjoyes, even occassionally, causing mischief to see what happens or to relieve boredom, they are an Instigator (although doing it to relieve boredom at the expense of the fun of others at the table is also being a problem player)

It is then a matter of how much or how little emphasis one places on each type/motivation

 

[HJFudge]

You can disagree all you’d like. But the people at critrolestats have the actual numbers, down to the second. Those percentages are how much combat is in CR. How the remainder is divided up isn’t clear. But neither campaign gets near 30% combat. They’re 24% and 21% respectively.

Do we care what the CR show does?

I don't think they're a useful metric for a variety of reasons. Like, I could say that at my table, for every 2 hours of non-combat there is one hour of combat (and it is ALL roleplaying) but that really is of very little use except to show how I prefer to run things.

But maybe there is some utility here I am missing.

 

[robus]

You can disagree all you’d like. But the people at critrolestats have the actual numbers, down to the second. Those percentages are how much combat is in CR. How the remainder is divided up isn’t clear. But neither campaign gets near 30% combat. They’re 24% and 21% respectively.

Whatever I guess, the point is you were dismissing the rest of the time as just the players talking to each other (a lot), when what is really going on is exploration of the world and story. There is more to the game than combat.

 

[overgeeked]

Do we care what the CR show does?

Not really. They were brought up. So I provided their numbers. They’re not a benchmark to shoot for.

I don't think they're a useful metric for a variety of reasons. Like, I could say that at my table, for every 2 hours of non-combat there is one hour of combat (and it is ALL roleplaying) but that really is of very little use except to show how I prefer to run things.

Yeah. I would be bored to tears having to roleplay through every shopping trip.

 

[overgeeked]

Whatever I guess, the point is you were dismissing the rest of the time as just the players talking to each other (a lot), when what is really going on is exploration of the world and story. There is more to the game than combat.

No. I wasn’t dismissing it and yes there’s more to the game than combat. The rest of the game outside of combat is literally just sitting around and talking a lot. With a few die rolls here and there. That’s not a judgement. It’s a description of what roleplaying games are.

 

[robus]

No. I wasn’t dismissing it and yes there’s more to the game than combat. The rest of the game outside of combat is literally just sitting around and talking a lot. With a few die rolls here and there. That’s not a judgement. It’s a description of what roleplaying games are.

My apologies then, I interpreted incorrectly.

 

[Lanefan]

I prefer roleplaying to OSR-style dungeoncrawling,

Heh - I prefer roleplaying while OSR-style dungeoncrawling!

If you came in as a reader and fan of fantasy fiction before you ever played, you probably had a different expectation of what the game was going to be like than if you didn't, and you probably found all of the weird 10-foot poles, dungeoncrawling and pixel-bitching a very tedious and strange activity.

I didn't. Once I figured out the game I found this stuff fascinating: what's around the next corner, and what's gonna kill us before we get there?

 

[Lanefan]

No, what it really means is that I like action, intrigue, and mystery like The X-files or a good spy thriller set in a fantasy setting, and I thoroughly reject the conflation of pixel-bitching with exploration, or dungeons with anything at all other than a handful of cells where prisoners are kept.

What you call pixel-bitching others call exploration, and they are not wrong in doing so.

The only differences are a) the level of PC risk, real or perceived, and b) the pace, as set by the degree of granularity.