Fun Versus Roleplay, How do you makes games Interesting?

[Chaosticket]

Watched Gamers 2 Dorkness Rising today. Not the first time Ive read, watched, or seen a great adventure.
Youve encountered this problem before where there are people with different ideas and goals.

Ive tried both roleplaying and going off the rails to avoid the typical idea of a Dungeons and Dragons game as Ive done that often already. Either be a murderhobo & kill everything, be a roleplayer and try to talk my way out of fights, and Im hoping to eventually get high tier spells and direct stories.

[Koo Rehtorb]

If you want to avoid a typical D&D game then play a different RPG instead?

[Chaosticket]

Let me known if youve done this before. You, the pretty heroes have a quest from people to kill the always evil ugly species.

I like to see deconstructions, parodies, and fourth wall breaks of that. Movies, webcomics, and other players stories' like befriending the "always evil" species. Or point out adventurers being hired killers doesnt exactly make them "good".

How often do you hear Monty Python references?

[Aneurin]

Watched Gamers 2 Dorkness Rising today. Not the first time Ive read, watched, or seen a great adventure.
Youve encountered this problem before where there are people with different ideas and goals.

Ive tried both roleplaying and going off the rails to avoid the typical idea of a Dungeons and Dragons game as Ive done that often already. Either be a murderhobo & kill everything, be a roleplayer and try to talk my way out of fights, and Im hoping to eventually get high tier spells and direct stories.

Uh, what are you asking here? Or what discussion do you want to create?

Your topic title doesn't really seem to relate to the body of the post. What do you want to talk about? How to have fun roleplaying? Having fun and playing a character aren't mutually exclusive, after all. Or how to deal with different play styles at the table? Or how to avoid fights and still get experience? (The answer to the last one is "don't play a system that only offers experience for murder and theft", by the way)


To answer the topic title, though; I personally reconcile fun and roleplaying by, well, having fun and taking pleasure in playing out a fully fleshed character. I don't need to kick ass and chew bubble gum to enjoy playing a particular character, and am quite happy watching the character unfold and develop as the story twists and turns.

If you want to avoid a typical D&D game then play a different RPG instead?

...This. The best way to avoid a standard D&D experience is not to play D&D. Or anything based on D20, really, like Pathfinder and M&M.

[Chaosticket]

Are you able to roleplay and have fun? Do you roleplay everything to be linear and serious?

Is roleplaying an anchor or an asset?

[Honest Tiefling]

Well, yes, I roleplay and have fun, it's the reason I play Dungeons and Dragons primarily. However, maybe you should explain why it doesn't quite gel for you? Why do you think fun and roleplaying are such vastly different things?

[KillianHawkeye]

Are you able to roleplay and have fun?

Yes, absolutely. If all I wanted was to mindlessly kill stuff, level up, and gain new abilities, I would just play a video game. Roleplaying is what makes games meaningful to me.

Do you roleplay everything to be linear and serious?

I don't know what you mean by "linear" in this context, but I'll play serious if my character is very serious, sure. I'll also play wacky if my character is a dumb comic relief character (which can be a lot of fun, too).

Is roleplaying an anchor or an asset?

Mostly an asset, but it can be both. If, for some reason, you decide not to be true to your character, then you might see it as an anchor. But hey, if anchors were so bad, you wouldn't find one on every ship! Even an anchor is an asset that has a useful function. But in all seriousness, having something that reminds you how your character usually acts is very helpful when you're roleplaying a personality that's very different from your normal one, especially for newer players or those who have difficulty maintaining a separation between themselves and their characters.



I think you have some preconceived notions about roleplaying that aren't really true for most people. You seem to see it as being in opposition to playing the game, when that couldn't be further from the truth. I mean, they call them roleplaying games for a reason, right? The fun of a roleplaying game is in getting to make decisions and seeing their outcomes and in testing your character's abilities and prevailing (or failing to prevail) against whatever dangerous situations you come across.

"Fun Versus Roleplay" is generally a false dichotomy, unless roleplaying is legitimately not fun for you. But then, why are you playing RPGs? I think that you believe that roleplaying only means talking, or only acting in certain restrictive pre-defined ways. A lot of people have similarly bad misconceptions about D&D-style alignment. But that's probably just because you've had a poor teacher, because the truth is that roleplaying is everything that your character does and every decision you make.

[Lord Raziere]

roleplaying IS fun.

I do not see what distinction is. If I'm roleplaying I'm having fun. My character being snarky? roleplaying. my character being referential when no one else gets the joke? roleplaying. my character being a badass? roleplaying. my character helping her daughter become santa and invent christmas by pulling the sleigh with her dbz powers? roleplaying. my character pulling a prank upon people by making something called trollface surprise with her horrible cooking? roleplaying. the same character as all of this crying in rage and despair to the sky because a dear friend sacrificed herself in battle? all of it is roleplaying. the best kind of roleplaying.

in a DnD game? I'm a hobgoblin artificer and literally the most intelligent character in the group. she is neutral good, knows five languages, draconic is the one she uses to cast spells because its the programming code of all of creation because creation is made of three dragons, she calls the uptight human noble she works with "Lady Peacock" while speaking goblin to the other hobgoblin in the group, she wields a crossbow and her ultimate goal is to learn artifice so that she can return to her people and uplift them in an industrial revolution someday so that their quality of life is improved.

and its all fun. I do not see why it wouldn't.

[johnbragg]

Are you able to roleplay and have fun? Do you roleplay everything to be linear and serious?

Is roleplaying an anchor or an asset?

I'm getting the sense that you're working in a second language.

"ARe you able to roleplay and have fun?" Yes. Roleplaying is the competitive advantage tabletop pen-and-paper (or play-by-post) games have over video games. Roleplaying is, or should be, the fun. My guy kills lots of stuff, I'm having the fun of inhabiting the personality of a big gruff hero who saves the village. OR inhabiting the personality of a sneaky sneak who strikes from the shadows, allowing his big dumb tank friend to take the hits. Or inhabiting the personality of a spellcaster obsessed with magical knowledge.

And these personalities interact (or should interact) around the table.

You sometimes have to handwave some things.

"Why do these conflicting personalities stay together?" If the campaign or DM hasn't supplied an answer, sometimes you have to handwave that a little bit.

"Why are we following this railroad plot?" Because you're giving your mediocre DM a break--he can't handle full scale sandbox shenanigans at this point in his DMing career.

Sometimes roleplaying is serious, sometimes lighthearted, depending on the tone of the campaign, the group, and the character. One of my characters was a military-brat straightlaced fighter, who disapproved of the unusual (substitute "conventional" for his alignment.) Another character just rubbed the rest of the party strangely, stealing the pants of defeated enemies (it's called a trademark, people.) and ended up playing the "bad cop" in the party--if his party members thought he was somewhat crazy, might as well lean into that and use that against the party's enemies. ("My friends, you see, they're nice guys. Me, I try to be a nice guy. But it Just. Doesn't. Work! I--I can't be the nice guy. So I guess that makes me--the Bad Guy. You should talk to my nice guy friends. Because if you can't work it out with them, then that just leaves me. The Bad Guy.")

[JNAProductions]

Roleplaying IS fun.

If you don't find that to be true, consider why you'd want to play a Role-Playing Game.

[Darth Ultron]

Youve encountered this problem before where there are people with different ideas and goals.

This is where you start. The ''myth'' is that you randomly walk over to your ''best'' friends and say ''I got this super cool game, lets play!", and then somehow you all ''magically'' have a great fun time.

So right from the start: Don't do that. To just randomly group some friends together guarantees different ideas and goals. What you want to do is find people that share the ideas and goals that you have, and befriend them and make a group.

Ive tried both roleplaying and going off the rails to avoid the typical idea of a Dungeons and Dragons game as Ive done that often already. Either be a murderhobo & kill everything, be a roleplayer and try to talk my way out of fights, and Im hoping to eventually get high tier spells and direct stories.

Well, you should always have fun.

[Chaosticket]

Okay this was poorly written as I had to work so I couldnt edit the opening post.

I like role-playing so long as one this is understood: dont ignore the effort. Im not demanding 1million experience for acting like Gandalf, but something. Also I hate railroading ignoring personal decisions especially when I do it in character.

Those the easiest way to break me in roleplaying and ruin a promising game.

[JNAProductions]

Okay this was poorly written as I had to work so I couldnt edit the opening post.

I like role-playing so long as one this is understood: dont ignore the effort. Im not demanding 1million experience for acting like Gandalf, but something. Also I hate railroading ignoring personal decisions especially when I do it in character.

Those the easiest way to break me in roleplaying and ruin a promising game.

See, for a lot of people, roleplaying is its own reward. We don't need XP or gold or anything to have a good time roleplaying. The act of roleplaying is fun, so even if it's actively BAD for our characters, we do it anyway, because that makes sense and is fun.

Most all of us are in agreement on the railroading bit, though. Railroading is bad. (Linearity is NOT necessarily bad, but the trick is to get player buy-in so that way their characters follow the path without it being forced.)

Chaos, from your various threads, it honestly sounds like you might not enjoy TTRPGs much. And that's fine-nothing says you HAVE to enjoy them-but you might honestly have a better time just playing Skyrim or something.

[Honest Tiefling]

I like role-playing so long as one this is understood: dont ignore the effort. Im not demanding 1million experience for acting like Gandalf, but something. Also I hate railroading ignoring personal decisions especially when I do it in character.

So...It sounds more like you hate bad DM's and like to have experience for roleplaying. I don't disagree with either, but I think the first is a bit...Well, done to death as to why it is a bad thing.

The latter? I don't see a problem with that. Tabletop players are still gamers, and sometimes that little powergaming gremlin we all have in our minds wants to take the wheel for a bit. I think a good game (and therefore, DM) utilizes the habits and expectations of their players to the benefit of the game. Is it gaming a bit to get experience for interacting with the bartender as a dwarf? Probably, but that doesn't make it a bad thing.

[RazorChain]

Ah the old roleplay vs fun argument.
We all know the answer to that one.

If roleplaying is no fun then stop doing it. Unless of course you are roleplaying at gunpoint then you should roleplay like your life depended on it.

[JNAProductions]

So...It sounds more like you hate bad DM's and like to have experience for roleplaying. I don't disagree with either, but I think the first is a bit...Well, done to death as to why it is a bad thing.

The latter? I don't see a problem with that. Tabletop players are still gamers, and sometimes that little powergaming gremlin we all have in our minds wants to take the wheel for a bit. I think a good game (and therefore, DM) utilizes the habits and expectations of their players to the benefit of the game. Is it gaming a bit to get experience for interacting with the bartender as a dwarf? Probably, but that doesn't make it a bad thing.

I'd say XP for RP is something that should be done sparingly, and usually as... Compensation, I guess?

Like, for instance, let's say your character is deathly afraid of something, and that fear causes the character to make some truly AWFUL decisions. I'd say that's something that could be worthy of XP if you, the player, know they're bad decisions and would usually avoid them, but it makes sense in character. It's the lollipop you get after your shot. :P

I would NOT give XP just for holding an in-character conversation with another player, or an NPC.

[johnbragg]

Okay this was poorly written as I had to work so I couldnt edit the opening post.

I like role-playing so long as one this is understood: dont ignore the effort. Im not demanding 1million experience for acting like Gandalf, but something.

I'm not 100% with you on this. Roleplaying is basically its own reward. It's what's supposed to make the game fun, not giving your character a cookie. I really don't like giving XP for roleplaying--if nothing else, it's an irritant to me to have different party members at different XP levels anyway. But I'm okay with some sort of a game reward for really exceptional roleplaying--some sort of hero point or drama point is okay. (A free re-roll, or an extra action or something--not something that creates a long-term imbalance in the party.) But I try to be careful of that, because sometimes you're rewarding some of your players for just being better at theater than others. On the other other hand, they're the ones carrying the dramatic load, so.....

Also I hate railroading ignoring personal decisions especially when I do it in character.

This is a bigger problem. It's not just that your roleplaying isn't rewarded, it's ignored. "My guy wants to do X" "Well, too bad, the party has to go do Y"

That sounds like your problem with your group. You want to play "your guy", your group just wants to kill the things and collect the loot and check off the quest.

Question: Is "your guy" someone that the rest of the party is apt to roleplay with? How often is your "ROLEPLAYING!" something that would derail the rest of the party's goals?

[Honest Tiefling]

I would NOT give XP just for holding an in-character conversation with another player, or an NPC.

I think a matter of taste and how the players act. If the group isn't using XP but milestones, doing something like attending a party to scope out a place for latter schemes might make a whole lot of sense. I usually think of RP being worthy of experience if it amused the other players. So yes, if you ordered that drink either by creative roleplaying or just by acting out the character enough to make others have fun, I'd say that's worthy.

[JNAProductions]

I think a matter of taste and how the players act. If the group isn't using XP but milestones, doing something like attending a party to scope out a place for latter schemes might make a whole lot of sense. I usually think of RP being worthy of experience if it amused the other players. So yes, if you ordered that drink either by creative roleplaying or just by acting out the character enough to make others have fun, I'd say that's worthy.

You and I shall have to disagree then.

Admittedly, I realize that I actually use milestones too, so it's more just whenever it's appropriate to level up, but I guess I'll echo what was said earlier.

Giving XP for RP will, in general, end up with players of differing levels. That's not the end of the world, but I generally try to avoid that.

[Honest Tiefling]

Giving XP for RP will, in general, end up with players of differing levels. That's not the end of the world, but I generally try to avoid that.

Oh. That. I usually just say that if one person roleplays well, it counts for the whole group. I don't like levels that are TOO uneven (1-2 at most, and usually not even that). I also see rewarding the group doesn't put pressure on people to put in 100% every session, because sometimes life happens or someone isn't feeling the situation or they choose to step back and let someone else have the spotlight. After all, that spotlight might get them closer to their next level anyway.

[Florian]

Folks just have different sources of "fun" when playing an RPG, which I try to accept and cater to. That said, I simply avoid having a "Cass" and a "Joana", with different or conflicting "fun" sources at my table at the same time, not worth the effort.

[Quertus]

I started as a War Gamer. The advantage that Role-playing Games have over War Games is, well, the Role-playing.

So, can one have fun while role-playing? Um, yeah, of course, otherwise, this "role-playing" fad would have failed, and we'd all be playing War Games.

Role-playing isn't just "Talky Time", though, it's every decision you make as the character.

Now, there are groups where serious role-playing would actually be a detriment to the fun with that group. If you have found yourself in such a group, you need to ask yourself if you can play a role-playing game without taking anything seriously - and, if you can, whether you'd want to. If that's not the kind of environment you'd enjoy, then that group / game might not be for you.

Ignore that last paragraph if I've read between the lines wrong, and that doesn't apply to your situation.

[johnbragg]

Giving XP for RP will, in general, end up with players of differing levels. That's not the end of the world, but I generally try to avoid that.

Yeah. If you're going to give a player a biscuit, I'd make it a consumable--good for one re-roll/extra action/minor plot point ("turns out we have ONE more healing potion/length of rope/etc we, uh, forgot about before"). They'll end up spending those on another party member most of the time anyway.

[Quertus]

Giving XP for RP will, in general, end up with players of differing levels. That's not the end of the world, but I generally try to avoid that.

You give the whole party XP for one player role-playing. Just like you reward the whole party for any behavior you want to see more of.

And, at the end of the session, you ask the players, as a group, to nominate events that are XP worthy. Then Everyone is looking for and remembering and liking everyone's contributions to the game. Books, books, books. (inside joke for something that still gets referenced at one of my tables).

EDIT: or, at least, that's what I've found works best for me.

[Tanarii]

If roleplaying is no fun then stop doing it. Unless of course you are roleplaying at gunpoint then you should roleplay like your life depended on it.

Now thats a disclaimer! 😂😂😂

Giving XP for RP will, in general, end up with players of differing levels. That's not the end of the world, but I generally try to avoid that.

Its not only not the end of the world, but it's also not a mechanical balance problem in any RPG I've played, ran, or read, to have a difference of one level. Most of them can handle a difference of more than one.

What's your reasoning for trying to avoid it? I can think of several not related to mechanical balance reasons off the top of my head, mostly related to requiring in-game downtime to gain a level or player psychology. But im curious what yours is.

[JNAProductions]

Now thats a disclaimer! 😂😂😂

Its not only not the end of the world, but it's also not a mechanical balance problem in any RPG I've played, ran, or read, to have a difference of one level. Most of them can handle a difference of more than one.

What's your reasoning for trying to avoid it? I can think of several not related to mechanical balance reasons off the top of my head, mostly related to requiring in-game downtime to gain a level or player psychology. But im curious what yours is.

I like my players to be mechanically similar, in terms of power. D&D 5E, the system I usually run, can handle discrepancies (though I wouldn't want players in different tiers of play, usually) but I'd rather keep it simple and have everyone be at the same level.

[Darth Ultron]

You give the whole party XP for one player role-playing. Just like you reward the whole party for any behavior you want to see more of.

So you do it ''everyone gets a participation trophy'' style?

Well, not a way I agree with, for sure. If one player act good, and the rest are jerks...you give everyone the reward so that next time that one player is good again, and everyone else is a jerk...again.

I give out individual XP as a reward for role playing. I don't care about the level differences: the good role players will be a couple levels higher and the bad roll players will be a couple levels lower. That is what I want.

The die hard, bad roll players won't change. But there are more then enough average players in the middle that will get the idea that role playing is a good idea and that they should do it.

[Honest Tiefling]

Well, not a way I agree with, for sure. If one player act good, and the rest are jerks...you give everyone the reward so that next time that one player is good again, and everyone else is a jerk...again.

Earlier in the thread, you mentioned not just gathering people due to familiarity and friendship, but common interests. This implies you go out of your way to gather a group of people who you then judge based on your own personal preferences and treat some like jerks. That's commitment to making yourself miserable.

[Tanarii]

I like my players to be mechanically similar, in terms of power. D&D 5E, the system I usually run, can handle discrepancies (though I wouldn't want players in different tiers of play, usually) but I'd rather keep it simple and have everyone be at the same level.

A one level difference is mechanically similar. A 3 level difference is mechanically similar once out of Tier 1. That's a rationale that doesn't hold up given the mechanics of the system.

[Honest Tiefling]

Even if the system COULD handle it, doesn't mean it should. Players aren't going to stick around if they feel like you're snubbing them, so it might feel like a circle jerk or popularity contest if not handled well. I mean...The DM is basically the arbiter of what is good RP or not, so a bit of pressure there.

Furthermore, giving out experience and loot becomes more difficult with different levels. It really seems like extra work to me, and that's something I strongly don't like. Begone, extra effort!

And lastly...It's going to be one weird story if the team are at different power levels. Ah yes, the many adventures of Wonder Woman, Superman, Batman and...Aquaman. He handles the coffee and watches over the other henchmen and mounts.