Introductions to role-playing games: are they ever useful?
Callan S.:
Quote
All that wasted space would be better used to explain the rules of that specific game.
Aye, this will explain the game you've made more!
However, in writing a game myself I've found at some points you want to describe the process of the general area of what your imagining when at a particular juncture in the rules, and then also an idea of how to intigrate other players spoken fictions together and integrate these back into the rules through the options that the rules grant. Sometimes without an idea of what imaginative direction the author was thinking of when it came to certain rules, they'll just seem like rules and it just wont readily come into someone elses head what sort of fiction you should be thinking about in regards to them, in order to play the game.
pawsplay:
Quote from: Moreno R. on January 23, 2012, 11:30:28 PM
[All that wasted space would be better used to explain the rules of that specific game.
I think an introduction to role-playing is specific to each game. If each game is a window into a different way of playing, then each represents a different potential introduction into the hobby. Where would Vampire be if White Wolf just assumed that all the D&D players would know what to do with it?... Look what happened, since in a certain sense, they did?
dugfromthearth:
I believe that they are useful, but they are of limited use and should take limited space. You can spend a paragraph saying what it is - but introduce playing your game, do not generically introduce rpgs.
Something like:
In this game you will take on the role of a knight defending Camelot. Your abilities will be defined in the rules and you will roll dice to determine if you are successful in your endeavors. You will be rewarded with gold to buy better equipment, experience to increase your skills, and perhaps the love of a fair lady.
Not:
Roleplaying games were invented in the 1960's and most share the same basic traits of having Player Characters, Non-Player Characters ...
Catelf:
I think they are a neccessity.
Why?
Ok, everyone that is already into it may not need it, but those that aren't?
Roleplaying requires free thinking, in a way that few other games need: Boardgames are often very structured, defined by their rules; Computer "Rpgs" are usually not really rpg's in the original(?) sense, unless they are MMORpgs or such, and even there, the limitations are built into the game; and if you go Roleplaying in forums, they frequently require players to write sentence after sentence in one reply, it is a whole different style of roleplaying!
They would need an introduction.
But also, they need examples of how the game is played.
So i'd rather do a different way than considering to remove it:
I'd try and work in all the other things that is important for a newcomer into the Introduction:
* Mood piece and/or storyline/setting description.
* What is a Roleplaying Game? , including references to pages that is important for getting started.
* Example(s?) of play.
Hasimir0:
Quote from: Callan S. on January 24, 2012, 07:52:38 PM
However, in writing a game myself I've found at some points you want to describe the process of the general area of what your imagining when at a particular juncture in the rules, and then also an idea of how to intigrate other players spoken fictions together and integrate these back into the rules through the options that the rules grant. Sometimes without an idea of what imaginative direction the author was thinking of when it came to certain rules, they'll just seem like rules and it just wont readily come into someone elses head what sort of fiction you should be thinking about in regards to them, in order to play the game.
Isn't it better if you simply describe how you envision the way your game should run (which is actually useful for anyone to know) by saying something genuine like (for example)
"this game should produce a regulated discussion among the participants, with specific rules to evaluate how far a given Player Character" (explain what a PC is) "can spit without biting his own tongue"
...Instead of the classic "A roleplay game is..." speech?
Besides, with soooo many people on the interwebs being such experts on what an RPG truly is or is not... isn't it better to avoid the use of such labels?
My game is A game.
It is a social game that requires from 3 to 6 participants to sit around a table and talk to each other following some rules to do it.
Every participant is a Player except one which is called Game Master and another which is called Food Keeper.
The game works like this... bla bla bla...
I also find this kind of "practical introduction" useful to explain the things we (expert roleplayers) always assume as a given ... like ... what does this game MEAN in material terms when it says "play your Character" ? ... and stuff like that.
It sure is a big help for someone who just picks up your game without knowing what an rpg actually is...
And it can also be very useful for "expert roleplayers" that never played your game and need to understand what is what in your system ... to help them avoid playing the DitV GM like they would the GURPS GM >_<
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page