Reality vs. Fantasy in RPG’s
Okay, so I’ve played lots of pen and paper role-playing systems over the years. While I’m certainly no expert on all the various systems, I have had the opportunity to participate in, as well as run, campaigns with various rule sets.
To start with my first experience (this is going to date me a bit) was with original D&D – Dungeons and Dragons, for all those uninitiated out there. I of course rode the river through various versions AD&D (Advanced D&D) 1st and 2nd ed, 3rd when it came out and the quick follow up of the 3.5 rule set. I noodled around with all the expansions that came along (Feats, Epic level, Combat Tactics, Criticals, Point based magic, etc). I was a big fan of the Ravenloft campaign setting back in 2nd. I am still a little miffed I never got the chance to personally run through the Tomb of Horrors, though I’ve DM’d it numerous times. I never got my immortal D&D character either… sad.
Later, I branched out of the TSR\WotC world into various D20 systems, Modern being the most familiar, as well as some White Wolf gaming. I played a little variation on BESM (Big Eyes Small Mouth), an anime adventure style game system. Then I was introduced to Little Fears and the D10 system. Gone was all I understood of Armor Classes, the standard stat list of Str, Dex, Cha, Wis, Int, Con. HP (hit points) were a thing of the past. And suddenly, I could die!
Now you have to understand something about me. As a player, I love challenging and relatively realistic combat in RPG’s. As a DM (which I spent far more time doing), I was one of those rare guys who had a reputation of killing characters on a regular enough basis that players had a healthy fear of what might happen when they tried something risky. I never abused this and I wasn’t one of those douche types that looked to kill a character, but I found it to make a more tense gaming environment when characters actually had to risk something.
That being said, for as many extra damage tables and crit hit charts I’d use, I never had someone die by basically one hit. D10 systems laughed at the 65 HP lvl 8 fighter or the 20 HP lvl 4 rouge. With D10 systems, “You’re a lvl 1 fighter? You have 10 Health. You’re a lvl 18 fighter? You have 10 Health.” Congratulations, everything just got a whole lot more real.
Then with D10 there were two kinds of damage: Bashing, that heals over time; and Lethal, this kills you fast and takes forever to heal. The system depends on more skill checks based on a combination of fewer skills than you would have in a traditional D&D style system. And as one could guess, all checks are made on d10’s instead of d20’s.
So rules aside, the question here is which role-playing experience is more enjoyable, the super human barbarian or the average Joe? What are your thoughts and experiences with pen and paper RPG systems?
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Darren Miller, Darren Miller. Darren Miller said: New Geekcentricity: Reality vs. Fantasy in RPG’s http://goo.gl/fb/fkQBv [...]
Our paths through gaming seem to have been quite similar! I also went from regular D&D through AD&D, then 3/3.5 and D20 Modern before defecting to White Wolf.
My problem is that the “realism” you mention is almost a false realism. It is tactically realistic, but can be quite story-unrealistic. I feel that a simple combat system can be as realistic as you want it to be (and I find D&D’s nearly endless HP’s to be a deal breaker for me – I had switched over to the Grim & Gritty system before leaving D20) if the GM and party commit to realistic descriptions of combat. We’ve had some nearly diceless combats with no miniatures and very little in the way of realistic rules that were made realistic through narrative description.
And on your last question: I prefer realism and a focus on the “average Joe” ordinary characters. I don’t like advancement based on “doing cool shit.” The focus then leaves the narrative and the players can become self-absorbed in character progression, not in story advancement.
Yeah that was the draw for me to turn to a harsher rule set was to help the players draw away from progression only focus and into more dynamic game play.
But why more harsh instead of a ruleset that fostered more cooperative storytelling? Have you checked out any of the indie games that are on the market? If you’re into horror, I recommend Maschine Zeit. If not, then any of Vincent Baker’s games (thanks, Darla), like Dogs In the Vineyard. The idea of making the narrative the focus instead of combat made me change the way I think about gaming (and this was a pretty recent thing).
Oh, and I have to admit, I went to “harsher” rules first too, before I discovered there were other things out there (and I would still use Grim & Gritty if I had to use a level-based system). So, I understand. Just playing devil’s advocate and encouraging new avenues of thought.
I know what you mean. i haven’t been exposed to narrative focused play in that way. D10 was certainly more of a lean in that direction however it was still level based play. That being said there is a very nostalgic and classic element to the level based D&D style. I always felt like the “super nerd” when i mentioned we’d be playing in a different ruleset. Haha. I guess that has to do with most of the gaming circle i was surrounded with though D&D to be the end all of pen and paper RPG’s.