Roleplaying VS Game
The other day we were having an interesting conversation on the Blackoath Discord server about narrative, journaling RPGs, and RPGs that are more gamified. To be fair, this is a conversation we've had many, many times, in one way or another. But this time I decided that I'd like to leave my current views (since I like to think my views about most things are fluid and changing, the more I learn) on the spectrum of RPGs and games in general. As usual, these are all my personal opinions and views, and I'm not here to lecture anyone or to make you think my way of seeing things is the right one.
It's no secret that I'm someone who enjoys crunchy RPGs, and as such, my own games tend to be more "gamified". What do I mean by this? I mean that they rely on concrete mechanics and rules, something that boardgames do a lot. All rules and mechanics are open to interpretation, but the less room to interpretation, the more gamified a game will be. Furthermore, by gamifying an RPG, you add elements that exist purely because the designer thought they would be fun. The first example I can think of this is how beanies work in Savage Worlds: they are a physical token representing a fun mechanic that gives players options. Or how momentum works in Modiphius' version of the Conan RPG (which is a pool of tokens that players can use). Those are mechanics that could have been very well implemented in different ways and still work, but were done so in this particular way with the sole purpose of making the game feel more fun by becoming more interactive. Of course, I can't claim to know what the designers had in mind, but as a designer myself it's easy to see the purpose behind certain mechanics.
I like these types of mechanics. Rules can be very dry and deterministic if we let them, so it's fun to have novel ways of interacting with them, and they usually become something memorable. For me it's still a WIP and something that I'm learning to do better. I believe that a solid structure, rules-wise, is very important when playing solo, because it lets the player focus on the story they are creating, instead of having to spend time making rulings.
On the other end of the spectrum are narrative games like journaling games that focus on creating a story through writing. Instead of rolling dice or engaging in mechanics, players respond to prompts and write down their character's actions, thoughts, and experiences. The key here is to just let yourself go with the flow and let the story develop, without any strong goals or decision making. Examples of this would be Wretched & Alone, or 1,000 Year Old Vampire.
It's no secret I really dislike this sort of game. I would rather just sit and write a story, because to be honest, it doesn't feel like playing a game to me. Which brings me to the reason behind this post: when it comes to RPGs, I believe there are two extremes: those games that focus on the "Roleplaying" aspect of RPGs, and those that focus on the "Game" side of RPGs. The way I see it, narrative and journaling games are on the "roleplaying" end of the spectrum, and pure dungeon crawlers, and most modern boardgames with RPG elements sit on the "game" end of the spectrum. This is the reason why I insist on saying that my games Salvage & Sorcery, or Ker Nethalas aren't RPGs. No, the way I see it, for a game to be an RPG it must sit in the middle of the spectrum. D&D, CoC, WFRPG, all those are pure-blooded RPGs because they allow us to roleplay, and do so with a strong mechanical support. Rules-lite games such as Knave or PBtA games are still RPGs but lean towards the narrative side of the spectrum, whereas something like my own Across a Thousand Dead Worlds is an RPG that leans more towards the "game" side of the spectrum.
Does any of this matter? Of course not, what matters is to have fun, and play what you enjoy, regardless of definitions. But I find it fun (and useful) to categorize things, hence this post.
What do you guys think? Am I full of shit? Do you agree?
Comments (22)
I completely agree with your view on rule sets being rigid and fixed. At the same time, I do a lot of narrative writing in K.N.. The strict rules make sense while still leaving openings for slight modifications to enhance the narrative. Here’s an example from my first playthrough of Stepping into Darkness in K.N.—a moment that really stuck with me: I was in Room V, “The Sorcerer’s Stash,” and had just finished fighting three rats. While searching the room, I rolled a 1, triggering a sanity check. I decided my character discovered the grisly remains of the sorcerer, whose body had been horrifically turned inside out from some failed experiment or spell. It was clear he had suffered for days before dying. (I passed my sanity check but had only 2 sanity points left before I’d have to roll on the sanity table.) I decided to camp... I set up camp in the room but didn’t have any rations, so I only received half the usual benefits. Then I failed the camp check. No benefits—and I triggered the appearance of two skeletal hordes. To integrate this into the narrative, I described the sorcerer’s body slightly twitching—uh oh, he’s not dead dead. It turned out that both the sorcerer and his assistant were mangled undead, with the sorcerer becoming “Skeletal Horde 1” and his assistant “Skeletal Horde 2.” During the first round of combat, the undead sorcerer fumbled his attack, rolling a 5. I interpreted this as him accidentally knocking a beaker off the table, which created a massive cloud of thick black smoke. This provided my character with concealment for 1d4 rounds—if I remember correctly, it lasted three rounds. The moment worked perfectly to blend the mechanics and the narrative, making the encounter much more engaging and memorable. I’d love to see expandsions on the corridor and room description cards by adding more information, details, and maybe even nested tables (tables in tables... in tables... 😅). These additions could include elements that affect specific enemies, boost certain Masteries, influence camping mechanics, or trigger unique events based on specific Overseers. Even simple narrative enhancements like this could give the rooms more depth and make the game more immersive. Or... don't screw with K.N. because its fine the way it is... 🖖🤓👍
This is awesome! And yes, I do have plans on including unique rooms and corridors, probably as part of The Vaelorian Codex #3. Those should add more flavor and interesting narrative!
I can understand the preference of one or the other but I think there is a actual balance that can be achieved. Where game mechanics feed into roleplaying by incentivizing a method of play. A game like Legends of the Wulin is very systems intensive but all those systems are there to make you feel like a Wuxia hero by both giving up to 7 actions in a turn and also giving you so many options to do with those actions. All this to say I like games with crunch, but I like when that crunch is easily understood and serves a specific theme. As for mechanics like bennies they are there to make players feel like pulp heroes where the only thing standing between them and victory is a unbreakable will and effort.
Oh yes, a balance can be achieved, and most RPGS do so, as a matter of fact. In my case, it depends on whether I'm playing alone of with a group. Alone, I prefer mechanics-driven RPGs, closer to a boardgame even. But with a group I'll play anything, especially as a player. Well, not true, I'd never play a PbtA game, haha. Not again, at least. And I completely agree, crunch must be there for a reason and to serve the game's theme, not for crunch's sake!
Hello! I think you are right about the spectrum, although the line between rpg and board game is a very blurry one. I once did a session report of the board game At The Gates of Loyang turning each turn of the game into a letter home to the protagonist's family, ending, IIRC, with a wedding (which does not really relate to the game's contents which is just about farming vegetables and selling them to buy victory points). Was that roleplaying then, as I was very narrative about stuff? Or was it still a board game? I see someone mentioned Ironsworn as a narrative system. I find that quite interesting, because I consider it to be very rules-guided like a board game, which is why I consider it a good game to recommend for people new to solo roleplaying. It is true, there is a lot of fluff around it and you are supposed to narrate your actions, but there is a relatively rigid quest system that leads your through the adventure by the nose. At least that is my perception. Personally, I enjoy the entire aspect of what rpgs can entail up to board games as well. I am just at home with a journaling game (provided the rules are clear - I am looking at you, Rarrr! I am a Monster Publishing) as with OSR or a Dungeon Crawler. And I do like my solo board games :) The aspect of gamey systems always reminds me of Libre as it is a very interesting example of a very gamey GME where you need a number of successful scenes to complete the adventure a success, or fail if you have too many failed scenes. And there are very clear criteria for a successful scene based on mechanisms (besides combat scenes which are a no-brainer, three successful skill tests with different skills and chance of success no more than 50% before special boni for non-combat action scenes). A rather unusual beast there. Wise Penguin mentioned that the definition is very loose, and I agree. Although, I don't consider it a recent phenomenon. When I began in the 90s, RPGs were defined by your potential freedom of action/choice for your character in a simulated world, but the specifics of the simulation left lots of room for interpretation. I also think that this wide spectrum is also part of the appeal of RPGs: They can be anything, so anyone interested in playing can potentially find a fitting RPG (theoretically, of course). There is nothing gamewise RPGs can't do. I end on that positive note before I fall completely into rambling. And I better finish rolling up that fourth character for Tales of Argosa (^_^;; Yours, Deathworks
Yes, you can definitely add roleplaying to any game, even to something like Monopoly, but it isn't supported by the game, or even facilitated by it. Creative people like yourself can certainly work around it, though, and I know that you enjoy doing so. And you aren't the first one who mentions Ironsworn being really rules-driven, which I find perplexing, haha. It was so vague and undefined that I had trouble with it. I had to make decisions all the time because the game left it all to interpretation. Of course, it could all have been lack of familiarity with the game (although I did play quite a few sessions). In any case, thanks for sharing your thoughts!
If I do play games leaning more in narrative, I find I have to play fast and follow first impulses without questioning them. The more tables and systems in a game like that, the better. There’s a great tool from the Game Unfolding Machine on itch that emulates the gm as if it was an actual person (not you if that makes sense) and whenever you are stuck, you roll on an ai table for this emulated gm and they toss something at you basically similar to if you were stuck in an actual game with other players in order to keep things moving. Best tool I’ve come across for legit helping with more narrative focused aspects of solo rpgs.
that sounds fun, I'll have to look into it!
Fully agree. My favorite solo rpg systems are in the space you describe (scarlet heroes + your games). I think Broken Shores is your best game at balancing mechanics and roleplaying. Granted I do not have Across a Thousand Dead Worlds.
Thank you! Yes, Broken Shores is probably a good middle.
I agree with you I'm here for the crunch if I wanted to do creative writing I would just write a story and cut out the middleman.
Hell yeah!
This is a timely post for me. I have been struggling to find my place on the RPG spectrum. I realize that I am ending up on the Crunchy/Rules side. I have played KN and I am just starting ATDW. I watched Deep Space Solo's videos on ATDW and there are times when he plays less crunchy and more on the narrative end (which is where I struggle).
Yes, it has definitely happened to me when playing something like Ironsworn. Back then, I didn't know why I was getting stuck (this was 5 years ago); now I understand that I need a strong support with rules that don't encourage just having to come up with every little detail of a story.
give me the crunch! lol
No, the crunch is all mine!
I definitly enjoy the games that sit on the GAME side of the spectrum for solo games. Not interested in lots of role playing, more interested in game mechanics. I guess that's why I enjoy your games so much.
it's nice to find a person of refined taste, haha
I feel like RPG is a catch all term, that has somewhat lost its meaning. Like Wise Penguin says, an RPG is where you get to create/customise a character. But I guess at the table, you take on the 'role' of that character. In terms of TTRPG, I'd say your stuff still counts as an RPG, because you are still taking on a role. Be that a condemned exploring a necropolis, and diver looking for alien tech, or a branded trying to avoid the inquisition. Are they more gamified compared to 1000 years a vampire, ironsworn or even D&D? Yes. But that gamification provides structure to the world, which is great for solo play. Using Ironsworn as an example, and watching Me, Myself and Die. It seems to lean more towards narrative role-play, which is fine. Playing make believe is fun, but it can be tiring having to come up with a narrative. It can be daunting, especially for someone new to solo games, to have to do all the heavy lifting, without any structure (or gamey stuff) to fall back on. And sometime we just want to role dice, and hit imaginary critters. But as you say "Does any of this matter? Of course not, what matters is to have fun, and play what you enjoy, regardless of definitions." And don't dismiss a game, just because it isn't the style you usually play. 😁 (sorry about this turning into an essay.)
Yes, videogames have definitely blurred the definition of what an RPG is.
The term RPG is too broad. Funnily enough, in videogames, an RPG is a game that allows you to customize your character (be it visually or item/skill wise), level up and grow. When used for tabletop, it usually means narrative "theater of the mind" type of games most of the time. So by "gamifying" it, I guess you're going closer to the videogame side of the RPG term (which I find specially good for solo gaming).
Yeah, that's it! Definitely making them closer to videogames, which like you said, works better when soloing, in my experience.