fantasy style role-plays and why I dislike them

[Akirapryde]

Disclaimer This Thread is not intended to insult, offend or call anyone out for actions or behavior. This Thread is also not meant to criticize or otherwise disrespect Heralds of the Hornblower. This Thread is only meant to express thoughts that were a result of last night's post-game conversation nothing more nothing less.

I finally realized what it is about Fantasy style games I dislike. Sure they are passe, but last night's post game conversation really hit the nail on the head.

For many years I have dislike fantasy style roleplay such as D&D, AD&D, Pathfinder and so on and so forth. I have always accuse them of being passe, lacking of imagination. But beyond that I was hard-pressed to put my finger on the real reason why I dislike these style games.

Now I have a solid reason. It is the two-dimensional style of game, coupled with the two-dimensional style of characters, coupled with the way the plot is shoved down our throats.

But these campaign world's don't start off like that. Take Heralds of the Hornblower. It is a rich campaign setting mixed with equally rich campaign characters. The NPC's are equally mysterious as much as they are enjoyable to engage.

But this intricate tapestry of rich settings and characters, like in so many fantasy style game  can by torn to shreds if care isn't taken to safeguard them from a common mistake made by players and narrators alike.

I would like to use Heralds of the Hornblower as my example for this topic. Here we have s group of adventures drawn together from different backgrounds. Each were given a wondrous dream foretelling a dark event slowly befalling the world they live in. Obviously each were chosen. Yet no one in the party has bothered to ask why. What commonality do they share? What special trait or background has drawn them together. Why them? Instead they take it on face value that this is their mission and they drive forward.

Noticed the missed opportunity for character exploration. Next take my character, someone who is so different from the rest of the party. Yet very little has been done to get to know her. For the party's on knowledge Eli could be a assassin sent by one of many factions that could be opposing the party's goals.

Because all we are doing is driving the plot forward, we are missing out on opportunities for role play among ourselves. Which in my humble opinion, has the most potential for rich settings and scenes.

By the very nature of these style of games, this is a natural risk. In the desire to drive the plot not only do we miss out on vital character building, we also risk driving the game to 'monster of the week' scenarios.

Don't be confused by the name, these scenarios are single session encounters. Where travel between are just storylined instead of enjoying the journey of getting there.

Here is an argument for the concept of "it's not the destination, it's the journey." The between major encounters travels (and their subsequent random encounters) is where we as a group grow. We learn how to fight as a team, we learn what makes each character who they are. We, the characters, are more than numerical strengths and weaknesses. These personalities are an essential part of role playing a character.

By ignoring these opportunities for character development we force the game into becoming a two-dimensional game. And truth be told, that's when these games lose their fun. Sure it's great to beat up on monsters, collect rewards and yada yada yada. It is at this moment when a role playing game becomes nothing more than a board game with character sheets.

If all I want to do is crawl through Dungeons, beat up on monsters and collect trophies at the end of the day, I  would play a board game. I want more!

Harold's of the Hornblower is more than a board game. And we would be doing this game a terrible injustice if we force it down that path. If we take away from what makes this wonderful story based game a role playing game.

[Gar]

My favorite book is Watership Down. Its a story about rabbits. From the outside this may seem like a lame and passe story, however, the writing, the character development, the plot, the skillful way that the story is told is what makes it one of the best books I have ever read.

All of the reasons you listed for disliking fantasy are not specifically tied to fantasy. It is the nature of tabletop games, period. This is how tabletop games operate. And, by the way, you can still get a lot of roleplay in while accomplishing objectives. It doesn't have to be a duality of one or the other.

The main point is: the setting where the role-playing takes place hardly matters. It is the story, the character building, and the plot that counts. The genre is just the flavor. You get what you put into it. So if a genre that is known for its imagination seems to lack imagination or is passe, then you probably just need to put more effort into it. Look for roleplay opportunities while we are getting shit done and let it be productive roleplay.

For example. I hate Star Wars with the fury of a thousand suns. I hate the sci fantasy genre. But I can still enjoy role-playing in one because I put effort in digging for objectives to reach, which personally gives me satisfaction as a player.

[Bay]

I don't believe we have to have be either a dungeon crawl or a rich world to play.

I agree that if we did a monster of the week dungeon crawl every session, it'd be very boring and shallow and I'd hate it. But if we also roleplayed everything that occurs we'd use up all of our table time and not progress the bigger story, which would make me feel like we haven't progressed at all.

It's about balance and I try to make the sessions switch every time. One week is action and one week is talking to the NPC's. Admittedly it doesn't always work, but I try.

[Akirapryde]

I have not read Watership Down. I will have to look for it.

You said that the reasons I listed are part of all genres of role playing. And evidently are partially correct. No other game genres has the built in format that allows these risks to become so easy to fall in to.

Yes, I get your point. You get out of a game what you put in to it. But what if whatnot coming out of it, is beyond the control of a player or a few players.

I believe that ever player points their heart in to their games. I truly believe that. you have seen me play. You know I out my heart in to the scenes and the interactions.

Okay with that said. Allow me to show you that your point regarding "you get what you pit in to it," is wrong.

Despite three characters not really edger to move forward with the plot, we did. Because we as a party railroaded ourselves.

But the real tragedy was lost when eight days of traveling was skipped over. Eight days that Eli would have used to get to know more about Arwen's past. I mean after all, the very ship we were on had been the ship she grew up on.

Eight days to work out details of Gar's plan.

Eight days for team building (for no other better reason)

The travel was skipped to get us to the base of the mountain and face our first challenge, the cold.

You see, it wasn't what we put in to it. because that was a great plan between Arwen and Eli to play "who is the better thief" in the city.

It was skip to the next plot encounter. Which is what o have seen nearly all fantasy style games devolved in to.

[Akirapryde]

Andre I don't think I could have said it better. Just because one person wants an apple and another person wants an orange. That doesn't mean you have to have only apples or oranges. You can have both. But as I said, it's all too often in fantasy genre role play games. What ends up happening is all of the role play gets set to the side or use as fillers outside of the monster of the week. And it really hit home yesterday. When we were talking about it and all of a sudden it's like the epiphany. That's what I dislike about fantasy games, because that's the destination all Fantasy games seem to come to.uu

Liz is partially right, what you put into it is what you get out of it. So yes I see her point. I know it doesn't have to be that way, but all too often it does.

It's the whole idea of a two-dimensional World set around a two dimensional plot with two dimensional characters. it's frustrating and it drives me crazy.

I have one bit of "Thank God," Heralds of the Hornblower is not like that.

Again, I don't want anyone to think that this is a critique of Harold Hornblower, the way Andre runs his game, or the way anyone runs their character. This was just my epiphany of why I can't stand fantasy-based games.

[Gar]

Those eight days can be handled in online inbetweens. Every player is different in what they like to get out of a game.

We rush forward and skip ahead in Star Wars, too, so that is just how it is sometimes. It's not just fantasy games. All tabletop games work like this. If my roleplay opportunities are skipped over for the group (as they have been multiple times in Star Wars) then I just resolve it in an inbetween. It doesn't have to be at the table all the time.

I like the way Andre runs his games and I don't want that to change, it's what makes sense to me and it's what I'm used to.

[Akirapryde]

I do not want to be maneuvered in to a position where we are talking solely about HoH, or how Andre runs his game. Because that is not what I am talking about here. Yes I have drawn in a few examples from it. But the bulk of where I am coming from actually comes from the conversation after the game, not the events within it.

I too enjoy how Andre runs his game. Do I want to see a change? No not really.

As for SW-NH, the reason why I created the online support is because I tend to run large complex groups. It would be impossible to get to ever scene. The nature of the two groups are very different. However as you have mentioned, in SW-NH I have allowed players to run off on whatever rabbit hole they want. There were a number of major plot events that the party missed because they simply didn't care or where no there.

[Gar]

Regarding major plot events: Personally I don't think players should be punished for things outside of their control or not showing interest in a plot hook. It sucks as the GM when the player doesn't bite but that's all par for the course.