The Hollows and Hobgoblins Blog

Tag: Theory

  • The Basics of Roleplaying, Part 2: What Do We Like About It?

    In the first part of this series, I described to the best of my ability what roleplaying is, specifically in the context of game-mastered roleplaying games, by describing what people tend to do during a game. Now I want to explore why we do it—what is it about roleplaying games that keeps enthusiasts coming back for more?

    A Brief Note on RPG Theory (I’m Not Doing it)

    Before diving in, I want to clarify that I won’t be delving into complex roleplaying game theory, as some others have done. Some people have developed elaborate models and theories about player preferences, compatibility between different play styles, and so on. I’m not convinced this theoretical approach makes much practical difference for most players or designers. The academic terminology often becomes ambiguous or exclusionary—take the term “narrativism,” which is an ambiguous term. You can have a narrative about anything. This term can be interpreted in numerous ways, and has created its own circle of theorists who deride those who use it improperly, and claim superior understanding and requisite status for themselves.

    Whether RPG theory has any validity is something I’ll leave for others to judge, but I think it’s simply fact that it rarely impacts or influences those who play or design games, with very few exceptions.

    What People Actually Enjoy About Roleplaying Games

    Instead, I want to discuss the general elements that people find appealing about roleplaying games. Understanding what you enjoy can help game masters prepare better sessions, or assist designers in creating more enjoyable experiences for themselves and their target audience.

    Character Focus

    To start, I’ll begin with what I just mentioned, what some might call “narrativism”. I don’t care what other people might mean by it in other contexts, but what I mean by it here is simply focus on the character, who they are and how they change. One thing many players enjoy is focusing on a character: their motivations, goals, moral center, and how these aspects evolve or change when the character faces difficult or extreme situations. Some players are essentially playing to discover who their character truly is and how (and if) they change through various challenges.

    This is just one element that some players enjoy—it’s no better or worse than any other preference, and all such preferences are legitimate.

    The Game Element: Winning and Losing

    At a fundamental level, many people enjoy roleplaying games because they are games with uncertain outcomes. There’s excitement in caring about your character, playing them striving toward their goals, and seeing whether or not they succeed. This uncertainty is what makes roleplaying games actual games—your character might not get what they want, creating a sense of stakes and potential loss.

    Problem-Solving

    Some players particularly enjoy creative or technical problem-solving. You see this in certain fiction, especially science fiction stories that emphasize clever technical solutions over character development. In roleplaying games, this might involve using magic in unexpected ways to escape a trap, spying on enemies through ingenious means, or combining tactics to defeat opponents. Rather than inventing some pretentious, ambiguous term for this preference, I’ll simply call it problem-solving.

    Combat Focus

    Related to but distinct from problem-solving is the focus on combat. Some players greatly enjoy games with significant combat elements, similar to why people enjoy wargames. In fact, a common origin story for roleplaying games traces them to wargamers who wanted more detail about individual characters in their battles. Some players appreciate the technical specifications, tactics, and strategy involved in confronting enemies in a shared imaginary world.

    Setting Immersion

    Another appeal is setting immersion. Players enjoy embodying characters because the setting itself is compelling—many science fiction fans have dreamed of serving as an officer on a Federation starship, or fighting orcs in Middle-Earth. The opportunity to experience a beloved fictional setting firsthand is a powerful draw.

    Character Immersion

    Whether you consider this separate from “character focus” or not, some players specifically enjoy the experience of embodying someone who isn’t themselves—stepping into another perspective and doing things they wouldn’t or couldn’t do in the real world.

    Emotional and Atmospheric Experiences

    Some players seek specific atmospheres or emotional content in their games. Horror roleplaying games create fear, while games like Ten Candles generate feelings of sorrow and nostalgia. These emotional experiences can be valuable and enjoyable in the right context.

    Social and Political Intrigue

    Though less common, some players prefer games focused on political maneuvering and social dynamics, such as Vampire: The Masquerade. The enjoyment comes from navigating complex social situations, increasing your character’s status, and outmaneuvering rivals.

    Conclusion

    These are the primary elements that I believe people enjoy about roleplaying games. There’s nothing particularly profound about this analysis, and I’m not interested in theorizing why people like these aspects—I’m only concerned with identifying what they actually enjoy. I also see no reason to think that these aspects are incompatible with each other, or that a game cannot or should not do more than one of them – such pronouncements are way too theoretical. The only way to test whether or not a game does more than one of these well is to have many people try it and see.

    But that’s neither here nor there. In my next blog post, I’ll discuss some best practices for basic roleplaying based on what we’ve covered so far.

    Until then, your thoughts and comments on this post are very much welcomed. Did I leave anything out? What is it you enjoy about tabletop roleplaying games?

    Footnote: For those who want to know what I mean about the kind of RPG theory I was alluding to earlier (and the big mess it can be), here is an example: https://www.arkenstonepublishing.net/isabout/2020/05/14/observations-on-gns-simulationism/

    Note that I mean no disrespect to the author, who does a great job with the various concepts he mentions. I’m just not sure any of it is worth spending any time on.

  • Roleplaying Basics, Part One: What Is It, Really?

    Hi everyone! I thought I’d spend the next few posts exploring the fundamentals of roleplaying games (RPGs). Not because I claim any special expertise, but simply because I enjoy thinking and talking about them. I’m also hoping this sparks a conversation, inviting you to share your own thoughts and perspectives.

    Part of my motivation is personal: I’m working to articulate my understanding in my own words, moving away from the specific jargon of a group I was previously involved with (AdeptPlay). This series is part of that process.

    What Roleplaying Isn’t: Storytelling

    First, let’s tackle what in my opinion is a common misconception. Despite what many books and articles suggest, roleplaying is not storytelling, at least not in the conventional sense. I believe framing it that way is misleading.

    Think about traditional storytelling: the storyteller typically arrives with a fully formed narrative – beginning, middle, end, plot points, the works. They then recount this pre-existing story to the audience.

    Roleplaying doesn’t work like that. While a story certainly emerges from a roleplaying session after it’s over, the act of playing isn’t about reciting or playing to a pre-written script.

    Crucially, the quality of the story that emerges after the session often has little correlation with how much fun the participants had during the session. You can have an incredible, engaging time playing, yet the resulting story, viewed objectively, might lack classic story structure or polish. Conversely, you might endure a dull or frustrating session where your contributions felt ignored, but the sequence of events, when looked back upon, coincidentally forms a structurally “good” story.

    Because the process isn’t storytelling, and because the quality of the resulting narrative doesn’t necessarily reflect the quality of the play experience, I find using “storytelling” as the primary lens for understanding RPGs to be unhelpful, even misleading.

    So, What Is Roleplaying? (Focusing on Game-mastered Games)

    Okay, if it’s not storytelling, what is happening during a roleplaying game?

    There’s a vast spectrum of RPGs. One major distinction is between games with a designated Game Master (GM) and those without (often called GM-less games). For this post, I’ll focus on games with a GM, simply because they are very common, though GM-less games are a fascinating topic for another time. (Note: It’s difficult to make sweeping generalizations about GM-less games due to their huge variety.)

    At its core, a GM’d roleplaying session is a conversation. Participants talk about what’s happening within a shared setting.

    For example, in a Star Trek Adventures game, the setting is the familiar sci-fi universe of the Federation, Klingons, Cardassians, Romulans, etc. Concepts like starships, phasers, transporters, and tractor beams are part of the assumed background shared by everyone playing.

    Most participants are Players, each typically controlling one or more specific characters within that setting. One participant is the Game Master (GM).

    Players assume the roles of their characters, describing their actions, words, and sometimes thoughts. They might also ask the GM questions to clarify the situation or environment (“What else do I see in this room?”).

    The Game Master has the power and responsibility to describe the setting, determine how the environment and its inhabitants react to the player characters (PCs), and portray all the other characters in the world, known as Non-Player Characters (NPCs). From a player’s perspective, NPCs are part of the setting managed by the GM.

    The Flow of Play

    The way play proceeds is, the GM presents a context, the players describe how their characters react, and the GM describes the outcome or the world’s response. The conversation flows back and forth between one or more players talking, the GM responding, and the players responding in turn.

    At certain points, most RPGs introduce an element of chance. Players, and sometimes the GM, might roll dice or use another randomizer (like drawing cards). The outcome of this randomization influences what happens next in the shared setting. Did the character succeed at their risky action? Did something unexpected occur? The result is incorporated into the ongoing conversation.

    This cycle—conversation, action, occasional randomization and determination of the outcome, followed by more conversation—repeats until the session reaches an endpoint. This might be due to external factors (like running out of scheduled time) or internal narrative developments (reaching a satisfying conclusion, achieving a goal or failing to). Occasionally, a session might end because players decide they aren’t enjoying the game anymore, which can happen for a myriad of reasons.

    Essential Elements of Gamemastered Roleplaying

    If that describes the process, what are the core components that make it work? Based on the flow described above (and please comment if you think I’ve missed something crucial!), here are what I see as the essential elements:

    Shared Setting: The group agrees to play within a specific fictional world (Middle-earth, the Star Trek universe, World War II, a post-apocalyptic wasteland, etc.) with common background assumptions about how that world works.

    Agreed-Upon Rules (The Game System): The group uses a specific set of rules (Dungeons & Dragons, Star Trek Adventures, Alien RPG, Call of Cthulhu, Apocalypse World, or one of the countless others). This system defines:

    • The distinct powers and responsibilities of the GM and the Players.
    • How characters are created and what they can do.
    • How and when randomization (dice, cards, etc.) is used to resolve uncertainty.
    • The ways characters and the setting can change.
    • Essentially, the game system dictates who gets to say what, when, and with what effect within the flow of play.

    GM Preparation: For most GM’d games, the GM does some preparation beforehand. The extent varies wildly by game system and GM style, but it generally involves creating or selecting fictional elements to drive the action and create conflict. This often includes:

    • Defining specific locations within the setting.
    • Creating NPCs with their own goals and motivations.
    • Establishing what’s at stake or what risks the player characters might face or care about.
    • For instance, if the GM knows the players want to reach a treasure cave on a mountain, they might prep the journey. This could involve creating a forest path, populating it with conflicting NPCs (like a lost baby dragon, goblins wanting to capture it, and its worried mother searching frantically), creating a dynamic context with choices for the players to navigate.

    Scene Framing: Someone (usually, but not always the GM) needs to kick off the action by describing the initial context: where the PCs are, what time it is, and what’s immediately happening. Examples: “You’re walking through the forest under a bright sun when a small dragon crashes through the trees into a clearing ahead.” or “You’re aboard your freighter, the Beowolf, en route to Hypatia Station when you pick up a distress signal.”

    Player Character Embodiment: Players respond to the framed scene by describing what their characters do, think, or say, guided by their character’s established goals, personality, and motivations.

    Active Listening and Building: Participants listen to each other. When a player describes their character’s action, it’s generally accepted as having happened in the shared world unless the rules or the GM intervenes (often by saying something like, “Okay, let’s see if you succeed at that,” and calling for a dice roll). Other players and the GM then react and build upon that contribution.

    GM Adjudication and Setting Response: The GM uses the rules and their prepared material (or improvisation) to describe how the world and NPCs react to the players’ actions. If a player character threatens a goblin, the GM portrays the goblin’s response based on what they know about its nature. If the outcome is uncertain (Just how intimidating was the threat? How tough is the goblin?), the GM might call for a dice roll based on the game’s rules. Similarly, if a character tries to scale a slippery wall, the GM might determine the difficulty and ask for a roll to see if they manage it.

    Player Response and Iteration: Players react to the outcomes and the GM’s descriptions, deciding on their characters’ next actions, continuing the cycle.

    Change and Consequence: As play progresses, the shared imagined world is dynamic. NPCs might change their goals, allegiances, abilities, or leave or die. Player characters can also change – gaining new abilities and powers, gaining or losing resources, changing their motivations, facing injuries and setbacks including death. Locations, organizations, and the overall setting will evolve based on the actions taken.

    Play continues cyclically and iteratively until a natural endpoint is reached for the session.

    Wrapping Up (For Now)
    So, that’s my initial take on describing what basic GM’d roleplaying is, focusing on the process rather than trying to define it by the story it might produce after the fact. I haven’t touched on what makes it good or effective yet – just the mechanics of what happens at the table.

    Over to You!
    What’s your perspective? Did I miss anything crucial in this description? Is there anything you think I’m off the mark on? I’d genuinely love to hear your thoughts in the comments!