Why Pentiment is an RPG and should be on this forum

[luj1]

... the point of an RPG is to give you something; mechanics, scenery, dialogue, or whatever else it can, to support that narrative.

That is where you are incorrect. Mechanics aren't supporting the narrative. The narrative is supporting the mechanics. Words of Gary Gygax, not me.

 

[OSK]

Here's a better argument: CD Projekt.

If their catalogue of Glorified Cutscene Simulators gets a pass, why not.

If Pentiment was made in Poland it would be RPG of the year.

 

[Shaki]

Every adventure game and visual novel can now be argued to be an RPG, after you absolute retards not only decided that Disco Elysium is one, but even voted it in as RPG of the year. Face the consequences of the decline you brought here, cucks.

I would say a few of the so called adventure games are more RPGs than stuff that is classically regarded as such. Zork, for instance. Visual novels can't be RPGs since they aren't games, though.

RPGs originated from wargaming, combat is the CORE of the genre, everything else is just an addition, stories and lore only exist to make combat feel more meaningful. There is no RPG without combat.

 

[Alex]

... the point of an RPG is to give you something; mechanics, scenery, dialogue, or whatever else it can, to support that narrative.

That is where you are incorrect. Mechanics aren't supporting the narrative. The narrative is supporting the mechanics. Words of Gary Gygax, not me.

Feel free to quote if you feel it is pertinent, but having a narrative supporting the mechanics is something you can do in any game, even chess or go (though creating a narrative for some movements might require a lot of creativity). RPGs on the other hand are unique* in that the mechanics are bendable by the narrative, so that if a player wants to attempt something that logically he should be able to, it is up to the GM to come up with a way to represent that fairly in the game.

*Someoene could argue that this is not unique of RPGs but present in all story games. This is true, but since RPGs are both the first kind of story game to gain popularity and remains as the most important sub-group of the genre, the differentiation is not that important. Either way, having a narrative that transforms the system back instead of having it completely dictated by the system remains a necessary feature in RPGs even if it isn't the defining characteristic.

 

[Shin]

Every adventure game and visual novel can now be argued to be an RPG, after you absolute retards not only decided that Disco Elysium is one, but even voted it in as RPG of the year. Face the consequences of the decline you brought here, cucks.

I would say a few of the so called adventure games are more RPGs than stuff that is classically regarded as such. Zork, for instance. Visual novels can't be RPGs since they aren't games, though.

RPGs originated from wargaming, combat is the CORE of the genre, everything else is just an addition, stories and lore only exist to make combat feel more meaningful. There is no RPG without combat.

Even some wargames focus more on logistics and resource management than the actual battles. I'd say that the bulk of wargaming heritage in RPG's are dice rolls and stats that determine success or failure at various actions (although the first published miniature wargame rulebook was some real time action based decline bs), not necessarily combat.

 

[luj1]

I'd say that the bulk of wargaming heritage in RPG's are dice rolls [snip], not necessarily combat.

Monopoly has dice rolls.

 

[luj1]

... but since RPGs are [snip] the first kind of story game...

"Storytelling games" are not RPGs.

If a game is nothing but role-playing, then it is not really an RPG, but some form of improvisational theater, for the game form includes far more than acting out assumed roles.

Pacifism in the fantasy milieu is for those who would be slaves.

in my considered opinion detailed "realistic" combat rules are a detriment to the RPG, not a benefit. There is already undue stress placed upon combat as the central theme of the game form.

Yes, there should be a lot more emphasis on roleplay, what it is to create a character and stay within the framework created, and what it means to the game overall when this is done. This is not to say I am disparaging combat, as it is a very important, integral part of the RPG form.

If people enjoy playing limited roles in a game setting in which there are "untouchables," where they must be marionettes for the GM to move about, well and good. It is just not full RPG activity, and often is little more than amateur theatrics, play acting in a minor and surely inferior story line built as an adjunct to the original authored fiction and relatively meaningless to that work. Still, if it's entertaining to the participants, it is fulfilling its purpose, but it ain't RPGing.

 

[Vic]

Pacifism in the fantasy milieu is for those who would be slaves.

haven't looked into your other quotes but this caught my eye and sure enough is quoted out if context. Link to full quote:

https://www.dragonsfoot.org/forums/viewtopic.php?p=197378#p197378

Disco Elysium has only one or two dice rolls pertaining to combat iirc, and it's still considered an RPG.

Action combat is not even PnP-like combat and yet games like Morrowind and Witcher are considered RPGs.

You can post 100 more (mis)quotes but I just don't see combat being a hard requirement for an RPG, not theoretically at least. After all you have to do something in a game and not all games can be a Disco Elysium.

 

[Alex]

... but since RPGs are [snip] the first kind of story game...

"Storytelling games" are not RPGs.

Perhaps this is an issue of definition? By "story game", I mean any game that has a narrative aspect associated to it as well as a mechanical one, and where there is a two-way interaction between these two aspects. I further define RPG as a game of this kind, but where each "player" interacts with both aspects from the point of view of a single character (at least at a time). You also need someone to play a game master to represent everyone else, but the way this is done is a bit less restrictive. Most story games that weren't rpgs I've seen were either attempts from the Forge to try to come up with something different or only focused on a single aspect of their theory of RPGs. Others were usually some kind of card game with a narrative aspect added as well, but they didn't usually have much depth because they lack on the "mechanical" aspect. I only make the distinction for the sake of being pedantic, to be honest.

If a game is nothing but role-playing, then it is not really an RPG, but some form of improvisational theater, for the game form includes far more than acting out assumed roles.

Don't disagree with this, but that is not the same as saying that the narrative aspect is not necessary. All this is saying is that it alone is not enough.

Pacifism in the fantasy milieu is for those who would be slaves.

I don't think this has anything to do with what is being discussed...

in my considered opinion detailed "realistic" combat rules are a detriment to the RPG, not a benefit. There is already undue stress placed upon combat as the central theme of the game form.

Yes, there should be a lot more emphasis on roleplay, what it is to create a character and stay within the framework created, and what it means to the game overall when this is done. This is not to say I am disparaging combat, as it is a very important, integral part of the RPG form.

If people enjoy playing limited roles in a game setting in which there are "untouchables," where they must be marionettes for the GM to move about, well and good. It is just not full RPG activity, and often is little more than amateur theatrics, play acting in a minor and surely inferior story line built as an adjunct to the original authored fiction and relatively meaningless to that work. Still, if it's entertaining to the participants, it is fulfilling its purpose, but it ain't RPGing.

Interesting, but none of these touch on an explanation of what RPGs are or are not. They simply ascertain that they are so. I don't doubt Mr. Gygax very much agreed with you that a game without combat might not be an RPG (though I don't know for sure). But I do doubt that he was right about it. To be clear, there are plenty of games that have the exact same combat as RPGs, but aren't so. There are a few games that, despite complaints, don't have combat (possibly accidentally, as in, the game could have combat, but due to how the players play it, it is avoided), but are still RPGs. As such, I don't see combat as a defining feature of the genre, but narrative on the other hand is.. If you don't have any narrative associated with your game, but rather an abstract board game, that is not an RPG.

 

[Vic]

the game could have combat, but due to how the players play it, it is avoided

I guess Fallout is not an RPG then as per luj because you can beat it without killing anyone in combat.

 

[Vic]

to me the question of what a game is, is answered by the experience I have while playing it. An RPG gives a unique experience different from playing any other genre, and yes, sometimes combat is not part of it.

 

[Deadyawn]

An rpg doesn't have to have a narrative.

An RPG must have a narrative.

Wrong.

I disagree. Even the most combat-centric of rpgs have some sort of narrative at a basic level to contextualize where you are and what you are doing.

If there is no narrative, what role is there to play in these roleplaying games?

 

[samuraigaiden]

Pentinent is medieval shit, like centuries ago. Everybody that plays a role in it is dead now, so it can't be a role playing game. Medieval people aren't even corpses now, they are just dirt.

 

[FriendlyMerchant]

An rpg doesn't have to have a narrative.

An RPG must have a narrative.

Wrong.

I disagree. Even the most combat-centric of rpgs have some sort of narrative at a basic level to contextualize where you are and what you are doing.

Narrative and Lore are two different things. A setting needs its lore. But playing a character through that setting doesn't need a narrative at any level other than at most the player character's background and whatever narrative the player creates by having their character adventure through that world and how the player has his character deal with what he comes across whether their literally adventuring, choosing to stay in town to work a profession, etc. That is true roleplaying. Whereas writing a narrative (a storyline) like most games called "rpgs" today and at most providing a handful of options in dialogue at various stages that only result in minor mechanical consequences (if you're lucky) and nothing else other than a ending slide is not roleplaying (it's barely a cyoa adventure novel format as you don't even get to really choose your adventures).

 

[Deadyawn]

But playing a character through that setting doesn't need a narrative at any level other than at most the player character's background and whatever narrative the player creates by having their character adventure through that world and how the player has his character deal with what he comes across whether their literally adventuring, choosing to stay in town to work a profession, etc. That is true roleplaying.

Presicely, I wholeheartedly agree. So you see at some level every RPG has a narrative. It's integral to what makes an RPG, just like combat.

Which brings us back to the point of this thread: Pentiment absolutely is not an RPG.

 

[luj1]

You can post 100 more (mis)quotes but I just don't see combat being a hard requirement for an RPG, not theoretically at least.

It's not important what you see. It is important what it is. They are not misquotes.

After all you have to do something in a game and not all games can be a Disco Elysium.

Why would a game want to be Disco Elysium, a game without gameplay? It has no combat or meaningful exploration. It is 95% reading.

 

[luj1]

So you see at some level every RPG has a narrative. It's integral to what makes an RPG, just like combat.

The "narrative" of Wizardry 6 is to escape the castle. It is a super straightforward narrative. So clearly not as important as gameplay without which the game does not exist.

 

[luj1]

the game could have combat, but due to how the players play it, it is avoided

I guess Fallout is not an RPG then as per luj because you can beat it without killing anyone in combat.

But combat exists in Fallout.

 

[luj1]

... sometimes combat is not part of it.

By choice, not by design.

 

[luj1]

If there is no narrative, what ROLE is there to play in these roleplaying games?

ROLE of characters or combat units. For example, the traditional class-based roles of Fighter, Mage, Cleric or Thief.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

Pediment should be moved to the architecture forum, if only the Codex had one.

"Pediments were originally triangular gables found on Greek and Roman temples. During the Renaissance and subsequent Baroque and Rococo periods, new and more complex shapes were introduced. Regardless of their shape or complexity, pediments remain a low-pitched form."

 

[NaturallyCarnivorousSheep]

I disagree.

 

[Zed Duke of Banville]

RPGs originated from wargaming, combat is the CORE of the genre, everything else is just an addition, stories and lore only exist to make combat feel more meaningful. There is no RPG without combat.

Exploration, along with combat, has been a fundamental component of RPGs since the creation of the genre, arguably the paramount element as advocated by Gary Gygax:

 

[Reinhardt]

Disco Elysium considered an RPG.

no

 

[SunKing]

An RPG must have a narrative

What's Mount and Blade's?

A rpg

Do you think Josh would consider having a gypsy roomate?