Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Favourite RPG

Rate this topic


JMeganSnow

Recommended Posts

I was a bit curious to know if anyone else here plays role-playing games. I've found it to be an enjoyable, albeit expensive, hobby and almost a form of performance art. I'm aware that RPG's aren't held in much esteem, and I'd love to hear from anyone wanting to express that side of things, too.

Here's my favorite systems:

Dungeons & Dragons (the NEW new one)

Deadlands

Mutants and Masterminds

Unless you're a serious fanatic I doubt you'll find a system I haven't seen, though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 73
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

They're fun, but the one thing that peeves me about most of them is their alignment system. If you are a Lawful good, that means your character is the type that gives all of his money to the poor, and lives a life of poverty because of his quest to be altruist. Ticks me off when I play a RPG and see a kitten and my choices are "sacrifice your right arm to let the kittie live" or "let them sacrifice the kittie to the god of death." then when you let the kittie die because you value your right arm more than you value the kittie and the game is like "YOU GAIN 5 EVIL POINTS!"

That's why my favorite RPG so far is Knights of the old Republic II, because it really begs the question if the light side is truly the only good decision? Especially when

*SPOILER*

*SPOILER* the jedi council judges you to be a threat to the force and calls for you to be an altruist and sacrifice yourself for the sake of the whole. Luckily your Jedi master comes and saves you because you really don't have a choice in the matter, then chastizes the Council for their arrogant assumption of what they think is moral*END SPOILER*

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They're fun, but the one thing that peeves me about most of them is their alignment system. If you are a Lawful good, that means your character is the type that gives all of his money to the poor, and lives a life of poverty because of his quest to be altruist. Ticks me off when I play a RPG and see a kitten and my choices are "sacrifice your right arm to let the kittie live" or "let them sacrifice the kittie to the god of death." then when you let the kittie die because you value your right arm more than you value the kittie and the game is like "YOU GAIN 5 EVIL POINTS!"

Sounds to me like you're talking about computer RPGs, whereas the original poster was talking about pen & paper RPGs. They're really two very different pastimes. A good pen & paper RPG really is a type of collective performance art, sort of like a bunch of people working together to improvise a play with no audience.

I've been playing in a game of Spycraft that recently broke up, and I'm contemplating taking the plunge into gamemaster-hood. My game of choice for this is Champions (a super-hero RPG). I've always really liked the Hero ruleset, but haven't had a chance to actually play seriously with it before.

That's why my favorite RPG so far is Knights of the old Republic II, because it really begs the question if the light side is truly the only good decision?

Odd coincidence alert: the best pen & paper RPG I've played in was a multi-year Dungeons & Dragons game in college. The guy who ran it (who was also best man at my wedding) currently works as a level designer at the software development company that wrote Knights of the Old Republic II.

We spent many many hours arguing moral issues in college. I have no idea whether that experience fed into his work on KOTOR2, or whether he was involved in the sequence you cited in your post, but it's an odd connection.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahh, you refer to computer RPG's, considered a lesser form of the High Art by us snooty paper-and-dice gamers. You give up character sovereignity for cool graphics.

On an side note: KOTOR uses the d20 system pioneered in the Third Edition D&D game. It was rapidly expanded to other genres and essentially destroyed the old Star Wars RPG that once enjoyed some popularity. I've played the new version once and I was not much impressed with it, but then I'm not much of a Star Wars fan, either.

I will agree with you that the "alignment" system is a bit . . . what's a good word . . . contrived.

For the edification of anyone not previously familiar with RPG's, the dominant system, Dungeons and Dragons, has a method for determining where your character stands morally. Interesting, is it not, that a game finds it necessary to have an objective (small o) means of determining moral standing?

Your character has two alignment ratings to determine where he/she stands on the two alignment axes Law/Chaos and Good/Evil.

The trouble is that they define Lawful to mean "obedient", and Good to mean "nice". You can infer the definitions of Chaotic and Evil from there. Thus your Lawful Good character, who should be a model of strength, virtue, and morality, becomes a simpering consensus-seeking brother-lover.

Bah. What alignment should a conscientious Objectivist pick?

(Pardon the bizarre tone of this post; I had too much sugar today. I don't THINK I infringed on any copyright/trademarked stuff, but if I did the D&D 3E manuals are the source.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My game of choice for this is Champions (a super-hero RPG).

I STRONGLY recommend you take a look at Mutants and Masterminds. I've played both Champions and M&M (and Abberant, and DC Heroes, and took a stab at Marvel Universe). M&M is by far my favorite, largely because of its elegant simplicity.

Let me ask you a more general question: what draws you to gaming? Why do you enjoy it? What makes a good game, or a poor one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to play pen and paper AD&D back when I was a little kid. I played the Star Wars RPG in high school and all of a sudden remembered the fantastic fun I used to have as a kid.

I almost universally prefer American RPGs like KOTOR and Baldur's gate to Japanese RPGs like final fantasy. Jap RPGs try to both pose the question and then try to answer it. American RPGs pose the question and let you decide for yourself. Though like JMeganSnow said, it ends up being a choice between being nice and being wicked, being obedient and being rebellious. Regardless, usually you get your point across fairly well.

In games, I usually end up as lawful good, because I like being nice and generally follow the rules and any contracts I make. I guess since the alignment "chaotic neutral" is billed as being an individualist, I guess that would make Objectivists that. Their quote on the matter was "a person of chaotic neutral alignment isn't as likely to burn a bridge as he is to cross it."

A far cry from the AD&D system, where being chaotic neutral ment you were a madman who couldn't care less about anything.

One major flaw in D&D is that nature is always billed as a benevolent god, and druids and other enviromentalists are sympathetic characters who favor the "balance" of nature. I don't know about you all, but when I watch a lion mauling a zebra on TV, benevolent isn't the word that comes to mind. Nor does the word "balance" when I watch a show on animal planet about animals that are slowly being driven into extinction.

EDIT: that's sweet about your friend, Khaight. KOTOR made several very poignant points. For example. I was in the market for some light side points, because light side mastery gives you a +3 to strength (by the end of KOTOR, my character had a modified str of 40, which in a D20 system is Godlike, and combined with extra criticals and master flurry, I was doing around 400 points of damage a turn) so I decided to give a bum some money. Immediatly, I was chastised by my master. She asked what I was doing and I said I was being nice. She told me that all decisions have a consequence, and that consequence may be inadvertent. She then used the force to show me the fate of the bum. It shows him getting mugged by a man who saw me give him some money. I'm pretty sure the bum ended up dying from it. Raised a very interesting point about the nature of altruism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I almost universally prefer American RPGs like KOTOR and Baldur's gate to Japanese RPGs like final fantasy. Jap RPGs try to both pose the question and then try to answer it. American RPGs pose the question and let you decide for yourself.

I also prefer the American RPGs, although I think the actual division is between PC RPGs and console RPGs. (Most Japanese CRPGs are written for consoles primarily; most American ones are written primarily for PCs.) There are also some German CRPGs that are pretty good (Gothic and Gothic 2 are both, IMHO, excellent.)

Objectivists might be interested in Deus Ex, which is sort of a hybrid between a CRPG and an action shooter. The plot involves your character working as an agent for a United Nations anti-terrorist group and then discovering that all is not as it seems. A no-holds-barred game of cloak and dagger ensues, and a good time is had by all who don't get killed in the end. One of my favorite PC games ever.

In games, I usually end up as lawful good, because I like being nice and generally follow the rules and any contracts I make.
There was an old CRPG called Ultima IV that had an explicit system of virtues (some good, some very bad from an Objectivist standpoint). One of the groundbreaking aspects of the game was that it would assign you ranking in each virtue based on what you did as you played. I'm pleased to say that my "self-sacrifice" ranking for most of the game was "self-serving slug" -- and this was before I ever read Ayn Rand!

In AD&D games I usually wind up playing "neutral good", which I interpret as someone interested in doing good while not being overly concerned about what the rules of society have to say about the proper way to do so.

...so I decided to give a bum some money. Immediatly, I was chastised by my master. She asked what I was doing and I said I was being nice. She told me that all decisions have a consequence, and that consequence may be inadvertent. She then used the force to show me the fate of the bum. It shows him getting mugged by a man who saw me give him some money. I'm pretty sure the bum ended up dying from it. Raised a very interesting point about the nature of altruism.

Interesting. I haven't played KOTOR2 yet (because I only have a PC, not an Xbox, so I have to wait for the PC version to come out in February), but once I do I'm definitely going to write my friend and find out which bits he was responsible for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting you make the division between Consoles and PCs, because KOTOR happens to be an Xbox game :D

you are more or less correct though. Perhaps I should say Japanese RPGs and Western RPGs, no?

two series I have noticed that really aren't RPGs but are still worthy of note is the Jak series and the Chronicles of Riddick. In both cases, the protagonist is a sympathetic anti-hero, shunned by society, and living by their own personal standards. Both choose to fight evil (Jak fights the metal heads and Riddick fights the Necromongers) but both also do so only for their own reasons (Riddick wants to save Kiera and Jak wants to save Ashelin)

I brought Riddick up because even though I was refering to the movie, he does have his own video game, which does have trace elements of an RPG, and also happens to be one of the sweetest games for the Xbox. Swallow your reservations about Vin Diesel, the man's a geek and the man knows what he wants in a video game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to play D&D and AD&D for years. Actually, from age 10 to 18 I've played quite a bit.

I particularly enjoyed being a Dungeon Master, but having a really cool character is also great fun.

However, you really need the right people to enjoy this game. They need to be intelligent, non-cynical, imaginative, and willing to suspend disbelief. I find that this requirement makes it practically impossible for me to play.

People are more interested in their own lives, or feel dorkish when playing, and so they continuously break out of character, or lose focus. I can relate, but really - why play at all with this set of mind?

When everything is ticking, however, the result can be magical. Great stories are born, and you learn a whole lot about yourself and your friends in the process.

(TRANSLATION: If someone decent around NYC wants to play, let me know! :D )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I played a good bit of AD&D (v.1) from 1983 to about 1991, Jr. high through college. I think young people sometimes use this as a way to project what they would like to be, develop fictional heroes of their own, hypothesize moral decisions, etc. I learned a bit about probability, literature and vocabulary, and public speaking in the process. It's a way to socialize, like a party with food, drink, and dice and paper thrown in. I also saw role-playing as a way for teenage boys (mostly) to engage in one-upsmanship. Practically every character in my group was designed to dominate the other players.

Overall, I'd say role playing is an excercise with some positive features, but the risk is that it absorbs too much time better spent advancing one's values in reality. Some people also use role playing as a form of escape from reality, where fake accomplishments in a non-existent world replace real accomplishments in the real world. Looking back, I wished I'd devoted more of that time of my life to Calculus or computer programming or other useful study.

I always saw AD&D's Chaotic-Good alignment as being most compatible with Objectivist ethics. People I played with would only choose Lawful Good because they had to to get the bonus abilities that Paladins won.

BTW, I also played Call of Cthulu, Rolemaster (a good system that few played), and a James Bond RPG, back in my teen years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

*waves at The Management*

I must confess to an error, here, I think this thread belongs on the Culture board and not in the Aesthetics board. Mea culpa.

And, please, I really did mean for this thread to be about paper-and-dice or tabletop gaming, not computer RPG's. Those are computer games first and RPG's as a secondary.

Overall, I'd say role playing is an excercise with some positive features, but the risk is that it absorbs too much time better spent advancing one's values in reality. Some people also use role playing as a form of escape from reality, where fake accomplishments in a non-existent world replace real accomplishments in the real world. Looking back, I wished I'd devoted more of that time of my life to Calculus or computer programming or other useful study.
I'll agree with this to an extent, but I'll add one thing. The period in my life that I was most active in gaming for the sake of gaming I was also suicidally depressed. I had no DESIRE to engage in useful activities, and wouldn't regardless of what filled the time. The ultimate purpose gaming served for me was that it enabled me to get in touch with my values in a non-threatening environment and to develop a sense of what I wanted and why. I don't think it was wasted time any more than any sort of learning or recreation is wasted time. The facts I might have absorbed if I'd spent the time studying something "practical" would have been of no use to me if I couldn't manage to come up with a reason to stay alive in the first place.

I learned a bit about probability, literature and vocabulary, and public speaking in the process.

That's all? Goodness, I can hardly list the things that I learned through gaming. history, science, computer programming, art appreciation, philosophy, problem-solving . . . the list goes on and on. It even helped me to find my passion: novel-writing.

I won't claim that everyone has or will have the experience I did, but I don't think that my gaming was anything but beneficial.

BTW, I also played Call of Cthulu, Rolemaster (a good system that few played), and a James Bond RPG, back in my teen years.
I used to play D&D and AD&D for years. Actually, from age 10 to 18 I've played quite a bit.

I particularly enjoyed being a Dungeon Master, but having a really cool character is also great fun.

The only CoC I've played was after the d20 conversion. It didn't impress me much, but then I find horror more amusing than anything. I'm too plebian I suppose. I've never played Rolemaster, although the worst criticism I've ever heard of it was that there were too many tables. Too much randomness detracts from the artistic aspects of the game sometimes. This may be that my group doesn't stop to consider what the results of failure may be, only how to prevent said failure.

(TRANSLATION: If someone decent around NYC wants to play, let me know!  )

Do you have AIM? I play online with a group of friends via AIM. One of them lives in New York, but we've have players in Ohio, Indiana, Minnesota, Oregon, California, and Pennsylvania. It makes it a bit easier to find a group when you don't have to be in the same geographical location.

If you're interested email me . . . if I can get some players I have an idea I'd be willing to run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there's nothing wrong with RPGs in principle as a hobby or recreation. In fact, it would be very interesting for an Objectivist to write modules (preferably for a non-mystical game) posing moral dillemmas concretizing the Objectivist philosophy. In that case it would be a form of interactive fiction.

Nevertheless, I think the points that Ayn Rand made in "An Open Letter to Boris Spassky" apply, potentially even more strongly to RPGs than to chess.

See:

http://www.chess4all.org/Articles/Fischer/ol_to_bs.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oh, yes, I read that letter some time ago and I completely agree. Personally I wonder if I use RPG's as a method of self-medicating my emotional problems. Otherwise normal, healthy people don't often become as devoted to RPG's as I've been, and I find my interest gradually decreasing as I become involved in other things. Well, no, I'm as interested as I ever was, it's more that my priorities have shifted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

(preferably for a non-mystical game)

This got me to thinking. While many gaming systems contain "magic" and "gods" I think you'd be hard pressed to find one that's truly "mystical."

My reasoning is this: every game that contains magic and religion has RULES for magic and religion. They aren't mysterious forces acting in ways man cannot comprehend, they're understood forces acting under very specific rules. Worshipping a deity is a very definite exchange: you follow these rules, you get these benefits.

In fact, I think this is why gaming is such a relief from the irrational: people might disagree about the application of the rules, but the rules are KING. It's like being in a world full of Objectivists for a while.

Interesting, no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In fact, I think this is why gaming is such a relief from the irrational: people might disagree about the application of the rules, but the rules are KING.  It's like being in a world full of Objectivists for a while.

Interesting, no?

Well, there's the Amber RPG, which uses a "diceless" system which often boils down to the GM deciding subjectively whether proposed character actions succeed or fail based on what makes for a more dramatic story. Not much objectivity there.

I think there's a grain of truth in the comparison to chess (which I also played when I was younger and enjoyed a lot). Whenever you have a moderately complex rule-based system there's a risk that playing with the system will become an end in itself, replacing a focus on reality. This can happen with chess. It can happen with role-playing games, as anybody who has been to a gaming convention can attest. It can happen with computer programming. It can even happen with philosophy. (I think this may explain some of the more pathological characteristics of the analytic school.) But the risk doesn't mean these pastimes or disciplines are without value; it just means you have to keep them in their place. I game. I program computers for a living. I read philosophy. I even play a game of chess now and then. But I don't use these activities to escape from reality -- they're parts of reality that enhance my enjoyment of life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've played Amber, and, in theory, it's not supposed to be left up to the GM's subjective approval/disapproval. Any time the GM makes a purely subjective decision the game has degenerated.

Given, it still happens.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ahh, you refer to computer RPG's, considered a lesser form of the High Art by us snooty paper-and-dice gamers.  You give up character sovereignity for cool graphics.

I may be going completely mad here, but do you have a prejudice against computer RPG's? :)

I've never played with pen&paper before. I lack the time, the experience, and the right people (or indeed any people). Computer RPG's provide a convenient alternative. Not that I wouldn't mind trying it the old fashioned way sometime, but I don't think it will happen. This might be a good thing because...

Overall, I'd say role playing is an excercise with some positive features, but the risk is that it absorbs too much time better spent advancing one's values in reality. Some people also use role playing as a form of escape from reality, where fake accomplishments in a non-existent world replace real accomplishments in the real world. Looking back, I wished I'd devoted more of that time of my life to Calculus or computer programming or other useful study.

I couldn't agree more with this. I have a sneaking suspicion this is the only reason I've ever played RPG's. I'm not entirely sure. Time eating hobby of DOOM is definitely a fitting description.

Btw (hope this doesn't deviate too much from the topic, it is more a passing curiosity) has anyone here played a MUD before?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Btw (hope this doesn't deviate too much from the topic, it is more a passing curiosity) has anyone here played a MUD before?

I experimented with TinyMUD for about six months while I was in college. I went through the exploration phase, the construction phase and the wizard phase. Then I got bored and moved on to something else. Essentially I was exploring the capabilities of the MUD as a software system and once I understood it I was finished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, there's just a thread on this page already for computer games.  Sorry.

Okay. You stated before that:

And, please, I really did mean for this thread to be about paper-and-dice or tabletop gaming, not computer RPG's. Those are computer games first and RPG's as a secondary.

Could you explain to me, objectively, why a Computer RPG is a "computer game first" whereas a tabletop RPG is not a "tabletop game first"? What significance does the medium it is presented in have that diminishes its status as an RPG? I'd appreciate it if you could explain your reasoning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used to play D&D, AD&D (yes there was a difference), the Hero System (Champions, Fantasy Hero, Star Hero, etc.) and a few others. AD&D was by far the most played in our group.

With the advent of better computer RPG's, I switched and never went back. It matters little to me that the P&P players look up or down on CRPG's as my entertainment is foremost my concern. :) Any comparison between the two (which is not in jest or good fun) is suggestive of someone seeking some status within a very limited circle of influence.

That said, I'll have a crack at this question;

Could you explain to me, objectively, why a Computer RPG is a "computer game first" whereas a tabletop RPG is not a "tabletop game first"? What significance does the medium it is presented in have that diminishes its status as an RPG? I'd appreciate it if you could explain your reasoning.

CRPG's seriously limit actual roleplaying by giving the player very limited paths (which are usually predefined) in order to act out their role. This is largely a limitation of the medium when compared to having a live person as a GM who can adjust the gameworld and its scenarios on the fly in virtually limitless directions. I like some CRPG's, but I see that very obvious distinction. In return however, there is more "game" going on, and less dice rolling, writing, number crunching, etc.

My current favorite game is the MMORPG World of Warcraft. I've never thought about MMORPG's very seriously, but I like Blizzard as a company. EVERY game they have put out has been a well designed enjoyable experience. Diablo 2:LOD ranks as my favorite all time game. When I tried the beta of World of Warcraft, I was almost instantly hooked. (as if it were digital crack :0 )

Edit: I believe Wizards of the Coast is currently developing D&D online. I plan on looking into it, but they will have a tough time taking my business from Blizzard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay. You stated before that:

Could you explain to me, objectively, why a Computer RPG is a "computer game first" whereas a tabletop RPG is not a "tabletop game first"? What significance does the medium it is presented in have that diminishes its status as an RPG? I'd appreciate it if you could explain your reasoning.

I didn't mean to indicate that CRPG's have "diminished" status, merely that they are DIFFERENT from tabletop RPG's. I play both, and the enjoyment I derive from CRPG's is entirely different from the experience I have playing tabletop. I will admit that tabletop games are given a slightly higher distinction among TRUE geeks, if only because it means you have enough friends to form a party and can actually get them all together in the same room occasionally. :confused:

For me, the most important factors of determining whether a CRPG is a "good" game aren't even found in tabletop RPG's: the scenery, art, music, interaction with objects, ease-of-play, etc. Having a truly interesting and original storyline isn't as big a deal. Many CRPG's are AMAZINGLY similar, and most of the story activity boils down to "go get me this object" and "kill this monster". The fascination derives from what you see while doing these various tasks.

In RPG's even if the GM has a preset task in mind it rarely survives first encounter with the players. Even if they do eventually "accomplish" it the results may be all out of whack. (I could relate some stories, but I won't bore you.) There is no scenery, although there are some ease-of-play factors depending on which system you use and how strictly you adhere to it.

This is only a partial explanation, but I think I've answered your question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

now heres another wrench to throw in this motor of a thread. Has anyone here played wargames? They are sort of like RPGs in that you take the role of an army commander. I have a few Warhammer and Warhammer 40k armies. I find it extremely rewarding to have 60+ models, each one lovingly peaced together and painted to exact standards, while you have that one model which you spent that extra time converting and painting. Then the exhilarating feeling of winning, squarely of course.

I like the 40k fluff, it's a dystopian view of the future, the consequence of the triumph of Kantian thinking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

now heres another wrench to throw in this motor of a thread. Has anyone here played wargames?

Squad Leader, Advanced Squad Leader, Panzerblitz, War of the Ring, Arab-Israeli Wars, just to name a few. You might say that wargaming was the "gateway drug" into role playing games for me. :confused:

Thus, I also like a few computer wargames such as Heroes of M&M 3, Close Combat 1&2, Combat Mission 1&2 (which is as close as the computer has every gotten to ASL in my opinion), and a few others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...