So, what do the players do in a roleplaying guide?

Simple, they play roles.

What do they do as they play their roles?

Depends, on what they feel like doing, and what the Guide Master (GM) suggests they do.

That’s the thing about plots and storylines, they’re really nothing more than suggestions. Hints when you get down to it. Give most groups a murder mystery to explore and they’ll want to know where that stash of vin ordinaire came from. In this players tend to be a distractible as a year old puppy.

What do the players do?

As they play their characters they get into all sorts of things. They interfere in muggings, track down ancient tomes and ancient grandmothers. They rescue kittens, baby dragons, and lost merchants. They guide hunting expeditions; land on unknown islands, worlds, trolley stops; converse with wisemen and fools of all sorts (and sometimes the same people), and on rare occasion they kill critters and take their stuff.

What do the players have to do?

Not a darn thing. At least nothing the GM would like them to do. For that is the secret of RPGs, freedom of choice. Any GM who refuses to accept player initiative is in the wrong hobby.

That’s rude!

Is it wrong?

You are a cruel man.

Isn’t limiting what people can do crueler still?

…In any case, the role of the players is to explore the setting they’ve been presented with, to present the GM with situations he hasn’t prepared for, and so encourage adaptability and imagination on his part. To put it simply, get him to loosen up and lighten up, and accept things won’t always go the way he planned.To help the GM understand that RPGs cannot be scripted, plotted, graphed out, or (for that matter) outline. All the GM can do is set up the basic situation, the opening incident, then watch as his players play merry hob with his scenario.

You ask, “What do the players do in an RPG?”

The answer is, “Gift the GM with consternation and confusion.” Remember, it’s part of his job to entertain you.

Alan Kellogg. I am a blogger and a gamer, and I opine on various subjects and topics. I live in San Diego CA, have been gaming since 1964 (board games) and 1975 (RPGs). Have credits in Dangerous Journeys: Mythus and have helped out with a few other projects (Charlemagne’s Paladins for TSR for instance). Currently working on a revision of Mythus for possible publication.

art by mazeo

According to Wikipedia a game can be considered an organized activity in which the participants engage in activities aimed at achieving a goal, either in competition with others, or in cooperation with them. The article in question notes that games often have elements in common, such as goals (victory conditions), a limited arena or playing field, and often a time limit. What about roleplaying games?

Note that in the case of an RPG most (there are exceptions) do not have formal goals, have an expansive playing field, and no real time limit. In the case of the last, play can be considered unending, with the group deciding when a particular campaign will come to an end. In short, you don’t need to end the game at a certain time and then assess victory and defeat. Nor do the players have to end a session when certain conditions are met and then determine victors and losers.

Instead, the players may suspend play at any time, then resume later. Thus the typical RPG is an endless game. Indeed, in some cases groups have made their games multigenerational, with the successors and heirs of the original characters carrying on after them.

Where time limits are concerned, they aren’t always adhered to. One group may solve the problem inside a few minutes. Another may take months of play just to get the adventurers together and hired to explore an ancient set of ruins. That is the thing about the great majority of RPGs, the players don’t have to complete their tasks in a certain set time, despite what certain parties would have you believe. In that sense RPGs are open ended.

The same applies to the arena. In a typical game – Parcheesi or Go or Chess – the field of play, pieces and terrain, are limited. This make mechanical balancing relatively easy. In an RPG the arena and the available actors are expansive indeed. When you consider an RPG environment is a largely active one, you come to realize the typical RPG cannot be mechanically balanced except in the most limited of fashions and for the most limited time. Look into Chaos Theory for further information regarding this.

Following the above we have the fact that things in any comprehensive world can not be equal in any real way in any but the most restrictive RPG. There is just too much going on for RPGs to be substantially balanced or to stay balanced.

So what do we have with RPGs? No real objective, no real time limit, and an unbalanced situation that relies on initiative on the part of player and GM alike for matters to work. And let’s not forget the opportunity factor. In a traditional game the player only has so many options he can follow. In an RPG there may be limits, but the choices available can often be wide ranging, and often there are occasions when even those choices can be expanded upon. When you get right down to it, RPGs really don’t qualify as games in the traditional sense. An RPG is more an exercise in imagination, exploration, and interaction. You have the freedom to solve your problems in a wide variety of ways, not just a few.

More could be said on the subject, but I think we’ll stop here. Unless something happens we’ll be taking a look at players in RPGs and what they do next week.

Alan Kellogg. I am a blogger and a gamer, and I opine on various subjects and topics. I live in San Diego CA, have been gaming since 1964 (board games) and 1975 (RPGs). Have credits in Dangerous Journeys: Mythus and have helped out with a few other projects (Charlemagne’s Paladins for TSR for instance). Currently working on a revision of Mythus for possible publication.

You see, the shared computers I’d usually use at my place of residence lost connection to the Internet, and that connection won’t be fixed until tomorrow. So I’m using a library computer, which means I can’t do the research on games I’d was supposed to do for this post. That means this second post will ask a question or two, starting with:

Given that a story is about things which have happened, and life is about things which are happening, and that an RPG is about things which are happening—albeit, imaginary things, how can RPGs be story?

How did performance; that is, playing a role, come to be storytelling?

Are we really storytelling, or storymaking?

I’d like to read your thoughts on the above.

Alan Kellogg. I am a blogger and a gamer, and I opine on various subjects and topics. I live in San Diego CA, have been gaming since 1964 (board games) and 1975 (RPGs). Have credits in Dangerous Journeys: Mythus and have helped out with a few other projects (Charlemagne’s Paladins for TSR for instance). Currently working on a revision of Mythus for possible publication.