General News - On Fantasy Economies

We see this sort of thing ("It's not an RPG if it doesn't have levelling/character creation/…") all the time here and anywhere else that cRPGs are discussed. Also the opposite; if a game contains "X" then it ISN'T an RPG.

Originally Posted by skavenhorde
They have the right to their opinion and so do I. Any CRPG without combat is just not a CRPG to me. I would call that an adventure or action game, but this is just splitting hairs.

P&P RPG or CRPG would be quite boring without having the added danger of battles.

I disagree.

This sounds to me as if daily living without a small brawl everyday wouldn't be (proper) daily living.


I like The Dark Eye because of their … as far as I see it … tendency towards roleplay without combat.

To me, combat is only ONE element in role playing, and not THE element, as I read your remark.

Of course, combat is now one of the deepest rooted elements in role playing, but as the words say, I'm a role-player, not a combat-player.

This sounds to me as if someone says to me that role playing without loot dropped by monsters is no role playing.

*shakes head*

I can't recall any rpg without at least some combat!!

I play in a (live tabletop) gaming group that has met for more than 10 years now. We regularly have sessions without any combat. In the last one we scouted out a hostile force that was approaching a town and went back and warned them. Most of the time spent was actually when we visited the inn in town after reporting. Was there "conflict"? Yeah, but no physical fights.

BTW, such stuff is particularly ill suited to a cRPG as it was all off the cuff stuff that has developed as our characters have gotten to know each other.

Originally Posted by Corwin
I can't recall any rpg without at least some combat!!

What about hosting a Murder Party?

Perhaps I should have said CRPG in my comment, as I was thinking PC games, not tabletop as far as combat is concerned!!

Originally Posted by Corwin
I can't recall any rpg without at least some combat!!

Of course there's always combat in it - but doesen't *consist* entirely of combat.

It's a difference if you put salt *into* a meal or eat salt *as* a meal.

Well, how about Puzzle Quest, Corwin? That's not really combat, that's puzzle solving that calls itself combat.

Puzzle Quest is not an rpg!!

Sorry to be so late to the party on this one. The first thing that strikes me on reading this thread is how badly we need better terminology in the role-playing realm. RPG is becoming an acronym that means too much or nothing at all--but that's another topic.

Responding to the latest comments first, there actually is some real insight into crpg combat in the Puzzle Quest analogy. When stripped of the conventions Abbaon referred to earlier, isn't all meaningful combat actually a question of solving a puzzle/strategic challenge? Or put negatively, if there are no ethical/story driven reasons for combat, doesn't combat itself just become another mini-game? Maybe this is an acid test for rpgs--are you fighting mechanically for the sheer material advantages you hope to gain in loot and levels(arpg), or are you forced to confront a plot situation that requires tactical and strategic planning to advance? In that case skills and equipment serve a larger function as tools to meet a challenge that may or may not involve bloodshed and rote left-clicking.

Somewhere in here is also the problem Skavenhorde and others were debating regarding combat--what actually do people play a crpg for? Part of what makes a game a game (and not a book, film or painting) is winning--if you have no combat, what are you "playing" and what do you win or lose? When you can transcend the Monty Haul syndrome(even if you have it included in one degree or another a la DnD) then you get to the same area of what entertains and engages the human brain as other art forms, and that is an enlargement of focus from "I beat the game!" to " That game really made me think."

Just a few thoughts that may be a bit fuzzy around the edges.

Originally Posted by Prime Junta
I dunno about anyone else, but I was slightly ticked by the way you phrased your opinion: "if it doesn't have combat, it's not a RPG." Had you said "if it doesn't have combat, I'm not interested," that would not have happened..

Are you freaking kidding me? Dude, look at my last post here I'll quote myself since your either really tired and couldn't read what I said or just trying to TICK me off too. I SAID "They have the right to their opinion and so do I. Any CRPG without combat is just not a CRPG to me. I would call that an adventure or action game, but this is just splitting hairs.

This ticked you off that I have my own opinion on what a RPG is to me? Look I've been playing these things since I was 6 years old. Started with my first D&D boxed set, you remember it came with two books, blue dice and a crayon. You had to use the crayon to darken the numbers on the dice. From there I mostly collected any roleplaying stuff I could and when I found minitures I was in love. I played on and off but mostly I played CRPG starting all the way back on the intellivsion. Now ever single game I ever played had combat in it. So do you think I might be a little partial to combat? Do you think that I might think that a RPG without stats, without combat, without a plot wouldn't be a RPG TO ME????? Just because I don't dress up in costumes and pretend to have an accent doesn't mean I don't like RPG and that kind of RPG to me would be boring.

Originally Posted by Prime Junta
(There's a name for that particular thought structure, btw -- it's called the No True Scotsman fallacy. The classic example is this:

"No true Scotsman puts salt on his porridge."
"But Angus puts salt on his porridge!"
"Then Angus isn't a true Scotsman.")

I AM SCOTTISH. Born in America but Grandparents were born in Scotland. So hey I guess your quaint little saying applies exactly to me, how convient for you.

@magerette Why can't beating the game make you think? That's the whole point for playing a game. To make me think how I'm going to complete these tasks to finish the game. Like any good book there is always a conclusion at the end, same as in RPGs.

I like tactics, strategy. I also like fantasy worlds and the traditional D&D game. I don't understand why some people can't understand that my definition of a role-playing game involves stats, combat and a narrative. That's how the majority of RPGs are. I don't even know of any RPGs out there that don't have that (I know they are out there, I'm just sayin I have never seen them)

we're sidetracked on a few of these threads on combat and RPG's

I'm going to start a new thread in a bit to consolidate them.
---

done:
new thread found here.