10 Best RPGs Of All Time @ MyGaming

It's valid if you require, as you said, that the character skills are more important than the human skills. I don't, so it's not valid for ME.
It's about what is characteristic of the genre not about what is valid for you…

If all RPGs have skills (in one form or another) then they are part of it regardless of whether you use them or not.


Ehm, no, why would I?

Well… think of it like this: do you accept that every RPG game that you know of (and I understand that would be plenty) has character skills that have some impact on the gameplay? If yes then that should be part of the definition (if other genres have then too it makes no difference)


Yes, that's why I call it roleplaying. What's your point?
Probably we agree then… I just thought you meant that it wasn't really roleplaying.


I don't really feel competent to form an opinion about that. Strikes me as extremely restrictive, and again, pretty much useless in terms of communicating exactly what we mean by "Classical" music. A fine example of needless borders, once again.
I suppose the people who placed those borders had a good enough reason... I couldn't tell. I think we can communicate well enough regardless though.
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
693
It's about what is characteristic of the genre not about what is valid for you…

If all RPGs have skills (in one form or another) then they are part of it regardless of whether you use them or not.

You got me completely confused here.

I thought we were discussing a possible definition of what makes an RPG. Furthermore, it seems to me that this definition requires character skill to dominate over human skill. Is that wrong?

I'm simply saying that such a definition wouldn't "cover me" and as such I consider it invalid. Not invalid to you or others, perhaps, but I'm pretty confident I get to choose my own definitions ;)

Well… think of it like this: do you accept that every RPG game that you know of (and I understand that would be plenty) has character skills that have some impact on the gameplay? If yes then that should be part of the definition (if other genres have then too it makes no difference)

Oh sure, and I agree.

However, many RPGs that I know of emphasise human skill over character skill - or at least give them "equal weight".

Something like Oblivion is a decent example - because I find I can overcome most obstacles simply by human skill alone. Not really a great implementation of it, but it serves as an example.

Something like WoW, in which your "level" and "build" most definitely weigh A LOT - but it's the human factor which ultimately dominates completely. At least, that's my perception after being competitive in the game. At least, I'd claim it's 50/50 - but it's a blurred line, because obviously a 1st level character can't do anything to a max level character - no matter the skill of either player.

I suppose the people who placed those borders had a good enough reason… I couldn't tell. I think we can communicate well enough regardless though.

I'm sure they felt that way, but I'm far from convinced it's an objectively "good reason".
 
I thought we were discussing a possible definition of what makes an RPG.
Actually that was more about the process of successfully making that definition.


Furthermore, it seems to me that this definition requires character skill to dominate over human skill. Is that wrong?
No, I'd say it's enough if it exists and has an impact on the gameplay.
(I'd argue that ideally it should dominate and if it doesn't then we don't have a 'pure' RPG. I consider Oblivion an Action RPG for that reason)


I'm pretty confident I get to choose my own definitions ;)
I believe definitions should be constant and absolute, otherwise I don't see what purpose they could possibly have. All this confusion is a product of everyone choosing their own definitions as I see it, and that's why any discussion about it degrades into an infinite loop.
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
693
I believe definitions should be constant and absolute, otherwise I don't see what purpose they could possibly have. All this confusion is a product of everyone choosing their own definitions as I see it, and that's why any discussion about it degrades into an infinite loop.

Although I do think definitions should be as objective or consensually-agreed-upon as possible, I think it's unrealistic to expect that they should be "constant and absolute," by which I take it you mean static and perfect. I think when it comes to defining man-made things, it is an evolving process. For instance, in the social sciences, definitions of complex constructs are almost always imperfect and evolving, not static, always subject to critique and revision.

Can definitions really be static and unchanging, when you're applying them to a man-made, creative enterprise that is itself constantly changing and evolving? For example, is "rock and roll" defined the same way it was in the 50s?

I have a sneaking suspicion that the attempt to define "RPG" is sometimes motivated by a desire to make the genre static, to freeze it in place, because the gamer is disappointed by the direction it's heading.

I wonder, too, about the C of this C. That is, why does it matter? Astrophysicists use exact terminology because it matters. Let's say we developed a consensus definition of "RPG." Ok, so what? It might eliminate some pointless arguments on the internet, but otherwise … does it matter?

I should say again, though, that I find the discussion interesting. I feel like in my own way, I am iterating myself toward a better definition, if only a personal one.
 
Joined
Sep 6, 2009
Messages
884
Location
US
I read that Classical music, strictly speaking, is limited to the works of Haydn, Mozart and early Beethoven. Now I don't know much about about music theory - and I can't for the life of me tell the difference between those composers and the ones of late Baroque or early Romanticism… but the guy who wrote what I read is a professional that spends his life studying this, so me doubting it would be redundant and arrogant on my part.

One can study virtually anything to some degree. Music in general can be studied at university, and special kinds of music within this field.

I know of one or two forums which contain almost nothing but P&P RPG theory discussions.

Yes, there are actually people discussing - as it seems to me - ALL kinds of of pen & paper role-playing aspects !

There have emerged theories, whole comncept, theories about player behaviour, distinct P6P playing styles and players, the newest discussion I saw is about the degree of attention spans of pen & paper players - and what kind of influences this might have on p&p sessions.

This is the ivory tower of role-playing, so to say.
 
Joined
Nov 5, 2006
Messages
21,908
Location
Old Europe
Back
Top Bottom