>I don't think we should kick out the gambling side of our RPGs, or the
>detail filtering. I think it's great to examine and change their
>influence on what we do, but we should always remember their benefits
as
>well as their restrictions.
I understand your argument, but who is 'we'? You argue powefully for your preffered way of roleplaying, however it happens not to appeal to me. The more I play in Glorantha, the more comfortable I feel in portraying my Gloranthan characters as faithfully as possible. This allows me to enjoy and explore the richness of the world of Glorantha - it's political conflicts, religious practices, philosophical conundrums and fantastical environments.
I still roleplay in the traditional manner, as you describe, but largely because that is the consensus approach within the groups I usualy play in. I usualy get a lot more satisfaction out of freeform and diceless games.
To me, time spent rolling dice, looking up tables and calculating results would be better spent creating lurid descriptions of swashbuckling action, taunting my foes and urging on my allies to more heroic efforts. I'd rather spend my time creating devious strategems and tactics to surprise or defeat my foes, rather than poring through dense texts full of dry game mechanical tricks and legalistic loopholes.
Innovative diceless or dice light game systems such as Amber and Everways allow us to do that. I find that playing a variety of game styles enriches my gaming experience. Sometimes I'm quite happy to sit down for a good game of Star Wars or Runequest 2, but other times I'd rather play Amber or a Star Trek rulesless moderated freeform.
All these approaches can be successfuly applied to Gloranthan gaming, but result in very different gaming experiences. I just feel that I've spent enough time rolling dice and digging through rulebooks to resolve obscure rules interactions for one lifetime - I'd rather just get on with playing my character and enjoying myself.
Simon Hibbs
Powered by hypermail