Tabletop games: let's play them.

Nothing except the reams and reams of setting information they publish.

I mean, seriously, look at for example any prestige class published in D&D 3rd edition and half to 3/4s of the text is background and setting information on how to play that class. They had entire sourcebooks with no crunch rules at all, that had as their entire purpose to present setting and background.

They did not have any mechanical rules for roleplaying, sure, but they didn't publish all that background stuff for no reason.

It's a difference in design philosophy. D&D puts out all the fodder for roleplay in the background, and lets the player decide how to use it.


-k

I'd consider a "superior first RPG" one with easy to understand basic rules that can be picked up and understood in 15-20 minutes, more than any "roleplay mechanics".

For a first timer, you'd want the lessons on how to roleplay to come from people, not some rules. The GM and other players.



-np

But not all groups have good roleplayers in them. Not all cities have good roleplayers in them. Someone new to the hobby has no guarantee of meeting anyone interested in roleplaying. And if that's what said new player wants to do, they'd be out of luck with a lot of games. However, games like 7th Sea, Houses of the Blooded, Amber Diceless, they provide help so that even without a single person capable of roleplaying, somebody new to the hobby could learn how to become their character.

There are people I hate to agree with... but system DOES matter. Although any essay which assumes you understand and agree with the "Narrativist, Realist, Evil Munchkin" division of players or whatever it's called comes out of the scabbard blunt.

There are game systems where the rules get in the way of EVERYTHING and don't in any way produce a better game.

There are game systems with virtually no rules that are equally bad.

And the fact that a "Who wants to play?" thread turned into a "I hate the way you play" thread by page 2 does tend to show the problems with the genre. There are people working on theories of game design; I know a few people who are involved in indie gaming to some extent. [Yeah yeah, 50% of tabletop gamers have made up their own RPG...]

I think the ideal beginner RPG is probably Feng Shui. Awesome is rewarded and realism is punished. (Or as a friend of mine said, "Every time you bring real physics into Star Wars, God kills a kitten." ) Everything moves fast and it makes perfect sense to jump out a 20th story window, grab a flying cybernetic demon-thing by the neck, and ride it down to ground level, using its shouldermounted death ray to shoot the OTHER cybernetic demon-things on the way down.

The only problem with that is trying to convince that same player, later in their gaming career, that they should care about attacks of opportunity, charge bonuses, and whether a goblin with a polearm has reach.

Hell, I'll give it a go.

The tabletop gaming group I have found in my new home of Port Angeles is... not the best fit for us. I'd like to find another group or form one.

The game itself can be whatever you want - I'm not too picky about system or setting. What I am looking for in a group is a mature group that can handle the fact that we have a 15 month old munchkin.

So, if you're marooned on the Olympic Peninsula by circumstance or choice, let me know, and my wife and I can try to set something up. Hell, if you're a Canadian from Victoria, you're welcome too - the ferry drops off only a couple miles from my home.

Yay I just recently found a group to play D&D 3.5 with here in my town. It has been two years since my last group broke apart due to lay offs, finding better jobs, and moving to said jobs. The best part is I may get to DM again. I can't wait! I've got to get all my supplies ready again.

Oh ya on the arguement of Roleplay vs Roll-play usually a mix is better. I don't care if the mechanics favor one or the other. Some players will get bored if there is too much roleplaying and not enough dice rolling and vice versa. The best way I found was to streamline combat a bit, since anyone who has played D&D 3.5 can tell you it sometimes takes over an hour. As long as the game doesn't stagnate on either side its usually entertaining for all. The other thing I do is use 3x5 notecard with the player's name on it to keep track of accomplishments and good roleplaying. I also tally up exp on the card and give it to the player at the beginning of the next game session. Its an easy way to calculate exp and gives the player a cliff notes version of the last session if they want to keep a character history.

I reward good roleplaying in order to encourage it but its not always exp rewards. Sometimes it is items or extra quest opportunities. At the same time I also encourage quick, efficient combat so there can be more of it. I make combat easier by having round by round tactics for each enemy group, and by encouraging players to come up with round by round tactics for their character. It helps prevent players spending 3-4 minutes deciding what they are going to do. My goal in combat is to keep non-spellcaster turns down to about 30-40 seconds and spellcaster turns to about 60-90 seconds. It helps keep combat down to about 5-15 minutes instead of an hour. Good grief I hate it when it takes a group 30 minutes to an hour to deal with an encounter that is maybe 1/2 to 3/4 of their level. No DBZ combat.

I must have been tired when I posted. I guess my contribution to the discussion is that a competent, friendly GM who keeps the game moving and friendly players are going to make a much bigger difference for new players and their likelihood of continuing to play RPGs than any system will. It has been my experience that the system and setting only comes into play with the type of adventure the new players would like to play. Some people like super heroes and villains (IE all of us here), others like modern supernatural like the WoD setting, and still others like sword and sorcery.