Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

[Guest Black Lotus]

May I present the Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom, hand-tooled by your humble ninja compatriot, Black Lotus!

 

Where do you feel you fit into the Triforce?

 

(Veterans, please elaborate on the meanings of the "corner" for the easy reference of future new players, if you'd be so kind.)

[instag8or19]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

I think Im more in the Gaming and Simulation area...and much less away from the Drama...but thats just me.

[Roy_The_Ruthles]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

gaming and simulation, i've played games that are dramatic, but not drama (more cinimatic than drama really)

[Guest Black Lotus]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

I'd say I'm closest to Drama, fairly close to Simulation, and farthest away from Gaming.

[stan da ork]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

I'm not positive about this but...

 

Gaming refers to how similar you like your RPG's to be to a board/video game. People who sit in the Gaming triangle like to build powerful characters, find interesting combinations of abilities, learn how the various rules interact, and other game-like aspects of the RPG in question. Pure Gamers also tend to look at RPG's much like other games, in that there is a winner and loser. These extreme Gamers are the GM's who think it's them versus the players, and the players who think they have to create an unbeatable character to have fun. Gamers are the people who want to rebuild their character after each game session, usually because some weakness was revealed in the character. Gamers are often refered to as power gamers and munchkins.

 

Drama refers to how similar you like your RPG's to be to a movie, play, novel, or comic. People in the Drama triangle like to build complex characters with goals, motivations, and relationships, and/or they like to take part in epic storylines. They are less concerned with in game power, and more concerned with the story. Pure Dramatists often hold the game rules in disdain, and sometimes purposefully build weak characters to prove that the rules are less important to them than the story. Dramatists are people who want to fudge dice rolls and ignore rules because they interrupt the flow of the game. Dramatists call themselves "real roleplayers," although other people call them less flattering things.

 

Simulation refers to how similar you like your RPG's to be to reality. People in the Simulation triangle like the game rules to mirror and reinforce what they know to be real. They want a bullet-proof vest in the game to stop a pistol round, but not a rifle round. They want an average strength character to be able to break down a door, but not a vault. Pure Simulationists can spend hours arguing over rules, going back and forth over how to make them more "realistic." Simulationists are the people most likely to stop a game session to argue over how to make a particular rule that has just cropped up more realistic. Simulationists don't really have any special names, although I suppose "expert" probably fits the bill most of the time.

 

I think that's a pretty good definition of each triangle in the Triforce. Personally, I fluctuate between Gaming and Drama, depending on my mood. I like building characters who are powerful and cool, that also have interesting personalities and backgrounds. I also want a good story to keep me interested in the game. I'm not much of a Simulationist, though, and as long as the game rules are consistent, I really don't care if they are realistic.

[Guest Black Lotus]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

Exactly right, Stan. You hit 'em better than I ever did.

[gojira]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

I vote for "Fun."

[Roy_The_Ruthles]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

well with those definitions, i change my stance to gaming and drama with as little sim as possible

[Fox1]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

While if stan's is the working definitions...

 

I don't fit anywhere...

 

Not an uncommon experience in such things.

[Chris Goodwin]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

I subscribe to a different set of definitions entirely.

 

Gamism means you like the challenge, whether the challenge is in the game (competing with other characters) or at the rules level (seeing how tightly you can design your character).

 

Narrativism (not Dramatism) means you are looking for theme (in a literary sense) or premise in your games. You want some kind of meaning to develop out of your play.

 

Simulationism means you want fidelity to some kind of source material, whether that source is a work of fiction in whatever medium or the real world.

[Zed-F]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

I've always thought all 3 were important to a RPG or RPG setting.

 

Gaming: Who doesn't want to beat the bad guys? If I can design in clever ways to give my character an advantage, so much the better. I like tactical wargames.

 

Drama/Narration: Well if the story isn't an interesting story, then what's the point? If all I want is a wargame, then I'll go play 40k or something.

 

Simulation: I agree to suspend my disbelief. I draw the line at hanging it by the neck until it croaks. A degree of versimilitude and believability is important for any movie/book/game to be enjoyable unless we're talking strictly beer & pretzels -- and I don't drink beer.

[mattingly]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

Drama, with a good portion of Gaming.

[CourtFool]

Dude, you are so Simulationist

 

I subscribe to a different set of definitions entirely.

 

Gamism means you like the challenge, whether the challenge is in the game (competing with other characters) or at the rules level (seeing how tightly you can design your character).

 

Narrativism (not Dramatism) means you are looking for theme (in a literary sense) or premise in your games. You want some kind of meaning to develop out of your play.

 

Simulationism means you want fidelity to some kind of source material, whether that source is a work of fiction in whatever medium or the real world.

 

The way I see it, Chris and Stan are pretty much on the same page except Chris suggest Simulationism means to simulate a particular reference not necessarily reality and that Stan has taken each view to its extreme where it appears disfunctional.

 

I do not think any three of the views is right or wrong, merely different. I also believe that the three are mutually exclusive which many will disagree with. Those of you who insist you are 100% Gamist and Narrativist are 50% Gamist and Narrativist. Deal with it.

 

I believe I am 20% Gamist, 60% Narrativist and 20% Simulationist. I become more gamist when surrounded by other gamists as a survival mechanism. I just do not like to be made fun of for my 'weak' characters. Of course inevitably, I will have less fun in this scenario.

[Guest Black Lotus]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

That only adds up to 80%, Court, but I feel much the same. Like 3 parts Drama, 2 parts Simulation, and 2 parts Gaming.

 

EDIT: Like 45% Drama, 35% Simulation, and 20% Gaming.

 

Yeah, that's it.

[Starlord]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

Drama - 60%

Gaming - 20%

Simulation - 20%

[Black Rose]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

So the goal is to stay in the little white inverted triangle, right?

[casualplayer]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

I like just enough rules to avoid arguments that burn valuable gaming time. I like to know how "gray" the game world is and act accordingly. I would rather lose a fight than act out of character (unless my character is a ruthless opportunist!) I can adjust as long as the gaming portion doesn't exceed ~40%, but I favor drama and simulation by quite a bit. So:

 

10% Gaming (strange that I play almost exclusively HERO)

40% Drama

50% Simulation

[Guest Black Lotus]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

So the goal is to stay in the little white inverted triangle' date=' right? [/quote']

 

If you value all three aspects of roleplaying equally, they'd each be rated at 33.33% for you, and you'd be a dot in the middle of the white inner triangle.

 

If, for example, you're 50% Drama, 30% Simulation, and 20% Gaming, you'd place your dot closest to Drama, farthest from Gaming, and not too far from Simulation.

 

If you value only Drama (100%), which is kinda impossible, I suppose you'd stay right in the middle of the Drama triangle.

 

Although for all intents and purpses, percentages are the most accurate way to represent your preferences. I just drew the Trifoece as a visual aid.

[zornwil]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

Something like 44% Sim, 33% Drama, 23% Gaming. (just because 40-30-20 doesn't quite add up and I couldn't bear to bring any one up to the next 5% step).

 

PS - to explain a bit, I enjoy the sensation of contextual realism the most and tend to concentrate on that and also moreso letting people explore the environment just to "see what happens" even if nothing, I do like characters to have air time and specifically some "acting", and finally I like to see some challenge every session for each player, ideally, but it ranks down there a bit. I'd rather give each character dramatic than challenging air time if it coems down to it.

[Vondy]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

Narrative 45%, Simulation 35%, Gaming 20%. I like a good challenge, but it has to be woven into story and environment in an interesting and satisfying way. I'm sort of the inverse of zorn. I like to see strong character development and character driven stories in a a fully realized world that has an undercurrent of versimiltude. The challenges just exist to add tension to the story and environment.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

I can put on completely different hats to match circumstances. For some topics I might be completely in the Gaming end. For others, you may not be able to tear me away from Drama. Sometimes I fit right at the tip of Simulation, and many times I am somewhere in the middle.

 

It depends on topic, but it also depends on my current role. As a GM planning out a storyline or adventure, I may sit squarely between Drama and Gaming. As a GM running a session, I might sit further from Gaming with more or less equal parts Drama and Simulation.

 

So, in a sense I am:

Gamist - 100%

Simulationist - 100%

Narrativist - 100%

On the other hand I may stray a little bit from Gamism when given the choice, as I find that many players tend to get rubbed the wrong way when it becomes too involved in any manner. So maybe I could be said to be:

Gamist - 90%

Simulationist - 100%

Narrativist - 100%

Or, if you must insist upon taking some inappropriate, "average," of all game-related activities and thinking, I suppose maybe you could call it:

Gamist - 25%

Simulationist - 30%

Narrativist - 45%

[zornwil]

Re: Triforce of Roleplaying Wisdom

 

Narrative 45%' date=' Simulation 35%, Gaming 20%. I like a good challenge, but it has to be woven into story and environment in an interesting and satisfying way. I'm sort of the inverse of zorn. I like to see strong character development and character driven stories in a a fully realized world that has an undercurrent of versimiltude. The challenges just exist to add tension to the story and environment.[/quote']

I think we meet on characterization, it's just the path to it - I like to see the characterizations develop in a more free-form context, essentially and to over-simplify.

 

Way back I used to be way more Sim but have moderated gradually over time.