RE: (TFT) Is TFT a role playing or board game?

["Christopher Brandon" <brandon@pokemon-seattle.com>]

Sorry Mr. Jackson, despite my earlier protestations to avoid posting,
the thoughtful posts by Ray and others enticed me to return.

First, I have zero issues with TFT used as an RPG system however one
defines that personally. I was fortunate enough to have an adventure
published by DCG so clearly I think the base system is great and I do
use it in my own playing (although in my very tweaked homebrewed rules
set).

Part of my Tactical RPG versus Story telling RPG thoughts stem from
writing adventures in the solitaire/ programmed format for Dark City.
(great guys & great adventures!) I find writing in this format
constricting and to be honest limiting.  Let me take a moment from a
recent non programmed adventure to illustrate:

You arrive in town with 6 silver pieces each, an empty stomach, and a
hunger for adventure.  Two characters are in a port town and need money
to get passage to an island where an ancient tomb is said to be.  They
pool their cash, haggle, and buy a very small bag of fine tobacco.  They
then go deeper into town trying to sell it as part of a recently arrived
select cargo.  They go through town and find a buyer.  They set up a
meet with the buyer at their "warehouse."  Their warehouse is actually
one they track down, break into, KO the guards, then meet the merchant,
make the sale, and then try to sneak out of town with the cash.  The try
to bribe the guards to let them out, then have to fight the guards to
keep the coin. They end up scattering the cash to end the fight. Each
ends up with 50 silver for all the trouble, two different angry
merchant's after them, and the town guard looking for them while they
are still trapped in the city.

That little interlude is about 5 hours worth of role playing with
reactions, fast talking, hunting through tobacco shops, hunting to find
a warehouse with tobacco in it, combat and all sorts of shenanigans.  If
I were to try and program that one night adventure out, it would easily
be 40-50 pages with all sorts of yes/no/maybe threads.  Would it be fun
for the player?  Mine thought so, but would it be fun for the
writer...for myself I dread the thought.  

Why? 2 reasons: First because the programmed adventure relies on die
rolls for success versus the player's ability to try and "sell" the GM
what they are attempting and act it out.  Second, because I have to
write out every possible out come from every decision or failed die roll
even though maybe half to 1/3 will actually be experienced in play.
There were only two combats in the entire adventure, and really only one
was life threatening.  So maybe my issue is really one of programmed
adventures.  The format is roll-playing heavy decision tree, and not
really role-playing where how you "act" has much more influence then a
binary success/fail die roll format.

Example:
You enter the dry goods shop.  The smell of spices and incense swirl in
the stained glass colored air. A large, muscled fellow off to the left
holding a staff watches you suspiciously as you enter.  Deep brightly
colored carpets muffle the sound of your boots on the floor; though the
occasional squeak of wood under the carpets tells of a shop that has
stood for quite some time.  The pinch faced, corpulent, black bearded
fellow behind a tapestry covered counter smiles as he looks up. Then you
see the corners of his smile falter and his eyes darken when he eyes
your shabby dress.  "Yes?" He asks imperiously.  

In a role playing adventure the characters can now throw out a whole
host of different responses.  Not so in a programmed adventure.  Also
would this sort of interaction be any fun in a programmed adventure?
Especially if written without any die rolls or interaction beyond "If
you say...go to XX" over and over and over for 95% of the tale? I am
going to guess...not so much.  Yet at the table it was a hell of a lot
of fun.

All of that (sorry so long) to say maybe the combat centric nature of
adventures published to support TFT may be what creates in my mind a
sense of limits to the system as originally written.  Thoughts?

Cheers!
Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: tft-admin@brainiac.com [mailto:tft-admin@brainiac.com] On Behalf
Of Ray Rangel
Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 7:09 AM
To: tft@brainiac.com
Subject: (TFT) Is TFT a role playing or board game?

The recent conversation has got me musing over what a role playing game
really is. But, before I begin, please understand that these are my own
thoughts and mental meanderings and nothing more. With that said...

I've been playing, first strategic board games, then tabletop historical
miniatures games, and in the last few years various RPGs, since I was
eighteen. That's about thirty-five years. The one universal element that
I've found in all of those years of gaming is that everyone role plays.
The
miniatures gamer oversees the deployment and movement of his vast
Napoleonic
army and soon take on the role of Marshall Ney, Davout, or Bonaparte
himself. Many is the miniature or paper battle that has been fought on
the
border of Natal and Zululand where the players have assumed the role of
the
stiff upper lipped Victorian officer or the proud brave Zulu prince
fighting
for their lives at Rourke's Drift.

Yet we generally don't consider these role playing games. Why not? I
think
that it is question of game design and intent rather than how is a game
is
actually used. The miniatures rules or board game focus is on the
mechanics
of play on the tabletop or board. The definitions and rules provided
apply
to movement, combat, and morale of the playing pieces (whether cardboard
chits or miniature soldiers). Any role playing is left up to the players
and
their understanding of historical (or fictional) personalities. The
objective in the miniatures or board game is to win.

Of course there are role playing games (or roleplaying, as it has become
one
word in the industry and gaming community and RPG for short). These
games
are specifically designed to provide the players a framework on which to
build a character or characters of which they assume the roles and act
accordingly. The objective of the RPG is to assume the guise of a
character
and to play.

Of course, these descriptions represent the poles. There are an infinite
number of variation between them with many games borrowing elements from
the
other in varying degrees. In my opinion, TFT is pretty darn close to the
equator. It, obviously, has strong elements of board gaming--it also has
strong elements of role playing games. I suppose this is why it is so
easy
to have contention when talking about TFT. In any given situation or
rules
discussion, one must first determine whether the correspondents are
viewing
the topic from one pole, the other, pole or the same pole. This is can
be
very difficult, in my opinion, because TFT lies on the midpoint and,
thus
both points of view--while different--are valid.

Anyhow...I hope you all will excuse my ramblings on this quite Sunday
morning. My intent is not to convince anyone of anything; rather to
simply
talk about my personal outlook and thoughts on TFT as happy medium
between a
board game and a role playing game.

 
Ray Rangel
ray.rangel@cox.net
http://xraysvision.blogspot.com/
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"