I have a problem with every gaming system including the D20 system, even though I consider it one of the best I have played. Rules are by their nature a hindrance to imagination and a lack of imagination makes for a poor role-playing game. Yet they are a necessary evil to provide structure and fairness. Let me start with an example of the problem.
In a game there must be a certain level of tension, the game is at its best when the players and characters find themselves poised between grand success and dismal failure.
To a point the game system provides uncertainty to keep everyone on the edge of their seats. Combat is the most dramatic example of this uncertainty, however this can become a dull routine and cheapens the player and characters accomplishments. Tension in the game is a positive element, but some players will despair, if the only tension is the result of a random computation.
Another example is the rewards of the game itself. The easiest and most systematic way to award experience points is by killing a non-player character or monster. Look at Everquest or Diablo and see the flaw. There has to be another way to have action and Experience without killing. (Though I like to kill stuff too!). You need to make sure you have Experience for problem solving and role-playing too.
I would like to see more situations where players must rely on their own memories and reasoning skills and less on skills like diplomacy and sense motive. Problems, complex political struggles, mysteries, puzzles, and riddles that award experience incorporated into gaming supplements and adventures. Situations and Developments need to be incorporated that make use of some of less used facets of role-playing that are not part of any system.
I am not preaching an elimination of combat I am just suggesting action other than fighting. I just don't want a game determined by the number of casualties.
Remember this is just my opinion, I want the opinion of others, because uncritizised work is a waste of my time.
As for the problem solving, I certainly can't cast spells and don't have Bardic Knowledge about the game. A lot needs to be handled under the rules, particularly in a FRP game.
Everything other than that is as much a matter of playing (and DMing) style as it is one of the rules in question. The rules add some guidance to the style of game, but are by no means absolutes (particularly when you enforce rule 0).
I agree with you on the experience idea, though. It's ridiculous that a bard, for example, can only become a better musician by lopping the head off a monster. I'd suggest gaming groups to have a long discussion about alternative ways of gaining experience.
In my opinion, Dungeons and Dragons has one of the best sets of rules to allow for extensive roleplaying and for credible combat. I also think that although rolling a die to determine whether a character knows how to do something is a great advance in roleplayin, certain things should be left to the players. Why should a character forget something between two Knowledge rolls? Challenge the player's mind, not the character's!
When my wife, son, and I drive from Maryland to Florida in two days, we play freestyle. No dice, just roleplay. It may be chaotic but it's also very rewarding. And yes, it is mostly puzzles and mysteries.
Combat? We take the average outcome. That's what long combat usually becomes, anyway. I know if the foe is above or below their combat level.
Bob
I find that all to often people let the rules get in the way of the experience of playing. One of my favorites games only has 5 stats. That’s 5 stats to cover physical, mental, and spiritual attributes, skill, knowledges, etc... the game doesn't even tell you what type of dice to use, and yet I’ve had far more heroic adventures in that system than in many others.
Combat needs to be the stuff of legends not just an excuse to try out new powers or abilities. Make combats exciting. That doesn't mean having them in exotic locations with a host of special rules, or having them face down hordes of lackeys, or using insane item combos to make the BBEG hard to defeat.
Make combats be about something the players care about. Do the PCs have loved ones? Kidnap them. Do they have causes or ideas that they care about? Threaten them. Do they have goals or dreams or desires? Help them see they get fulfilled.
Sometimes the line between player knowledge and character knowledge gets to well defined. Part of the fun is problem solving. Let the players use their own reasoning skills to solve a puzzle. Let them use their own debate or speaking skills to extract info from an NPC. If the dumb, obnoxious fighter with no common sense is doing all the talking and problem solving then who cares? How many heroes are idiots?
I guess you could say I'm a chaotic gamer
Originally posted by Steve Russell
I would like to see more situations where players must rely on their own memories and reasoning skills and less on skills like diplomacy and sense motive.
There is already a system which does this. Its called "life." And if you start solving adventures by using what the *player* knows, not what the *character* then you are no longer Playing a Role (which must be at the core of Roleplaying, surely?) but you are merely being yourself, which doesn't require much in the way of imagination.
Originally posted by Steve Russell
Problems, complex political struggles, mysteries, puzzles, and riddles that award experience incorporated into gaming supplements and adventures.
Situations and Developments need to be incorporated that make use of some of less used facets of role-playing that are not part of any system.
These are very in the hands of the DM, not the system. The setting of the game is what encourages intrigue, not the mechanics - if you send your PCs on a goblin hunt, there will probably not be much intrigue going on. If you send them to uncover a dastardly plot in the imperial court, there should be more use of wits than swords.
That said, there are systems out there that inherently promote in-character intrigue and politicking. (I won't name them, and ask others not to do so, since that inevitably starts a "my system is better than your system” style debate)
One very popular system has rules for your status in society, and rewards those who use politics to increase their status instead of simply trying to kill everything.
Another system that was especially popular in the UK was famous for its single published campaign being very political indeed, as players try to schmooze with important political figures to find out we the ruler of the city seems to be going off his trolley.
And another popular game has characters who face foes that they probably cannot beat physically, an *must* play detective if they are going to survive.
*******
It seems that your sweeping statement is in fact down to your having a very narrow field of experience with RPGs. If D&D is what you are primarily referring to, I am not surprised you have reached this conclusion. Of all the mainstream RPGs I have encountered, D&D does less to encourage the things you are looking for than any other.
That's not a "fault" though, its just the way it is designed - for high fantasy action adventures. If that isn’t your cup of tea, don't try to change the system, look for a game that *does* encourage the things you are looking for.
It is important to remember that you are playing a character that is not you. The basic idea behind playing D&D is to take on the mantle of someone other than you. That includes the myriad of skills and abilities the 'character' possesses. If you want to use your own problem solving skills and powers of reason in a game then I suggest you buy "Clue", Pictionary, or some other cognition/intuition based game. By the way, if you want to play someone like yourself it would behoove you to remember that magic, as it is presented in D&D, is neither available to you and thus should not be a part of your character. And most gamers are nowhere near the physical shape to wear armor or swing a heavy sword. I was a combat medic in the U.S. Army and know exactly what it means to be fit for action.
Also consider that most D&D adventurers are the cream of the crop. They have to be otherwise they couldn't survive the challenges they face. Before creating yourself as character you would have to be very honest with yourself about your adventuring ability and then make an honest attempt at capturing those skills and abilities into D&D format. I have sat around a lot of gaming tables and can only say that most characters created that way would end up being Commoner 1-4, with some having 1-4 levels of Expert, and/or 1-4 levels of Warrior and/or Adept due to military, religious, or medical experience/training. I have never played with any type of Aristocrat but some players might view themselves as such. Remember you are supposed to be honest with yourself.
In closing let me remind everyone that D&D is escapism. Given a chance to view a motion picture or play D&D I'll choose D&D any day of the week. But when playing I willingly accept the fact that I am supposed to pretend to be someone else not myself otherwise I wouldn't be out in the campaign world looking for some magic sword/armor, spellbooks, or other loot. I would be trying to locate the ingredients for gunpowder.
With no rules, a hero might attempt to leap a chasm - their player believing they will absolutely succeed. They may fall and die horrible, simply because the DM may not view the hero, the chasm, or the physics of jumping in the same way as the hero's player. The hero cannot be certain of their universe; it doesn't feel real to anyone - which means the players can't suspend their disbelief.
With a clear set of rules, the hero might take some time estimating the jump, sizing it up, and thinking about "can I make that?" At the same time, their player is getting the DC for the DM, looking at their Jump skill, and thinking about "can I make that?" The player IS relying on their reasoning to come to the right decision - jump, or do something else. The player's actions map directly on to those of the hero; while one is wearing a puzzled frown at the table while contemplating distance and strength, the other is wearing the exact same expression as they pace back and forth along the edge of the chasm.
Now, an overdose of combat, especially of constant, flat-square no-tricks combat, leads to characterizations about as interesting as an action movie character. If that's no good for you, don't overdose. If it's what you want, do. In this case, the presence or absence of rules is not the problem; the overuse or underuse of them is.