To get the right mindset, first I’d like to explain why you’d want an answer to this question. With the 21st century being here and with all our amazing technology (flying cars, robot maids and iPads) most games have taken on these technologies. Not RPGs though, not really. When I bring this up people invariably bring up PDFs and POD, but that’s a delivery method and doesn’t bring technology to the game itself.
People have made thousands of computer RPGs in the past but in truth only an MMO really starts to be an RPG. Why?Because most computer RPGs have nothing to do with taking on a “role”. They’re called “RPG” because they use the rules structure of a table top RPG but not its function.
There we have the first criteria for what makes an RPG, the players taking on a role. They have to have an avatar that they control and use to represent themselves to other players. To put your mind at ease, I’m not going to finish this off explaining play and what it means to be a game.
There is the famous quote about the child’s game Cops and Robbers being in essence an RPG and it almost is. I’d call it role play but it has no structure to it and that’s why it doesn’t work as an RPG. The structure of an arbiter between players (rules) is what makes the game playable. The question could be asked, how small a rule set can an RPG have and still be functional? There only needs to be one rule but it has a price. The rule is that one player is a Game Master and they are the final arbiter of any conflict. Many games still carry this rule as a back up to cover any holes in the system. The power of this rule cannot be overstated and that is why it is so hard to get rid of it. I used to play an RPG that used only this rule, it was simple and it was fun if the GM wanted to make the game fun.
Does that mean an RPG has to have a GM? No, there are plenty of games out there that don’t use one and they work just fine. Their structure is significantly different because they don’t use the final arbiter rule but they do have an arbitration process.
So there is our next component. An arbitration process whether it falls to one player or rules or the next player in the turn order.
There is one more element that gives the players the experience of an RPG, especially a TTRPG an that is social interaction being it’s main mode of play. The world is created by the players and they negotiate with each other (via the arbiter) how the game will progress.
21st Century Stuff
Now back to why you might be interested in this question and it’s answer. So far computer technology has tried to replace the final arbiter with a video game while following the rule structure of an RPG and the results have entertained but they miss the great power that an RPG holds. Because a TTRPG is created by the players and negotiated by the players, it is what they want it to be. The interactions of people playing the game makes anything possible. Introduce a computer to control the world and it can only follow the program it has been given and as many possibilities as their may be, they are still limited.
With that in mind, how can technology help instead of limit the scope of an RPG? Instead of having the computer define the world, the players need to keep that power but the computer becomes the arbiter of the world. In other words the players manage the story using their characters while the computer resolves conflict (based on the rules it’s given). Computers are great at being the rulebook, not so great at making up stories. The problem is that this has, for the most part been tried. Virtual table top programs have tried to use the rules to replicate existing RPGs and the results may be functional but they haven’t taken the community by storm. They’re not clearly better.
I think the mistake that these virtual table tops make is that they try to be generic, to replicate existing games. These are games designed for human minds to handle, where the computer could handle a far more complicated rule set effortlessly with great results.
One way to bring technology to RPGs might be to use a system like an iPad to run the game rules or they could be connected to each other if more than one person has one. But instead of a generic rule set, give the program the metastory, delivered by cut scene videos and make the app an actual game. The Players fill in their part of the story using the material provided. I’d even say, keep the character generation and rules hidden. Don’t show the players a single number. Just give them classes of actions they’d like to perform, track statuses (HP, energy, mental health, etc.) give NPCs (stat blocks hidden) and make the game open to whatever the players wanted to make with the materials in the game. For a traditional feel, having a GM guide things might be easier but it’s not the only model that could be followed.
Excuse Me While I Rant
This is the kind of thing a big RPG company could do. Really, why haven’t they? A one man operation with $200 in software and website dues can offer a product roughly comparable to what they produce. Why are they standing still while we advance? There’s a lot of talk about RPGs growing or dying and many seem to fear the established names going out of business. My question is, what are they doing to stay in business? Sure glossy pages and amazing artwork is great but is it enough? Functionally everyone and their brother can replicate what they’re doing. If everyone can do it, why does anyone need an industry?
There are two models they could follow to stay on top, produce more for cheaper, produce a product that home hobbyist cannot. So far the two advantages they have is name recognition and quality and those advantages are being eroded.
What do you think? How would you like to see RPGs move into the 21st century?
The Free RPG Blog