RPGs and Martial Arts
Mar. 16th, 2006 06:16 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
mneme posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
labcatsHere's the thing:
A lot of new games just aren't comfortable to play. They are what's referred to as "high contact" -- where you're bouncing off the system all the time.
Now, people will truthfully point out that there's always a system; you just aren't always aware of it, and that what you're bouncing off may be ingrained habits. And that's true enough.
But...that's not all of it.
When you learn a martial arts system (let's say, fencing, since that's what I know well), you're bouncing off it all the time as you learn. You're constantly having to remind yourself to only use the attacks and defenses that are part of the system, to not hit off-target areas, etc. Just like learning a RPG that really uses a different system than the one you're used to.
But to use a martial arts system -well-, you have to get beyond all that. You have to get to the point where you're not seeing the system any more at all -- where it's there, informing your actions and part of it, but where you're not thinking "I can't hit his arm; it's off target" or "I can't attack now because he has priority" -- you're not thinking on that level at all; instead, you're just acting, but because your training has taught you to work within the system, your actions follow the system's rules and are informed by the system's principle.
This is where a lot of indy games fall down for me -- I'm not convinced that it's possible to play them in a manner where you're "just acting" -- being within the system without being concious of it. And I don't think I can have a satisfying game without this, in the end.
The thing is, if you only play games that follow systems you know, you can have a good time, but you're limiting yourself to things you already know; to patterns you've already internalized. You can get really good at those patterns, but if they aren't all that great patterns to begin with, or even if they aren't, you're not reaching your full potential.
But if you're constantly learning, exploring, and confronting -- never simply being -- never fencing, rather than practicing, you never really know anything well either; instead, you're constantly going over the surface of things rather than learning them in any depth.
So I want RPG systems like that. Ones that push you into knew patterns -- their own patterns -- sure, but also ones that with a smallish amount of effort, you can learn to the point where you're not constantly bouncing off the cage of the system, encountering the boundaries or following roads, and instead, just -playing-.
Capes doesn't do it. WGP doesn't do it either. PTA might do it, though it has issues, not sure about others.
Any thoughts?
A lot of new games just aren't comfortable to play. They are what's referred to as "high contact" -- where you're bouncing off the system all the time.
Now, people will truthfully point out that there's always a system; you just aren't always aware of it, and that what you're bouncing off may be ingrained habits. And that's true enough.
But...that's not all of it.
When you learn a martial arts system (let's say, fencing, since that's what I know well), you're bouncing off it all the time as you learn. You're constantly having to remind yourself to only use the attacks and defenses that are part of the system, to not hit off-target areas, etc. Just like learning a RPG that really uses a different system than the one you're used to.
But to use a martial arts system -well-, you have to get beyond all that. You have to get to the point where you're not seeing the system any more at all -- where it's there, informing your actions and part of it, but where you're not thinking "I can't hit his arm; it's off target" or "I can't attack now because he has priority" -- you're not thinking on that level at all; instead, you're just acting, but because your training has taught you to work within the system, your actions follow the system's rules and are informed by the system's principle.
This is where a lot of indy games fall down for me -- I'm not convinced that it's possible to play them in a manner where you're "just acting" -- being within the system without being concious of it. And I don't think I can have a satisfying game without this, in the end.
The thing is, if you only play games that follow systems you know, you can have a good time, but you're limiting yourself to things you already know; to patterns you've already internalized. You can get really good at those patterns, but if they aren't all that great patterns to begin with, or even if they aren't, you're not reaching your full potential.
But if you're constantly learning, exploring, and confronting -- never simply being -- never fencing, rather than practicing, you never really know anything well either; instead, you're constantly going over the surface of things rather than learning them in any depth.
So I want RPG systems like that. Ones that push you into knew patterns -- their own patterns -- sure, but also ones that with a smallish amount of effort, you can learn to the point where you're not constantly bouncing off the cage of the system, encountering the boundaries or following roads, and instead, just -playing-.
Capes doesn't do it. WGP doesn't do it either. PTA might do it, though it has issues, not sure about others.
Any thoughts?
no subject
Date: 2006-03-22 03:23 pm (UTC)By the same token, the way to avoid having such a system insinuate itself into any other game you played would be to learn more than one, just like learning more than one martial art, language, etc. In effect, most of us already know one set of responses, trained by years of roleplaying. Learning other sets should in principle make it easier to distinguish between the two (note that the theory that having learned one set of trained responses, you cannot help but use it in every circumstance is wrong. I have trained with sabre, foil, and about three styles of rapier. But I'd no more use a sabre technique when fencing foil, or for that matter attempt a sabre cut when holding a rapier, than I'd start trying to swim down a city street).
Regarding "what would it do"...what does any system do? It's more what it needs to avoid doing -- that one must be able to allow the system to slip below the surface in the same way that the predominant systems for roleplaying -- the call and response where the GM sets a scene, the players initiate dialogue or actions, the actions result in a resolution, and things continue until the next fade or the session ends -- do so, becoming the medium for roleplaying and conflict rather than a source of conflict in and of itself.
In theory, there's a lot of flexibility here; I don't see any reason (barring further analysis) that Capes, PTA, or Dogs could not be learned in this fashion, though I, personally, have further constraints, in that I want such games to serve as a vehicle for immersive play (causing a game like Capes, where a fair amount of the play even when the system is trained to the point that it becomes a medium is likely to involve strategizing the mechanics to be unsuitable).