I love these philosophical types of conversations surrounding roleplaying games, and I'm excited for more to come! It's what drew me into Burning Wheel, which is as much a philosophical text on how to roleplay as it is a self-contained system.
I'd like to push back on the idea that a roleplaying game must have 2+ players, and that a solo roleplaying game is, by it's nature, something else that doesn't fully fit within the bounds of "roleplaying games".
Firstly, I agree completely that players are not inherently good at providing adversity for their characters. However, I think a lot of this is the result of how most players have been trained to roleplay by most of the systems out there. The vast majority of systems posit that "The GM presents the problems, and the players present the solutions", and as a result that's the format of play that we've all internalized.
Solo roleplaying, and by extension solo roleplaying games, attempts to solve this "problem" by effectively teaching the player how to generate adversity for themselves.
Pseudo-aside: solo roleplaying is system agnostic. It's a style of play, not a style of game. Practically every ruleset can be played solo with the addition of an Oracle taking on part of the role of the GM.
Let's take the example of the hallway that was presented in the episode, but approach it as a solo roleplayer. The player would not actually know if the hallway is trapped. They also wouldn't know what produced the sound around the corner at the end of the hallway. They would decide that their character moved down the hallway, intent on peaking around the corner to get a look, and then, if the idea comes to them, they would ask the oracle, "Hey, is this hallway trapped?". They would then roll according to the rules of the oracle to generate a "Yes" or "No" response, rules that are normally somehow tied to the context of the world that the character exists within in (i.e. a "Yes" answer is more likely if it's equally more likely that this particular hallway in this particular location would be trapped). If a "Yes" comes up, they would then need to role for a couple of prompts to determine what the trap is. Rolling on a table in the Mythic GM Emulator (my first, and preferred, oracle) produces "Bizarre" and "Liquid" (which fit together almost too nicely). Aha! So the hallway is trapped, and a bizarre, multi-colored, steaming, sickly-sweet, smelling liquid has begun oozing out of the walls. What will my character do in response?
The same would be done for the creature. I wouldn't know what it is. The sound previously heard was a spontaneously generated response to a question asked, an answer received, and some clarifying prompts (if needed). Rolling again I get "Constructed" and "Verbal". Given the context of the world, I might decide in the moment that this is an automaton doing... something (roll again, "Reward" + "Idea") AH! It's furiously tearing books out of a bookcase?! Now why would it be doing that?
Solo roleplaying, and solo roleplaying games, rely on prompts from the oracle to tell the player when to take on the role of GM and present some adversity. They seek to solve the issue that players are indeed bad at being mean to themselves. The conversation that you, Luke, said is so important to roleplaying games still happens, in my opinion. It just happens between you and yourself as prompted by the Oracle, instead of between you and another player. As a result, I'd argue that solo roleplaying games, at least ones the properly try to emulate the lack of knowledge that a player would normally be operating on, are indeed full fledged roleplaying games. This is especially true because almost all systems can be played solo.
ah! great news chaps! a podcast of ONLY introductions :P
I love these philosophical types of conversations surrounding roleplaying games, and I'm excited for more to come! It's what drew me into Burning Wheel, which is as much a philosophical text on how to roleplay as it is a self-contained system.
I'd like to push back on the idea that a roleplaying game must have 2+ players, and that a solo roleplaying game is, by it's nature, something else that doesn't fully fit within the bounds of "roleplaying games".
Firstly, I agree completely that players are not inherently good at providing adversity for their characters. However, I think a lot of this is the result of how most players have been trained to roleplay by most of the systems out there. The vast majority of systems posit that "The GM presents the problems, and the players present the solutions", and as a result that's the format of play that we've all internalized.
Solo roleplaying, and by extension solo roleplaying games, attempts to solve this "problem" by effectively teaching the player how to generate adversity for themselves.
Pseudo-aside: solo roleplaying is system agnostic. It's a style of play, not a style of game. Practically every ruleset can be played solo with the addition of an Oracle taking on part of the role of the GM.
Let's take the example of the hallway that was presented in the episode, but approach it as a solo roleplayer. The player would not actually know if the hallway is trapped. They also wouldn't know what produced the sound around the corner at the end of the hallway. They would decide that their character moved down the hallway, intent on peaking around the corner to get a look, and then, if the idea comes to them, they would ask the oracle, "Hey, is this hallway trapped?". They would then roll according to the rules of the oracle to generate a "Yes" or "No" response, rules that are normally somehow tied to the context of the world that the character exists within in (i.e. a "Yes" answer is more likely if it's equally more likely that this particular hallway in this particular location would be trapped). If a "Yes" comes up, they would then need to role for a couple of prompts to determine what the trap is. Rolling on a table in the Mythic GM Emulator (my first, and preferred, oracle) produces "Bizarre" and "Liquid" (which fit together almost too nicely). Aha! So the hallway is trapped, and a bizarre, multi-colored, steaming, sickly-sweet, smelling liquid has begun oozing out of the walls. What will my character do in response?
The same would be done for the creature. I wouldn't know what it is. The sound previously heard was a spontaneously generated response to a question asked, an answer received, and some clarifying prompts (if needed). Rolling again I get "Constructed" and "Verbal". Given the context of the world, I might decide in the moment that this is an automaton doing... something (roll again, "Reward" + "Idea") AH! It's furiously tearing books out of a bookcase?! Now why would it be doing that?
Solo roleplaying, and solo roleplaying games, rely on prompts from the oracle to tell the player when to take on the role of GM and present some adversity. They seek to solve the issue that players are indeed bad at being mean to themselves. The conversation that you, Luke, said is so important to roleplaying games still happens, in my opinion. It just happens between you and yourself as prompted by the Oracle, instead of between you and another player. As a result, I'd argue that solo roleplaying games, at least ones the properly try to emulate the lack of knowledge that a player would normally be operating on, are indeed full fledged roleplaying games. This is especially true because almost all systems can be played solo.