The Contradictions of Modern Gaming
The inherently self-destructive nature of the conventional gaming style.
My recent journey to RPG enlightenment has been an odd one full of a lot of false starts and questions of whether or not all of this is worth it. The unfortunate reality of modern, conventional roleplaying is that it's unsustainable. Gamers of my generation have all heard tales of campaigns that last for years and even decades on end. However, most of us struggle to keep a group together for more than six sessions. Many GMs burn out before the campaign even gets started. Why is that? Well, that's because modern gaming is built on a series of contradictions. These contradictions cause games to be unsustainable and, if not addressed, will kill your passion for the hobby. Each of these will need their own articles, but I would like to broadly outline them today.
The first contradiction is the contradiction of story. This is one that will likely need multiple deep dives but, somewhere along the way, gamers began to expect that their games include an in-depth story that the campaign follows. I've been guilty of perpetuating this myth myself by saying things like “An RPG is a fantasy novel in-progress,” but that simply isn't true. An RPG can't follow a story the same way a book or a video game can because an RPG is made up of players with agency. Either the players have total freedom and can completely derail a story with their choices or their choices and actions are meaningless unless they further the story. One way frustrates the GM, the other way frustrates the players. Either way, nobody is happy.
The next contradiction is the Agency Contradiction. Players demand agency and should have it. However, modern players have also been trained to view their characters as an extension of themselves. They commission expensive character portraits and make custom miniatures and write elaborate backstories about how their character 1v1ed a Beholder at the age of 12. When players use their agency though, bad things tend to happen to their precious OCs which upsets them. Players need to realize that agency comes with consequences if bad decisions are made. Agency or immunity. You can't have both.
The third contradiction is the Service Provider GM Contradiction. Modern players are very quick to say things like “The GM is a player too” but will then treat their GM like a servant. In their eyes, the GM should be required to provide interesting plot hooks, colorful NPCs, and thrilling adventures but not make things too hard, too boring or too challenging to their sensibilities. The GM then feels pressure to constantly entertain his players and to ignore rules or consequences that might cause upsetting outcomes. Instead of being an arbiter and a referee who holds all players to the rules, the GM becomes a caretaker who bends or ignores rules when they become inconvenient.
The fourth and final contradiction is the Game Contradiction. An RPG is a game at the end of the day. Games have rules and removing rules chips away at the structure of the game itself. However, modern players are taught that the rules are optional and should be changed when it suits them. Games are necessarily defined by their rules though. Even on Whose Line is it Anyway the games have rules and not following those rules gets you the buzzer. Yet RPG rules can be changed or ignored on a whim and somehow it's still considered a game. D&D has become the game that's not a game. A contradiction in and of itself.
Each of these deserves expansion in their own articles and that's what I aim to do. I will expand on these four contradictions and, should any others arise in my discussion of the big four, I'll discuss them as well. Let me know in the comments or on Twitter if there are any additional contradictions you believe should be discussed.