Cantr II Discussion Forum

Rambling musing follows. May be TLDR.

Over in Emote Variation,

Dudel wrote:1) Cantr is actually a Role Playing Game or RPG.
2) You can RP in an RPG, however they are not places for actual RP. They are GAME FIRST, RP second.
3) The only thing Cantr simulates is building of stuff and the collecting of stuff. Game Mechanics SHOULD support the claim of "simulation", not RP, thus Cantr can not make the claim of simulation.
4) The only RP "rule" that Cantr keeps is "Try not to meta-game", which then only depends on the type of RPing you are participating in.
5) In this instance I am being the elitist.

My knee-jerk response to this was that of course RPGs are places for actual role playing. Then I had a think about it, and I think that the piece that's missing here is the social contract. This is the set or sets of conventions beyond the mechanics and rules by which players agree among themselves to play the game.

The social contract may be unspoken and thus learned by modelling the behaviour of other players and/or by operant conditioning as the other players respond positively or negatively to a given player's behaviour in relation to the conventions. It may be explicitly stated, which, really, is a much healthier way to operate IMO.

Consider a game of tag. Tag has few rules, easily grasped by all players. A given group of older neigbourhood kids might also share a convention where they tend to run more slowly or play with feigned clumsiness when playing with younger, slower kids. If they don't let the new big kid know about this convention of theirs when she joins the game, and if she comes from a neighbourhood where they play cutthroat tag, tears and anger will probably follow in short order.

In Cantr, I would probably call the CR an explicit --and possibly only -- shared social contract. Of course, as IRL, Cantr players operate by a variety social contracts that often are at odds with each other. If anything, I would say that this is something Cantr simulates very well. (Or is that only true if one includes forum and game as a whole system?)

To return to the RP thing, in what way are RPGs not places for RP? I wonder if I have a confusion of definitions going on here . . .

I believe the confusion is ONLY among Cantr players as anywhere else, be that in an actual RP environment or a gaming environment, Cantr is first and foremost seen as a GAME and THEN it is seen as a place to RP. I can not correct them based simply on what an RPG is, what Roleplaying is and what Cantr is. Cantr is heavy into RP but its still a game first.

Roleplaying
Roleplaying Game

You'll notice the key word is "Game". Even the description within the articles note this.

Wiki wrote:A role-playing game is a game in which the participants assume the roles of characters and collaboratively create stories. Participants determine the actions of their characters based on their characterization, and the actions succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines. Within the rules, they may improvise freely; their choices shape the direction and outcome of the games.

Wiki wrote:A role-playing game (RPG) is a broad family of games in which players assume the roles of characters, or take control of one or more avatars, in a fictional setting. Actions taken within the game succeed or fail according to a formal system of rules and guidelines.

Roleplaying vs the "game" aspect is the rules. HOWEVER, Cantr wants to bleed the two (at least its players do) and this does not work when the bleeding requirements are conflicting. I stick to and always have with "Mechanics first" which means people can't "block doors" from the inside without having the key. Characters can not hit without using the hit mechanic and "other insects" do not exist as they are not mentioned. Characters can't "sit down" on a cot/rug/whatever without resting

However I know better about having cake and eating it too. I see the above and do not complain when people "dodge hits", exit rooms when they "can't" etc. Mechanics go first and there are things within Cantr that people wanna do which they simply CAN NOT do. People do those things (and others) which are somehow accepted and at the same time complain about actual Cantr mechanics of death and being hit "without RP" as well as dropping the famous "There are no <blank> in Cantr" line when the world of Cantr is not described.

Yes, a character should have used the mechanic to remove their clothes (which woulda given others time to respond/react anyway) HOWEVER for actual RPing it is allowed to interact with an action regardless of its time placing if your character has not done so already. You CAN NOT then say "Its bad RP cause..." when it was simply not paying attention to Mechanics which most experienced Cantr players do with everything except combat.

Those conflicting aspects (and some PD hypocrisy) force players to leave before they can get into the fun of Cantr. Not to mention that a GAME's rules should be shown if enforced so heavily but this is different argument which I have raised before.

Note: Wiki is majority and can easily be seen as "false fact" but in my instance that is preferred.

If anyone else has considered (I hope I'm not the only one) about why D&D is so great, its because (with a good DM) the DM is human, and can alter or change the rules altogether, to fit the needs of the players or scenario. A human DM run the game by rules, but he can make exceptions at any given time.

Cantr is not a human DM, it runs by a ruleset that does not vary, it is simply updated from time to time.

Kinda heartless, but thats just something that is inherent to all coded "RPG"s. You exchange freeness for... well... Cantr.

- Natso

Those are called "House Rules" Natso and Cantr has no "House Rules".


People like to think it does, though.

Cantr has as many house rules as can be agreed upon between any set of players. Problems only occur when people don't play along.

I was not only referring to house rules, earlier. The rules lay out many things that are vague, and leave it to the discretion of the DM and Players. For instance, if my character, for some obscure and insane reason, was to walk across the line between two telephone poles, we'd expect a Balance check for that, even though it's never actually stated in the rules. Now assume the DM was a program, instead. It would probably let me balance on some expected things (cliffsides, ropes, etc) but not say... on a rolling barrel. There are things we can expect easily from humans that are unreasonably difficult to consider coding for a game-world.

- Natso

While Rigil's argument is for different reasons he is correct in his notions.

1) The rules are very vague and are "interpreted" on a case-by-case basis. This isn't really a house rule and, in theory, is exactly what Natso is talking about. Cantr has that one... but there is only "My word is law" and not a player consensus. There is no playing along when the guy with the stick wont even look you in the eye before he smacks you with it.

2) If you do "piss off the wrong people" or "act in a certain manner" you basically can NOT play Cantr anymore (See Rigil). You are a target for one thing or another, especially if you've annoyed a PD member. (People are people and power + people = headache.)

3) Cantr's flow is, INDEED, heavily handed by anyone afraid of anything they find destructive to their pretty picture. Many have pointed this out and there are some degrees where things are honestly destructive but a majority of things are player bias.

4) Cantr's rules are its mechanics and the CR. However the CR isn't in the same manner as the mechanics. If your character swings an axe they have a chance of hitting or a chance of missing but no matter what the swing of the axe was still made. The mechanics are concrete (which is why a lot of players pick mechanics over RP) as apposed to the "willy-nilly" behavior of the CR. The CR could have two near identical situations with different rulings while no matter how many times you click "hit character" you always swing at them.

Though now I am unsure as to if this is off-topic or not. The bulletins do apply to the situation but at the same time are simply Dudel repeats of self, which is becoming annoying.

Also note, CR infractions are done by majority Cantr players and not the Rigil.