Is D&D a Role Playing Game?

What is Role Playing?
It is generally accepted that "Role Playing" is an important aspect of playing a "Role Playing Game" but there is little consensus as to what this means. Some people insist upon an interpretation which places Role Playing in the mould of Thespian and Psychotherapy roleplay. Some people go further and say that since D&D didn't contain rules or recommendations for anything like this, nor did it originally call itself a Role Playing Game, that D&D was not a Role Playing Game. Derogatory terms such as "Rollplayer" are used for people who do not toe the line as regards the correct sort of role playing. On the other hand, some people say that Story Games are not RPGs, despite containing role playing.

Why did people call D&D a Role Playing Game?
It is true that in the earliest days, D&D didn't call itself a Role Playing Game – it was "Rules for Fantastic Medieval Wargames Campaigns Playable with Paper and Pencil and Miniature Figures". However it does mention role playing, that is – literally – playing a role:

"Before they begin, players must decide what role they will play in the campaign, human or otherwise, fighter, cleric, or magic-user."

So how did this "playing a role" morph into "role playing", and what is meant by it?

I don’t believe that people referred to D&D as a "role playing game" implying an adherence to the Thespian and Therapy meaning of roleplay – to understand what they meant you should discard all prior baggage associated with the term and instead look at the game that they are trying to describe with the term.

In D&D, role playing, or playing the role of your character, simply means you are told by the DM what your character sees / hears / experiences, you ask questions about this information and say what your character does, and the rules are used to resolve situations.

It is not an understatement to say that this was an entirely new concept in games. It does not require you to identify with your character, pretend to be your character, or to think as your character (though you may choose to do so). It is entirely compatible with Thespian/Therapy roleplay; but how much you incorporate this into your games is a matter of personal taste.

Is this a helpful or meaningful definition of "Role Playing"?
In this form of Role Playing, you cannot find out things which your character does not know, you are not told about things your character does not experience, you have no influence over events other than that which your character can exert. That is, Role Playing is both an enabler (you have complete control over the character's decisions) and a restriction (you cannot do more than play your character's role).

This definition allows you to clearly see how come some adherents of "Role Playing Games" insist that Character Choice is all important, Causation* is imperative, Cut Scenes are an irrelevant distraction, Thespianism** is optional, and the degree of Simulation is a matter of taste.

It is also clear that you can easily roleplay without it being an RPG (e.g. dress up and talk in character when playing Cluedo) and also that by removing the restriction on your actions to be limited to the role of your character (e.g. collaborative story telling games) you break something fundamental to RPGs to the point that it is at the least misleading for it to be referred to as an RPG.

Strict Role Playing
To this end, I suggest that we refer to this influence-and-knowledge-remains-within-the-role-of-the-character which characterises D&D (and most other RPGs) as "Strict Role Playing" to distinguish this play from other uses of the term and to highlight the difference. It is then possible to talk about the difference between strict RPG play and other forms of RPG (such as Story Games) without annoying adherents of other approaches by saying they aren't roleplaying and hence (by inference) aren't "doing it properly", and hence allowing people to discuss the issues and understand other viewpoints.


* By Causation I mean what people often term associated mechanics. Players say what their character does, and the game resolves the character's actions.

** By Thespianism, I mean putting on a voice or affecting mannerisms or style of speech, ever asking yourself "what is my Character's motive in this scene?", or taking actions based upon the beliefs of your character rather than what is optimal. I do a bit of all of this when I play RPGs!

An RPG Manifesto

This is my manifesto for how I like my games to roll - what's yours?

1. The DM controls the world, providing interesting settings and situations.
2. Players control the actions of their characters, and consequences of actions or restrictions on actions are explainable within the fiction of the game world.
3. There’s a random element to the game that sometime brings unexpected fortune, and sometimes unexpected disaster.
4. Plot and story are not imposed directly upon the game - they are an emergent property of interaction between the previous rules.
5. Failure should always be a possibility.
6. The DM is an impartial referee.
7. The DM makes rulings when needed, and can override rules if they deem necessary.
8. The DM and players often come to a gentleman’s agreement about aspects of the game – this does not violate player choice.
9. It is better for aspects of the world that will have consequences for player choices to be determined by the DM before those choices are made.
10. The DM should abide by the outcome of dice rolls.
11. The DM should not alter the world to invalidate players’ choices.
12. Random Tables can provide inspiration for the DM – but not a strait jacket – this is not fudging.
13. Impartial adjudication of NPC/monster behaviour can be enabled through dice.
14. It is better to roll a dice to resolve whether something is possible, than debate it endlessly.
15. It is your responsibility not to game with people who wreck it, not the game designer’s responsibility to stop them from wrecking it.
16. Rules should only be as complex as they need to be; less is often more.
17. The more complex the game mechanic, the harder it is to discover the consequences of it, and the more likely it is to be deeply flawed.
18. If someone burns all your rules, character sheets, dice, modules, melts your miniatures, and puts an axe to your laptop - you should be able to carry on playing almost the same game with rock-paper-scissors.
19. Content is more important than presentation, and clarity is the most important aspect of presentation.
20. There is more to learn from RPGs dating from the era of runaway success - the first ten years (1974-1984) – than there is from the niche appeal and limited success of subsequent games.
21. No game mechanic is a sacred cow.
22. Rules in a game are there for situations which require them, they do not indicate the relative importance of the situation to the game. 
23. More time should be spent playing than preparing.
24. The proof of the game is in the playing.