DnD is kind of a cross between improv, telling stories, and a choose-your-own-adventure, from what I gather from my spouse who runs games for a living. Playing Baldurs Gate 3 was really eye opening and I think the game helps one understand the appeal of tabletop RPGs a bit better.
It’s interesting to hear from someone who has trouble seeing the appeal. I think of storytelling, whether fictional or otherwise, as a core aspect of the human experience.
I think everyone should learn to tell a story that hangs together and has some elements of structure and style. We can’t all be raconteurs for hire, but getting to participate in a story is important. It gives us a chance to live a purer existence for a while.
The thing that’s always kept me from trying it is thinking on the spot. I have really bad social anxiety and I have bad validation issues and I always need to impress, so I get freaked out about having to improv. Collaboration is hard for me too. I’m much better when I have all the control and can make all the decisions myself and not have to worry about screwing up or disappointing. I loved BG3 though and it’s piqued my interest in DnD again.
That’s very understandable. I’m so bad at improvising (or used to be?) that the only way I can stand to run a game is by writing huge reams of prepared content. So, not railroady, but narratively I’d create a room full of tripwire events and canned monologues so that no matter where they go or what they do, there are plot hooks and repercussions taking place.
I got quite obsessive about it for a while. Sometimes I think I’d be better off writing a book, but it’s too much fun to see people getting into it.
It’s similar to people who got into the Lord of the Rings or Harry Potter after watching the movies. The movies aren’t exactly like the books, and generally speaking, “the book was better”, but the movies are easier for a newbie to digest and if they enjoy it, they’ll feel more comfortable committing time and effort into digging into the “deeper” version of it.