This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Base Mechanics of Forgie Games

Started by HinterWelt, March 11, 2009, 03:48:06 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

HinterWelt

Quote from: David R;289150Here's a definition from John Kim's site :

http://www.darkshire.net/~jhkim/rpg/theory/glossary/alphabetical/B.html

As for BW, the person who should be posting is blakkie. He's really into the game.

Regards,
David R

So, it is originally a Sorcerer term...and what I would have called a plot point 25 years ago. The case for codification grows...;)

Thanks David.
The RPG Haven - Talking about RPGs
My Site
Oh...the HinterBlog
Lord Protector of the Cult of Clash was Right
When you look around you have to wonder,
Do you play to win or are you just a bad loser?

HinterWelt

Quote from: James J Skach;289149This is Artha

"I don't think that word means what you think it means."
The RPG Haven - Talking about RPGs
My Site
Oh...the HinterBlog
Lord Protector of the Cult of Clash was Right
When you look around you have to wonder,
Do you play to win or are you just a bad loser?

christopherkubasik

Quote from: HinterWelt;289146See, that is why I end up thinking many of the methods used are similar to what I have seen at cons, in games shops and with groups before and after Sorcerer. I mean, essentially, it sounds like the way a lot of folks make groups for trad games. The difference is, it is advice in my books but codified rules in indie games. Probably a well duh to others but I find it interesting.

Hi Bill,

I think you've summed it up well.  The only thing I'd add is that -- from your own response to what it would be like to GM Sorcerer -- when you codify a specific set of rules and procedures, something new is created.  

What these specific rules and procedures are for any game, and how they interact, is what makes that experience of play that experience.


I can only suggest that if one doesn't look at how all the pieces fit together in a game (whether it be Sorcerer, Burning Wheel, or whatever), the understanding of one piece might seem like, "Okay, got it."  But, in my experience at least, what they actually do in the game and how the Players actually use them is still incomplete.

That's why I introduced how the GM brings definitions of Humanity, Lore and stuff in the long post.  Because they will inform the Player created Kickers.  All the procedures impinge on each other.

HinterWelt

Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;289166Hi Bill,

I think you've summed it up well.  The only thing I'd add is that -- from your own response to what it would be like to GM Sorcerer -- when you codify a specific set of rules and procedures, something new is created.  

What these specific rules and procedures are for any game, and how they interact, is what makes that experience of play that experience.


I can only suggest that if one doesn't look at how all the pieces fit together in a game (whether it be Sorcerer, Burning Wheel, or whatever), the understanding of one piece might seem like, "Okay, got it."  But, in my experience at least, what they actually do in the game and how the Players actually use them is still incomplete.

That's why I introduced how the GM brings definitions of Humanity, Lore and stuff in the long post.  Because they will inform the Player created Kickers.  All the procedures impinge on each other.

I agree that a system is often more than the sum of its parts. However, the point of the thread (and you have stayed on topic) is the mechanics and how they work. So, I am hoping to grasp the way a game works AND how it is written. I am a strong believer in the game experience far exceeds the system as written. I think I begin to see, though, how forgie mentality works. If you assume that the game system is the experience then you must insist the group play the system as written. This is reinforced by the codification of what I call meta-game elements. See, from my side of the divide, codification looks like this:
1. Pick up die.
2. Cup hands together
3. Shake hands three times
4. Stop shaking hands
5. Drop dice on table

One could make the argument very easily, that this is a new and interesting element in a game. It ties to the rolling of dice and touches on everything from combat to skill resolution to stat checks. However, to me, it is "well, duh". Also, I do not know that it is a "But you are experienced" thing. In my experience (and I have seen a LOT of new gamers) one of the easiest concepts they grasp is that we need to work as a group to make this fun.

With the definitions you supplied in your write-up, it only reinforced these ideas for me. What you really were talking about were
a) here are the elements that are resources to my character
b) here are the people that affect my character
c) here is the plot device that will drive my character

Note: the point is that not EVERYONE does character creation this way. Some are more comfortable with the GM saying "Here is the setting" and then the make characters to fit. I am not saying Sorcerer does it incorrectly, only that it does it one and only one way. It happens to be pretty close to how I do it in my trad games but not always.

Now, don't get me wrong. I am not knocking this. I imagine a lot of folks enjoy the game and the mechanics but they seem, well, like Captain Obvious was at the helm of writing the game. I am more impressed with the mechanics in BW. But still, I can appreciate that this is a means of codifying what I would consider a good way of making a character and setting, but only one way.

Thanks!
The RPG Haven - Talking about RPGs
My Site
Oh...the HinterBlog
Lord Protector of the Cult of Clash was Right
When you look around you have to wonder,
Do you play to win or are you just a bad loser?

christopherkubasik

Cool.

But let me ask what is the basis of how GMing Sorcerer is still something you don't quite get?  (At least in a pervious post.)

Clearly something is different.  What is producing the difference?

HinterWelt

Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;289170Cool.

But let me ask what is the basis of how GMing Sorcerer is still something you don't quite get?  (At least in a pervious post.)

Clearly something is different.  What is producing the difference?

Well, what you seemed to say was mostly about the role of guiding character creation. My confusion is still over the role of the GM once the game begins. Now, if he is running the NPCs and some setting, well, I think you could easily drop the GM and rotate PC duties. Again, I may be missing something but the role of the GM during play seems nominal. He is no there to drive the story, that is the role of the players and their kickers. He is even, to an extent, not really encouraged to bring NPCs in so much as properly portray the ones the players introduced. Again, not bad, just not sure how much fun for the GM that would be. Also, I have not played the game so certainly, take the above as pure conjecture.
The RPG Haven - Talking about RPGs
My Site
Oh...the HinterBlog
Lord Protector of the Cult of Clash was Right
When you look around you have to wonder,
Do you play to win or are you just a bad loser?

christopherkubasik

Right.

The GM brings in lots of other NPCs.  For example, in THE BROTHERHOOD game, a player created Carver, the NPC the cult leader who was also in the prison.  

But I created Carver's great-great grandfather, Landsfield, the man who built the original prison on the backs of slave labor in the 19th century.  Landsfield roamed the corridors under the prison as a sorcerous lich.

I also took the idea that one player came up with (the nephew arriving to take control of the PCs cell block demon) and built out a turf war, which made sense in a prison environment.  I made up three factions that were at war for control of the prison.  The crux of the war was that Landsfield was coming to kill Caver as a sacrifice for his own magic, and Carver was trying to get complete control of the prison to stay safe.

The Players knew about the surface prison conflicts when play began.  But they only bumped into facts about the secret war as their agendas bumped into the agendas of the NPCs.  As they learned more, more NPCs came to them trying enlist them into helping their factions cause.  Which way they Players had their PCs jump was completely up them, of course.  But their choices could bring down pain from other NPCs -- or NPCs they refused to help.

That's a small part of what was going on.  David King's also turned out to be a sorcerer who had an affair with Carver years earlier, which is why David's daughter was targeted for sacrifice.  The drug dealer that Roman killed was actually alive and well and seeking vengeance... and so on...

This is what I mean by the GM creating the backstory.  And this is why the game, it seems to me, wouldn't work as a GMless game. The GM is carrying lots of secrets and NPC agendas that work best with one person sitting on one side of the game, and everyone else on the other side.

RPGPundit

Kubasik is obviously engaging in stealth marketing, and obviously is a Forge Shill. Nice pre-emptive work there, Pvt. Droog, by the way.

But really, I wasn't going to mention it until you did, and it doesn't matter that he's here now, because he's in Off-topic. It certainly does prove that all my suppositions about what would become of this thread have come to pass.

RPGPundit
LION & DRAGON: Medieval-Authentic OSR Roleplaying is available now! You only THINK you\'ve played \'medieval fantasy\' until you play L&D.


My Blog:  http://therpgpundit.blogspot.com/
The most famous uruguayan gaming blog on the planet!

NEW!
Check out my short OSR supplements series; The RPGPundit Presents!


Dark Albion: The Rose War! The OSR fantasy setting of the history that inspired Shakespeare and Martin alike.
Also available in Variant Cover form!
Also, now with the CULTS OF CHAOS cult-generation sourcebook

ARROWS OF INDRA
Arrows of Indra: The Old-School Epic Indian RPG!
NOW AVAILABLE: AoI in print form

LORDS OF OLYMPUS
The new Diceless RPG of multiversal power, adventure and intrigue, now available.


David R

#114
Quote from: HinterWelt;289162So, it is originally a Sorcerer term...and what I would have called a plot point 25 years ago. The case for codification grows...;)

I think you're right. In fact if you read some of my posts here about Forge games, I've more or less said the same thing. I'm not really too enthusiastic about CKubasik's contention that codifying concepts etc creates something new. I mean it's kinda of like what Tarantino does, recyles old stuff but it looks new, esp to those who aren't aware of his specific references.

The interesting thing about CKubasik's examples of play is that it reads like any other roleplaying game.....which has always been my point....a sore one it would seem.

Edit: I think this wanders into Pseudoephedrine's Culture of Play. I think.

Regards,
David R

HinterWelt

Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;289175Right.

The GM brings in lots of other NPCs. For example, in THE BROTHERHOOD game, a player created Carver, the NPC the cult leader who was also in the prison.  
Ah, that was the piece I was missing. That makes the GMs job better IMO.
Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;289175But I created Carver's great-great grandfather, Landsfield, the man who built the original prison on the backs of slave labor in the 19th century.  Landsfield roamed the corridors under the prison as a sorcerous lich.

I also took the idea that one player came up with (the nephew arriving to take control of the PCs cell block demon) and built out a turf war, which made sense in a prison environment.  I made up three factions that were at war for control of the prison.  The crux of the war was that Landsfield was coming to kill Caver as a sacrifice for his own magic, and Carver was trying to get complete control of the prison to stay safe.
I think this was another important point that was missing. The GM does introduce setting elements. My misunderstanding here.
Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;289175The Players knew about the surface prison conflicts when play began.  But they only bumped into facts about the secret war as their agendas bumped into the agendas of the NPCs.  As they learned more, more NPCs came to them trying enlist them into helping their factions cause.  Which way they Players had their PCs jump was completely up them, of course.  But their choices could bring down pain from other NPCs -- or NPCs they refused to help.

That's a small part of what was going on.  David King's also turned out to be a sorcerer who had an affair with Carver years earlier, which is why David's daughter was targeted for sacrifice.  The drug dealer that Roman killed was actually alive and well and seeking vengeance... and so on...

This is what I mean by the GM creating the backstory.  And this is why the game, it seems to me, wouldn't work as a GMless game. The GM is carrying lots of secrets and NPC agendas that work best with one person sitting on one side of the game, and everyone else on the other side.
I agree now. The role of the GM is alot more traditional than I first understood it to be. This has been very helpful in understanding how the pieces work together, the role of the GM and the contribution of the players.

As a side note to other readers, Sorcerer sure looks like RPG to me.

Thanks CK.
The RPG Haven - Talking about RPGs
My Site
Oh...the HinterBlog
Lord Protector of the Cult of Clash was Right
When you look around you have to wonder,
Do you play to win or are you just a bad loser?

Imperator

Quote from: David R;289194The interesting thing about CKubasik's examples of play is that it reads like any other roleplaying game.....which has always been my point....a sore one it would seem.

Edit: I think this wanders into Pseudoephedrine's Culture of Play. I think.

Regards,
David R
My point exactly. Can someone point me to that Pseudo's posts, please?
My name is Ramón Nogueras. Running now Vampire: the Masquerade (Giovanni Chronicles IV for just 3 players), and itching to resume my Call of Cthulhu campaign (The Sense of the Sleight-of-Hand Man).

Imperator

Quote from: HinterWelt;289232As a side note to other readers, Sorcerer sure looks like RPG to me.
If you check Sorcerer & Sword, that impression of yours will probably increased.
My name is Ramón Nogueras. Running now Vampire: the Masquerade (Giovanni Chronicles IV for just 3 players), and itching to resume my Call of Cthulhu campaign (The Sense of the Sleight-of-Hand Man).

David R

Quote from: Imperator;289234My point exactly. Can someone point me to that Pseudo's posts, please?

They are kind of all over the place, Imperator. The last time he mentioned it was when he (Pseudophedrine) and Stormbringer were going at it over 4E. Maybe he'll write it up one day :D

Regards,
David R

Imperator

Quote from: David R;289236They are kind of all over the place, Imperator. The last time he mentioned it was when he (Pseudophedrine) and Stormbringer were going at it over 4E. Maybe he'll write it up one day :D

Regards,
David R
Fuck, I will have to go back and check.
My name is Ramón Nogueras. Running now Vampire: the Masquerade (Giovanni Chronicles IV for just 3 players), and itching to resume my Call of Cthulhu campaign (The Sense of the Sleight-of-Hand Man).