Quote from: Drohem;288911In all seriousness, I honestly don't believe Bill is that type of person from what I know of his online persona.  I may be wrong, but I don't think so.

[sarcasm]Yeah, because I am all about pissing people off when I post unlike some folks who run this site. [/sarcasm]

Drohem, note the above is not directed at your comment. Thanks for giving me the benefit of the doubt. I honestly thought I was discussing the mechanics of certain RPGs in the forum that would best draw the most opinions on the subject. Hopefully, we can get back to addressing those points.

Quote from: RPGPundit;288903Dude, unlike say, Droog, who has been here from day one without any purpose other than to try to cause trouble

Aww, dude! You've hurt my feelings, dude!

I guess this thread moving is fallout from my shitstirring on the help thread. Sorry Bill. I think this is an interesting thread and wish I could be a participant instead watching from the sidelines, but my knowledge of rules stuff is so poor that I doubt I'd be doing the games any favours.

Whenever a Forge or Forge-like game has surfaced around these parts, you and James Skach have always asked interesting questions and moved the discussion away from the normal hatefest that the Pundit would like it to be.

That's one of the strenghts of this place and the majority of it's posters.This is supposed to be a place where folks have no holds barred discussions about games. Not the place where we have discussions about what the owner defines as games.
 
I should have just left it alone but AM's recent swinery on the 4E threads got under my skin a little. To not poke the beast would have been criminal negligence on my part. So much for the Wielder of the Flaming Keystrokes of Truth.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: HinterWelt;288905Again, I think I am being dense or something. How do other folks make there characters? I mean, do you run off and secretly make dozens of characters then come to the table a say, "Here you bitch GM, I made a Dragonborn Lowrider! Deal!"

No, but I have done a lot of one-on-one work with people on chrs. And sometimes people make chrs and bring them for approval. There are still types of games I would be happy to use that method with. In Pendragon I'm like "Fuck the other players, this is YOUR CHR!"

It's just that Sorcerer works best if you're all involved from the start. You may well have found that for your games independently. The reason it's good for Sorcerer is that kickers can take people in all sorts of directions, i.e. characters may not stick together or even meet.

So what holds a game of Sorcerer together is all the players being interested and invested in the definition of Humanity used for that game. As if you read a book of short stories about a theme, like "Tales of Weirdness" or something.

On the other hand, what holds a game of Pendragon together is the setting. It's like a medieval tapestry you weave your own thread into. So it doesn't matter if your chrs go off and do different things, but it's for a different reason from Sorcerer, so the chrs don't have to have any unifying theme.

Quote from: David R;288934I guess this thread moving is fallout from my shitstirring on the help thread. Sorry Bill. I think this is an interesting thread and wish I could be a participant instead watching from the sidelines, but my knowledge of rules stuff is so poor that I doubt I'd be doing the games any favours.

Whenever a Forge or Forge-like game has surfaced around these parts, you and James Skach have always asked interesting questions and moved the discussion away from the normal hatefest that the Pundit would like it to be.

That's one of the strenghts of this place and the majority of it's posters.This is supposed to be a place where folks have no holds barred discussions about games. Not the place where we have discussions about what the owner defines as games.
 
I should have just left it alone but AM's recent swinery on the 4E threads got under my skin a little. To not poke the beast would have been criminal negligence on my part. So much for the Wielder of the Flaming Keystrokes of Truth.

Regards,
David R

David, don;t worry man, I am a big boy and can take it (or give it). I do want to say that though the thread in help sparked the idea of the thread I was far more interested in the mechanics it would reveal. I have played some of these games (BW) YEARS ago and only once so you can imagine that I could use a refresher. I would have been equally happy with "Base Mechanics for Diceless Games" but I do not know if there are enough of these to make a thread worth while.

And you know what, if I am ashamed about anything it is that I one of the primary motivations for this thread is mining ideas from other game designers. Yeah, it may be strange, but I am a very self reliant kind of guy. I prefer my own ideas even if they are reinventing (unknowingly) something someone else has done.

Generally, yeah, I have no problems with indie games. I tend to be snubbed by their club but I find that more amusing than hurtful. Just last month IPR told me I am not "avante guard enough" for them and declined to carry my "too trad" products. I could get all in a shitstrom over that and start spouting non-sense about swinery (or Squinery) but I still think that is just this side of non-sense. I do not really play indie games and I knew some folks were knowledgeable on these forums. I could probably have done it over on RPGNet and gotten a lot less grief but I think we (sometimes) can get bgetter dialogue here. Case in point, look at JHKim, Imperator, Droog and a few others with their very informative posts. Personally, if I ran the forum, I would pull some of those out and sticky them in theory or even OT (if that is the place) for a reference. I would put up one about 4e, D20, Iridium, Clash's systems and Brett's. We coudl have something you do not see often on the net, a truly useful reference. If I was into wikis I would start one.

But I ramble... Thanks.

Quote from: droog;288936No, but I have done a lot of one-on-one work with people on chrs. And sometimes people make chrs and bring them for approval. There are still types of games I would be happy to use that method with. In Pendragon I'm like "Fuck the other players, this is YOUR CHR!"

It's just that Sorcerer works best if you're all involved from the start. You may well have found that for your games independently. The reason it's good for Sorcerer is that kickers can take people in all sorts of directions, i.e. characters may not stick together or even meet.

So what holds a game of Sorcerer together is all the players being interested and invested in the definition of Humanity used for that game. As if you read a book of short stories about a theme, like "Tales of Weirdness" or something.

On the other hand, what holds a game of Pendragon together is the setting. It's like a medieval tapestry you weave your own thread into. So it doesn't matter if your chrs go off and do different things, but it's for a different reason from Sorcerer, so the chrs don't have to have any unifying theme.

O.k. I think I see what you are saying. The "setting" is not the glue here. The Concept that the GM brings is just a genre, maybe? For example:
GM: Let's play super heros in the 1930s!
Player 1: Yeah! I will be The Cape! He is a defender of justice with a dark secret!
Player 2: O.k. but I want to play a Amazing Woman. She is an amazon from Teledo, OH with a gingivitis!
Player 1...um, maybe give her an arch enemy like the PMS Avenger who only strikes on 4 days a month?
Player 2: Sounds good.
Player 3: I will be playing the Red Mask. He is secretly the PMS Avenger!
GM: Alright, we are all in New York. There is a  plot afoot by the PMS Avenger. He has somehow gotten Bronzantium, a deadly explosive and plans to destroy the city. I am looking at you "The Cape"!

Something like that?

Thanks.

Quote from: HinterWelt;288958And you know what, if I am ashamed about anything it is that I one of the primary motivations for this thread is mining ideas from other game designers.

This is what I do too. Which is why threads like these and any talk of games even if they are so-called Forgey games are so cool, IMO.

QuoteCase in point, look at JHKim, Imperator, Droog and a few others with their very informative posts.

Agreed.

And droog has always been a kinky fellow. His suggestion of using Sorceror for my biopunk game, SexyBeasts has gone down very well with my crew.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: RPGPundit;2889103/10 at best. A very sub-par attempt at character assassination on your part.

If I was like Ron Edwards, I'd have closed this thread and forbidden any debate on my positions.

If I was like an RPGnet Mod, I'd have banned Hinterwelt for his provocation, and at least a half-dozen other people who have posted to this thread.

Your argument holds no water, and the fact that you are allowed to make it is the very proof of that.

RPGPundit

But in this very thread you have proven you are rpgnet moderator material.  The thread was going straight, narrow and right on topic.  Then you jump in here flinging fecal material and cause it to diverge.  Now that it's gone that direction you are using it as support for moving it.  Classic rpg.net moderator baiting right there all done to get what you want.  Which is mainly to point and say 'See, see, I told you so.'

Character assassination is not my goal.  It would be a waste of time since nearly everyone here knows the way you are and your little fits and crybaby outs.  Especially your 'my way is right, your way is wrong LALALALALA' attitude about everything.  There is nothing  to assissinate in the end.  You have done that to yourself many times over.

Quote from: RPGPundit;288768You know what? I've changed my mind. This thread goes to Off-topic, and consider yourself warned. Don't pull this shit again.

I've always felt that derailing threads was something worth being warned for. People were asking about the mechanics behind Forger games. You're derailing it with arguments about whether they're really rpgs, and your personal spats with a few other posters.

As I've said to Forgers: please keep your theory and personal disputes out of our rpg discussions. Don't derail threads. Derailing threads because they're about games you dislike is "trolling". Don't do that, Pundit. It sets a bad example to the kids. We don't come into the Amber threads and derail them because it's diceless deviance, don't you come into threads about Forger games and derail them because they're pretentious and depressing, or fail to follow your self-contradictory Landmarks.

Quote from: HinterWelt;288958Something like that?

Yes, I think that's more or less right, except that the players would be writing kickers in there too. Kickers form the basis of the chr's adventure/story/whatever.

So Player 1 (the Cape) might write a kicker that goes: Today I got a phone call that said "We know who you are."

Player 2 might write: My boyfriend's parents have come to stay.

Player 3 might write: Red Mask has discovered Bronzantium, a deadly explosive.

The GM takes all those kickers and uses them to drive the game. Broadly, a game of Sorcerer is 'over' when your chr's kicker has been resolved.

So the GM's role is pretty crucial.

Quote from: HinterWelt;288920Those are your words.

I went on, in that very same post, to list games that were not regular RPGs, and those happened to be pretty much exactly the ones on your list.  The point of your thread was also to somehow try to argue that the basic mechanics of these games are "the same" as regular RPGs'.

Come on dude, we all know each other here. Do you really think you're fooling anyone about this?

QuoteYou do not want to believe this because your position is weak (essentially, "I don't like the game")

No, the reason they're not discussed in the main RPG forum is because they're not regular RPGs.
The reason they're not discussed in "electronic and other games" is because I don't like them. :pundit:

Quotebut these seem very much to be roleplaying games. That means that either the RPG forum is for discussing RPGs or they are for discussing RPGs you approve of.

Nonsense. I can't stand White Wolf's games, for example, and many other RPGs, that are totally open to be discussed in the main RPG forum.

QuoteYou then go on to accuse me of being a secret agent of the Forge.

Nah, its guys like Droog that are here on behest of the Cult of Ron.

You? You've just disliked me ever since I panned "Roma Imperious" (still not correct Latin, btw).

RPGPundit

Quote from: David R;288934I guess this thread moving is fallout from my shitstirring on the help thread. Sorry Bill. I think this is an interesting thread and wish I could be a participant instead watching from the sidelines, but my knowledge of rules stuff is so poor that I doubt I'd be doing the games any favours.

Whenever a Forge or Forge-like game has surfaced around these parts, you and James Skach have always asked interesting questions and moved the discussion away from the normal hatefest that the Pundit would like it to be.

That's one of the strenghts of this place and the majority of it's posters.This is supposed to be a place where folks have no holds barred discussions about games. Not the place where we have discussions about what the owner defines as games.
 
I should have just left it alone but AM's recent swinery on the 4E threads got under my skin a little. To not poke the beast would have been criminal negligence on my part. So much for the Wielder of the Flaming Keystrokes of Truth.

Regards,
David R

As I said, you're welcome to discuss forge games on this thread till you're blue in the face. Legal concerns excepted, no discussion is banned on this site as long as its done on the right forum.

RPGPundit

Quote from: peteramthor;288967But in this very thread you have proven you are rpgnet moderator material.  The thread was going straight, narrow and right on topic.  Then you jump in here flinging fecal material and cause it to diverge.  Now that it's gone that direction you are using it as support for moving it.  Classic rpg.net moderator baiting right there all done to get what you want.  Which is mainly to point and say 'See, see, I told you so.'

Before I'd done anything other than a single post stating that I was going to allow the thread to continue on a probationary basis in the main forum, the Pundit-hater crowd had come in here and used it as a blunt object.
Sorry, this thread failed on its own.

QuoteCharacter assassination is not my goal.  It would be a waste of time since nearly everyone here knows the way you are and your little fits and crybaby outs.  Especially your 'my way is right, your way is wrong LALALALALA' attitude about everything.  There is nothing  to assissinate in the end.  You have done that to yourself many times over.

And yet, despite all these claims, you felt the need to take the tact of claiming that I was EXACTLY LIKE the guys who ban people at the drop of a hat or the guy who closes any thread he doesn't like in the least.
Now your argument, too, has failed.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;289025As I said, you're welcome to discuss forge games on this thread till you're blue in the face. Legal concerns excepted, no discussion is banned on this site as long as its done on the right forum.

"The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."

Regards,
David R

Against my better judgment I will play along. This thread is still useful to an extent, dispite your best efforts.

Quote from: RPGPundit;289024I went on, in that very same post, to list games that were not regular RPGs, and those happened to be pretty much exactly the ones on your list.  The point of your thread was also to somehow try to argue that the basic mechanics of these games are "the same" as regular RPGs'.

Come on dude, we all know each other here. Do you really think you're fooling anyone about this?

First, I don't read most of your posts. They are not worth it.

No, one of the poitns of this thread, and I have admitted as much, was to familiarize myself with the mechanics so that I could try and see your point of view. So far, I do not see it. They are pretty mundane mechanics. I am not friend of Rons nor am I well liked by forgites either. I am not "sticking it to you". Generally, I avoid anything like this. Was I aware that you would blow a gasket over this? I thought you might but the worst that would happen is you would move it to OT. No, you warn me and precede to derail the thread. You make the thread about you. I wonder who that sounds like.

Quote from: RPGPundit;289024No, the reason they're not discussed in the main RPG forum is because they're not regular RPGs.
The reason they're not discussed in "electronic and other games" is because I don't like them. :pundit:

No, it is because you have some ideologue you feel the need to push. These specific games here are most assuredly RPGs. I suspect most any discussed here would be as well.

Quote from: RPGPundit;289024Nonsense. I can't stand White Wolf's games, for example, and many other RPGs, that are totally open to be discussed in the main RPG forum.

How are these games not RPGs? Seriously. Because they use a board instead of a battle map? No, because they do not use a board. Because you dress up and walk around acting in character? No, because you do not do that.

Look, I am not some ivy league academic. I am an engineer by training and an analytical thinker by profession. If it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck it is a duck.

Quote from: RPGPundit;289024Nah, its guys like Droog that are here on behest of the Cult of Ron.

You? You've just disliked me ever since I panned "Roma Imperious" (still not correct Latin, btw).

RPGPundit

No, give yourself credit, I had only heard of you by then. I dislike you because you are a coward that hides like the intellectual child you are. You have a "persona" that can only trade in hate and deceit. You do not even have the courage to claim your own work. I dislike the inteelectually weak and cowardly.

And no, as usual, you have it wrong. The Latin is not incorrect.

Now, stop disrupting this thread...or will you warn yourself? I thought not.

Hi Bill,

I thought I'd add a few details on top of what droog and Imperator have already laid out for Sorcerer.

I want to highlight a question you asked droog: "Also, is it presented in the context of advice or is it actual codified rules;i.e. You receive 1 Kicker vs. It is a good idea to have a kicker."

A thing to know about Sorcerer is that lots of things that might be optional or good techniques in some RPG groups are hard wired into the rules of Sorcerer.  Kickers is one of these things. When you play Sorcerer, the players write Kickers.  That's just a rule.  Pretty much everything droog has mentioned are rules of play.

In terms of setting or what the GM brings to the Players, there are couple of setting elements the GM needs to fill out and define for play to proceed.  These setting elements are the definitions of Humanity, Demons, Lore and what happens to a character at Humanity of 0.  These are the elements of "glue" that you referred to in your previous post.

Humanity, by the way, is stat that ranges in value for any character from 0 to 10.  Deeds the Player has the PC do an raise or lower Humanity by one point, so that there's never a "Do this and you lose a Humanity point."  It's die roll (about a 50-50 chance) that it might go up or down for any Humanity threatening or Humanity gaining action.  Also, Humanity does not affect a PC's actions, attitude, or moral range in any way unless it hits 0.  Thus, the Players can "ride" Humanity down for a bit, taking actions that might compromise them morally, but lets them do things that really, really matter to them.  (For example, I don't know if you've seen the show THE SHIELD, but Humanity in the context of that show might be, "Living the Law."  And I don't think any character made it through that show without making some Humanity loss checks.  Half the time it was for a really, really good reason... but still, they broke their code of being cops.)  If Humanity reaches 0, the PC is removed from the Players control.  He's now off the scale of protagonist -- pure bad guy.  (There are rules for rewriting the character and having him returned to the Player.)

Okay, so the GM shows up with setting details.  I GMed last year we called, THE BROTHERHOOD.  Here is what I pitched the Players.

The setting is a state penitentiary located in the middle of nowhere somewhere between Los Angeles and San Francisco.

Your character might have been guilty. He might have been innocent.  He might be a guard, a prisoner, a warden, a doctor in the infirmary, but he or she is part of The System.

Your character knew no sorcery before entering The System. But there are a few teachers within the walls of the prison — people who survive by summoning the unnatural powers within the prison walls.

Demons are tattoos, shivs, razor blades, cocaine, cigarettes, money, shadows, pin-ups, fantasies of the world outside and all things prison.

Lore is acts of domination and submission between men.

Humanity is standing up for your own moral code.

At Humanity 0 you are a "thing of the prison" -- a soulless, broken feature of the prison who no longer has a will of your own, only following order or ordering them, but only by habit.

It’s important to remember that the word “demon” in this game doesn’t mean “things from hell.” Think more of the girl from “The Ring” -- where something has gone WRONG with the fabric of reality. We’re building our own specific and self-contained story, with it’s own specific mythology and world.

I mentioned several media references that inspired me to really want to play in this setting: HBO's series Oz and The Wire, The Shield on F/X, and some of the works of Clive Barker.

The Players liked the idea, and came up with characters:

1) VISILI (player: Colin): a Lifer in the prison who's demon is a cell block; he doesn't want to leave because he's very comfortable where he is. He was part of a russian mob, and while he has ties to his family and is loyal to them, he's pretty much cut off from the world in the safety of his cell block.  (He's been up for parole several times and has always managed to screw it up on purpose.)

His Kicker was this his nephew arrived at the penitentiary and is making a move to take control of his cell block.


2) DAVID KING (player Eric): a man who committed a crime and bound a demon to confront the  cult leader who rules a nationwide organization from inside the prison. (The cult killed the man's daughter.) His demons are snakes down his forearm, and a second demon that is the tattoo of a third eye on his forehead that let's him "astrally" project when he mediates on the cot of his cell and learn more about what's happening many places.

His Kicker was that he found out his daughter was still alive.  (His sister-in-law brought his daughter to jail to visit him.  David's wife went mad from the "death" of their daughter and is in an asylum.)


3) ROMAN (player Vasco): a corrupt cop sent to jail for killing a fellow police officer and a drug dealer when his schemes were about to go public.  He summoned and bound a demon to survive a place where cops are the biggest targets short of child molesters. His demon are tattoos that cover his body (he looks just like a criminal now!) that let him to internal damage to people and let him withstand a lot of damage... All while looking like all he did was maybe give you a friendly slap on the shoulder. The tattoos shift and change, showing a collage of all people he beat the hell out of.

His Kicker was someone in his crew ratted him out and set him up to be killed.


The PC creation is a whole session all by itself.  Lots of bouncing around of ideas.  You can see that the Players created a lot of NPCs (the cult leader, the fellow cop Roman killed, the nephew, the gang Roman runs, and so on...)  All this stuff gets written down on the character sheet.  (Here's a link)  If you go down to the second page you'll see a big box where the Players write down all the NPCs, locations, objects and events that fit under the categories of Lore or Kicker or whatever.  Things that are related are placed near each other on the diagram.  Again, this is procedure, not a suggestion.  It forces the Players to write down all the stuff that got their character to where they got in the Kicker, and makes clear how all these things are related to each other.


Okay, so then I, the GM, go off and make up bunches of stuff.  I take all the material the Players manufactured for their PCs and mix it with what I had already been thinking about.  I've got till the next time we play to create the BACKSTORY and all the relationships between the NPCs and so on.  So, in THE BROTHERHOOD, I suddenly had a cult and a cult leader to work with, which was awesome.

The promise of a Sorcerer GM is that he'll actually make the stuff on the PC sheets the focus of the game.  Also, the GM gets to do anything he wants with what the Players created (NPCs, objects, whatever)  Once play begins, that's his department.

The Players, in turn, get to do with their PCs whatever they want.  The GM has no "plot," no agenda, no climax he's building toward; it's the Players and the choices for their PCs that will create the story.  I might think NPC Such-n-Such is the coolest thing since sliced bread, but if the Players are all fascinated by the fate of the girl who got in that car last session, then by god, that's what the story is going to be about.

So, I create a big matrix of details and we gather again.  And then we start playing, leading up to the Kickers.  And when we get to the first Kicker, you'll notice that they sort of demand action... Like, Roman was betrayed.  What the hell is he going to do about that?   And David's daughter is alive.  What the hell is that about?  (I, as GM know what that means, but the Player does not.)  Is he going to continue his path to revenge?  Neither I, nor the Players know what is going to happen.  I frame the scenes, we reach the Kicker, and the Players start making choices for their Players.

I should say now that I'm not particularly concerned about whether other people play this way.  Or have before.  Of somewhere someone has done this.  Or something like it.  The concern for novelty or pure invention or who got there first really is of little interest to me. What is of interest to me is that Sorcerer puts into play, through its procedures, a system that reliably sets up PCs and Backstory in a way where no one has any idea where things are going and it works.  (To contrast this, I've seen people write, "My players can do anything they want..." but then also discuss "where the campaign is going" as they prep for the game.  Sorcerer is explicitly not that -- and I say that knowing other people have played like Sorcerer before.  The only trick is this is how you play Sorcerer.)

The arc of play, which usually lasts 9 to 12 sessions, but can go longer, is the resolution of the Kicker.  That's a vague notion that, strangely, reliably wraps up with a cool climax without anyone doing a lot of planning or the GM leading to any kind of climax.  Everyone creatively steps up and makes the cool climaxes happen.

So, that's Kickers. But, in my view, all the pieces of Sorcerer inform the other pieces. So that I brought in lots of other procedures and rules to explain how they work.  It's how all these pieces impinge on each other, especially in the creative scene work of everyone working at the table, that makes Sorcerer one of my favorite games.  Again, you used the word "glue" earlier, and I think all these pieces bind the game thematically in ways that make the creative payoff really cool.