Quote from: blakkie:tears:

Very well, the discussion between us on this subject is over.

Pity, previously you seemed to have interesting things to say.

Quote from: gleichmanVery well, the discussion between us on this subject is over.

Pity, previously you seemed to have interesting things to say.

Pity you apparently can't even be bothered to list what you think isn't in there from the list I gave. Not that I want to be bothered to track down the books to give you page references for someone with that sort of attitude.

Quote from: SpikeMy most successful thread ever and I'm not even sure they're talking about what I was talking about....

I rather certain that outside the predator has no niche characters claim, I wasn't. And I've learned that I had no idea what blakkie was talking about either.

Is this how you measure a successful thread? If so, I think I'll be slightly depressed now. I was hoping for something better.

Quote from: SpikeI watch a 'team' movie like Predator, and I see a fuckload of sneaky melee guys with big fucking guns. You have the redneck big motherfucker with guns, the nerdy big motherfucker with guns, the angry black big motherfucker with guns and even the racist stereotype indian big motherfucker with guns.

Wait.. they are ALL big motherfuckers with guns!!!!

Holy Shit! Imagine that! No niches!!!

Yup... it's also a movie.  The characters are really only worried about the invisible thing that's hunting them down and picking them off one-by-one.  They don't care that Arnold outclasses all of them in every area.  I believe that it's nice to be able to think "If the party needs to rig some electronics, I'm their guy."

Besides the "scout" did anyone else in the movie do any "niche" stuff ? I mean in films like Guns of Navarone and The Dirty Dozen, I see some niche protection going on, but Predator.....not really. I mean  another film without NP is Aliens. Tech is the great equalizer....except Bishop of course....fuckin' GMPC.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RBesides the "scout" did anyone else in the movie do any "niche" stuff ?

Not successfully.

The radio guy did radio stuff, but it didn't help.

The demo guy did demo stuff, but caught himself a pig.

The BFG guy did BFG stuff and killed mooks, but never got a shot off at the big bad.

Heck, even the Indian Scout wasn't really successful (his screaming at his death was quite the disappointment, not part of the cliche).



But it wasn't that kind of a movie, there were there to set up the final man-vs.-alien conflict and die. So it makes a rather poor example for mapping into a traditional rpg design.

Quote from: gleichmanSo it makes a rather poor example for mapping into a traditional rpg design.

It's a good example though if one does not consider NP an essential element of game design.

Regards,
David R

I wrote two games where all the characters are fighter pilots. Another one where all the characters are naval officers in the age of sail. Are there niches? Sure, if the players want to make them. Are these niches protected? Not at all. What if two players choose the exact same skill sets? They could - nothing stopping them. The game won't fall apart, any more than two people wearing the same outfit to a party is really a problem. If they don't care, it doesn't matter mechanically.

BTW, Mr. Gleichman - I don't think I ever said it was useless to talk about mechanics. I have said before that mechanics are not the whole of a game system, and may be the least immportant part of a system, maybe that's what you are remembering as being particularly heretical?

Quote from: gleichmanAh, so we make the same claim as the Forge does. Only the elite may speak and have meaningful exchanges about game design.

Very well, I'm not a member of the elite. You may feel free therefor to ignore me.

What the hell is your problem? Seriously man, I did not say anything about elite. You want another example, a discussion between a group of players and their GM. I have had that discussion often from both player and GM sides. It can be very useful. However, such discussion on the internet bring people from all walks with their own definitions. This makes for a much less useful discussion.

Quote from: gleichmanI believe we already discovered this. But few here seem interested in reaching agreement on those definitions.

Translation: Everyone wont agree to my definition. And there in lies the rub.

Bill

Quote from: David RIt's a good example though if one does not consider NP an essential element of game design.

Illogical. Niche Protection had nothing to do with it, from that PoV the characters just failed their rolls,  good as those rolls were.

What has something to do with it is that one would be hard pressed to find players willing to have all their characters killed just to set up a one-on-one battle for the GM's favorite player...

Quote from: HinterWeltTranslation: Everyone wont agree to my definition. And there in lies the rub.

I'm willing to accept a different term for what I'm talking about. Call it JoeNiche or whatever.

Also since this was sparked by my article, common courtesy would have required that author of said article had the right to define the terms he was using.

Quote from: HinterWeltHowever, such discussion on the internet bring people from all walks with their own definitions. This makes for a much less useful discussion.

That's a different statement than your first one. One that I agree with.

I was hoping for an exception for a day or so, from at least one or two people. It wasn't to be.

Quote from: gleichmanIllogical. Niche Protection had nothing to do with it, from that PoV the characters just failed their rolls,  good as those rolls were.

It's only illogical if you're seeing NP where there's none (or in this case, you're finding it difficult to make a case for NP with these characters) Take heist films for instance. You'll normally find NP in most heist films. Then you get something like Reservoir Dogs, where the only niche, is how badass you are.

QuoteWhat has something to do with it is that one would be hard pressed to find players willing to have all their characters killed just to set up a one-on-one battle for the GM's favorite player...

What's this got to do with the topic at hand :confused:

Regards,
David R

Quote from: gleichmanIs this how you measure a successful thread? If so, I think I'll be slightly depressed now. I was hoping for something better.

I speak of success by number of posts in a single day. I think my previous record for posts (not counting my own) was maybe a handful a week.

Yes, depressing.

Since a great number of 'gamer' films don't actually involve teams, much less teams of equals/near equals (its debatable if Arnold really was much better than his team, he just was last, so he had more time to figure out what to do to survive... don't forget others saw it long before he did... low perception maybe?) its hard to cite too many. If you want Diehard 4 as counterbalance, your two man team had the 'hard core motherfucker' and the 'smart but somewhat girly non-fucker' as the team. Definitely niche protected.

What makes predator a good choice is the very solid team foundation of characters.  yeah, Arnold is the star, and the lone survivor, but for a good chunk of the movie he's surrounded by guys who are... leaving aside actor wattage, just as cool/badass as he is.. in other words 'equals'.

What of the Seven Samurai? Is 'noble sword swinger' a niche compared to 'savage sword swinger' vs 'old cunning sword swinger'?  

Is the noble sword swinger really going to be put out if there is another noble sword swinger in the group?  Its not niche, its characterization.


To go back to my comment: it wasn't about niche protection by itself, but the entire idea of altering games purely around metagame considerations, often without thinking through how those metagame considerations are really reflected by the reality you are simulating.  Is it synthetic hearts that let you dodge like crack-yoda but do fuck all else in combat? Is it 'learning to shoot rifles is more complex than learning to build a car from spare parts'?

Is it: once you pick up a sword, the magic forever leaves your body, but if you learn magic you'll forever be a wimp no matter how heavy a backpack you can lug around?

Is it: allowing snipers to kill orcs with single arrows to the head at the start of the game is broken,so therefore all creatures can essentially ignore a yard long pointy stick stuck in their vitals?

Is it wanted to model every possible thing you could learn, but to keep character creation under control, your character will never know how to do half the things YOU know how to do because if we did that everyone would wind up playing superhumans that dont know how to do anything at all?

Quote from: gleichmanI'm willing to accept a different term for what I'm talking about. Call it JoeNiche or whatever.

Also since this was sparked by my article, common courtesy would have required that author of said article had the right to define the terms he was using.

Que?!? Spike started this thread and I started the other one...you have a thread somewhere that you started that has something to do with niche protection? Sorry, I did not see it and did not realize you had a lock on defining these terms...

Quote from: gleichmanThat's a different statement than your first one. One that I agree with.

I was hoping for an exception for a day or so, from at least one or two people. It wasn't to be.

Quote from: MEIn a focused group, very useful. On an internet forum, less so. I think there could be merit in such a discussion with other designers or publishers. About a year ago I had a really good one with some mid-tier publishers on a closed forum.

My emphasis. In a focused group, then an example of a focused group.

Honestly, do I know you from somewhere? Did I piss in your cornflakes this morning and not realize it? You seem to take any possible interpretation of what I type and take the worst, most insulting interpretation of it. To say the least, you have a confrontational posting style.

Bill

Quote from: HinterWeltQue?!? Spike started this thread

Sett started the first post with a reference to an old (and worthless) article of mine that spoke of nich protection in tactical game design. That seemed to spawn another thread on nich protection (which was a sub-subject of the first one) and this one also thread also seemed to directly reference some of the material found in the first two.

If they're truly unrelated. The error is mine. I thought that unlikely, but upon reflection I realize I don't actually know that.

Quote from: HinterWeltSorry, I did not see it and did not realize you had a lock on defining these terms...

I don't have a lock outside of references to that article. Nor frankly all that much interest. I just wanted to respond to critism of the original article to either make myself clear or to learn where I went wrong.

Quote from: HinterWeltHonestly, do I know you from somewhere? Did I piss in your cornflakes this morning and not realize it? You seem to take any possible interpretation of what I type and take the worst, most insulting interpretation of it. To say the least, you have a confrontational posting style.

I could say the same of you.