Quote from: JimBobOzOf course it's an rpg!

Yeah, that's how I feel too.  Roleplaying?  Check.  Game elements?  Check.

Quote from: Christmas Apebut...you can't interrupt a conflict with another? If two Dogs are arguing in a room and, let's say, a third Dog wrestling with a thief he caught come crashing through the window to the floor...what?

If two Dogs are arguing in a room about something; let's say the stakes are "Do we kill a Sinner or just throw him out into the desert?" You resolve that conflict as one thing, until one of the Dogs gives up. You could also have another  conflict happening at the same time between with a third Dog and an NPC with stakes something like "Do I stop this thief?" Personally, I wouldn't run those concurrently -- it's a lot easier not to -- even though they could be occuring at the same time in the gameworld.

If, for some reason, these two conflicts did get mixed up, both groups would have to Give on thier conflicts they were already in and immediately start a followup conflict with new stakes -- "Do we get the thief to confess/repent/return the stolen goods?" or something.

And Afraid -- Vincent's forthcoming supernatural horror game -- will use a modified version of the DitV rules which provide more support for this kind of thing as well.

Quote from: Christmas ApeWow. I was going to chime in with "DitV is one of those things I'm cool with calling an RPG. It's a really, really, hyper-focused one with one character style and a self-proclaimed "heavy shit" emphasis I don't need, but still an RPG", but...you can't interrupt a conflict with another? If two Dogs are arguing in a room and, let's say, a third Dog wrestling with a thief he caught come crashing through the window to the floor...what? They have to keep arguing while the other keeps fighting unless someone gives in? Their argument dice spill over onto the fight? The fight dice spill into the argument?

I haven't played it either, but unless this is different than I'm reading it;

PAGING D. VINCENT BAKER. Please pick up the white courtesy phone and finish your fucking game. PAGING D. VINCENT BAKER.

Exactly.

Calling it "not an RPG" isn't an insult to DiTV.

Calling it an RPG would be the insulting bit, because it would mean DiTV is one of the worst-designed RPGs of all time, and Vince Baker was dropped on his head one too many times as a child.

If you really want to argue that DiTV is an RPG, then I guess you can have it your way, but its utter crap by any standard of what RPGs are supposed to do.  If, on the other hand, its a "Story Game"; then that's not for me to judge.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditCalling it an RPG would be the insulting bit, because it would mean DiTV is one of the worst-designed RPGs of all time, and Vince Baker was dropped on his head one too many times as a child.

Out of interest ... have you read the book?  Played the game?

Quote from: TonyLBOut of interest ... have you read the book?  Played the game?

He's read it, but not played it.  We've had that discussion before.

And John;

Those uber-builds are awesome.  But do you get what I'm expressing?  Gaming the system in Dogs to any real degree is something that simply doesn't occur to players because of the way you play.  The game elements are there to support play - they aren't an equal partner in producing fun.

To me, it's absolutley an RPG; the emphasis on various parts is just different.  To people that haven't got much interest in moving the emphasis around in their definition, it's a crap RPG, or not an RPG at all.

And while I, personally, get a lot of fun playing with the emphasis of play on different parts of sitting down to an RPG, some folks simply don't - they know why they're at the table, enjoy what they came for, and feel badly served by something that tries to change up crucial parts of what they enjoy.

Is Dogs in the Vineyard an RPG?



"Who the hell cares? If you want to... do whatever you want to do. What the hell is an R-P-G... what does a game need a name for? They have no sense. You can't go up to the thing and tap on the thing and call them, can ya? RPG, RPG, RPG. I mean, you're a fool..."

Quote from: Levi KornelsenThose uber-builds are awesome.  But do you get what I'm expressing?  Gaming the system in Dogs to any real degree is something that simply doesn't occur to players because of the way you play.  The game elements are there to support play - they aren't an equal partner in producing fun.

My point is just that it's a difference in degree of emphasis, not a difference in kind.  (My impression is that you agree with this, just that you're emphasizing the difference in degree.)  

In both games, I think, there's some gaming of the system reined in by limits of what is acceptable.  At least, I certainly game the system in Dogs when I play as have most of my players, just within certain limits.

Ok, Pundit, what is "an RPG supposed to do?"

BTW, as for the conflict thing I could think of several ways to handle it pretty easily. I mean, you could just set the arguement aside or combine the two conflicts. I mean, imagine it, an arguement about whether it is better to kill the sinner or not be so brutal going on in a fight. If the side who says "kill the sinner" wins that winning is emphasized by the sinner in question beating up the dogs, thus showing that handling things in a less-than lethal manner isn't likely to do.

I guess what makes Dogs "not an RPG" is that it uses conflict as opposed to task based resolution. I was trying to think of differences between Dogs and D&D and couldn't think of many besides focus, but I had gotten so used to conflict resolution I didn't even consider it.

I loves me some conflict resolution, especially with Dogs poker style "betting" added in.

Rather disingenius thread idea, Sethwick. Kudos for a clever potstirring. :stirthepot:

Because you more or less selected one of the Forge games that is very much RPG material to argue your point.  Funky analogy time:

I say: Fruits tend to be sour. I don't like sour stuff so I don't eat fruit.

You come in and say: Kumquats are totally not sour, why do you say kumquats are sour?


Ah, but we weren't talking Kumquats in particular, we were talking fruit. See, while Forge stuff tends to get panned, and a few people are particularly religious about panning them as 'non-rpgs', I can't recall to many discussions about DitV in particular being not an RPG.  None, really. It's guilt by association.  Now you're doing 'defense by exception', roughly the inverse.

So, if we admit that DitV is in fact and RPG, then we must, perforce, agree that RPG's come out of the Forge, thus... according to this chain... invalidating the entire concept of forge games as 'not RPGs'.


Clever but pointless.

Yes, DitV is an RPG. Possibly incomplete and certainly narrowminded.  Burning Empires is an RPG.  It plays like a boardgame if you use the rules as written, but it does provide the tools... aside from that emphasis on boardgame-itus... to use it as an RPG.


Your point?  

Oh, yeah... I remember


:stirthepot:

Quote from:  SpikeI say: Fruits tend to be sour. I don't like sour stuff so I don't eat fruit.

Uh, dude... you might want to get some help at the supermarket.  :confused:

Quote from: jhkimMy point is just that it's a difference in degree of emphasis, not a difference in kind.  (My impression is that you agree with this, just that you're emphasizing the difference in degree.)  

I do agree.

I just want to make sure that where the side is at is visible, because most of the people on that other side are really tired of explaining it, and tend to yell.

Quote from: SpikeRather disingenius thread idea, Sethwick. Kudos for a clever potstirring. :stirthepot:

Because you more or less selected one of the Forge games that is very much RPG material to argue your point.  Funky analogy time:

I say: Fruits tend to be sour. I don't like sour stuff so I don't eat fruit.

You come in and say: Kumquats are totally not sour, why do you say kumquats are sour?


Ah, but we weren't talking Kumquats in particular, we were talking fruit. See, while Forge stuff tends to get panned, and a few people are particularly religious about panning them as 'non-rpgs', I can't recall to many discussions about DitV in particular being not an RPG.  None, really. It's guilt by association.  Now you're doing 'defense by exception', roughly the inverse.

So, if we admit that DitV is in fact and RPG, then we must, perforce, agree that RPG's come out of the Forge, thus... according to this chain... invalidating the entire concept of forge games as 'not RPGs'.


Clever but pointless.

Yes, DitV is an RPG. Possibly incomplete and certainly narrowminded.  Burning Empires is an RPG.  It plays like a boardgame if you use the rules as written, but it does provide the tools... aside from that emphasis on boardgame-itus... to use it as an RPG.


Your point?  

Oh, yeah... I remember


:stirthepot:

Well, I asked particularly about DitV because I had heard it mentioned as among "swinish non-rpgs." It perked my interest because I really couldn't think of anything, besides focus and setting, that made it very different. So, I asked, and apparently it is conflict resolution.

Also, "narrowminded"? That's certainly a very negative way of saying "focused" and really not all that accurate anyway. Narrowminded implies something quite different from "very focused."

Also, it's not a good comparison to fruit. I mean, sourness can not really be traced back to a component part of a fruit (unless you want to get into discussions of a fruits molecular makeup). "Non-rpgness" can. I mean, it's obvious that something lacking or present in something makes it "not an RPG." DITV has roleplaying, a GM, personal characters, etc, so I was wondering what it did or did not have that lead some to say it wasn't an RPG. And I got my answer.

Also, your example of fruit did bring up something rather funny. If you had asked for the defining taste characteristic of fruit I would have said "sweet" not "sour."

Quote from: SethwickAlso, your example of fruit did bring up something rather funny. If you had asked for the defining taste characteristic of fruit I would have said "sweet" not "sour."

Bah. If I'd gone with sweetness I couldn't have used Kumquats in my example with a straight face.


I wasn't comparing DitV to a fruit, I was comparing you argument to a fallacious argument about fruit.  

DitV gets a lot of name checks in regards to Forge, because it is one of the more successful, even playable... RPG's.  

Think about it for a moment. The most RPG of forge games typcially mentioned as 'forgite' or what have you, is the most successful and recognizable stuff.  I've never bought or read DitV, never seen a book for sale even, yet I could probably hold my own in a discussion of the basic mechanics and game play, simply because it is discussed SO VERY MUCH.

It's an RPG. Yes. It is comparativly successful to the LESS SO games that come from the forge. Yes.

I hold that the two are linked and leave MY worries at the door. I was just commenting about your tactics. I've only seen you in two threads, one where you attacked anyone who didn't come  into a game with the story arc of their character preplotted as 'dead eyed and boring', stopping just past calling them 'non-gamers'.

And this one where you are :stirthepot:  with a debate you crafted out of midair for all I can see.   I only know two posters on this site that really care of DitV is an RPG or not, and they both agree it's a game and it involves role playing.  I merely call you on it, bring out the tactics involved for all to see.

Go. Eat. Kumquats.

Quote from: SpikeBah. If I'd gone with sweetness I couldn't have used Kumquats in my example with a straight face.


I wasn't comparing DitV to a fruit, I was comparing you argument to a fallacious argument about fruit.  

DitV gets a lot of name checks in regards to Forge, because it is one of the more successful, even playable... RPG's.  

Think about it for a moment. The most RPG of forge games typcially mentioned as 'forgite' or what have you, is the most successful and recognizable stuff.  I've never bought or read DitV, never seen a book for sale even, yet I could probably hold my own in a discussion of the basic mechanics and game play, simply because it is discussed SO VERY MUCH.

It's an RPG. Yes. It is comparativly successful to the LESS SO games that come from the forge. Yes.

I hold that the two are linked and leave MY worries at the door. I was just commenting about your tactics. I've only seen you in two threads, one where you attacked anyone who didn't come  into a game with the story arc of their character preplotted as 'dead eyed and boring', stopping just past calling them 'non-gamers'.

And this one where you are :stirthepot:  with a debate you crafted out of midair for all I can see.   I only know two posters on this site that really care of DitV is an RPG or not, and they both agree it's a game and it involves role playing.  I merely call you on it, bring out the tactics involved for all to see.

Go. Eat. Kumquats.

Okay. You say this, despite the fact that Pundit, a pretty high profile poster on this site has said in this thread that he wouldn't say it was an RPG.

I was wondering what was found objectionable about the more traditional "Forge" games, and DitV is the most prominent example I can think of. It seems that its method of conflict resolution was what makes it "a piss poor RPG."

I wasn't going to argue that it is an RPG. I was just asking why some people thought otherwise. I got my answer.

As for that other thread, you are exagerrating my words, but that  would probably be better discussed IN that thread. And in that thread I said I was going to think about it and try to put up something AFTER my finals, which end tomorrow.

Quote from: SethwickOkay. You say this, despite the fact that Pundit, a pretty high profile poster on this site has said in this thread that he wouldn't say it was an RPG.

"High Profile" around here doesn't mean "Typically agreed with".