Quote from: SpikeI'll even submit to you that exploring themes of mormon cowboy killers for God is going to be largely the same for people if adapted to another system... so long as the GM and players are all 'getting' the 'genre' of DitV.  Add what rules you need to on top of, rather than instead of, a solid set of core mechanics.  

We're coming at this from entirely different angles. To me, the mechanics of DitV are the reason to play it. It's not really about Mormon cowboy killers for God – that's the set-up, not the game.

If you want to 'explore themes', you can indeed do so in any system you wish. But playing DitV is playing DitV, and no other game has the same texture of play (and you can say the same about any game).

QuoteDoesn't sound platonic to me. It sounds practical.  Like I've always said before, what rules are stopping you from having soap opera crises in Champions?

Well, what I'm saying is that you can do whatever you like with whatever rules you like, but each system will do it in a different way, and some will resonate better with you than others.

By the way, I'm not sure where the disconnect is coming from, but I assure you that "solid, enjoyable characters who can impact the game meaningfully" are very important to games like MLwM and DitV.

Quote from: droogBy the way, I'm not sure where the disconnect is coming from, but I assure you that "solid, enjoyable characters who can impact the game meaningfully" are very important to games like MLwM and DitV.

To be honest, it is my fault for mentioning DitV. I only know the premise of MLwM, so I didn't want to use it. Neither may apply overmuch, as I understand that within some limits DitV at least allows for some well defined characters (I am less a fan of the 'make shit up' school of thought, but some people swear by it. A la Wushu fans and UA skill purists)

More to the point, I've seen people on this site talk about Superhero games that reduce Superheroes to one generic stat of 'protagonism' and a list of soap opera guidelines. Sure, it will be fun for like minded players, but it utterly exiles guys that just want to fly and blast shit.

I've seen complaints that AFMBE zombies are killable monsters, and that the focus of the game isn't on man's inhumanity to man, and zombies are set dressing. Sure, such a game might be fun to some Romero purists, it dismisses the entire subset of players who simply enjoy putting two barrels of buckshot into a deader and calling it a day.
I've also ran into hundreds of people on line and off who suggest that a 1930's 'adventurer' who might fly a biplane and has explored the dark heart of africa in search of gold and carries a webley revolver and a combat knife is completely inappropriate for Call of Cthulu (or for that matter, a Foriegn Legion veteran who's seen too much) because he actually knows how to fight!!! Oh, the horror. He's still gonna be eaten by the end of a game, perhaps, but that isn't he point. He's a valid archetype for the era and even the type of stories being told. Yet there are people who honestly seem to think that gun or combat skills don't belong in the game because it isn't 'genre' to them.

Genre is a pretty fucking loose catagory. Characters are not.

In short: My 'heart of the game' is not an attack against your favorite games.  It's an attack perhaps against a certain philosophy of design I've seen slowly cropping up in the internet and out of it.  Hell, I've been guilty a bit in recent past, attacking the new cyberpunk setting from R.talsorian for being more transhuman than CP. Mea Culpa.

Quote from: SpikeI've seen complaints that AFMBE zombies are killable monsters, and that the focus of the game isn't on man's inhumanity to man, and zombies are set dressing. Sure, such a game might be fun to some Romero purists, it dismisses the entire subset of players who simply enjoy putting two barrels of buckshot into a deader and calling it a day.

It's a lot of fun, but sooner or later your characters are going to wind up with enough weaponry, vehicles and smarts that a simple mob of zombies isn't a challenge any more

Quote from: Hastur T. FannonIt's a lot of fun, but sooner or later your characters are going to wind up with enough weaponry, vehicles and smarts that a simple mob of zombies isn't a challenge any more

Ah... but you do realize that MY personal enjoyment of the zombie game goes AFTER you can start dealing with smaller mobs of Zombies and can now address the more complex challenges of 'solving' the apocalypse in the first place.

I know you know, because I told you so...

now i like to play Archlord online..................
http://www.playerturbo.com

QuoteIt's a lot of fun, but sooner or later your characters are going to wind up with enough weaponry, vehicles and smarts that a simple mob of zombies isn't a challenge any more

I have a comic... some kind of zombie anthology... can't find it at the moment.

Anyway, the 2 characters in one story have an armoured tank, suits of heavy armour, and flamethrowers.  They drive around the countryside roasting zombies whenever they find 'em.  To these guys, it's like a job.  The zombies are really no threat to them.

That is until one of the guys gets bit by a mosquito.  A zombie blood infected mosquito.

All the gear didn't make too much difference.  The story ended as zombie stories tend to end...

Quote from: SpikeGenre is a pretty fucking loose catagory. Characters are not.

In short: My 'heart of the game' is not an attack against your favorite games.  It's an attack perhaps against a certain philosophy of design I've seen slowly cropping up in the internet and out of it.  Hell, I've been guilty a bit in recent past, attacking the new cyberpunk setting from R.talsorian for being more transhuman than CP. Mea Culpa.

I barely understand what you're saying, so don't worry about offending me. Could you explain a bit more? What do you mean by "Genre is a pretty fucking loose catagory. Characters are not."? What is the design philosophy you don't like? Which games exemplify it?

Quote from: droogI barely understand what you're saying, so don't worry about offending me. Could you explain a bit more? What do you mean by "Genre is a pretty fucking loose catagory. Characters are not."? What is the design philosophy you don't like? Which games exemplify it?

Genre is a very loose grouping of 'tropes' or common themes.  Very loose, by nature. To give you an example: in music Heavy Metal is a Genre. So is Pop Music. This morning someone mentioned to me that Ozzy Osborne is now found in 'Pop Music'. His music hasn't changed since it was recorded, but the perception of it has.... at least to some poeple.

More to the point: Way back when Black Sabbath started doing it's thing, they weren't listing a bunch of tropes and creative concepts for their music so that they would be 'Rock and Roll'... they more likely just wrote and played what they liked.

Most authors and other artistic creator types probably don't sit down with a list of 'things' they need to do to make a proper 'genre' story, they simply write. Eventually, enough people do enough of the same sort of stuff that a bunch of 'things' start to appear across a wide enough selection that someone, in the inevitably human process of catagorization, labels a 'genre' and attempts to fix it in stone. Maybe some hack comes along later and writes a 'genre' story, putting in as many tropes as he can. It will probably suck.

Thus genre's are loose things and open to interpretation... and endless subdivision. Zombie flicks are a genre, Romero Zombie Flicks are a subdivision. 'Early Romero...' might be a subdivision of THAT!

On the other hand, a solidly characterized 'character' is the same regardless.  If you want to get fancy we could talk about Jungian Archetypes.  Any given actual character might be unique, certainly... or at least as unique as any given real person is (not as much as you might like...), but you always have characters. And characters are what participants in an entertainment event sympathize with, identify with.   If you got a good story, but crappy characters, chances are people aren't gonna like your story much. If you got a crappy story, but great characters you can skate quite a bit. Ask Lucas...

Does that clear it up at all?

QuoteDoes that clear it up at all?

Not really.

Are you saying that 'genre' is a problematic term? And that great characters are essential to memorable fiction? I'd have to agree with that, but at the same time, it's pretty broad and vague.

What I'm proposing is that instead of concerning ourselves with 'genre', we look at each game in its own right. It's not always useful to slot two 'zombie games' together. The less generalization and the more solidly-rooted, specific critique the better.

At the moment I can only guess at what you're criticizing and what you're really talking about.

Quote from: droogNot really.

Are you saying that 'genre' is a problematic term? And that great characters are essential to memorable fiction? I'd have to agree with that, but at the same time, it's pretty broad and vague.

What I'm proposing is that instead of concerning ourselves with 'genre', we look at each game in its own right. It's not always useful to slot two 'zombie games' together. The less generalization and the more solidly-rooted, specific critique the better.

At the moment I can only guess at what you're criticizing and what you're really talking about.

Genre is subjective. If you try too hard to make the game too specific to a single genre, or rather your interpretation of it you might miss entirely what other people got out of the exact same sources... their interpretation of Genre.

Characters are not nearly as subjective, not nearly as open to interpretation.

Doesn't any game's character creation system presuppose a genre? Or even impose a genre?

In some way you're opposing 'genre' to 'characters', but I just don't get it.

Genre is composed of elements which are only very loosely linked, but are often associated.

I'm going to relate it to writing... There is language, setting, props, and message.

The most obvious elements are setting and props: the characters are in an abandoned house on a hill, there is a strange whispering statue, and vampires are lurking outside; the characters are on a small scout ship, the automated systems are on the blink, and strange robots have broken out of the cargo hold.

Then there is the implicit or explicit message woven into the genre. The horror genre has messages of hopelessness, despair, revulsion, and so forth. The SciFi genre is tricky, since it's often broken up into multiple subgenres, but one can identify either the utopian 'reason can overcome the world's problems' or the dystopian 'reason can't overcome the world's problems' (to put it very very simply).

Finally, there's language. In a story, this is word choice, and how scenes are presented to the reader. 'It was a dark and stormy night' vs. 'The heavens wept, but no amount of tears could wash away this city's sins' vs. 'Rain beat down on the planetary surface, obscuring the waiting doom above' vs. 'The long dry days had finally given way to a vigorous storm'

I realized a few years ago why I (and other geeks) were having so many long and protracted arguments about high fantasy, low fantasy, space opera, hard SF, etc etc. And it was the above.

I mean, Scooby Doo has elements of horror -- it has the setting and props of the horror genre. It just doesn't have the language or message of horror.

Conversely, a WWII movie can have the message and language of horror, even if it doesn't have a haunted house or ghouls.

A side issue -- a lot of genres are actually 'anti' genres, which complicates working out just what they are. For example, low fantasy is primarily defined by being 'not high fantasy.' Given there are several identifying factors of high fantasy, and variation of what high fantasy can be, the specific items being reacted to lead to an every broader spectrum of low fantasy.

For example, high fantasy is noted by lots of magic and a certain cinematic style. So one low fantasy story might have very little magic... but still is cinematic. Another low fantasy story has oodles of magic... but the style is dark and gritty. And thus sparks internet arguments.