Quote from: RPGPunditSo, just to review, we are all clear now that "Say yes or roll the dice" is either a monumentally fucking stupid concept; or that it actually means "say yes or no or roll the dice", in which case its utterly meaningless and thus a monumentally fucking useless concept?

RPGPundit

Wha?  So you think that rolling dice for pointless stuff - let's say, just to see if Bob the Barbarian can tie his shoes - is a good idea?

Say yes or roll the dice means only roll dice when it's cool and fun to do so.  Don't roll the dice when it's totally pointless.

If you want to say it's not a new concept, that's cool, I'd agree with you; but to rail against something basic like that is... well, I just don't get it.

Quote from: GabrielI agree.  I thought the exact same thing on the post prior to the one you quoted.

In any event, my original issues were answered.  

I do think the Landmarks have a bit of a flaw, and it's because they were created as a reaction to Forge theory.  I think #4, #9, and #10 are the Landmarks which are probably the most meaningful to discussion.

#3 has the slight connotation that a successful RPG with many followers can't be called "bad".  That certainly has implications for my tendency to gripe about Palladium mechanics.  But, I haven't been banned yet.  ::knock on wood::

No one would ever be banned for griping about any mechanic.  If I can help it, no one will ever be banned, period.

As for #3, it doesn't really mean that at all. It means you can't suggest that games that are successful aren't what most gamers really want. It counteracts the common syndrome in theorists, most of whom don't care for mainstream games, of claiming "millions of D&D players actually despise D&D like I do, and really want to play Gay Cowboys Eating Pudding, like I do, they are just ignorant and don't realize that they hate themselves".

It doesn't mean you have to bend over and let D&D rape you with a +5 tool; which is how many have apparently chosen to interpret it.

If you agree with the general spirit of the Landmarks, but disagree with the execution, I might suggest you could start a new thread presenting your own set of the Landmarks, and we could compare and contrast?

RPGPundit

Quote from: LostSoulWha?  So you think that rolling dice for pointless stuff - let's say, just to see if Bob the Barbarian can tie his shoes - is a good idea?

Say yes or roll the dice means only roll dice when it's cool and fun to do so.  Don't roll the dice when it's totally pointless.

If you want to say it's not a new concept, that's cool, I'd agree with you; but to rail against something basic like that is... well, I just don't get it.

I have to assume you're either willingly playing stupid here, or you didn't actually read the thread?

The problem with "just say yes or roll the dice" is that it is implicit that you can't just say no.

RPGPundit

QuoteIf you agree with the general spirit of the Landmarks, but disagree with the execution, I might suggest you could start a new thread presenting your own set of the Landmarks, and we could compare and contrast?

Here we go

Quote from: StuartHere we go

Right, except I was suggesting you formalize these thoughts into your own set of "Landmarks", rather than just a commentary to my own. You're halfway there, you might as well go whole hog!

RPGPundit

If the game has done its job, if character creation has done its job and everyone is on the same page, ready to dip their big toe and then take a dive into where the game is heading, saying no isn't necessary that often.

Sometimes...sure but even when I run games with strangers at cons if the intro is tight, no's can be kept in the chamber where they belong and we can play the game and go.

Say, "Yes," and roll the dice is for driving a game forward.

Thassall.

Well, well well. Turns out the quote is just one part of the handholder design DitV. It's thematic rolplaying, which has nothing to do with adventure gaming. It's a special rule for a special game.
Don't harass us with a special case for a special game, as I am not harassing you with the intricacies of interstellar trade!

And for the superiour insight in that phrase: Wow. Gm has to keep game moving. wow. If you needed Vincent to tell you that, I pity you.

So take this special rule, and apply it to the game it belongs. And this is not an adventure game.

Quote from: SettembriniWell, well well. Turns out the quote is just one part of the handholder design DitV. It's thematic rolplaying, which has nothing to do with adventure gaming. It's a special rule for a special game.
Don't harass us with a special case for a special game, as I am not harassing you with the intricacies of interstellar trade!

And for the superiour insight in that phrase: Wow. Gm has to keep game moving. wow. If you needed Vincent to tell you that, I pity you.

So take this special rule, and apply it to the game it belongs. And this is not an adventure game.

Oh!

You are going to spew venom no matter what anyone says.

Got it.

Thanks, Settembrini, you have just saved me tons of time.

Spare your snappy line, it's not venom. It's truth.
I have no ill feelings about DitV. It's only that several people mixed stuff up. And your idea of:

"simply keep the game moving"

is, actually laudable, but doesn't need the unbearable asbsolutism in the cited passage.

We are all here for discussion, so dismount your mortally offended horse and talk stuff to us. If Vincent was the first to show it to some people, just fucking admit it. There is no pain involved. If it's so brilliant, then admit it. Say:
"The way he put it opened my eyes!"

That would be honest shit, instead of claiming that it`s not individual enlightenment but universal insight only Vincent could spread to the world which is in the oft-mentioned line.

This is not a pissing match, we are talking down to earth. But as long as anybody is elevating that line above what it actually is, I will keep attacking it.

Again: That way Vincent of putting it into exactly those words worked for you? Great! It changed your look at games? Great! But don't be so arrogant to claim that nobody ever bofore reflected on GMing and came to the same conclusion.

Quote from: SettembriniDon't harass us with a special case for a special game, as I am not harassing you with the intricacies of interstellar trade!

The thing is, I don't think anybody was harassing anybody else with that phrase. The Poobah, maybe. Where were people saying "YOU WILL USE THIS RULE!"?

And I might well be interested in the intricacies of interstellar trade. It depends. Got anything interesting to say about it?

Quote from: SettembriniSo take this special rule, and apply it to the game it belongs. And this is not an adventure game.

Okay, I will take this rule and apply it to Dogs in the Vineyard and Burning Wheel and HeroQuest, and I will promise not to bother you with it. Did I?

QuoteOkay, I will take this rule and apply it to Dogs in the Vineyard and Burning Wheel and HeroQuest, and I will promise not to bother you with it. Did I?

Honestly I don't know who started the thread. I just don't see the need to argue about it:

It's absolutism is non-discussable in a general gaming context.
It's basic idea...well let's say others had it too beforehand.

As a textual artifact, it might have laurels, as for some gamers it opened their eyes (I assume). We could discuss that.

@bothering: You got me there. It was hyperbole, of course nobody is actually bothering me, as it is "consentual posting and readin" what is happening here. You defend things you were asked to defend.

Quote from: RPGPunditI have to assume you're either willingly playing stupid here, or you didn't actually read the thread?

The problem with "just say yes or roll the dice" is that it is implicit that you can't just say no.

RPGPundit

Sorry dude, I was thinking that you were responding to the game text from Dogs.  When you look at what the text says, it doesn't mention that you can't say no at all.

I think this whole "can I say no" thing doesn't really have anything to do with "Say yes or roll the dice" - as presented in Dogs.

Quote from: SettembriniSpare your snappy line, it's not venom. It's truth.
I have no ill feelings about DitV. It's only that several people mixed stuff up. And your idea of:

"simply keep the game moving"

is, actually laudable, but doesn't need the unbearable asbsolutism in the cited passage.

We are all here for discussion, so dismount your mortally offended horse and talk stuff to us. If Vincent was the first to show it to some people, just fucking admit it. There is no pain involved. If it's so brilliant, then admit it. Say:
"The way he put it opened my eyes!"

That would be honest shit, instead of claiming that it`s not individual enlightenment but universal insight only Vincent could spread to the world which is in the oft-mentioned line.

This is not a pissing match, we are talking down to earth. But as long as anybody is elevating that line above what it actually is, I will keep attacking it.

Again: That way Vincent of putting it into exactly those words worked for you? Great! It changed your look at games? Great! But don't be so arrogant to claim that nobody ever bofore reflected on GMing and came to the same conclusion.

That was a good post.  I haven't read your posts as containing any venom - I see RPGs the way you do: Thematic roleplaying and Adventure gaming.  Cool!  I really like thematic roleplaying, but I also like adventure gaming.  

I'll admit it: I needed Vincent to say it in that way for it to *click* with me.  I kind-of knew the concept before, but presented in that way it really connected with me.

[off-topic]

I also admit to being a crazy-ass supporter of Narrativism when I first read about it.  I was playing Star Wars d20, and I kept thinking, "This game needs a theme to make it cool."  Somehow I stumbled on to the Forge, and I saw all these techniques to give me what I wanted!  Wicked!

I say this because it never really dawned on me that people wouldn't want to play that way.  After reading the GNS stuff, I started to understand that what I wanted from the game wasn't the same thing that people I was playing with wanted - and that there wasn't anything wrong with that.  So to make it fun for me, I consciously decided to change my goals for play.  And things have been much better since.

Now, maybe GNS is flawed and everything, but I don't care.  It helped me get more fun out of my own gaming experiences, and that's all I care about.

I don't know where I'm going with this, but I just got back from the club and I don't really care.

Quote from: RPGPunditThe whole "say yes or roll the dice"; "fun now", shit... NARRATIVISM is nothing more, when it comes down to it, then the players' selfish demands that they get to protagonize exactly the way they want to, the idea that if something is happening with the story that they don't care for, they should be able to change reality to fit their wants; even if it goes against what the GM had planned.

This is where all the disagreement in the thread stems from, I think.

Personally, I think Pundit is pretty accurate.  You use the resources that the mechanics give you to influence the story (the way things turn out).

I just don't know why he thinks that it's selfish to do that sort of thing.

Quote from: YamoSo it's really, definitively "Say yes or roll the dice or say no."

Which is exactly the same as every RPG since EGG wrote that supplement for Chainmail.  Has there ever been a GM advice chapter that doesn't have "don't bother rolling for trivial things that don't advance the game."?