Quote from: Darrin Kelley;1133924A few people have given me shit on this board for liking Fate. But I don't really care what they think. Fate provided me something I found valuable in my RPG hobby. A departure from the usual methodology I was used to. A change in approach I was very much looking for.

I like it too. As long as you've a good bunch of players. I've played it a few times and it was fun. But the players didn't take the piss with the rules. So, their agency was limited (which I liked). I just completely ignore any politics they might bleat on about. I find his whole Lovecraft 'cash in' complete hypocrisy. Monte Cooke did something similar with one of the supplements for Numanera. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

In fact, I ignore all politics when it comes to RPGs. I have my own political believes and no one is going to tell me anything different.

The core concept of Dungeon World, aka the "success with consequence", comes from Better Games, an obscure publisher in the 80s and 90s who owned the Space Gamer magazine for a few years where they put out games using their house system, most notably Battleborn (imagine a light hearted version of Starship Troopers). In the Better Games system, you rolled 2D8 for your actions (3D8 if you had a skill or trait that affected the situation) and compared it to a chart based on the difficulty of your action. The midline result was called Mixed which was "kinda fail, kinda success" and it was VERY fun to GM and roleplay. Even though most of everyone has never heard of Better Games, they were hugely popular at the Los Angeles game conventions in the early 90s with plenty of California game designers as players.

The Better Games guys now sell their stuff on DriveThruRPG.
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/249220/Battle-Born-Original

Interesting. The autor of the Dungeon World engine says he took the idea of success with complications from an early Talislanta edition. But if Better Games came before, maybe it was an inspiration for Talislanta too.

Quote from: Itachi;1133921@VisionStorm, yes there are "moves" that work like skills but in a more archetype-specific fashion. Here, some sample classes and their moves ( for Masks, another game in same engine as DW):

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1pPX5-GqiUll6fk6CWqn35HTr86pmuFnj/view?usp=drivesdk

Interesting, though, a bit hard to follow, since I don't know the rest of the rules. Not necessarily my preference, but I think I get the gist of how archetypes operate. Basically each gets a number of tricks and benefits that reinforces what the archetype is about, and may require a check to use.

Quote from: VisionStorm;1133953Interesting, though, a bit hard to follow, since I don't know the rest of the rules. Not necessarily my preference, but I think I get the gist of how archetypes operate. Basically each gets a number of tricks and benefits that reinforces what the archetype is about, and may require a check to use.

I like the common, standard, basic moves that can be attempted by any player character in Dungeon World.

Quote from: Itachi;1133898Anyway, it's a RPG through and through.

If you define Roleplaying as having built into every single roll a possible outcome that frequently requires you to stop Roleplaying your character and make a decision that the character could not possibly make.  

Well, are there SJW authors who have done significant work in the Storygame & Narrative Roleplaying space?  Sure, of course.
Are there authors with Left-leaning or Liberal, or Democrat views that have done significant work in the traditional RPG space?  Sure, of course.

Has anyone done any significant work when their politics are actually injected into the work or inform their work?  Blue Rose, I guess.  Otherwise, no.

Quote from: CRKrueger;1133980If you define Roleplaying as having built into every single roll a possible outcome that frequently requires you to stop Roleplaying your character and make a decision that the character could not possibly make.  

Now this I hadn't heard before, care to expand upon it?

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1133984Now this I hadn't heard before, care to expand upon it?

It's a fairly common complaint about stance. I'm not strictly always bothered by this myself, but it's a legit complaint. Basically, take a Move from Dungeon World. I'm gonna use "Carouse" as an example. It's an option to use this Move after returning from an adventure triumphant, spending some cash to throw a party. For each 100 coins you spend, you get a +1 on the 2d6 roll. If you roll 10+, you choose 3 items from a list, if you roll 7-9 you choose one, and if you roll less, you still choose one but things get out of hand (in a way the GM describes). The items on the list? * You befriend a useful NPC. * You hear rumors of an opportunity. * You gain useful information. * You are not entangles, ensorcelled, or tricked.

The point is that as a player you have to make these decisions of what you want to happen out of that list, but they are player decisions, not character decisions. Like, in character, is your character thinking "Hell yeah, party! I'm gonna make sure I'm not ensorcelled and hear a rumor of an opportunity!"?  It'd be an odd way for a character to think, and so it can have this effect of pulling you out of the "I'm immersed in playing my character" stance, interrupting you to ask you about how you want the story to proceed. The results also kinda happen regardless of the in-character role-play. Like, you might imagine a character talking to someone in particular and possibly making a social roll of some kind while RPing, looking for rumors of an opportunity, and you kind of learn in the moment if your character succeeds. In this Dungeon World way, you roll 1st, then have to invent the fiction to make sense of the roll afterwards. That invention isn't done by you pretending to be your character in the moment, but rather you and the GM kinda describing a story to make the results of the roll make sense.

I may not have explained this perfectly, but I think that's the jist of what CRKrueger is getting at.

Quote from: Razor 007;1133978I like the common, standard, basic moves that can be attempted by any player character in Dungeon World.

Those are the Basic moves. They are like basic rules for each game, based on common tropes for each genre.

So, a lucha libre game would have "do a dramatic speech" and "pick a chair from the sideline" as basic moves.

Quote from: NeonAce;1133989It's a fairly common complaint about stance. I'm not strictly always bothered by this myself, but it's a legit complaint. Basically, take a Move from Dungeon World. I'm gonna use "Carouse" as an example. It's an option to use this Move after returning from an adventure triumphant, spending some cash to throw a party. For each 100 coins you spend, you get a +1 on the 2d6 roll. If you roll 10+, you choose 3 items from a list, if you roll 7-9 you choose one, and if you roll less, you still choose one but things get out of hand (in a way the GM describes). The items on the list? * You befriend a useful NPC. * You hear rumors of an opportunity. * You gain useful information. * You are not entangles, ensorcelled, or tricked.

The point is that as a player you have to make these decisions of what you want to happen out of that list, but they are player decisions, not character decisions. Like, in character, is your character thinking "Hell yeah, party! I'm gonna make sure I'm not ensorcelled and hear a rumor of an opportunity!"?  It'd be an odd way for a character to think, and so it can have this effect of pulling you out of the "I'm immersed in playing my character" stance, interrupting you to ask you about how you want the story to proceed. The results also kinda happen regardless of the in-character role-play. Like, you might imagine a character talking to someone in particular and possibly making a social roll of some kind while RPing, looking for rumors of an opportunity, and you kind of learn in the moment if your character succeeds. In this Dungeon World way, you roll 1st, then have to invent the fiction to make sense of the roll afterwards. That invention isn't done by you pretending to be your character in the moment, but rather you and the GM kinda describing a story to make the results of the roll make sense.

I may not have explained this perfectly, but I think that's the jist of what CRKrueger is getting at.

Exactly.

Quote from: NeonAce;1133989It's a fairly common complaint about stance. I'm not strictly always bothered by this myself, but it's a legit complaint. Basically, take a Move from Dungeon World. I'm gonna use "Carouse" as an example. It's an option to use this Move after returning from an adventure triumphant, spending some cash to throw a party. For each 100 coins you spend, you get a +1 on the 2d6 roll. If you roll 10+, you choose 3 items from a list, if you roll 7-9 you choose one, and if you roll less, you still choose one but things get out of hand (in a way the GM describes). The items on the list? * You befriend a useful NPC. * You hear rumors of an opportunity. * You gain useful information. * You are not entangles, ensorcelled, or tricked.

The point is that as a player you have to make these decisions of what you want to happen out of that list, but they are player decisions, not character decisions. Like, in character, is your character thinking "Hell yeah, party! I'm gonna make sure I'm not ensorcelled and hear a rumor of an opportunity!"?  It'd be an odd way for a character to think, and so it can have this effect of pulling you out of the "I'm immersed in playing my character" stance, interrupting you to ask you about how you want the story to proceed. The results also kinda happen regardless of the in-character role-play. Like, you might imagine a character talking to someone in particular and possibly making a social roll of some kind while RPing, looking for rumors of an opportunity, and you kind of learn in the moment if your character succeeds. In this Dungeon World way, you roll 1st, then have to invent the fiction to make sense of the roll afterwards. That invention isn't done by you pretending to be your character in the moment, but rather you and the GM kinda describing a story to make the results of the roll make sense.

I may not have explained this perfectly, but I think that's the jist of what CRKrueger is getting at.

So it's a storytelling game and not a roleplaying game.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1134000So it's a storytelling game and not a roleplaying game.

The distinction isn't worth making, we all roll dice and pretend to do things.

Regarding dungeon world, what is wrong with the player having to choose the consequences of a "success at a cost result" rather than the gm choosing it? You do have to be on the ball to come up with sensible or interesting things but i like it.

Quote from: Altheus;1134006The distinction isn't worth making, we all roll dice and pretend to do things.

Regarding dungeon world, what is wrong with the player having to choose the consequences of a "success at a cost result" rather than the gm choosing it? You do have to be on the ball to come up with sensible or interesting things but i like it.

Pretend to do things and then, maybe roll dice to see if you succeed vs roll dice and then invent something to justify the result of the roll...

Yeah, totally the same shit, silly me.

Quote from: GeekyBugle;1134007Pretend to do things and then, maybe roll dice to see if you succeed vs roll dice and then invent something to justify the result of the roll...

Yeah, totally the same shit, silly me.

You do both. You describe what you're trying to do, the GM determines if you need to roll to see if you succeed(in PbtA terminology, you trigger the Move), and the results often let the player have some say in how things play out. The GM still does most of the heavy lifting, but yeah, some of the minor duties are handed to the players. Going in and out of character like this doesn't bother me at all, but I understand why some people would be rubbed the wrong way. You still absolutely play your characters and make decisions from their POV and based on what they'd do. If you were to have a line with fully traditional GM structure at one end(1) and fully-shared responsibilities/GMless at the other(10), most PbtA games would be around a 3 or 4. Not all that far removed, but enough to be noticeable, especially if you're easily pulled out of your immersion.