The War Against Desborough and Mongoose Publishing

The Traveller · July 03, 2012, 02:42:46 PM

Quote from: jhkim;556017It's pretty obvious to me that shunting certain games off into a side forum discourages discussion. Pundit commented about this a while ago when RPGnet folded out D&D and Fantasy D20 into a separate forum, calling it an anti-D&D move.

It may be obvious to you, but the seperation into a seperate D&D forum seems to have done D&D discussion no harm whatsoever on rpgnet. If anything its busier. On the contrary, seperating storygames here seems to have highlighted that nobody gives a crap about them. Unless the Pundit finally got his "electrocute-storygamers-across-the-internet" device functional and just didn't tell anyone.

Aos · July 03, 2012, 02:47:14 PM

Actually the D&D forum at rpg.net is the best thing about the site- at least during edition war lulls.

jeff37923 · July 03, 2012, 02:49:53 PM

Quote from: jhkim;556017I'm registered on both story-games.com and here. I play a fairly wide range of RPGs. I comment sometimes in the Other Games section here, but being shunted off to a lower-traffic side forum does discourage discussion. I don't check the Other Games forum that often, and story games discussions there don't go very far.

It's pretty obvious to me that shunting certain games off into a side forum discourages discussion.

Except it usually was not discussion, it was proslytization. A Forgie would pop in and start evangelizing about GNS or the latest Forge darling. When any discussion was tried, there was a lot of bad faith arguement from the Forgie to try and shut any criticism down. It got fucking tiresome really damn quick.

Now, if you are trying to compare the treatment of story-gamers on this site to what happened to James Desborough and Mongoose Publishing, go ahead. Except that you will find very very little in comparison.

Benoist · July 03, 2012, 03:03:11 PM

This forum is about the discussion of role playing games and gaming. It's not about story games. As such, it really isn't that surprising to see the users of the RPG Site not being that interested in discussing the latest abortion of a game coming out of the Forge-think these days. I'm sorry a few posters still feel like whining about it years after the fact, but here we are, nonetheless.

Sacrosanct · July 03, 2012, 03:08:31 PM

Quote from: Benoist;556024This forum is about the discussion of role playing games and gaming. It's not about story games. As such, it really isn't that surprising to see the users of the RPG Site not being that interested in discussing the latest abortion of a game coming out of the Forge-think these days. I'm sorry a few posters still feel like whining about it years after the fact, but here we are, nonetheless.

Here's the thing:

1. What differentiates between a storygame and a role-playing game is not an objective line at all, and often overlap one another.

2. If you want to grow this site (as it seems that you do), setting some arbitrary line based only on your personal opinion as to what cannot be discussed will only hinder that.

If someone wants to discuss a storygame/rpg, why not? Just don't participate in the thread if you don't like it.

Benoist · July 03, 2012, 03:11:12 PM

Quote from: Sacrosanct;556025If someone wants to discuss a storygame/rpg, why not?

Indeed, why not?

You can.

In the Other Games section of the site.

thedungeondelver · July 03, 2012, 03:16:27 PM

Quote from: Gib;556020Actually the D&D forum at rpg.net is the best thing about the site- at least during edition war lulls.

Beyond the shadow of a doubt.

When oldgeezer is actually allowed to post and not subject to the chaotic-neutral application of bans at that 'site what he writes is as compelling as what Gary used to post at Dragonsfoot and Enworld. Moreso, in some ways, since Gary only reluctantly talked about playing (A)D&D, whereas OG will focus on it almost exclusively.

Claudius · July 03, 2012, 03:28:19 PM

Quote from: Sacrosanct;556025Here's the thing:

1. What differentiates between a storygame and a role-playing game is not an objective line at all, and often overlap one another.

2. If you want to grow this site (as it seems that you do), setting some arbitrary line based only on your personal opinion as to what cannot be discussed will only hinder that.

If someone wants to discuss a storygame/rpg, why not? Just don't participate in the thread if you don't like it.

That's exactly what people do here; save a few, they don't participate in storygaming threads.

Sacrosanct · July 03, 2012, 03:34:49 PM

Quote from: Benoist;556026Indeed, why not?

You can.

In the Other Games section of the site.

So a poster cannot discuss a role playing game in the role-playing games forum because you think that it's too much like a storygame?

It seems clear by the several declarations of victory whenever that is an increase in membership that increasing members is important. But that seems contradictory to the policy you're advocating.

I mean, it's your guys' forum, do what you want and I don't care. But don't complain if the forum gets criticism and/or not as many new members as you'd like.

Ghost Whistler · July 03, 2012, 03:39:29 PM

Quote from: The Traveller;556019It may be obvious to you, but the seperation into a seperate D&D forum seems to have done D&D discussion no harm whatsoever on rpgnet. If anything its busier. On the contrary, seperating storygames here seems to have highlighted that nobody gives a crap about them. Unless the Pundit finally got his "electrocute-storygamers-across-the-internet" device functional and just didn't tell anyone.

The D&D sub forum is fairly clearly labelled, as is the game itself.

Not quite the same thing as happens here.

Ghost Whistler · July 03, 2012, 03:40:55 PM

Quote from: jeff37923;556021Except it usually was not discussion, it was proslytization.

I have never seen that happen. Not fucking once.

If it's tolerable that they can 'proselytize' in the other forum then they can do so in the rpg forum. Of course this is about marginalising discussion.

Marleycat · July 03, 2012, 03:41:47 PM

Quote from: Claudius;556030That's exactly what people do here; save a few, they don't participate in storygaming threads.

Well if there were discussion about Mage I would participate otherwise I just not that interested in story type games. And Mage isn't really a storygame it just looks like it.

Ghost Whistler · July 03, 2012, 03:42:52 PM

Quote from: Benoist;556024This forum is about the discussion of role playing games and gaming.

Obviously not.

It's about discussing what pundit deems a roleplaying game, even though he cannot adequately explain why, for instance, Apocalypse World (a game I neither own nor intend to play), is not an rpg.

Ghost Whistler · July 03, 2012, 03:44:27 PM

Quote from: Claudius;556030That's exactly what people do here; save a few, they don't participate in storygaming threads.

Then someone who starts a 'story'game thread in the rpg forum won't get very far and the thread will fade, so what's the problem? Are we now saying that only threads that will prove popular be allowed?

Ghost Whistler · July 03, 2012, 03:46:08 PM

Quote from: Sacrosanct;556032So a poster cannot discuss a role playing game in the role-playing games forum because you think that it's too much like a storygame?

It seems clear by the several declarations of victory whenever that is an increase in membership that increasing members is important. But that seems contradictory to the policy you're advocating.

I mean, it's your guys' forum, do what you want and I don't care. But don't complain if the forum gets criticism and/or not as many new members as you'd like.

Of course it will get criticism: post this banner ad and this is the first thing that will be discussed, and the critics will be right because pundit doesn't have a leg to stand on, his opinions are purely arbitrary. where they are sold story games are classed as rpgs...if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and swims like a duck...