Quote from: Ladybird;734122If you ever say the word "fiction" at the table to refer to the events of game, you're doing it wrong. It's a rulebook term, nothing more.

To me, it's the wrong term in the rules book because it's the wrong term at the game table.

All it does is create needless dissonance and confusion, IMO.

Are we still going on about the word "fiction"?

Quote from: jhkim;733440While the word "fiction" isn't commonly used - traditional RPGs have been using similar terms like "scene", "story", "chronicle", "plot arc", and more for decades - from James Bond 007 to Star Wars D6, and more. Many current RPGs continue to use such language - White Wolf most prominently, but also lots of others.

Similarly, there was a point when "graphic novel" was a considered a pretentious term for a comic collection - but these days its just the norm.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;733455Dude, Torg guy here. Scene, Act, Subplot card, Act Awards, Dramatic or Standard scene for combat — I know this happens.

That's irrelevant. This phrase — "the Fiction" — is both pretentious and disruptive. It's a pointless affectation.

"In-game" or "in-character" is better, clearer, and less affected.

So are you saying that Torg's use of terms like "Scene" and "Act" are also pretentious? Or are you saying that Torg is non-pretentious for using such terms, but if other games pull in similar terms then they are pretentious?

Personally, I don't think that any of "act", "scene", "plot", or "fiction" are pretentious. "Fiction" is ordinary English that people on the street use to distinguish between things that aren't real and things that are.


As for your alternatives, they are both useful - but they don't refer to the same thing.

"In-game" is good for distinguishing out-of-game stuff, like comments, jokes, and so forth. However, it doesn't distinguish between stuff in the fictional game-world (i.e. "Throg hits the troll with his axe") and stuff at the real-world game table (i.e. "I rolled an 18 to hit").

"In-character" is good for distinguishing stuff from the characters' point of view - but it only refers to the characters. This is different from the fiction if the characters are mistaken and/or lying. For example, Throg thinks that trolls are demons, but they aren't really - or Throg might say "I killed it" in-character, but really he didn't kill it.

The equivalent to "fiction" is really "in-game-world", which is fine - but while it is established, it isn't nearly as entrenched as terms like GM, NPC, or in-character.

Quote from: jhkim;734274Personally, I don't think that any of "act", "scene", "plot", or "fiction" are pretentious. "Fiction" is ordinary English that people on the street use to distinguish between things that aren't real and things that are.


.

Obviously this is just a subjective assessment and may be shaped by regional speech. But for me both "Act" and "Fiction" (especially "The Fiction") come off as snobby or pretentious. That is simply how they sound to me when I hear them. Plot just sounds like everyday speech to talk about events in a game, movie, video game, book, etc. Scene, while it is a word I would personally to talk about what happened during a game, doesn't strike me as pretentious or arrogant.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;734294Obviously this is just a subjective assessment and may be shaped by regional speech. But for me both "Act" and "Fiction" (especially "The Fiction") come off as snobby or pretentious. That is simply how they sound to me when I hear them. Plot just sounds like everyday speech to talk about events in a game, movie, video game, book, etc. Scene, while it is a word I would personally to talk about what happened during a game, doesn't strike me as pretentious or arrogant.

I think a lot of it is just baggage.  Between the 20+ years of railroading we've seen in the industry, and the pretentiousness that hit during the 90s, it gets really easy to hear something like "fiction first" and think either "fuck the players, fuck the rules, I'm telling my story", or some avant-garde post-modern roleplaying bullshit, rather than hearing what's actually intended - "focus on what's happening in the game world, not on your fucking character sheets and minis map".

There's certain terms that I avoid (especially here) simply because of that baggage.

That, and a lot of the stuff is so ingrained into old-school players that it seems not even worth mentioning to people that have fully internalized it.

Quote from: Bill;734255So what is the essence of DW?

If two game groups were playing side by side, one being 1E dnd and the other DW, and I was observing them, what would be different?

For THIS old fart's money, pretty much only that in DW, EVERYTHING is "2d6, 2-6 fails, 7-9 success with complication, 10-12 success."

If you watched closer, you'd see that DW doesn't have the skirmish wargame aspect of D&D; if six orcs are chopping on you they only roll once and "extra" orcs only add damage.

Frankly, that's the one thing I do NOT like about DW; for my taste, combat sucks horribly.  I WANT a skirmish wargame.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;734294Obviously this is just a subjective assessment and may be shaped by regional speech. But for me both "Act" and "Fiction" (especially "The Fiction") come off as snobby or pretentious. That is simply how they sound to me when I hear them. Plot just sounds like everyday speech to talk about events in a game, movie, video game, book, etc. Scene, while it is a word I would personally to talk about what happened during a game, doesn't strike me as pretentious or arrogant.

So "act" and "fiction" sound pretentious to you, while "scene" and "plot" do not. As you say, it is a subjective reaction - and I don't have a problem with that, but also one shouldn't read too much into author intent based on that.

I just don't think it should be a big deal. RPGs have had a lot of varying terms for stuff. For example, Gygax used the term "milieu" for this same concept - which didn't really catch on - possibly because it sounds pretentious, or just because it was obscure. It wasn't a big deal, though, to adjust to that usage.

Quote from: jhkim;734363So "act" and "fiction" sound pretentious to you, while "scene" and "plot" do not. As you say, it is a subjective reaction - and I don't have a problem with that, but also one shouldn't read too much into author intent based on that.

Yes.

I am not making any assumptions about intent, just saying what my gut reaction is to these words. That said, it will likely color my impression of the speaker or message.

I was reading a book the other day, and put it down because the writer was useing a lot of pretentious language. This had nothing to do with RPGs, though.

QuoteI just don't think it should be a big deal. RPGs have had a lot of varying terms for stuff. For example, Gygax used the term "milieu" for this same concept - which didn't really catch on - possibly because it sounds pretentious, or just because it was obscure. It wasn't a big deal, though, to adjust to that usage.

I wouldn't say it is a big deal. People can communicate however they wish. I would add in Milieu as sounding pretentious too though(just coming from the other side of the spectrum). For me, I have to admit, I have a bit if an instinctive negative reaction to things that come off as pretentious or snobby.

Quote from: Benoist;734263To me, it's the wrong term in the rules book because it's the wrong term at the game table.

And that's why it works for me; it's a term we can use to discuss the game rules (The contents of the book Dungeon World) and their interaction with play, as distinct from discussing the actual game (Which is what happens at the table).

So... it doesn't produce any confusion for me.

Quote from: Benoist;734263To me, it's the wrong term in the rules book because it's the wrong term at the game table.

All it does is create needless dissonance and confusion, IMO.

It may create dissonance for you and other people, but that is not my experience for myself or others I have introduced the game to.

You can replace Fiction, Shared Imaginary Space, Game world, In-Game, In-Character Milieu, narrative, story, plot, campaign, campaign world, ~~The Theater of the Mind~~, etc. with Made-Up Bullshit, the least pretentious term for the made-up bullshit gamers talk about in their elfgames.

Fiction works for me because it's easy for players new to the hobby to understand when you use it, and players who don't frequent internet forums for arguing about RPGs don't have any adverse reaction to it. It has no dissonance for players I have introduced the game to, whether they have experience in made-up bullshit games or not.

The rules give a definition of the fiction as a term in the first paragraph explaining the game.

Quote from: Dungeon WorldPlaying Dungeon World means having a conversation; somebody says something, then you reply, maybe someone else chimes in. We talk about the fiction—the world of the characters and the things that happen around them. As we play, the rules will chime in, too. They have something to say about the world. There are no turns or rounds in Dungeon World, no rules to say whose turn it is to talk. Instead players take turns in the natural flow of the conversation, which always has some back-and-forth. The GM says something, the players respond. The players ask questions or make statements, the GM tells them what happens next. Dungeon World is never a monologue; it's always a conversation.

A lot of roleplaying games are written only for people that already play roleplaying games. They don't work on making themselves approachable for players new to the hobby, creating an insular community. I like that dungeon world is written so that you could pick it up and play it without ever hearing about roleplaying games or D&D.

Quote from: Old Geezer;734354For THIS old fart's money, pretty much only that in DW, EVERYTHING is "2d6, 2-6 fails, 7-9 success with complication, 10-12 success."

If you watched closer, you'd see that DW doesn't have the skirmish wargame aspect of D&D; if six orcs are chopping on you they only roll once and "extra" orcs only add damage.

Frankly, that's the one thing I do NOT like about DW; for my taste, combat sucks horribly.  I WANT a skirmish wargame.

DW definitely doesn't scratch that minis skirmish combat itch. Instead, combat (and arguably the whole game) revolves around positioning yourself so that the stakes and consequences of your actions are more favorable. It focuses on leveraging the situation and your surroundings to your advantage, instead of leveraging rules to your advantage. The intent is that you spend less time discussing the rules, and more time talking about made-up bullshit to determine what happens next.

A drawback can be that if the players and GM aren't creative with stakes, actions, and consequences, it can turn into bland "I swing my axe." "You do your damage and take D8 damage, roll."

Quote from: Adric;734401It may create dissonance for you and other people, but that is not my experience for myself or others I have introduced the game to.

That's cool. The only real question is whether I'm just a blip on the radar, or there are more people like me who think a term like "fiction" to describe "the game world" is needlessly confusing and leads to all sorts of red herrings, like construing role playing games as a story telling medium complete with novel-writing techniques and movie-making tropes. It looks, from the sample we have here, that it is the latter.

I know, I know. The plural of anecdote is not data. But still. I feel entitled to say my piece.

'The Fiction' gets my hackles up a bit because it reminds me of 'The Text' and the literature majors who pepper their talk with that term to cover up the fact that they're speaking nonsense.

I have always used "the fiction" to refer back to the source material we are supposed to be trying to emulate. So in an 007 game I am trying to get the game to feel like a James boind movie (no the books). If I am playing Star Wars likewise.

So in D&D terms it depends on what fantasy genre this particular game is aimed at, Dying earth, Conan, Locke Lamora, Blade itself, Middle Earth.

So I will complain about say clerics, because they don't feature in "The fiction" and so feel like a meta class added in to make some bad design decisions work in play, etc

Obviously just me

Quote from: jhkim;734274Are we still going on about the word "fiction"?

Aren't you?

Quote from: jhkim;734274So are you saying that Torg's use of terms like "Scene" and "Act" are also pretentious?

'Course not. And you know that. Come on.

Quote from: jhkim;734274Or are you saying that Torg is non-pretentious for using such terms,

Yup.

Quote from: jhkim;734274if other games pull in similar terms then they are pretentious?

This game using this term in this way is pretentious.

Quote from: jhkim;734274However, it doesn't distinguish between stuff in the fictional game-world (i.e. "Throg hits the troll with his axe") and stuff at the real-world game table (i.e. "I rolled an 18 to hit").

Maybe the term means something different where you live, but the gamers I've talked to use "in-game" as shorthand for "in the game world", as in "what's happening in-game". It is wholly and undoubtedly different from "in the real world".

"In-game" and "in the real world" are not the same thing. At least with respect to the people I've gamed with and spoken to. And there has never been any confusion about the term. Your experience obviously differs.

Quote from: Daddy Warpig;734440Maybe the term means something different where you live, but the gamers I've talked to use "in-game" as shorthand for "in the game world", as in "what's happening in-game". It is wholly and undoubtedly different from "in the real world".

"In-game" and "in the real world" are not the same thing. At least with respect to the people I've gamed with and spoken to. And there has never been any confusion about the term. Your experience obviously differs.

I'm not sure we're disagreeing here. Maybe another example would help.

So Madeline asks me "What happened last time in-game?"  I reply, "Well, we fought our way through a bunch of abominations in the pyramid, and Taylor got to level 4, but Mike's character died so he introduced a new PC - a ranger."

Does that sound like something you might hear? Or is your usage contrary to this?

Don't people usually ask "what happened during the game?".

"What happened in the fiction" sounds strange.