Quote from: JoeNuttall;843874Justin Alexander sees the innovation as

Oops. My bad typo. Thanks for catching the typo.

Re: ever increasing difficulty until failure, I've known DMs from the 70s who did that. Innovative is not the way most of us described that style of play.

QuoteHe wasn't arguing that the use of Jenga itself was innovative.

If that's true then I really don't know why he was quoting and responding to me.

QuoteWhen I read that I can push Adjectives onto a target my brain refuses to parse the English ;-)

I didn't bother to parse it. It sounds too much like the semi-free form games like Hero Wars that just aren't my cup of tea. They impose system where I don't need system to do the work and they ignore system where I want the system to do the work.

The vast majority of what people claim as "innovation" in RPGs is either just a largely aesthetic or otherwise meaningless change in something that already existed, needless complication of something that already existed, or trying to supplant existing mechanical systems with pointless faddy gimmickry.

A Russian roulette mechanic would probably add much more tension to Dread than Jenga can. You'd put one more bullet in each time you have to roll the bullet chamber.

 That would probably count as an innovative use of an old game in RPGs.

Quote from: RPGPundit;844450The vast majority of what people claim as "innovation" in RPGs is either just a largely aesthetic or otherwise meaningless change in something that already existed, needless complication of something that already existed, or trying to supplant existing mechanical systems with pointless faddy gimmickry.

I do see a lot of people reusing or slightly changing what was done before.  But I also see the need for people to try to better match their setting needs to individually tuned mechanic.

It's remarkable how different the attitudes towards innovation are in the RPG hobby (or at least this corner of it) and the boardgaming hobby. Innovation has been responsible for boardgaming exploding tenfold as a hobby in recent years. I don't know that you'd find any boardgamers against innovation outside of a handful of 50+ year old wargamers clutching faded copies of Advanced Third Reich and D-Day. And even in the wargaming sub-hobby, the most popular games by far today use innovative mechanics that were introduced in the last 10 years.

Quote from: Haffrung;844474It's remarkable how different the attitudes towards innovation are in the RPG hobby (or at least this corner of it) and the boardgaming hobby. Innovation has been responsible for boardgaming exploding tenfold as a hobby in recent years. I don't know that you'd find any boardgamers against innovation outside of a handful of 50+ year old wargamers clutching faded copies of Advanced Third Reich and D-Day. And even in the wargaming sub-hobby, the most popular games by far today use innovative mechanics that were introduced in the last 10 years.

Good point.

Quote from: Haffrung;844474It's remarkable how different the attitudes towards innovation are in the RPG hobby (or at least this corner of it) and the boardgaming hobby. Innovation has been responsible for boardgaming exploding tenfold as a hobby in recent years. I don't know that you'd find any boardgamers against innovation outside of a handful of 50+ year old wargamers clutching faded copies of Advanced Third Reich and D-Day. And even in the wargaming sub-hobby, the most popular games by far today use innovative mechanics that were introduced in the last 10 years.

I'm going to suggest thats largely because in a boardgame the primary focus is on mechanics, while a great many roleplayers prefer that the mechanics remain invisible or as unobtrusive as possible, to the point of seeing them as simply a necessary evil.

We already had a role playing game that was innovated and was board game friendly.  It was called Dungeons & Dragons 4th edition which sold like...  Oh wait a minute the game bombed and was the shortest lived edition in D&D history.  Only lasted 2.5 years before WOTC had to go back to the drawing board.  It is as if role players had different tastes than board gamers.

Quote from: Haffrung;844474It's remarkable how different the attitudes towards innovation are in the RPG hobby (or at least this corner of it) and the boardgaming hobby. Innovation has been responsible for boardgaming exploding tenfold as a hobby in recent years. I don't know that you'd find any boardgamers against innovation outside of a handful of 50+ year old wargamers clutching faded copies of Advanced Third Reich and D-Day. And even in the wargaming sub-hobby, the most popular games by far today use innovative mechanics that were introduced in the last 10 years.

I do think some of the reaction against innovation in RPGs is knee-jerk. But I also think it is around some fundamental divisions on the point of play.

This is a much smaller hobby. We've had lots of innovation but somehow that hasn't translated into the huge explosion you see in boardgames. Part of me suspects this is because the rules themselves are not what drives interest in play. The rules are important and I don't think we should poo-poo innovation where it arise.

For me the ideal is we become a community that embraces both experimentation and innovation, but also allows approaches based on tried and true methods. One that is totally comfortable with OD&D and quirky indie RPGs existing without having to annihilate one another. I think what is killing our hobby more than innovation or lack of innovation, is the ideological divide where we see our way of doing things as the right way, and the other guy's as a blight.

Quote from: Snowman0147;844492We already had a role playing game that was innovated and was board game friendly.  It was called Dungeons & Dragons 4th edition which sold like...  Oh wait a minute the game bombed and was the shortest lived edition in D&D history.  Only lasted 2.5 years before WOTC had to go back to the drawing board.  It is as if role players had different tastes than board gamers.

Can you point to anything in my post that suggested RPGs should be mechanically like board games? Just because a game has mechanics doesn't make it a boardgame, or boardgame-like. You understand that, right? The 1E AD&D DMG is chock full of dozens and dozens of pages of mechanics, systems, and sub-systems.

Quote from: Haffrung;844500Can you point to anything in my post that suggested RPGs should be mechanically like board games? Just because a game has mechanics doesn't make it a boardgame, or boardgame-like. You understand that, right? The 1E AD&D DMG is chock full of dozens and dozens of pages of mechanics, systems, and sub-systems.

I suspect where he is coming from is how a lot of people look to board games as the model for innovation in RPGs (at least that is how it felt a few years ago, not so much anymore). I think people have begun to realize the key difference between the two is a board game's mechanics are kind of the point. If the mechanics are not fun, the game itself isn't fun (and the mechanics only superficially have to connect with the flavor material). Whereas RPGs need mechanics that enhance the flavor component. I don't play D&D to experience the thrill of rolling initiative. I roll initiative to experience the thrill of combat.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;844498For me the ideal is we become a community that embraces both experimentation and innovation, but also allows approaches based on tried and true methods. One that is totally comfortable with OD&D and quirky indie RPGs existing without having to annihilate one another. I think what is killing our hobby more than innovation or lack of innovation, is the ideological divide where we see our way of doing things as the right way, and the other guy's as a blight.

Frankly, that ideological divide is driven by two groups of people:

1) Indie hipsters who love innovation for innovation's sake but have trouble designing games people actually want to play.

2) Nostalgic grognards who have an idealized era in their RPG history that they're desperately trying to define and defend.

A common trait to both groups is how many of them do not actively play RPGs, and instead have made a hobby of promoting their idealized notions of how people should play. The boardgaming hobby is not only much larger than the RPG hobby, but its participants are overwhelmingly people who are actively playing games right now. So any theory-crafting and nostalgia are swamped by the dizzying amount of actual play going on, and the shared experience of that play.

Innovation doesn't have to increase complexity or promote novelty for novelty's sake. The stunt dice in Dragon Age is an excellent example of simple, fun innovation. It's the kind of thing that would be shamelessly looted by boardgame designers and incorporated into new games that were suitable for stunts.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;844462A Russian roulette mechanic would probably add much more tension to Dread than Jenga can. You'd put one more bullet in each time you have to roll the bullet chamber.

Presumably, using a D6 rather than an actual revolver :eek:

Quote from: soltakss;844510Presumably, using a D6 rather than an actual revolver :eek:

I think he was facetiously suggesting a real revolver (the ultimate simulation of suspense and dread!).

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;844503I suspect where he is coming from is how a lot of people look to board games as the model for innovation in RPGs (at least that is how it felt a few years ago, not so much anymore). I think people have begun to realize the key difference between the two is a board game's mechanics are kind of the point. If the mechanics are not fun, the game itself isn't fun (and the mechanics only superficially have to connect with the flavor material). Whereas RPGs need mechanics that enhance the flavor component. I don't play D&D to experience the thrill of rolling initiative. I roll initiative to experience the thrill of combat.

You hit the nail on the head.