War is hell.

Quote from: SettembriniPundit?
Would you at least consider you know, like, fucking SPLIT the thread?

Sett - If I remember correctly, you're the guy that originally prompted him to move threads like this one. You practically requested this kind of action.


- Ed C.

Quote from: J ArcaneGet your own fucking ideas, and stop polluting threads by rehashing weak ones that deserve to be forgotten, and then you won't find the threads getting moved.

Yes.  If you want to discuss Forge / Storygames jargon, why not do it on Forge or Storygames? :confused:

Why continually try to force it's use here?

Quote from: StuartWhy continually try to force it's use here?

Nobody's forcing anything, Stuart. It grew naturally out of an exchange between me and Cal.

But the innocents always get hurt.

Speaking personally, I've never felt like I had much in common with the people on Storygames, and the Forge only allows theory discussion in the context of actual play reports, which are a lot of work to write up, though I do post there sometimes when I have one I want to discuss with those guys.

I personally don't spend a lot of time thinking about the Big Model anymore, but its terminology, flaws, disfiguring prejudices, and all, is the only serious, systematic language for discussing RPGs I know of. So it's basically an 'only game in town' thing. Levi's craft stuff, while perhaps more useful to most gamers, isn't really a theory in the sense I mean it, and the rest of the stuff (Threefold, Blacow, Robin's Laws, Real Men, etc. etc.) is at best similar to Levi's work and at worst either empty or wrong.

(Levi's Manyfold might be a theory, but insofar as I've been able to make it out as one, it's basically a variant of the Big Model which allows a greater multiplicity and compatibility of CA. Which claim I would agree with, but that doesn't make it a distinct theory in my mind so much as a challenge within the Big Model to some of that theory's claims.)

But even given a general desire to avoid theoretical discussion about RPGs, this board is the LAST place on the internet I want to talk about Big Model. It's just that, along with the bitchers (Pundit, J Arcane, Balbinus, etc. etc.), some of the most thoughtful, serious critics of the Big Model hang out here (Wilen, Morrow, Sett, Kornelson, etc. etc.) and so it comes up sometimes.

But probably not too much more.

Quote from: CalithenaBut probably not too much more.

Oh, I don't know! It could be a new sort of game. How many threads can you get moved to OT?

Anyone who writes off the Isle of Dread as 'not an adventure' needs their game design license taken away.

I'd also like to note that the introduction of Forge terminology has not done much to help this thread.

Quote from: ImperatorThis I agree completely. I'm currently running Horror at the Orient Express (Call of Cthulhu), which is maligned by many as the biggest railroad ever. Well, it's one of the most popular Cthulhu adventures I've ever run, so much that my girlfriend played it, loved it so much that he read the campaign cover to cover, and she asked me to play it for a second time (playing NPCs and a support PC) just because she loved the colour so much.

You know what? With a title that namechecks an actual frickin' train, I've steered clear of that scenario precisely because I expected a railroad.  Sett, did the fact that you're playing an 'Adventure Path' ever suggest anything to you?  I've never touched that stuff precisely because I expected the path to not have many forks.

Quote from: jrientsAnyone who writes off the Isle of Dread as 'not an adventure' needs their game design license taken away.

I'd also like to note that the introduction of Forge terminology has not done much to help this thread.

Jeff - who said that? That's crazy talk.

Isle of Dread is actually a good example of how a canned setting can lead to pretty fun, colorful play, with nothing more than evocative scenes, good fights, and a half-dozen seeds for stories that might spring up naturally out of play based on where you go and what you do.

The introduction of Forge terminology didn't even help threads on the Forge's own theory forums ultimately, which I imagine is in part why Ron closed them down. This is a drag, and I don't know what to do about it; the well is well poisoned.

I guess making up new terminology could be an option, but that's work, and also it would feel vaguely unclean to do that when so much of it would just be a rewriting of what's on the Forge already. Though I guess Vincent Baker managed to improve things a little in some corners of the internet by rephrasing some things in his own words and making some new contributions of his own.

Quote from: Calithena-----------

Pundit's behavior here is amusing. Here he's got a thread with serious, systematic critique of his supposed bete noir, instead of the half-baked shit he spews in the absence of knowing what the fuck he's talking about, and he moves it to OT. The dude won't take a rifle for his own fucking war because he's so hot to keep jacking off with blunt knives.

No.  
When you start using Forge Jargon in any capacity other than for criticism of the Forge (ie. when you start trying to use the Jargon to analyze games and other such bullshit), you are expressly doing what the Theory Forum wasn't supposed to be about.

So you're off-topic.  

Its been demonstrated that Forge Jargon is nothing but mindless doublespeak intended to promote internal-elitism and control conversation. Its based on flawed theories that ignore reality. Its therefore useless to any real examination of theory.

If you want to engage in a huge pseudo-intellectual circle jerk, you're welcome to do so; in off-topic.

RPGPundit

Quote from: CalithenaJeff - who said that? That's crazy talk.

James Jacob - the bigwig at Paizo - said as much when he opined that all adventures should have a plot, and any adventure which doesn't is just a setting book.

As for Forge theory and big model or whatever the fuck it's called, I'd like to note for the record that I've been using the term 'immersion' because that's simply the best word for what I look for in an RPG. Just because someone else uses that word as part of a theory that Pundit hates shouldn't render it verboten. Terms like 'immersion' and 'gamism' have commonly accepted meanings outside Forge-speak. You see wargamers talking about simulation versus gamism all the time, and it isn't because of Ron Edwards, or some grand theory of wargaming.

Quote from: droogNobody's forcing anything, Stuart. It grew naturally out of an exchange between me and Cal.

But the innocents always get hurt.

Bullshit. Unless you're mentally retarded, you could always use the same words that regular human beings use, instead of having to descend into cultspeak.

Next time either make an effort, or fuck off.

RPGPundit

Quote from: droogOh, I don't know! It could be a new sort of game. How many threads can you get moved to OT?

If I get even the passing feeling that you're doing this sort of thing, Droog, you will be considered someone who is intentionally attempting to disrupt the functioning of this site.

So if I was you, and if you really give a shit about continuing to be here (I would think you might if only so that you can continue to try to spread your Forge doctrine for as long as possible), I would be very very careful to avoid injecting conversations in Forgespeak or attempts to dominate the conversation by creating assumptions with jargon.

RPGPundit

Quote from: jrientsYou know what? With a title that namechecks an actual frickin' train, I've steered clear of that scenario precisely because I expected a railroad.  Sett, did the fact that you're playing an 'Adventure Path' ever suggest anything to you?  I've never touched that stuff precisely because I expected the path to not have many forks.

Yup, frankly I was never too drawn to paizo's stuff, for this reason among others.

RPGPundit

Quote from: CalithenaI personally don't spend a lot of time thinking about the Big Model anymore, but its terminology, flaws, disfiguring prejudices, and all, is the only serious, systematic language for discussing RPGs I know of. So it's basically an 'only game in town' thing.

It's a bit like saying it's the only brand of oven mitts created for playing the piano.  That might be, but it's still not helpful and you'd be better not to use them.

There's actually a fair bit of academic writing about games, interactive narratives, immersive worlds, and roleplaying.  They don't make up as much new jargon specific to RPGs though, and are more about comparing to other forms than creating a scientific model.

Quote from: CalithenaI guess making up new terminology could be an option, but that's work, and also it would feel vaguely unclean to do that when so much of it would just be a rewriting of what's on the Forge already. Though I guess Vincent Baker managed to improve things a little in some corners of the internet by rephrasing some things in his own words and making some new contributions of his own.

I know its crazy, but you could try speaking in motherfucking English...

RPGPundit