Quote from: Benoist;667712The game redefines the role of the GM as a guy who just applies a set of prescripted moves otherwise it's "bad" and he "cheats". That's a game that's based on the notion the GM must be held by the balls by the rules, and in that, it's as far from traditional as you can get it. It's a hack on Apocalypse World which has been written by a guy who believes the traditional role of the GM is a problem that should be fixed, the worse thing that happened to RPGs, and that game is the direct fruit of that fucked up thinking.

This is so not a game I want to look over. The more I hear about a game trying to call the DM a cheat, the more I know that game is bullshit with angst from the game designer because some mean DM touched him in the wrong place a decade ago. It's pathetic.

Quote from: Jason Coplen;668063This is so not a game I want to look over. The more I hear about a game trying to call the DM a cheat, the more I know that game is bullshit with angst from the game designer because some mean DM touched him in the wrong place a decade ago. It's pathetic.

The only people who have used the word "cheat" in relation to DW is Benoist and yourself. If that's the reason you don't want to look over the game, perhaps stop doing the thing you object to and ignore Benoist. You should be fine.

FWIW I can confirm that the word "cheat" in DW only appears in relating to "cheating death" with its death's door mechanic.

Quote from: Skywalker;668065The only people who have used the word "cheat" in relation to DW is Benoist and yourself. If that's the reason you don't want to look over the game, perhaps stop doing the thing you object to and ignore Benoist. You should be fine.

FWIW I can confirm that the word "cheat" in DW only appears in relating to "cheating death" with its death's door mechanic.

Okay. I can do that. I won't buy the game (lack of money), but I can look over some stuff online about it. I'll know better in a few days or weeks when I get around to it.

There's no silliness like FATE Aspects, is there? I like FATE, but Aspects smack me as weird. Maybe I'm too traditional of a DM.

Asking Benoist opinion on DW is like asking how good a shooting guard Kobe Bryant is to a guy who never saw a basketball game in his entire life.

Quote from: Jason Coplen;668068There's no silliness like FATE Aspects, is there? I like FATE, but Aspects smack me as weird. Maybe I'm too traditional of a DM.

There is nothing like FATE's aspects. And FWIW I actually dislike FATE aspects too for constantly positioning the player into an authorial position (oh, the irony)

About as close as you get to the player in DW having authorial control is:

- the player of the Cleric being able to choose their PC's deity's domain and precepts at character creation.
- sometimes, on a failure, the player may be given a choose of 1 of 2 bad options i.e. "you can make the jump over the chasm but to do so you either have to grab onto the far ledge with your fingers or have to land so carelessly that you take damage". From experience, all of this can be framed as choices for the PC though (which I think is the intention of the rules), and not the player.

FWIW you can download the PC sheets and moves sheets here: http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3269630/dwdotcom/DungeonWorld_character_sheets.pdf. That is pretty much 90% of the rules, other than the fact that the players are the only ones to roll in the RPG and that you roll 2d6 and add a bonus from Attribute - 6- is a failure, 7-9 is a success with a cost, and 10+ is a success.

What you will see is pretty weird at first glance. DW takes a novel way about how to approach roleplaying. But its still roleplaying (and FWIW its totally legit to not like that approach).

Also, FWIW, there are RPGs out where I think it is a valid criticism for that you can call cheat on the GM, such as Burning Empires. DW is just not one of those RPGs.

No doubt, some raging mod will seek to correct me

Quote from: fuseboy;668061That's very cool, Opaopajr.  What are the roots of this, or is it something you concocted?

It vaguely reminds me of Apocalypse World clocks and Burning Empires infection disposition, but those are player-visible counters (and in the latter case, there are explicit OOC mechanics for players to interact with it).

Normally, my NPC actions and turns of events are planned in a fairly 'just in time' sense, but I find one shortcoming of this is that a certain verisimilitude can be lacking when you're invisibly retconning behind the screen.  NPC actions behind the scenes tend to throw off evidence of one sort or another, which can make it pretty satisfying when players finally figure out wtf is going on.

Self-creation. I took Final Fantasy Tactics' tick counter initiative resolution and applied it as a programmable routine. It's a fungible way to manage time, and even go backwards in progress, while still running automatically. This was way back before, in 1999 or early '00s. And it was entirely hidden to avoid OOC metagaming.

It's just like a random table in a way; you program which encounters, at what quantity, at what frequency, at what terrain and then let the program run itself whenever the players interact with it. Here you program simultaneous goals, any compound goals, subroitines within goals, those with alternate results, and throw up a tabulating routine. Interestingly, if you have more than one NPC routine they can end up conflicting regardless of PC action. Great world in motion and rumor fodder!

It's basic delegation of GM tasks to an automated program.

Is it an RPG?  It has roleplaying in it.  If that's your only definition, not sure why you're bothering defining anything.
 
Dungeon World contains mechanics that can be engaged while IC.
Dungeon World contains mechanics that can't be engaged while IC.

Can you immerse under those conditions?  Some can easily, some find it a little odd at times, others can't.

Basically the people that tell you DW is like any other RPG are simply people who have a high tolerance for narrative mechanics, prefer narrative mechanics, or can't tell the difference between a narrative and non-narrative mechanic.

Reading the rules makes it obvious that the author is of the "rpgs create a fictional construct" school of thought.  As a result, he rarely, if ever, mentions "in character", but always mentions "in the fiction".  If you want to know more about this view of RPGs, see here, where Black Vulmea examines a discussion from ConTessa about Collaborative World-Building.

DW is a hybrid game of 100% New School design, not a single thing traditional or old school about the mechanics, or the underlying foundation of what roleplaying means. The only thing traditional or old school about it is the tropes of dungeoneering.

Quote from: silva;668072Asking Benoist opinion on DW is like asking how good a shooting guard Kobe Bryant is to a guy who never saw a basketball game in his entire life.

This coming from the guy who admits he's never immersed once in any tabletop RPG as much as he has in computer games.  Yeah, you're one to talk. :rolleyes:

Quote from: CKruegerDungeon World contains mechanics that can't be engaged while IC.

Just like D&D then ?

Or can you engage "Experience Points" and "Level ups" while in character ?

Quote from: CRKrueger;668122This coming from the guy who admits he's never immersed once in any tabletop RPG as much as he has in computer games.  Yeah, you're one to talk. :rolleyes:

I'm curious, is immersion required for it to be an RPG? Is it required for it to be Old School?

Quote from: CRKrueger;668120DW is a hybrid game of 100% New School design, not a single thing traditional or old school about the mechanics, or the underlying foundation of what roleplaying means. The only thing traditional or old school about it is the tropes of dungeoneering.

Well, they billed on the Kickstarter as a game with modern rules and old-school style, so that sounds about right.

Quote from: Noclue;668124I'm curious, is immersion required for it to be an RPG? Is it required for it to be Old School?

I used immersion because the quote I was referring to used immersion.  I'm not going to use the term again, because that term is a "going to the mattresses" definition for the Usual Suspects.

Instead I would say that playing a game from an In-Character perspective is the definition of roleplaying (it's hard to see how you're roleplaying if you are not playing a role).  Now, obviously, you don't have to roleplay while playing a old school RPG, in fact Old Geezer will live forever through internet quotes as proof of that fact.

I would, however, say that games that require you at times, to engage core, fundamental mechanics while OOC, like FATE or like DW, deliberately reduce the roleplaying experience to add a more authorial (ie. narrative control) experience to the game.

Such games are a specific Hybrid of RPGs and STGs as they divide the gameplay between IC and OOC.

Quote from: Noclue;668124Well, they billed on the Kickstarter as a game with modern rules and old-school style, so that sounds about right.

Right, the author himself, Baker's forums, Storygames site, basically everywhere but awfulpurple and here recognize it's a new-school game.  The idiots at awfulpurple are the ones who really started the "DW is a traditional old school game" meme and the guys here continue it, well because that's what they do here for some reason.

Quote from: CKruegerI would, however, say that games that require you at times, to engage core, fundamental mechanics while OOC.. deliberately reduce the roleplaying experience to add a more authorial (ie. narrative control) experience to the game.

In most traditional rpgs (D&D included) you must go OOC to engage with "experience points", "leveling up", "prestige classes", "playing dice", and the such.

Those games are not rpgs ?

Quote from: silva;668123Just like D&D then ?

Or can you engage "Experience Points" and "Level ups" while in character ?

Heh, don't try to be Justin, you don't have the chops.  You don't really engage XP mechanics in any game.  

You've never played AD&D, so you wouldn't know that "leveling up" in AD&D isn't like DW where you just play the Level Up move after having played the End Session move, but your character actually has to seek out a trainer in-game, hire the trainer in-game, pay the trainer in-game and then spend in-game time training.  You tell me, Rainman.

Oh, actually you would know because you've been told that about 50 times but you ignore it like anything else that doesn't fit Silva-view when you want to do a knucklehead me-too drive-by to try and score points.

BTW, DW's mechanics and playstyle are discussed elsewhere, to get an idea of what other people think and how they play, check out this Reddit discussion.

Don't worry about defining terms, just ask yourself if what they are describing is what scratches your RPG itch.  If you're like some people here, it will, if you're like others here, it won't.