Or perhaps it means something even more revolutionary! That there isn't a hard, bright line between tabletop game types, and the passion of this whole classification war is misplaced.

Quote from: _nthdegree;675081Or perhaps it means something even more revolutionary! That there isn't a hard, bright line between tabletop game types, and the passion of this whole classification war is misplaced.

Heresy!

Quote from: Noclue;675109Heresy!

If you ever talk to a biologist who knows anything about taxonomy, you'll find out how often whole species get bumped around, relabeled and regrouped on the tree of life. And this, when there's actual DNA to use for identifying connections and heredity of traits!

Suddenly you feel that trying to classify & label with laser precision all the varieties of something as nebulous as RPGs is probably a fool's errand.

Obviously Pundit was bribed and/or replaced with False Pundit. CRKruger, as I think you are the most knowledgeable in these matters, I propose we flee on my barge to Constanti- TBP and excommunicate Pundit then swear fealty to Mods of RPG.net, IT IS THE ONLY OPTION.

Quote from: _nthdegree;675081Or perhaps it means something even more revolutionary! That there isn't a hard, bright line between tabletop game types, and the passion of this whole classification war is misplaced.

Nope. What's fascinating about DW is precisely about how in its zeal to "break through" to regular RPG gamers it essentially abandons all the things that do in fact make Storygames fundamentally different from Regular RPGs.

They're pretty much listed point by point in my post.

RPGPundit

Move the thread and retitle it "Dungeon World is an RPG"

I'm not sure we have any zeal to "breakthrough" to anybody. Like I've said a few times, DW was first a game we wanted to play. It only went to other people because there was demand.

The entire idea that we're Boris Yeltsin seems to assume that we inherited some agenda which we're betraying. We're just people, making a game we like, because we like to play it. That describes every other game designer I've talked to.

You're welcome to call that game whatever you like, though it sounds like we'd both call it an RPG.

Quote from: sage;675132I'm not sure we have any zeal to "breakthrough" to anybody. Like I've said a few times, DW was first a game we wanted to play. It only went to other people because there was demand.

The entire idea that we're Boris Yeltsin seems to assume that we inherited some agenda which we're betraying. We're just people, making a game we like, because we like to play it. That describes every other game designer I've talked to.

You're welcome to call that game whatever you like, though it sounds like we'd both call it an RPG.

Well, whether intentional or unintentional (as you seem to have tried claiming in this thread) you utilize the language, jargon, and overall style of the Forge/Storygames movement. That movement most definitely does have (or had) an agenda; and on multiple occasions they expressed it openly.  

And one way or the other, your game does in essence break that agenda; whether you meant to do so or not.  From the point of view of Ron Edwards' GNS essays, your game is absolutely a "betrayal".  That it is by far the most successful game to have ever come out of those origins (you know, the long list of people you thank in the credits, who belong to that particular school of RPG design?) and that it accomplishes this by doing the exact opposite of what GNS theory wanted is a far bigger slap in the face to the Forge movement than anything I could have come up with in my wildest dreams.  That's true whether you meant it to be that way or not.

And yes, I would definitely call it an RPG. An RPG that uses the language and styling of Storygaming but does not on any of the central points actually use the methods and theories when push comes to shove.  

RPGPundit

Quote from: sage;675018Yeah, but there are many settings. If I started talking about "what's happening in the setting" that wouldn't be much like current usage, I think.

There's (usually) only one setting per campaign so I doubt there would be much confusion at the table.

QuoteThere's the setting, which is this place that the GM came up with (or learned about), but at least the way I'm used to talking about it "the setting" is a place, not the current state of an entire world.

Perhaps the same way were refer to the current state of the real world. "Current events" or or something similar.

However, I can see your point here, but I think "the Fiction" in a really bad choice because most people seeing the term are likely to think you are referring to "the story".  Fiction is usually "story" in common usage. I think some form with "Fictional" would have been much clearer in meaning to the average person reading about the game or skimming the rules. Perhaps the seldom used term "fictionality" (noun form of "fictional"), although I suppose that would send people to a dictionary.

Quote from: RandallS;675151There's (usually) only one setting per campaign so I doubt there would be much confusion at the table.

True, but as a rulebook, DW needs to at least try to speak to the players of all instances of the game, everywhere, for all time, yes? Which is where confusion about "which setting" might enter.

Quote from: _nthdegree;675176True, but as a rulebook, DW needs to at least try to speak to the players of all instances of the game, everywhere, for all time, yes? Which is where confusion about "which setting" might enter.

Seriously? But no confusion about the word "fiction" could possibly arise, right?

Let's cut the bullshit here, the reason the word "fiction" was used was because its something much more favorable to the storygames lexicon.  There's no other special purpose, its definitely not to try to avoid the "confusion" of using ordinary terms that RPGs have used for the last 40 years.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;675179Seriously? But no confusion about the word "fiction" could possibly arise, right?

Haha, I think you may have me dead to rights there, sir.

Quote from: RPGPundit;675179the reason the word "fiction" was used was because its something much more favorable to the storygames lexicon.  There's no other special purpose, its definitely not to try to avoid the "confusion" of using ordinary terms that RPGs have used for the last 40 years.

RPGPundit

"All the IC table talk from setting development to player actions" is obviously too cumbersome a phrase for the way DW and AW use "the fiction". Then what's a good term to cover everything from what the last player said as their action to setting details ? As a shorthand for "all the fictional stuff in the game" fiction is a useful, if loaded, word.

In DW the GM is admonished to be consistent with the fiction, and that means everything that's been said in the game. Don't contradict a setting detail that came out in the last session, that prophecy might have ramifications behind the scenes. Don't ignore what the Druid changed into, someone might be allergic. Remember where the Thief said they were hiding. Can the guards see that the Ranger has her bow out from all the way down there ? A Battlemind in Serpent's Coil form might impress those snake god cultists and become their new prophet.

So in DW it's a useful shorthand for an essential abstraction. How about "narrative" as a less loaded synonym ? If that doesn't have too many storygaming connotations it would be a good way to phrase an imperative for the GM to keep the narrative consistent. I don't think many would disagree that consistency is a prerequisite for good GMing. The trick is to find an acceptable phrase for what the GM should be consistent with.

Quote from: mllaneza;675212"All the IC table talk from setting development to player actions" is obviously too cumbersome a phrase for the way DW and AW use "the fiction". Then what's a good term to cover everything from what the last player said as their action to setting details ? As a shorthand for "all the fictional stuff in the game" fiction is a useful, if loaded, word.

In DW the GM is admonished to be consistent with the fiction, and that means everything that's been said in the game. Don't contradict a setting detail that came out in the last session, that prophecy might have ramifications behind the scenes. Don't ignore what the Druid changed into, someone might be allergic. Remember where the Thief said they were hiding. Can the guards see that the Ranger has her bow out from all the way down there ? A Battlemind in Serpent's Coil form might impress those snake god cultists and become their new prophet.

So in DW it's a useful shorthand for an essential abstraction. How about "narrative" as a less loaded synonym ? If that doesn't have too many storygaming connotations it would be a good way to phrase an imperative for the GM to keep the narrative consistent. I don't think many would disagree that consistency is a prerequisite for good GMing. The trick is to find an acceptable phrase for what the GM should be consistent with.

Again, this is quite a game of pretend-necessity you guys are playing.  Why has this never been a problem for, oh, say, EVERY RPG ever made until now?

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;675216pretend-necessity
RPGPundit

I'm not sure what that means. Does it sound like I'm insisting that there be one term for setting+player actions ? I am assuming that there should be one in terms of DW, but should is a funny word. Are you saying that we'd be better off without the concept of "the fiction" under any name ?