There must be a terminus technicus from the humanities. maybe Pierce can help.

history of reception/impact?

It's one of those handy German compounds with no one-word equivalent in English. When used as scholarly jargon, it tends to be kept as Wirkungsgeschichte, similar to how we also use words like Selbstverständnis, Bildungsroman and Weltanschauung without translation (indeed, the latter spawned the colloquial English term world-view to compensate for our lack of such a term).

In this context, the most concise way to express Wirkungsgeschichte in English is "the history of its actual effect in practice," which is hardly as convenient as just using the German word. I've also seen it rendered as "history of the reception," but that makes no more sense to the average English-speaker than the German would. The downside to just using the German is that only university-educated people are likely to understand what you're talking about, and thus it can come off as obtuse. But if you're a native German-speaker, you should get a free pass in that respect.

To get back on topic, in the past I've considered getting R's Ls of GG, but it seemed to go out of print before I got around to it. Did I miss out? Is it as informative today as it was when it was written several years ago, or do we take most of its maxims for granted by now? Just curious.

Quote from: Black FlagTo get back on topic, in the past I've considered getting R's Ls of GG, but it seemed to go out of print before I got around to it. Did I miss out? Is it as informative today as it was when it was written several years ago, or do we take most of its maxims for granted by now? Just curious.

I do think many of it's maxims are, yes, pretty commonplace among well heeled gamers. However, given how many gamers still seem to fastly adhere to notions of there being "one right way to play", I'll say there's still a place for it. If you personally understand different needs and desires in gamers and have a credible means of catering to those different tastes as-is, then it may seem a bit basic to you.

Robin's letter is a bit of a softball, but it's good advice that all kinds of small press folks should adhere to:
- use a non-ass font/layout
- stop namechecking your colleagues, srsly
- stop telling us about your extra-special biography and experience, srsly
- WRITE WITH EXCITEMENT NOT WITH LAME

(Of course, points 2 + 3 are much more likely in Forgely games.) I guess cruddy layout/font is a inescapable consequence of more people publishing things, but I'm hoping it'll get better soon. Once a few Actual For Real Graphic Designers start publishing some design tips, I think everyone will be better off.

Right or wrong, reception history is the commonly used term, and it fits anyway...

It's true that Laws is good at identifying play motives but not so good at suggesting how to satisfy or reconcile them in the game. "Little bit of everything," well yes...

Then again, actual play is really complex and messy, so you're bound to end up writing about ideal types using platitudes. Books like that need an active reader who knows how to read them. But then, so does the DMG.

Quote from: Pierce InverarityBooks like that need an active reader who knows how to read them. But then, so does the DMG.

But people who read the DMG are already showing effort. It´s a hard and long read. Whereas the internet wisecracks totally indulge RoLoGG, because it´s a fast (deceivingly) easy ready, and it gives them some wisecracky arguments to make. But alas, the wisecracks take whatever they can.
Maybe we just settle with RL being an all around smart guy, and let it at that. I wonder though, why it took him so long to see the distastefulness in Forger writing style. I could swear he was reading BE recently...

Nonono... he's not saying the writing is distasteful (except for the odd goofy font) but that it's boring. In other words, he's saying too few indie games are written in the style of BE.

Mmm. I read it the other way round. Especially with his two points concerning overexplanation and shitty use of jargon.

Quote from: Black FlagIt's one of those handy German compounds with no one-word equivalent in English. When used as scholarly jargon, it tends to be kept as Wirkungsgeschichte, similar to how we also use words like Selbstverständnis, Bildungsroman and Weltanschauung without translation (indeed, the latter spawned the colloquial English term world-view to compensate for our lack of such a term).

In this context, the most concise way to express Wirkungsgeschichte in English is "the history of its actual effect in practice," which is hardly as convenient as just using the German word. I've also seen it rendered as "history of the reception," but that makes no more sense to the average English-speaker than the German would. The downside to just using the German is that only university-educated people are likely to understand what you're talking about, and thus it can come off as obtuse. But if you're a native German-speaker, you should get a free pass in that respect.

To get back on topic, in the past I've considered getting R's Ls of GG, but it seemed to go out of print before I got around to it. Did I miss out? Is it as informative today as it was when it was written several years ago, or do we take most of its maxims for granted by now? Just curious.

"Practical impact" maybe?

Another interesting post to his livejournal here.

I think insightful?