Quote from: KenHR;257204Damn, gleichman should've stuck around for this one.  I know one of his pet peeves (and one I agree with) is the lack of designer's notes in most RPGs.  Designer's notes are very useful in that they tell you what the author was trying to accomplish and give you a better idea of their thrust or intent.

Like Zachary said above, I try to at least keep what authorial intent I can glean from a text in mind while playing so I can better understand why the game was built the way it was.  My personal campaign may well (read: will inevitably) diverge from that baseline, but at least I have an understanding of why I liked/did not like certain parts of the game and can intelligently house rule from there.

Hmmm... I've never had any use for designer's notes. I've always felt they were useless padding that served only to inflate the designer's ego. I put designers notes in one of my games, bending to pleas from my friend Marco Chacon, which I regret to this day. I have always figured if you couldn't clearly see the author's intent from the rules and settings themselves, they didn't effectively matter. Maybe it's just me?

-clash

Quote from: flyingmice;257212Hmmm... I've never had any use for designer's notes. I've always felt they were useless padding that served only to inflate the designer's ego. I put designers notes in one of my games, bending to pleas from my friend Marco Chacon, which I regret to this day. I have always figured if you couldn't clearly see the author's intent from the rules and settings themselves, they didn't effectively matter. Maybe it's just me?

-clash

I like designer's notes in the style of what you'd find in old AH wargames.  A very brief, to-the-point discussion of what was being considered, not a big narrative of the designer's "struggle" or a list of fashionable names to drop.  Sidebars or offset text work wonderfully for this.  The Squad Leader games, for instance, had brief paragraphs introducing each major rule section that explained what factors they felt were most important to consider mechanically.

It's true that much of the author's intent can (or should) be divined from the game mechanics.  However, a plain-spoken statement of intent can help you determine if the author really got what s/he was going for.  Like a lot of those games in the late '80s or early '90s that professed to be about providing more in-game support for role-playing and drama but had uber-detailed combat systems and little else...how can you really divine the intent (and judge how successful the author was at capturing it in the game) in such a case?

Quote from: KenHR;257216I like designer's notes in the style of what you'd find in old AH wargames.  A very brief, to-the-point discussion of what was being considered, not a big narrative of the designer's "struggle" or a list of fashionable names to drop.  Sidebars or offset text work wonderfully for this.  The Squad Leader games, for instance, had brief paragraphs introducing each major rule section that explained what factors they felt were most important to consider mechanically.

It's true that much of the author's intent can (or should) be divined from the game mechanics.  However, a plain-spoken statement of intent can help you determine if the author really got what s/he was going for.  Like a lot of those games in the late '80s or early '90s that professed to be about providing more in-game support for role-playing and drama but had uber-detailed combat systems and little else...how can you really divine the intent (and judge how successful the author was at capturing it in the game) in such a case?

Maybe I should provide such factual notes in downloadable format for those who care to read them, and not burden those who would find them intrusive, boring, or padding? It just goes against my grain...

-clash

Quote from: flyingmice;257220Maybe I should provide such factual notes in downloadable format for those who care to read them, and not burden those who would find them intrusive, boring, or padding? It just goes against my grain...

-clash

I think you should do what you think is right and take any suggestions from a bunch of random yos on a message board with a massive grain of salt!

Quote from: KenHR;257222I think you should do what you think is right and take any suggestions from a bunch of random yos on a message board with a massive grain of salt!

-clash

Quote from: Silverlion;257137Well any game you write will include the concept you wish to put in the game--if you have rules for combat, then  you are suggesting that combat is a way of handling situations that crop up in game. If you offer rules for fast talking and subterfuge--you are suggesting these things are ways to solve situations or influence play as well.  More specifically if you choose a certain skill list set, you are influencing what kinds of things can be done in your game by those choices (without houserules.)

Basically if I choose to measure a persons Social traits. (Like White Wolf's system.) I'm providing an influence on what can be done in play.

hmm, see, maybe it is just in my head (like the voices ) but I see an important distinction. It would be one thing if i provided one and only one way to do something. So, if you only had a combat system, then yes, I would agree, you are supplying an intent. However, if it is just an option, then you are supplying a tool, one in a tool box that the players can then use to build whatever type of adventure they want.

So, with you WW example, the social traits are there, but so are the physical. Skills exist for deception as well as shooting. This is the closest I come to what I would term game balance (I am sure someone else will call it something different). To be clear, I am not saying author intent does not exist, just that, IMO, it is not universal.

Now for the disclaimers. You may be modeling a genre and I guess that could be called "intent" but I would call it modeling a genre. here it gets fuzzy to me is where it switches from "I added the Drive skill because the setting is in modern US" to "I added the Fascist Oppressor skill because the PCs are all US government employees". One is modeling, the other is the designer's agenda.

I think I need more or less coffee. Does that make any sense?

Quote from: Silverlion;257137Author's influence can be vastly subtle--in the simple choices you make in your games presentation of material, its system utilization, and so on.

Influence definitely! Intent, not so much. Personally, intent/agenda usually reeks and sticks out like a sore thumb.

Quote from: Silverlion;257137For example if I write a game and the stats are: Brains, Body, and Faith, this suggests something specific is important to play.  If I have traits that are: Strength, Dexterity, etc. (D&D stats), then I'm indicating that there are things I am wanting measured in the game and influence how play folds out.

This goes back to my point on modeling. A subtle but important (to me) point. Did you choose your stats because you feel people should know about faith, that you had something to share about faith or because you thought it the best way to model your setting?

Quote from: Silverlion;257137A more finely detailed example: My friend decided to use Hearts & Souls for a Naruto game, and he was calculating chances of success and noticed a certain lean for heroes at the Human scale. He asked if this was intended (of course.) That choice I made in writing the mechanics, influences outcomes, which means my intent has impacted play by merely designing the mechanics.

You r intent or because you wanted to model that "element" into your game? Were you sending a message about your world view or your religion or some unrelated to the game design or were you modeling an aspect the best you could?

Let's take a counter example. You have three stats for you system. I have eleven. Are you wrong? Am I? I do not believe so. Some would then say it is our preferences that set those decisions. For me, I would say it was our design decisions. Mine involved three very fundamental ones:
1) Player entertainment
2) Character growth and options
3) Stat modifying skill dynamic
Now, the freaky thing is that you could use the same arguments for your choice of three stats. We are modeling different elements of play. Some players will want to only deal with three stats, while others want a whole lot.

In the end, I guess it depends a lot on how you define "intent". To me, it is a capricious thing, an element from outside the design of the setting and system. Something from your personal life or a message you are trying to send readers like "Man-boy love is fine" or "Tolerance is good". To me, such messages do not belong in a game.

Bill

Quote from: flyingmice;257212Hmmm... I've never had any use for designer's notes. I've always felt they were useless padding that served only to inflate the designer's ego. I put designers notes in one of my games, bending to pleas from my friend Marco Chacon, which I regret to this day. I have always figured if you couldn't clearly see the author's intent from the rules and settings themselves, they didn't effectively matter. Maybe it's just me?

-clash

This!

The closest I have come is my squirrel games and that is usually something comical about how a friends cat inspired the idea for catsassins.

Bill

Quote from: James J Skach;257181Well, this really is the question. To whit, it doesn't matter what the author's intent is or is not - it's whether or not they make the attempt to, through the rules and the outcomes, instantiate that intent.

So, as clash says, if there's nothing in the rules that forces the players, in order to actually play the game, author intent is unimportant.

I doubt it's a switch. It's probably a huge spectrum of possibilities - various places in the rules where the author's intent is more strictly instantiated and other places where the rules do little to nothing to forward the author's intended play. I think recent design movement is towards more structure in the rule set that drives the author's intended method of play.

I would only add that it can be the setting as well. I would argue that setting is as influential in many ways as system and can be as subtle. Ideas like conservatism, religious fanaticism, fascism and a whole list of isms can be integrated into a setting, in some cases, easier than into system.

Bill

Quote from: HinterWelt;256997Do you believe that authors of games have an intended type or style of play assigned to their work?

Not all authors, but most.  Even so-called generic engines often show their designer's intent or bias or preferred way to use the rules.  

Quote from: HinterWelt;256997Do you think this is the norm?

Yes.  

Also, I like designer's notes in games.  I enjoy reading why an author chose to do X vs. Y with the game.  I am fine when the author lays out the intended style of play and his own preferences and suggestions.  If I don't like them, I don't use them, but its always interesting to see the different point of view.

Quote from: HinterWelt;256997If so, do you care, as in would you aspire to play as intended or just junk it (assuming you found it)?

Most people play the game as intended.   Most don't deviate in any dramatic manner from the core focus of the game.  The online hardcore talk about crazy stuff like melding GURPS with SilCore using a combo setting of Greyhawk and Space 1889.   Offline, the mass of gamers play games as written.

I think all games are written with an intended style of play whether the designer realizes it or not.

Quote from: Mcrow;257252I think all games are written with an intended style of play whether the designer realizes it or not.

I agree. I just don't think it's an issue unless the author attempts to enforce this intention, and it isn't a problem unless the intent runs counter to your group's intent. For example, I like running Pendragon, even though it enforces a certain play style, because that play style doesn't conflict with my intended play, even though I am very conscious of the enforcement. The intent of DitV, on the other hand, conflicts with what I want to do with it. If you want to do what Mr. Baker is interested in, there is no conflict, and fun can be had by all. If you don't want to do what Mr. Stafford is interested in, then there's conflict, and no fun.

-clash

How could an author enforce their intent?

I mean if I buy a copy of FTA, and use it run a SciFi game in which the players are all Serial Killers what exactly is Pundit going to do? Come to my house and try to kick my ass? Send me an angrily worded email? Call me names?

As long as I'm having fun what would I care?

Quote from: CavScout;257157Seems so many are confusing intent with "can only be played this way".

Man this is ironic given your comments in Fritz's thread on that silly Maid game. But I actually agree with this. I don't care how Shadowrun was intended to be played. I care about how I play it.

I've never run a Dungeon Crawl in D&D. My players just aren't interested in it. So we don't use one possible popular style of play, but we still have fun. How are we wrong?

We're not is the answer.

Quote from: Serious Paul;257264Man this is ironic given your comments in Fritz's thread on that silly Maid game. But I actually agree with this. I don't care how Shadowrun was intended to be played. I care about how I play it.

Not sure why you would find it "ironic". If an author's intent is a pedophilia-like game, the game is a POS regardless of how people might actually play it. FATAL is a POS game irregardless if some group somewhere might actually play it ignoring on the ignorant crap crammed between the pages.

That's why the examples of "but someone could run 10 year old girls having sex in D&D!" were such bullshit. The author's intent of D&D is certainly not that.

QuoteI've never run a Dungeon Crawl in D&D. My players just aren't interested in it. So we don't use one possible popular style of play, but we still have fun. How are we wrong?

We're not is the answer.

Who said you were?

Quote from: CavScout;257271Not sure why you would find it "ironic".

No you wouldn't. Which is a shame. But not a tragedy.

QuoteWho said you were?

Not you, if that's what you were worried about. (I included that last little bit not as a direct reply to you, but rather as just a general statement on my behalf.) Some people have very much said shit like this here, or words to that effect.