Quote from: RPGPundit;1081711It isn't true at all, and it was shown how he was lying about it just like, one thread ago.

Thus why I empathize the if.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1081710You really need to stop lying about this. You were proven wrong already... no sorry, proven to be LYING about what the book said. It's time you stop. Keep trying to derail threads and we'll be having a problem.

Where is your proof?  I've shown mine, with page numbers and text.  If you have evidence, lay it out.  Page numbers, references.  I copy mine directly from my copy of the book.  Calling someone else a liar constantly with no evidence expecting others to believe you is the exact same thing the Regressive Left does.  SHOW ME YOUR EVIDENCE.  I am quite willing to be proven wrong.  Show ME.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1081195I think that a lot of the "x has this particular mechanic doesn't that make it a storygame" thing is based on assuming that you are a storygame if you have any mechanic used by storygames.

There are RPGs that have some mechanics that ended up being used in storygames, but that doesn't make them storygames. There are newer RPGs that have brought in some mechanics used in storygames, that certainly makes them storygame-influenced but it may not make them Storygames.

They're storygames if the fundamental system is a storygame system. That is, if you removed the storygame elements, the game couldn't actually be run at all without serious modification.

What's a concrete example of that though? What's a storygame and what are the elements that, if you remove them, the game cannot be run at all without serious modification? Do you have a specific example we can look at instead of in the abstract?

A specific example might help distill some of the more general cases.

Is this going to turn out to be a Jacobellis thing? ("I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description [hard-core pornography]; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that. ")

Quote from: Tanin Wulf;1081761Is this going to turn out to be a Jacobellis thing? ("I shall not today attempt further to define the kinds of material I understand to be embraced within that shorthand description [hard-core pornography]; and perhaps I could never succeed in intelligibly doing so. But I know it when I see it, and the motion picture involved in this case is not that. ")

That's pretty much what Pundit claims the difference between RPGs and this weird Storygame label, he doesn't seem to know what it is, but he knows it when he sees it.

I think a good definition should be based on mechanics.

If your game entirely, or heavily relies on meta points that exist outside of the game it would be a story game.  Especially games that forces you out of your character and think what is best for the story.  Another especially for games that punishes the players either for playing well, or using energy by giving enemy npcs more energy.  This is a reasonable standard to start with.

OK...

So I'm trying to think of something to fit these criteria and give a concrete example. Mutants & Masterminds? There's a heavy reliance on the Hero Points (not required, but there is a heavy reliance to do things to alternatively adjust the scenario; and if you go with "would not have the same genre/feel without them" as being required, then they would be required) as a metacurrency. You can only use them to do things that are truly heroic / befitting the story. You get them for playing well, which gives the enemy more to work with also.

Does that put Mutants & Masterminds into the storygame category, or am I missing something? In which case, is there a better example you're thinking of?

Quote from: Snowman0147;1081793I think a good definition should be based on mechanics.

If your game entirely, or heavily relies on meta points that exist outside of the game it would be a story game.  Especially games that forces you out of your character and think what is best for the story.  Another especially for games that punishes the players either for playing well, or using energy by giving enemy npcs more energy.  This is a reasonable standard to start with.

Amber in this case relies entirely on GM whim on how the 'story' of the game should go, if you have it's Meta currency, like Good Stuff or Bad Stuff, Trumps or the like, those also help influence the GM's decisions, also, the game allows for player input to change the direction of the 'story' with discussion with the GM (all games with meta currencies, like FATE or Mutants and Masterminds, require the player to discuss it with the GM and that the GM is to keep an open mind, but Veto powers rest in the hands of the arbitrator should a suggestion go counter to what the GM has planned), and the idea of structuring the game LIKE a story is key throughout the book.  You don't spend anything because there are no real mechanics of that sort.

Quote from: Tanin Wulf;1081796OK...

So I'm trying to think of something to fit these criteria and give a concrete example. Mutants & Masterminds? There's a heavy reliance on the Hero Points (not required, but there is a heavy reliance to do things to alternatively adjust the scenario; and if you go with "would not have the same genre/feel without them" as being required, then they would be required) as a metacurrency. You can only use them to do things that are truly heroic / befitting the story. You get them for playing well, which gives the enemy more to work with also.

Does that put Mutants & Masterminds into the storygame category, or am I missing something? In which case, is there a better example you're thinking of?

If that is the intention of the design I would say yes.  If not it would be a hybrid for sure.

Quote from: Christopher Brady;1081800Amber in this case relies entirely on GM whim on how the 'story' of the game should go, if you have it's Meta currency, like Good Stuff or Bad Stuff, Trumps or the like, those also help influence the GM's decisions, also, the game allows for player input to change the direction of the 'story' with discussion with the GM (all games with meta currencies, like FATE or Mutants and Masterminds, require the player to discuss it with the GM and that the GM is to keep an open mind, but Veto powers rest in the hands of the arbitrator should a suggestion go counter to what the GM has planned), and the idea of structuring the game LIKE a story is key throughout the book.  You don't spend anything because there are no real mechanics of that sort.

I want to hear Pundit's counter point because as I said I had not read the book.  In fact we need a neutral judge who has read the book to make a honest verdict.

Quote from: Snowman0147;1081812I want to hear Pundit's counter point because as I said I had not read the book.  In fact we need a neutral judge who has read the book to make a honest verdict.

One of my players has it. But I dont know where at the moment.

Quote from: Omega;1081817One of my players has it. But I dont know where at the moment.

Sweet if he, or she can get it we would have a neutral judge.

So here's a decent overview of Spione: Story Now in Cold War Berlin, one of Ron Edwards' offerings, AFAIK it is an archetypal storygame.

In fact, as the reviewer notes, the book doesn't even describe itself as a roleplaying game.


And I get that....except that I would argue it is better-suited to highly experienced roleplayers, even if ruleswise it is very straightforward, anyone can pick it up within a few minutes.

And the game is amazing, instantly immersive (or rather, will be, with a group that is used to freeforming narrative on the fly).

D&D it isn't. Settlers of Catan it isn't. Warhammer Fantasy Battles it isn't. Call of Duty 4 it isn't. Texas Hold 'Em it isn't.

But it is waaay closer to the first than any of the others. I don't see a need to distinguish the two in regular discourse - someone outside the hobby probably wouldn't understand (or care about) the difference between Spione and D&D, but they would grok the differences between those games and the other four. Within the hobby...we spend a dozen pages trying to nitpick the differences in order to justify some kind of wall. It's fucking dumb.

[video=youtube;bHiuav6cOjo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHiuav6cOjo[/youtube]


I love all things espionage, so I bought this purely on spec. But I'm pleased to say I immediately fell in love with the concepts, genius stuff.

Quote from: Snowman0147;1081812I want to hear Pundit's counter point because as I said I had not read the book.  In fact we need a neutral judge who has read the book to make a honest verdict.

I'm not sure if you'd judge me neutral in this or not as I have no dog in whatever spat that is going on (just confusion as to what is a storygame and why they're excluded) here's what I'd rate Christopher's claims based on your criteria:

Quote from: Christopher BradyAmber in this case relies entirely on GM whim on how the 'story' of the game should go,

True, but not really different than almost any other RPG out there. So no different than a DM in D&D.

Quoteif you have it's Meta currency, like Good Stuff or Bad Stuff, Trumps or the like, those also help influence the GM's decisions,

Good Stuff and Bad Stuff operate more like a metacurrency, but Trumps does not. Trumps are a "magic power," more analogous to spellcasting in D&D. They help influence the GM's decision only because they offer you a greater toolset to work with, like how the spell Knock gives you a greater ability to work with locked doors in a dungeon.

Good and Bad Stuff, however, is pretty much straight up a metacurrency where you're buying or selling luck in the game explicitly to detail how the universe is going to treat you for story purposes. The example even given in the book shows a guy with Good stuff catching arrows out of the air with a grin because he's the "hero" and the universe likes him. Whereas the poor sod with Bad Stuff... every arrow that can hit him does. There's another line that basically says if the GM can't decide who something untoward should happen to, or if there's some element of chance, it always resolves against the person with Bad Stuff.

Quotealso, the game allows for player input to change the direction of the 'story' with discussion with the GM (all games with meta currencies, like FATE or Mutants and Masterminds, require the player to discuss it with the GM and that the GM is to keep an open mind, but Veto powers rest in the hands of the arbitrator should a suggestion go counter to what the GM has planned), and the idea of structuring the game LIKE a story is key throughout the book. You don't spend anything because there are no real mechanics of that sort.

True...ish. The book does encourage the GM to work with the players to see where the plot is going, but also encourages the GM to be a straight up bastard to keep the plot in genre. It is driven by Amber's storytelling style of a noir high fantasy mystery thriller.

Quote from: Motorskills;1081820So here's a decent overview of Spione: Story Now in Cold War Berlin, one of Ron Edwards' offerings, AFAIK it is an archetypal storygame.

OK. So I don't think that fits under Snowman's definition. Or at least I'm not sure without much deeper understanding of the rules. However... yeah, watching that video, that's a really, really solid game to point to as "this is a storygame" if you want to hold up an illustration. Looks interesting, but definitely not what you'd normally think of when you think of an RPG. Yet also clearly not a boardgame or a wargame.

Doesn't sound like there's an arbitrator/judge/GM at all.

That's pretty darned helpful.

I'm not 100% sold it isn't an RPG, but it at least gives a great point of comparison.