TheRPGSite

Best rules award in the first, and game of the year in the second.

Congratualtions to Sage and co. :hatsoff:

P.S: and congrats to Vincent Baker too. Having Apocalypse World winning the 2010 award, and hacks winning 2 years later (Monsterhearts got a second place, and Monster of the Week was nominated too) is no easy task.

Quote from: silva;682433Best rules award in the first, and game of the year in the second.

Congratualtions to Sage and co. :hatsoff:

Cool, but on the other hand (And not to take anything away from a great game that I think is a good winner), it hasn't been a particularly interesting year for new games.

Nights Black Agents certainly looks good, it's on my shelf but I haven't had a chance to play yet. But the writing is solid and there's a lot of advice on how to actually use it in play.

Milli Vanilli won a Grammy.

Quote from: Ladybird;682447Cool, but on the other hand (And not to take anything away from a great game that I think is a good winner), it hasn't been a particularly interesting year for new games.

Nights Black Agents certainly looks good, it's on my shelf but I haven't had a chance to play yet. But the writing is solid and there's a lot of advice on how to actually use it in play.

This.  It's akin to the year that Halle Berry won her Oscar: shit field, weak competition, and the Academy getting shaken down by outside parties wanting some form of payoff.  In other words, it won because it was the least shit of the lot.

Dungeon World has some interesting ideas. However, I could never buy it, knowing I'd be putting money in the pocket of the creep who designed Poison'd and used an RPG convention session of the game as the dumping ground for some deeply messed up personal shit that would be better addressed by several years of counselling.

Quote from: Haffrung;682459Dungeon World has some interesting ideas. However, I could never buy it, knowing I'd be putting money in the pocket of the creep who designed Poison'd and used an RPG convention session of the game as the dumping ground for some deeply messed up personal shit that would be better addressed by several years of counselling.

Barker isn't behind DW, he designed the engine that was later used ("hacked") to create DW.

Paizo won eight, including best product.  Not to dismiss the win, but it wasn't a terribly great year.  I really liked the NPC CODEX, but best product of the year smells like the competition was weak.  

Part of the problem is that the most creative and interesting stuff is currently fermenting in  thousand small venues and hasn't really built itself into something big yet.

Quote from: Rincewind1;682461Barker isn't behind DW, he designed the engine that was later used ("hacked") to create DW.

It seems you're right. So I can purchase it with a clean conscience.

Quote from: haffrung;682466it seems you're right. So i can purchase it with a clean conscience.

what have i dooooooone!

;)

Quote from: Black Vulmea;682448Milli Vanilli won a Grammy.

Brack Obama won a Nobel Peace Prize.

Quote from: Haffrung;682459Dungeon World has some interesting ideas. However, I could never buy it, knowing I'd be putting money in the pocket of the creep who designed Poison'd and used an RPG convention session of the game as the dumping ground for some deeply messed up personal shit that would be better addressed by several years of counselling.

Wait, what? I've never heard this story about Baker. What'd he do?

Quote from: Black Vulmea;682448Milli Vanilli won a Grammy.

Harry and the Hendersons won an Oscar.

Quote from: Zachary The First;682517Harry and the Hendersons won an Oscar.

Hey, we do NOT talk shit about Harry and the Hendersons!

Seriously though, that monkey suit was some of the best Rich Baker work ever.

Quote from: Grey Wanderer;682511Wait, what? I've never heard this story about Baker. What'd he do?

It's a long story, but in short - the example of play Baker provided from a con game was distasteful to say the very least, including the infamous "raping of a cabin boy in a neck stump".

Quote from: Grey Wanderer;682511Wait, what? I've never heard this story about Baker. What'd he do?

GeCon Poison'd, but you don't get the whole story (//www.indie-rpgs.com/archive/index.php?topic=24749)

Quote from: Haffrung;682671GeCon Poison'd, but you don't get the whole story (//www.indie-rpgs.com/archive/index.php?topic=24749)

I've been in those kinds of games (Not the neck-rapey games, the ones that you can never explain to other people because they weren't there and just won't understand, ever).

They're the best sort of games, but there's no fucking way I could go through that more than a couple times a year.

Quote from: Ladybird;682696I've been in those kinds of games (Not the neck-rapey games, the ones that you can never explain to other people because they weren't there and just won't understand, ever).

They're the best sort of games, but there's no fucking way I could go through that more than a couple times a year.

I call those games "week long binge".

:D

Quote from: Haffrung;682671GeCon Poison'd, but you don't get the whole story (//www.indie-rpgs.com/archive/index.php?topic=24749)

RPGnet poster: "It's okay, because Vince Baker did it."

Quote from: Benoist;682738RPGnet poster: "It's okay, because Vince Baker did it."

Now translated onto the rpgsite as "it's never okay, if Vincent Baker's involved."

I, honestly, hope that James Raggi sends pundit a copy of The Seclusium of Orphone of the Three Visions for review. I'm genuinely interested in hearing what he thinks, and whether he deems it an rpg-book at all. And he is, when it all boils down, a good and thorough reviewer.

Here is a link:

One day I'll figure out how to put it in the word: Here but until I'm that savvy...

http://www.ennie-awards.com/blog/announcing-the-2013-ennie-awards-winners/

Quote from: DKChannelBoredom;682741Now translated onto the rpgsite as "it's never okay, if Vincent Baker's involved."

I, honestly, hope that James Raggi sends pundit a copy of The Seclusium of Orphone of the Three Visions for review. I'm genuinely interested in hearing what he thinks, and whether he deems it an rpg-book at all. And he is, when it all boils down, a good and thorough reviewer.

WTF is that ?

Tell us more.

Quote from: Rincewind1;682566It's a long story, but in short - the example of play Baker provided from a con game was distasteful to say the very least, including the infamous "raping of a cabin boy in a neck stump".

Quote from: Haffrung;682671GeCon Poison'd, but you don't get the whole story (//www.indie-rpgs.com/archive/index.php?topic=24749)

(http://i.imgur.com/6nXxs4B.gif)

The hate-on for DungeonWorld is :rolleyes:.  Deal with it, nerds.  The game is fast and fun, and the gameplay is very much in a style of old school gaming that I hear lauded all the time (rulings, not rules!).  You could port in the random tables and a d20 and you'd be set.

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;682827The hate-on for DungeonWorld is :rolleyes:.  Deal with it, nerds.  The game is fast and fun, and the gameplay is very much in a style of old school gaming that I hear lauded all the time (rulings, not rules!).  You could port in the random tables and a d20 and you'd be set.

And a middle finger to you to, lad.

Though Ennies always were delivering customers to dentists and proctologists, haven't they? :D

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;682827The hate-on for DungeonWorld is :rolleyes:.  Deal with it, nerds.  The game is fast and fun, and the gameplay is very much in a style of old school gaming that I hear lauded all the time (rulings, not rules!).  You could port in the random tables and a d20 and you'd be set.

No.

Dungeon World IS a very well designed game, and there is no question it is great fun for some gamers. Where people like me ARE going to push back is when guys like you start talking about how it's "really old school" and "there's fundamentally no difference with old games". Fuck that noise. This is just not true at all, and is a position either born out of sheer ignorance, or willful misrepresentation.

THIS is what people like me object to. Please stop pretending there's fundamentally no difference.

Quote from: Benoist;682829No.

Dungeon World IS a very well designed game, and there is no question it is great fun for some gamers. Where people like me ARE going to push back is when guys like you start talking about how it's "really old school" and "there's fundamentally no difference with old games". Fuck that noise. This is just not true at all, and is a position either born out of sheer ignorance, or willful misrepresentation.

THIS is what people like me object to. Please stop pretending there's fundamentally no difference.

It is very different. I have initiative in my D&D Rules Cyclopedia games. I don't have to pick names from a preset list in Labyrinth Lord, or limit my group to one of each class in AD&D. The differences go on from there.

I'm sure folks have a lot of fun with Dungeon World; there's certainly enough of them cheering it on via message board and social media. But frankly, I'm a little tired of it being recommended as a cure-all, and as some sort of an old-school game. Even the game author has very clearly said it is not, and a glance at the SRD will tell much the same.

When folks keep bringing it up in every instance and attempting to pretend it is the be-all and end-all, and something it is not, it is natural there is going to be some pushback.

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;682827The hate-on for DungeonWorld is :rolleyes:.  Deal with it, nerds.  The game is fast and fun, and the gameplay is very much in a style of old school gaming that I hear lauded all the time (rulings, not rules!).  You could port in the random tables and a d20 and you'd be set.

I don't have to deal with shit. So take your condescending bullshit and stick it right in your goddamn ear. Not everyone enjoys the same games, and because someone or something wins an online popularity contest doesn't mean we have to instantly love it or give it another chance. Bullshit like you are slinging is half the reason folks who don't like this game or are borderline on it won't touch it with a 10-foot pole. It's the same shit that happened with Wushu on RPGnet: a bunch of fanatical fanboys are going to prescribe it for everything from crappy GMs to mecha/space opera, and everyone is going to get tired of hearing about it in every thread, as it is thrown in as a cure for cancer and glaucoma. It's already happening.

So play what you want, talk about what you want, but don't piss down our back and tell us it's raining.

EDIT: That might be a little harsh, but goddamn, I sick to death of hearing about this game.

I never said it was an old-school game; I said it's played in the same style as old school games.

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;682835I never said it was an old-school game; I said it's played in the same style as old school games.

Man, not in my experience.

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;682835I never said it was an old-school game; I said it's played in the same style as old school games.

No. Take your word-fencing bullshit and shove it.

Quote from: Benoist;682841No. Take your word-fencing bullshit and shove it.

:rolleyes:

Quote from: Zachary The First;682836Man, not in my experience.

Care to elaborate?

Here are the full Indie RPG Award results for 2012 games, from  the website (http://www.rpg-awards.com/2012/):  


Indie Game of the Year

Winner: Dungeon World - 32 points
First runner-up: Monsterhearts - 30 points
Second runner-up: Dog Eat Dog - 20 points
Servants of Gaius - 12 points
Monster of the Week - 10 points
Durance - 10 points
Lords of Olympus - 10 points
Itras By: A surreal role playing game - 8 points
The Final Girl - 7 points
Mythender - 6 points

Indie Supplement of the Year

Winner: Fiasco: American Disasters - 45 points
First runner-up: Second runner-up: The Blood of Misty Harbour - 22 points
Terror Network/The Patriot Incident - 16 points
Roller Girls Vs. - 15 points

Best Free Game

Winner: Mythender - 51 points
First runner-up: Second runner-up: School Daze - 14 points
Zounds! - 7 points
Pirates! - 7 points

Best Support

Winner: Dungeon World - 55 points
First runner-up: Monsterhearts - 26 points
Second runner-up: Lords of Olympus - 11 points
Adventurer, Conqueror, King - 9 points
Monster of the Week - 8 points

Best Production

Winner: Dungeon World - 34 points
First runner-up: Durance - 27 points
Second runner-up: Adventurer, Conqueror, King - 16 points
Lords of Olympus - 10 points
Project Ninja Panda Taco - 9 points
Monsterhearts - 9 points
Mythender - 6 points
Itras By: A surreal role playing game - 6 points
School Daze - 6 points
STALKER - The SciFi Roleplaying Game - 6 points

Most Innovative Game

Winner: First runner-up: Dog Eat Dog - 22 points
Second runner-up: Durance - 17 points
Itras By: A surreal role playing game - 16 points
The Final Girl - 11 points
Colony: Moon - 8 points
The Play's The Thing - 8 points
Dungeon World - 6 points

Quote from: Rincewind1;682566It's a long story, but in short - the example of play Baker provided from a con game was distasteful to say the very least, including the infamous "raping of a cabin boy in a neck stump".

Vincent wasn't in the neck raping game. Here http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?350453-Let-me-recommend-you-a-great-pirates-game

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;682845:rolleyes:



Care to elaborate?

People who suggest similarity between Dungeon World and "old school games" are falsely conflating genre furniture (dungeon, character classes, searching for gold, etc.) with play style.

Quote from: silva;682778WTF is that ?

Tell us more.

Seclusium was Vincent Bakers contribution to the LotFP KS-campaign of yore - and it's just come out in a very good looking 160 page package (http://www.lotfp.com/store/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=171). But this is probably for another thread - I'll post when I have had the time to more than just flick through it.

Quote from: Noclue;682864Vincent wasn't in the neck raping game. Here http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?350453-Let-me-recommend-you-a-great-pirates-game

Erm, didn't he GM it? Or am I thinking of a different game...

Quote from: Ladybird;682929Erm, didn't he GM it? Or am I thinking of a different game...

There were two notorious session reports posted for Poison'd. One where some guys did the old 'let's see how sick we can make this!' session, which involved decapitating and then neck-raping a cabin boy. It was distasteful, and the kind of thing a lot of RPGers get out of their system when they're 13. In this case, it was grown adults, so pretty pathetic.

Far more disturbing, for me, was the session report by Baker himself, kicking off with how surprised he was he could still get a kick out of roleplaying rape, as he has done it so many times in his gaming career, then going into some hideously creepy stuff, and ending with how beautiful and moving it all was. Oh, and he wasn't going to spill the beans on the really good stuff. So yeah, acclaimed indie designer is far, far creepier than any catpiss man.

Quote from: noisms;682897People who suggest similarity between Dungeon World and "old school games" are falsely conflating genre furniture (dungeon, character classes, searching for gold, etc.) with play style.

But don't you remember playing White Plume Mountain back in the day, when as a player you decided that you had a flying carpet to cross the lava cavern, and then the DM had to use a move to waken the vampire to defend Whelm?

Hats off to the winners and finalists.

Quote from: Haffrung;682933There were two notorious session reports posted for Poison'd.

Huh, I thought Baker was discussing the same session. Oh well.

Quote from: Haffrung;682934But don't you remember playing White Plume Mountain back in the day, when as a player you decided that you had a flying carpet to cross the lava cavern, and then the DM had to use a move to waken the vampire to defend Whelm?

You do realise that all "a move" means, from the GM perspective, is doing something, right? Everything the GM would do is "a move" in * World language. So yeah, waking the vampire is "a move", because everything is. It's purely a piece of terminology.

Also, unless a player already had a flying carpet, or had a class with some sort of item-creating ability, they can't just magically decide they have something like that. You can't simply get what you want, for free, as a player. The game won't let you do that any more than any other RPG would.

Quote from: Ladybird;682993You do realise that all "a move" means, from the GM perspective, is doing something, right? Everything the GM would do is "a move" in * World language. So yeah, waking the vampire is "a move", because everything is. It's purely a piece of terminology.

Also, unless a player already had a flying carpet, or had a class with some sort of item-creating ability, they can't just magically decide they have something like that. You can't simply get what you want, for free, as a player. The game won't let you do that any more than any other RPG would.

Please don't let the facts get in the way of the glorious crusade

I'm not part of some crusade against Dungeon World. In fact, I'll probably end up buying it. I've read the SRD and it has some really cool ideas about organizations and fronts.

But let's not pretend Dungeon World is a traditional RPG. It cheerfully wades into shared narrative waters that a lot of gamers simply don't want any part of.

Quote from: soviet;683001Please don't let the facts get in the way of the glorious crusade

If you're that interested in it, there's one thread that JHKim started that only him and one or two others actually participated in.

So much for being interested in the game/style of game, rather than where discussion of it goes, hmm.

Take your charger there chum.

Quote from: Haffrung;683006I'm not part of some crusade against Dungeon World. In fact, I'll probably end up buying it. I've read the SRD and it has some really cool ideas about organizations and fronts.

But let's not pretend Dungeon World is a traditional RPG. It cheerfully wades into shared narrative waters that a lot of gamers simply don't want any part of.

I thought Pundit already ruled on this point. It's a traditional RPG that dupes the story gamers into thinking they're playing a shared narrative game only to peek out from behind the bushes and yell "gotcha!"

Quote from: Haffrung;683006I'm not part of some crusade against Dungeon World. In fact, I'll probably end up buying it. I've read the SRD and it has some really cool ideas about organizations and fronts.

But let's not pretend Dungeon World is a traditional RPG. It cheerfully wades into shared narrative waters that a lot of gamers simply don't want any part of.

That's exactly my position. If the players can postulate something and have it exist when it didn't exist before than you are not in the territory of traditional RPGs anymore, no matter how many times you say "dungeon".

But I like Apocalypse World and will probably take a look at Dungeon World too.

Quote from: Noclue;683015I thought Pundit already ruled on this point. It's a traditional RPG that dupes the story gamers into thinking they're playing a shared narrative game only to peek out from behind the bushes and yell "gotcha!"

If there ever comes a 2nd edition Dungeon World, then that should be on the back of the cover.

I'm turned off by having this shit constantly pushed at me online.

Fuck Dungeon World and all the rest of the -Worlds.

Quote from: jeff37923;683020I'm turned off by having this shit constantly pushed at me online.

Fuck Dungeon World and all the rest of the -Worlds.

Ditto.

It reminds me of the massive tBP adventure/wushu/exalted circlejerks.

Quote from: jeff37923;683020Fuck Dungeon World and all the rest of the -Worlds.

Noooh! Not Gamma World! What did the Podogs ever do to deserve this!

It is a little off subject, but it would be cool (if it isn't already being done) for someone to launch an Old School RPG awards and tie it in with the ennies like the indie rpg awards.

Quote from: jeff37923;683020I'm turned off by having this shit constantly pushed at me online.

Fuck Dungeon World and all the rest of the -Worlds.

There does seem to be a push on by the fanbase, I've noticed this with other games previously as well. There are a few weeks of publicising which may or may not be astroturfing followed by the next darling which comes along doing the same thing.

I dunno, it has some interesting ideas but for me the way fans are making free with other peoples' intellectual property and publishing conversions is a black mark against it, like the way they are targeting Shadowrun in an attempt to piggyback for free on the publicity of the latest release. I mean what, are they going to do the same thing every time a big release comes out? Do the hard work and make up your own compelling settings ya lazy bastards. And pay for your own marketing like everyone else.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;683027It is a little off subject, but it would be cool (if it isn't already being done) for someone to launch an Old School RPG awards and tie it in with the ennies like the indie rpg awards.

That would be cool actually yeah. 'Megadungeon of the year' and so on.

Quote from: jeff37923;683020Fuck Dungeon World and all the rest of the -Worlds.

I want to point out that Other Worlds is nothing to do with AW and DW and all the other sham RPGs looking like storygames that look like RPGs pieces of crap.

Other Worlds is its own kind of RPG looking like a storygame that looks like an RPG piece of crap. :)

Quote from: soviet;683034I want to point out that Other Worlds is nothing to do with AW and DW and all the other sham RPGs looking like storygames that look like RPGs pieces of crap.

Other Worlds is its own kind of RPG looking like a storygame that looks like an RPG piece of crap. :)

So what?

If it gets pushed at me, I just push it away.

Quote from: soviet;683031That would be cool actually yeah. 'Megadungeon of the year' and so on.

I think it would be nice because there are some great old school games out there (or just games that are more traditional) that have a harder time getting recognition at some of these awards (nothing against ennies or indie rpg awards). I think there is a big enough base of people intested in these sort of rpgs that an old school rpg awards would have legs.

Quote from: Haffrung;683006But let's not pretend Dungeon World is a traditional RPG. It cheerfully wades into shared narrative waters that a lot of gamers simply don't want any part of.

I'm sure you'll enjoy it, it's a good game, but don't change the subject. If you're going to criticize Dungeon World, criticise it for something it actually does, not just complaining that is has terminology and then making something up about it.

Quote from: One Horse Town;683011So much for being interested in the game/style of game, rather than where discussion of it goes, hmm.

If we could keep the pointless sneering to one thread, that would be great, too!

I'm having a lot of fun GM'ing it. I'm considering getting a copy of Amber for the GM'ing info, as it's also diceless and rules-light.

Quote from: The Traveller;683030I dunno, it has some interesting ideas but for me the way fans are making free with other peoples' intellectual property and publishing conversions is a black mark against it, like the way they are targeting Shadowrun in an attempt to piggyback for free on the publicity of the latest release. I mean what, are they going to do the same thing every time a big release comes out? Do the hard work and make up your own compelling settings ya lazy bastards. And pay for your own marketing like everyone else.

Like * World is the only system that this ever happens with. As long as there's been more than two systems, people have been porting settings across.

And define "published" - nobody's making any money off the SR hack, for example, it's just a thing that exists. Or would you rather publishers were more draconian in cracking down on uses of their IP?

Quote from: Ladybird;683047Like * World is the only system that this ever happens with. As long as there's been more than two systems, people have been porting settings across.

It's the first time I've seen blatant attempts to piggyback on major new releases by publishers through conversions by 'fans'. Can you point me to any other examples, like around the same time as a milestone publication?

Quote from: Ladybird;683047And define "published" - nobody's making any money off the SR hack, for example, it's just a thing that exists. Or would you rather publishers were more draconian in cracking down on uses of their IP?

The current price for DW stands at ten dollars for the PDF, without which you can't use the conversion. The problem however is the same as with most IP infringements, trying to get a piece of someone else's marketing effort and expense without spending anything yourself. You do understand that much if not most of the cost of making a successful product is often marketing, right?

Edit: oh and yes, I would be absolutely delighted if Catalyst sued seven shades of shit out of those nimrods.

Quote from: noisms;682897People who suggest similarity between Dungeon World and "old school games" are falsely conflating genre furniture (dungeon, character classes, searching for gold, etc.) with play style.

Prove it.

Quote from: The Traveller;683052Edit: oh and yes, I would be absolutely delighted if Catalyst sued seven shades of shit out of those nimrods.

Suing forum posters who are probably anonymous and probably penniless would seem like an expensive and pointless way to get a lot of bad PR.

Suing the probably penniless publishers of another RPG for a thread their fans created (and that has caused no measurable damages) would be the same.

Quote from: soviet;683066Suing forum posters who are probably anonymous and probably penniless would seem like an expensive and pointless way to get a lot of bad PR.

Suing the probably penniless publishers of another RPG for a thread their fans created (and that has caused no measurable damages) would be the same.

If they're trying to become less penniless by riding on the coat tails of someone else's hard work and expense, then hell yes sue them. That's assuming you have access to the financial accounts of either the fans or the publishers of DW and can speak with any authority on the matter, which you don't.

Invoking the legal system has gotten something of a bad name due to abuses followed through by large companies, but I strongly believe in people protecting their work if that's what they want to do. If that means they're getting a bad name it's only among people who weren't going to be customers in the first place. You know what Catalyst were calling it? "The Year of Shadowrun". So along come these backalley hawkers and try to take advantage of that. It's bad business, at best unethical, at worst illegal.

We're talking about a dungeon crawling system being applied to a futuristic cyberpunk setting, a worse fit you'd be hard pressed to find - the only conclusion is opportunism.

I mean it when I say I'd have a great deal more respect for them if they put in the time and effort to create and market their own setting rather than latching on to people who really have put in the effort. And I started out ambivalent or even favourable towards the system as my posting record here will show.

Quote from: Ladybird;683047If we could keep the pointless sneering to one thread, that would be great, too!

If someone's going to try to get on their high-horse about so-called crusades, i think it's worth pointing out that that person is also involved in one - just from the opposite perspective.

I prefer to answer sneers with sneers.

Sneers at Dawn?

Quote from: The Traveller;683071If they're trying to become less penniless by riding on the coat tails of someone else's hard work and expense, then hell yes sue them. That's assuming you have access to the financial accounts of either the fans or the publishers of DW and can speak with any authority on the matter, which you don't.

Invoking the legal system has gotten something of a bad name due to abuses followed through by large companies, but I strongly believe in people protecting their work if that's what they want to do. If that means they're getting a bad name it's only among people who weren't going to be customers in the first place. You know what Catalyst were calling it? "The Year of Shadowrun". So along come these backalley hawkers and try to take advantage of that. It's bad business, at best unethical, at worst illegal.

We're talking about a dungeon crawling system being applied to a futuristic cyberpunk setting, a worse fit you'd be hard pressed to find - the only conclusion is opportunism.

I mean it when I say I'd have a great deal more respect for them if they put in the time and effort to create and market their own setting rather than latching on to people who really have put in the effort. And I started out ambivalent or even favourable towards the system as my posting record here will show.

Who are the 'they' in this instance though? Are you suggesting suing the publishers of DW, who have had (AFAIK) no involvement in this? Or the forum posters who created the thread, who have (AFAIK) no financial stake in the success of DW?

Even aside from the fact that conversion threads are ten a penny and have been a part of the hobby since the start. One of the early TSR books had stats for Cthulhu in D&D even!

Quote from: soviet;683079Who are the 'they' in this instance though? Are you suggesting suing the publishers of DW, who have had (AFAIK) no involvement in this? Or the forum posters who created the thread, who have (AFAIK) no financial stake in the success of DW?

At least one individual who I assume is a part of the official DW team showed up to heartily endorse the effort, but in this case it would make more sense to sue the converters. Are you suggesting it would be wrong to do so, ethically or legally?

Quote from: soviet;683079Even aside from the fact that conversion threads are ten a penny and have been a part of the hobby since the start. One of the early TSR books had stats for Cthulhu in D&D even!

Cthulhu is in the public domain. It's the timing I find reprehensible, around the same time as Shadowrun starts the big launch of their new product, ho look someone's pushing a dungeon crawl system as a conversion for a futuristic cyberpunk system under the same banner. Do me a favour.

It's nice to see that carelessness about DW winning Ennies.

And I don't like DW or AW or *W or anything that comes from Baker and his gaming apostles.

It's pretty fun, bro.  Give it a chance.

Traveller, talking about siccing the hounds on fan-conversions is something that actually would be harmful to the hobby.
Hate on DW all you like, but now you're barking up the wrong tree.

That said; I'd welcome any SR-conversions. It is an amazingly cool setting marred by some of the worst set of mechanics* known to man.
*I'm not familiar with the latest edition. I base my statement on the previous 4. Crap, every single one.

edit: Removed the post since I didn't feel like jumping into this particular fray, but well, too late, and might as well put on that armour.

Nice to see that carelessness about DW winning the Ennies.

And I don't like DW, AW, or any other *W or games coming from Baker and his gaming apostles.

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;683088It's pretty fun, bro.  Give it a chance.

Actually I will admit something - for me, the biggest turn off are the gaming hipsters who praised AW as the next coming of Homer. I actually played AW and it was a decent experience, though I could replicate the experience with a system I felt more comfortable and less abstract. Plus, the whole smug attitude about "GMs playing by the rules as everyone else" and "Play as Written" that's been such a strong point of "Indie" RPGs... Those principles turn me off more than the sex for experience moves (which I find rather ridiculous), really.

Admittedly however, while I do somewhat like D&D, the peons sung for it by fans of various editions, are also causing me to sneer and roll my eyes, especially when the discussions reach the inevitable point of "Why anything else, when there's D&D". And same rule applies to AW and it's clones for me.

Quote from: baragei;683092Traveller, talking about siccing the hounds on fan-conversions is something that actually would be harmful to the hobby.
Hate on DW all you like, but now you're barking up the wrong tree.

Had they waited for a few years until the SR launch was settled I'd agree with you, but this seems like an actively malicious attempt to scoop the cream off the top of someone else's cup of coffee.

Also, as already mentioned, I'm not opposed to DW as a system and I've no interest in SR, so it's not as though I'm arguing from a position of fandom.

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;683065Prove it.

Nah, that's okay thanks. You're the one who made the claim that "it's played in the style of old school games". The burden of proof is entirely on you.

Quote from: The Traveller;683052It's the first time I've seen blatant attempts to piggyback on major new releases by publishers through conversions by 'fans'. Can you point me to any other examples, like around the same time as a milestone publication?

Yeah, I'm not spending an evening on Google Timeline for you. You're so sure there's a conspiracy here? Prove it.

Shadowrun's hot right now because Catalyst are taking advantage of a slow year, and it's making everyone remember what they thought about the game, good or bad - and it's one of those games where the mechanics really do ruin the fun. Dungeon World is a popular new game. There's gonna be some crossover.

QuoteThe current price for DW stands at

free, for the online SRD (http://book.dwgazetteer.com/)

Quote, without which you can't use the conversion.

Actually, the conversion has all the rules you need, as far as I can tell. Other than the GM advice (Available for FREE), there's nothing else you'd need from a * World book, but Shadowrun books would certainly be useful. And you certainly wouldn't mistake this for an official Shadowrun product.

QuoteEdit: oh and yes, I would be absolutely delighted if Catalyst sued seven shades of shit out of those nimrods.

"I'd quite like the lawyers to selectively stomp out this game that mimmicks an IP in ways that make me upset".

Lawyers are not laser-guided.

Quote from: One Horse Town;683074If someone's going to try to get on their high-horse about so-called crusades, i think it's worth pointing out that that person is also involved in one - just from the opposite perspective.

I prefer to answer sneers with sneers.

Aye, fair enough. Soviet can fight his own damned crusade, I'm not getting involved in that.

But let's go back to the Initiative thread - third post in and it's derailed to "why are you talking about this here".

But hey, be the change and all that.

If people want to see more old school stuff in the ENies awards, you might consider simply approaching Morrus about adding such a category or set of categories for next year.  He might be open to that idea.

Quote from: Ladybird;683111Aye, fair enough. Soviet can fight his own damned crusade, I'm not getting involved in that.

Wait, what crusade am I fighting?

Quote from: Ladybird;683111Yeah, I'm not spending an evening on Google Timeline for you. You're so sure there's a conspiracy here? Prove it.

You're the one making the claim, you prove it. The onus isn't on me to support your statement that this is common practice, because it isn't. I'm guessing a quick googling provided nothing and so you're trying to make it my problem.

A swing and a miss.

Quote from: Ladybird;683111Shadowrun's hot right now because Catalyst are taking advantage of a slow year

Oh Catalyst is the one taking advantage. I see.

Quote from: Ladybird;683111free, for the online SRD (http://book.dwgazetteer.com/)

I don't follow, the first two links are to paid purchases and the third is to some sort of wiki-gibberish.

Quote from: Ladybird;683111Actually, the conversion has all the rules you need, as far as I can tell. Other than the GM advice (Available for FREE), there's nothing else you'd need from a * World book, but Shadowrun books would certainly be useful. And you certainly wouldn't mistake this for an official Shadowrun product.

So the fact that Catalyst just happens to be putting a lot of money and effort into marketing their game around the exact same time makes no never mind to you, huh.

Quote from: Ladybird;683111"I'd quite like the lawyers to selectively stomp out this game that mimmicks an IP in ways that make me upset".

Who said it upset me? By all accounts SR has a shit system, DW is probably better. What irritates me is chancers taking a punt on the back of someone else's hard work. Like I said, if they had waited a few years all would be dandy. What happens now, the DW D&D Next conversion? Hoy.

Quote from: soviet;683113Wait, what crusade am I fighting?

To be honest, I can't keep track of who's crusading for what any more. I can't even remember what my agenda is meant to be.

Ah, ha, ahaha , ha, jesus fucking christ you've gone off the deep end.

Fan conversions happen ALL THE TIME. Especially fan conversions of things that are in the public eye.

Emphasis on FAN. Fans are converting it. Not the creators. FANS. The people creating the conversions aren't doing it for money, they are doing it because they like Shadowrun's setting but probably think the rules are balls.

Just like how Benoist seems not to keen on Numenara because of the GM rolls no dice thing but is still interested in the setting.

The way you are conflating this into some conspiracy to make more money, by either the designers or the fans (which is hilarious considering the rules are in the conversion, and the conversion is free) is just absurd conspiracy theorist nonsense to take a piss on a brand you don't like over something that people have been doing since the beginning of the hobby.

Quote from: Emperor Norton;683128The way you are conflating this into some conspiracy to make more money, by either the designers or the fans (which is hilarious considering the rules are in the conversion, and the conversion is free) is just absurd conspiracy theorist nonsense to take a piss on a brand you don't like over something that people have been doing since the beginning of the hobby.

All I said was that I'd be delighted if they were sued. I'd still be delighted if they were sued after your contribution, so eh, thanks for that.

Quote from: noisms;683107Nah, that's okay thanks. You're the one who made the claim that "it's played in the style of old school games". The burden of proof is entirely on you.

You don't have to prove it, point the jackass to the post on this very forum by the actual author of Dungeon World where Sage states it is not an old school game.

I sure hope companies don't start suing people for fan conversions. Last thing I want to go back to are the days of T$R. Thankfully companies these days seem to have a much better relationship with fans who generate gameable content.

Quote from: CRKrueger;683132You don't have to prove it, point the jackass to the post on this very forum by the actual author of Dungeon World where Sage states it is not an old school game.

"Played in the style of an old school game" /= "is an old school game".

I painted my door in the style of a Doctor Who TARDIS.  My door is not TARDIS.

Quote from: The Traveller;683131All I said was that I'd be delighted if they were sued. I'd still be delighted if they were sued after your contribution, so eh, thanks for that.

Quote from: The Traveller;683071If they're trying to become less penniless by riding on the coat tails of someone else's hard work and expense, then hell yes sue them. That's assuming you have access to the financial accounts of either the fans or the publishers of DW and can speak with any authority on the matter, which you don't.

Invoking the legal system has gotten something of a bad name due to abuses followed through by large companies, but I strongly believe in people protecting their work if that's what they want to do. If that means they're getting a bad name it's only among people who weren't going to be customers in the first place. You know what Catalyst were calling it? "The Year of Shadowrun". So along come these backalley hawkers and try to take advantage of that. It's bad business, at best unethical, at worst illegal.

Quote from: The Traveller;683052The current price for DW stands at ten dollars for the PDF, without which you can't use the conversion. The problem however is the same as with most IP infringements, trying to get a piece of someone else's marketing effort and expense without spending anything yourself. You do understand that much if not most of the cost of making a successful product is often marketing, right?

Quote from: The Traveller;683098Had they waited for a few years until the SR launch was settled I'd agree with you, but this seems like an actively malicious attempt to scoop the cream off the top of someone else's cup of coffee.

I just want you to know, I'm not arguing with you. I'm openly mocking you and laughing at you because this is some of the dumbest bullshit I've seen on the site.

EDIT: I'd also like to point out that I give exactly zero shits about Dungeon World. So before someone drops the "CRUSADE" bullshit on me, shove it.

Quote from: Emperor Norton;683136I just want you to know, I'm not arguing with you. I'm openly mocking you and laughing at you because this is some of the dumbest bullshit I've seen on the site.

Well you feel free to parade your ignorance around however you feel best, it's not my job to stop you.

Is there a free if shortened version of DW going around? I can't seem to find it.

Quote from: Emperor Norton;683136I just want you to know, I'm not arguing with you. I'm openly mocking you and laughing at you because this is some of the dumbest bullshit I've seen on the site.

And I have no clue what you guys are talking about, but damn, that's a really high bar you claim was just highjumped.

Quote from: Mistwell;683138And I have no clue what you guys are talking about, but damn, that's a really high bar you claim was just highjumped.

Traveller is positing that there is a conspiracy by Dungeon World creators/fans to hijack the marketing of Shadowrun to make more money. Despite the fact that its a free fan conversion someone is posting up that has no real connection to the creators of Dungeon World other than that one of the creators popped into its thread and said it was pretty cool.

And that all the rules needed to play are in the conversion, so it can't even be used to sell more copies of DW.

Also, apparently I'm ignorant for not seeing the malicious intent of these horrible people who are making a fan conversion of a setting they like to a rule system they like. Because that totally doesn't happen near constantly in the rpg & storygame hobby.

Quote from: The Traveller;683123You're the one making the claim, you prove it. The onus isn't on me to support your statement that this is common practice, because it isn't. I'm guessing a quick googling provided nothing and so you're trying to make it my problem.

A swing and a miss.

To be honest, I went off and had some risotto. It was okay. Needed some salt.

So no, I've never seen a conversion at about the same time as the original launches - but I've never been looking, either, so that doesn't prove anything. But there were a lot of D&D retroclones around the launch of 4e, and this (http://evilhat.wikidot.com/community-fate-core-extensions) is a page that's got a FATE hack for SR.

QuoteOh Catalyst is the one taking advantage. I see.

Er, yes? SR5 evidently wasn't ready last year, D&D5 is going to have a huge launch next year and releasing anything against it would be stupid. Waiting until 2015 for the new edition? Catalyst aren't Wizards, so probably can't afford to go that long without a major release; best to take advantage of a large game-sized hole in the market.

QuoteI don't follow, the first two links are to paid purchases and the third is to some sort of wiki-gibberish.

See those menus at the top of the screen? They lead to 99% of the text of the book (The other 1% is side notes, references, and pop culture quotes).

And you still don't need it for Sixth World.

QuoteSo the fact that Catalyst just happens to be putting a lot of money and effort into marketing their game around the exact same time makes no never mind to you, huh.

Catalyst are spending a lot of time and money making people think about Shadowrun, yeah, and not all those thoughts are going to be complimentary.

And, Sage et al have been pushing Dungeon World. It just so happens that was a while ago. I put in for the kickstarter for the Inverse World setting too, so we'll see how that is when it comes out.

QuoteWho said it upset me? By all accounts SR has a shit system, DW is probably better. What irritates me is chancers taking a punt on the back of someone else's hard work. Like I said, if they had waited a few years all would be dandy. What happens now, the DW D&D Next conversion? Hoy.

It's dungeons all the way down from here.

Quote from: The Traveller;683137Well you feel free to parade your ignorance around however you feel best, it's not my job to stop you.

Is there a free if shortened version of DW going around? I can't seem to find it.

Yes, actually (https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/3269630/dwdotcom/world_of_dungeons_1979_bw.pdf).

Or you could just get all the rules for free. From the link I gave you.

Quote from: Ladybird;683144So no, I've never seen a conversion at about the same time as the original launches - but I've never been looking, either, so that doesn't prove anything. But there were a lot of D&D retroclones around the launch of 4e, and this (http://evilhat.wikidot.com/community-fate-core-extensions) is a page that's got a FATE hack for SR.

There was a Fate version of Star Wars I saw go up right around the time of Edge of the Empire's release.

I can take a guess as to the actual thought process that went into making the SR hack for DW though:

"Oh man, new Shadowrun coming out, awesome. I love Shadowrun. Well, the setting. Crap, man I don't want to run that system again. Hey wait, I do like Dungeon World and my group has been getting a kick out of that. Let's see if I can hack SR into that. I bet people online would think it was cool, too."

Catalyst got people thinking about Shadowrun. It doesn't surprise me that a few people decided that they wanted to convert it to a different system when they started thinking about it.

Quote from: Emperor Norton;683143Traveller is positing that there is a conspiracy by Dungeon World creators/fans to hijack the marketing of Shadowrun to make more money. Despite the fact that its a free fan conversion someone is posting up that has no real connection to the creators of Dungeon World other than that one of the creators popped into its thread and said it was pretty cool.

And that all the rules needed to play are in the conversion, so it can't even be used to sell more copies of DW.

Also, apparently I'm ignorant for not seeing the malicious intent of these horrible people who are making a fan conversion of a setting they like to a rule system they like. Because that totally doesn't happen near constantly in the rpg & storygame hobby.

Ah, OK.  That does seem like a stream of authentic nerdrage gibberish.  Still though, worst ever seen on this board? That gives it far too much credit.

Is this fanfic actually violating any IP? Have the actusl rights holders voiced any concerns?

Quote from: Emperor Norton;683143Also, apparently I'm ignorant for not seeing the malicious intent of these horrible people who are making a fan conversion of a setting they like to a rule system they like. Because that totally doesn't happen near constantly in the rpg & storygame hobby.

No, you're ignorant for not being able to read. But don't let that stop you, chucklehead. Just because the fans aren't about to make bank from taking advantage of somone else's efforts doesn't absolve them from responsibility. And I've already said that the fans are the ones who should be held responsible. Go ahead, paddle back through the thread, it's right there.

Quote from: Ladybird;683144So no, I've never seen a conversion at about the same time as the original launches - but I've never been looking, either, so that doesn't prove anything.

So you retract your comment?

Quote from: Ladybird;683144Er, yes?

Their product was ready, and they released it. Damn their advantage taking eyes!

Quote from: Ladybird;683144See those menus at the top of the screen? They lead to 99% of the text of the book (The other 1% is side notes, references, and pop culture quotes).

What are you talking about. You linked to a page with links to paid purchase options for DW, I can't find a single link that gives me a free PDF, go ahead and update your link at your earliest convenience. FREE if you want to scalp the working bits out of some badly designed website. Eclipse Phase was free.

Quote from: Ladybird;683144Catalyst are spending a lot of time and money making people think about Shadowrun, yeah, and not all those thoughts are going to be complimentary.

When you create a game that 100% of everyone loves let us know. What does this even mean?

Quote from: The Traveller;683150So you retract your comment?

What, that settings have been ported to alternative systems before? That there's going to be some crossover between discontented Shadowrun players and happy Dungeon World players?

It's you that's making allegations of malice...

Quote from: The Traveller;683098but this seems like an actively malicious attempt to scoop the cream off the top of someone else's cup of coffee.

Anyway.

QuoteTheir product was ready, and they released it. Damn their advantage taking eyes!

Er, yes? That's exactly what product release plans are for, to take advantage of market conditions?

You'd have to be stupid to launch a second-tier game like Shadowrun next year.

QuoteWhat are you talking about. You linked to a page with links to paid purchase options for DW, I can't find a single link that gives me a free PDF, go ahead and update your link at your earliest convenience. FREE if you want to scalp the working bits out of some badly designed website. Eclipse Phase was free.

Ah, so now you're changing the rules. It can't be a free copy of the rules because you might have to put the slightest form of effort into it? What, your keyboard lacking CTRL, C and V keys?

QuoteWhen you create a game that 100% of everyone loves let us know. What does this even mean?

It means some people are going to think "Shadowrun, cool setting, crap system. What else can I use...". Same as every other game with it's own strong setting.

Quote from: The Traveller;683150No, you're ignorant for not being able to read. But don't let that stop you, chucklehead. Just because the fans aren't about to make bank from taking advantage of somone else's efforts doesn't absolve them from responsibility. And I've already said that the fans are the ones who should be held responsible. Go ahead, paddle back through the thread, it's right there.

You are a Grade-A moron. Do you think if you scream loud enough the meaning of the words you used will change?

Or are you just going to ignore the last time you said the "all I said was" where I pulled three quotes of you saying something completely different.

Do you really think any single person on here doesn't think you are a fucking moron? Yeah, there are a lot of people not commenting, but that has more to do with the culture of "if there is something I don't like, I can't possibly defend it even from stupid ass straight out bullshit claims" this site has than that people agree with you. (Its also incredibly likely that a lot of people have you on ignore, because you have a record of being a dumbass shit.)

Notice how not a single person has agreed with you? That is because your argument is monumentally and painfully dumb as shit, and encourages the stupid ass late TSR suehappy shit that no one wants to see back.

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;682835I never said it was an old-school game; I said it's played in the same style as old school games.

When you use the word "style" here, what's your definition of that word?

If you mean something like "both of these games have elves", then... sure. Whatever. It's a pointless statement, but I guess factually accurate.

But if you mean anything to do with the mechanics of the game beyond "these are both RPGs", then Benoist is right: You have no idea what you're talking about.

Quote from: noisms;683018That's exactly my position. If the players can postulate something and have it exist when it didn't exist before...

OTOH, noisms and a bunch of other people in this thread also have no fucking idea what they're talking about.

Quote from: The Traveller;683085At least one individual who I assume is a part of the official DW team showed up to heartily endorse the effort, but in this case it would make more sense to sue the converters. Are you suggesting it would be wrong to do so, ethically or legally?

This, BTW, is the dumbest fucking conspiracy theory I have ever seen.

(1) See that this is the "Year of Shadowrun".

(2) Travel back in time (http://apocalypse-world.com/forums/index.php?topic=402.0) to start developing the hack before Catalyst announces the "Year of Shadowrun".

(3) Establish fake identities so that it only looks like completely different people are responsible for the fan-hack (while, in reality, it's actually the developers of Dungeon World themselves).

(4) Release the "Sixth World" hack for Dungeon World and charge no money for it.

(5) Profit from all the people buying Dungeon World (which is also available for free (http://book.dwgazetteer.com/introduction.html)) in order to play your fan-hack.

(6) ???

(7) PROFIT!

Quote from: Emperor Norton;683164You are a Grade-A moron. Do you think if you scream loud enough the meaning of the words you used will change?

Or are you just going to ignore the last time you said the "all I said was" where I pulled three quotes of you saying something completely different.

Do you really think any single person on here doesn't think you are a fucking moron? Yeah, there are a lot of people not commenting, but that has more to do with the culture of "if there is something I don't like, I can't possibly defend it even from stupid ass straight out bullshit claims" this site has than that people agree with you. (Its also incredibly likely that a lot of people have you on ignore, because you have a record of being a dumbass shit.)

Notice how not a single person has agreed with you? That is because your argument is monumentally and painfully dumb as shit, and encourages the stupid ass late TSR suehappy shit that no one wants to see back.

Ahahaha! Doesn't read thread, gets bitchslapped on account of same, launches into tirade of abuse.

It's like 1993 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eternal_September) all over again.

Quote from: Ladybird;683159What, that settings have been ported to alternative systems before?

The response you made to the problem I pointed out is pretty much the textbook definition of 'strawman', and you're only digging yourself in deeper here.

Quote from: Ladybird;683159It's you that's making allegations of malice...

If I was in the SR team around the time of that conversion I'd be pretty pissed, so yes, malice. At least from their pespective.

To be honest I don't know who was the idiot from DW who weighed in to express joy at the effort but he needs his head examined.

Quote from: Ladybird;683159Er, yes? That's exactly what product release plans are for, to take advantage of market conditions?

You'd have to be stupid to launch a second-tier game like Shadowrun next year.

And good faith goes under entirely...

Quote from: Ladybird;683159Ah, so now you're changing the rules. It can't be a free copy of the rules because you might have to put the slightest form of effort into it? What, your keyboard lacking CTRL, C and V keys?

I would have a hard time making anything gameable out of that mess of a website. Assuming it is playable, the cross referencing was a joke after you hit races in classes.

Quote from: Ladybird;683159It means some people are going to think "Shadowrun, cool setting, crap system. What else can I use...".

They can think that all they like. They can even port it to another setting in the comfort of their own homes. I'm saying that I hope the pricks get sued into oblivion for releasing it in SR's flagship year. Don't like it? Not my problem.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;683166This, BTW, is the dumbest fucking conspiracy theory I have ever seen.

(1) See that this is the "Year of Shadowrun".

(2) Travel back in time (http://apocalypse-world.com/forums/index.php?topic=402.0) to start developing the hack before Catalyst announces the "Year of Shadowrun".

(3) Establish fake identities so that it only looks like completely different people are responsible for the fan-hack (while, in reality, it's actually the developers of Dungeon World themselves).

(4) Release the "Sixth World" hack for Dungeon World and charge no money for it.

(5) Profit from all the people buying Dungeon World (which is also available for free (http://book.dwgazetteer.com/introduction.html)) in order to play your fan-hack.

(6) ???

(7) PROFIT!

You must be the brains of the operation.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;683166OTOH, noisms and a bunch of other people in this thread also have no fucking idea what they're talking about.

Oh great, Justin Alexander, the most intelligent man in the world and the acknowledged gate-keeper of what is or isn't a role playing game is here to set us all straight.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;683166When you use the word "style" here, what's your definition of that word?

If you mean something like "both of these games have elves", then... sure. Whatever. It's a pointless statement, but I guess factually accurate.

But if you mean anything to do with the mechanics of the game beyond "these are both RPGs", then Benoist is right: You have no idea what you're talking about.

There's very little mechanical similarity between DW and old-school D&D.  Some of the stats are the same, but the actual die rolls involved are pretty radically different.

But in terms of "feel", I'm less concerned about the mechanics than the types of decisions that people are making, who's making them, etc.

Who's rolling the dice, or how many of them, is less important to me than the decisions that players are making and how they interact with the game.

And on those fronts, *to me*, DW plays a lot more like old-school D&D (1e or B/X) than anything else.  Or, to put it another way - if I were to run some old-school D&D game, and recorded the audio, and just removed anything relating to mechanics, I think it would sound a lot like if I did the same thing with DW.

YMMV, of course.

Quote from: Rincewind1;683093Plus, the whole smug attitude about "GMs playing by the rules as everyone else" and "Play as Written" that's been such a strong point of "Indie" RPGs...

I actually like "Play as Written."  I think it's more of a demand that the *game designers* make the game playable as written than anything else.  I've also found a lot of cool things in games by playing them *as written* before tweaking them.  Sometimes, something that doesn't make sense is just contrary to my expectations, and going with it for a while shows me how it fits together and makes sense.

Of course, sometimes it's just a crap rule.

That said, I don't think anyone should hesitate from tweaking a game to their liking.  Just be aware that it's a variant, like the Free Parking rule in Monopoly.

Quote from: Rincewind1;683093Those principles turn me off more than the sex for experience moves (which I find rather ridiculous), really.

Yeah.  Baker has a bug up his ass about sex in games, that's for sure.

Quote from: Rincewind1;683093Admittedly however, while I do somewhat like D&D, the peons sung for it by fans of various editions, are also causing me to sneer and roll my eyes, especially when the discussions reach the inevitable point of "Why anything else, when there's D&D". And same rule applies to AW and it's clones for me.

I find "One True System" to be weird.  I mean, I like steak, but I don't want to eat steak every day.  Different systems do different things, and give you different experiences.  That's cool.  Why would I want to only play one, ever?

Oh, mea fucking culpa. Now I've just helped derail another Dungeon World thread.

I'm done here, feel free to declare yourself victorious or whatever.

Quote from: Ladybird;683202Oh, mea fucking culpa. Now I've just helped derail another Dungeon World thread.

I'm done here, feel free to declare yourself victorious or whatever.

I think it's safe to say we all know it exists and where to get it by now. ;)

Quote from: The Traveller;683179Ahahaha! Doesn't read thread, gets bitchslapped on account of same, launches into tirade of abuse.

If that was a bitchslap, it was the lamest excuse of a bitchslap I've ever seen. Oh no, the horror, one dude who can't even read his own posts apparently said I was ignorant.

Anyway, I'm out. Its not like anyone here thinks your conspiracy theory is in any way credible. Its fun to watch you flail around like an idiot, but I've got better things to do.

Quote from: Emperor Norton;683222If that was a bitchslap, it was the lamest excuse of a bitchslap I've ever seen. Oh no, the horror, one dude who can't even read his own posts apparently said I was ignorant.

Anyway, I'm out. Its not like anyone here thinks your conspiracy theory is in any way credible. Its fun to watch you flail around like an idiot, but I've got better things to do.

Good man, carry on.

Quote from: Rincewind1;683093Actually I will admit something - for me, the biggest turn off are the gaming hipsters who praised AW as the next coming of Homer. I actually played AW and it was a decent experience, though I could replicate the experience with a system I felt more comfortable and less abstract. Plus, the whole smug attitude about "GMs playing by the rules as everyone else" and "Play as Written" that's been such a strong point of "Indie" RPGs... Those principles turn me off more than the sex for experience moves (which I find rather ridiculous), really.

Admittedly however, while I do somewhat like D&D, the peons sung for it by fans of various editions, are also causing me to sneer and roll my eyes, especially when the discussions reach the inevitable point of "Why anything else, when there's D&D". And same rule applies to AW and it's clones for me.

Yeah, the hardcore storygamers are huge douchebags.  Seems like most of the Tumblrites over on RPG.net are big into that sort of thing, probably because the "old school" D&D dredges up memories of Ronald Reagan and being bullied at high school.  I'm normally against "hipster RPGs" and storygames, but damn if Dungeon World isn't a load of fun.  The GM my group played with was a storygamer, but we still had a load of fun.

Quote from: noisms;683107Nah, that's okay thanks. You're the one who made the claim that "it's played in the style of old school games". The burden of proof is entirely on you.

Uhh, okay.  Here's what happened in our game.  I was an elf fighter.  One of my compatriots was a rogue.  We were facing a door to the dungeon.  The rogue wants to quietly open the door.  The DM says, "How are you going to do that?  It's a huge wooden door."  The rogue thinks for a minute and says he's going to oil the hinges and slowly push the door open, just peeking in.  The DM says he succeeds based on his actions within the game.

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;683232Uhh, okay.  Here's what happened in our game.  I was an elf fighter.  One of my compatriots was a rogue.  We were facing a door to the dungeon.  The rogue wants to quietly open the door.  The DM says, "How are you going to do that?  It's a huge wooden door."  The rogue thinks for a minute and says he's going to oil the hinges and slowly push the door open, just peeking in.  The DM says he succeeds based on his actions within the game.

I'm confused. What exactly sets that apart from any other game?

Quote from: brettmb;683297I'm confused. What exactly sets that apart from any other game?

Nothing, which is I think what his point was.

Did the Elf Fighter have a bow? ;)

Quote from: CRKrueger;683304Did the Elf Fighter have a bow? ;)

With 22 coins, a Fighter can start with a bow. Plus they can buy one later, assuming money and availability.

Quote from: Skywalker;683309With 22 coins, a Fighter can start with a bow. Plus they can buy one later, assuming money and availability.

The bait wasn't for you...that's no fun.

Quote from: brettmb;683297I'm confused. What exactly sets that apart from any other game?

The amount of butthurt over it?

No, wait, that won't set it apart either.

You got me!

Quote from: brettmb;683297I'm confused. What exactly sets that apart from any other game?

It doesn't.  That's the point.

OK. So I skimmed through the book a while ago, but I still didn't see what people were raving about. Can someone just use a few bullet points to explain all the hoopla?

It captures a particular freewheeling style for playing D&D. If you like that style, or you played D&D in that style, its a lot of fun. There is really not much more to it than that.

I have found that it allows me to run my AD&D modules in a way that it feels like I used to do many years ago, but also suits a lot of players today that aren't otherwise interested in such games.

So it's compatible with D&D?

Quote from: brettmb;683347So it's compatible with D&D?

Compatible? Not directly. However, I can run my AD&D modules on the fly with it as all the concepts are there.

Plus the adventure design approach of DW when applied to AD&D modules tends to do an good job of turning the somewhat static adventures into something more dynamic. I could have done this myself, but DW makes it more fun and its nice to have the support.

I have run Against the Cult of the Reptile God, Treasure Hunt, The Sentinel and The Gauntlet so far. I plan to run Ptolus, Red Hand of Doom, Labyrinth of Madness, and Expedition to Castle Ravenloft with it at some stage.

FWIW I have posted my AD&D conversions for Dungeon World here:

N1: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/14355510/Reptile%20Cult.pdf
N4: http://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/14355510/Treasure%20Hunt.pdf
UK2&3: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/14355510/Sentinel%20%26%20Gauntlet.pdf

Sorry, if I'm sounding a bit thick here, but I can run any module on the fly with any game with which I'm familiar. I still don't get it. Nothing here sounds new. What am I missing?

Quote from: brettmb;683354Sorry, if I'm sounding a bit thick here, but I can run any module on the fly with any game with which I'm familiar. I still don't get it. Nothing here sounds new. What am I missing?

Does it need to be new to be good? Dungeon World is good at what it does. I don't know if it does anything particularly new or innovative.

Also, I didn't say that DW's success is from running modules on the fly. The key to why I like it is the style of play it presents. It just so happens that it allows for AD&D module conversions easily.

If you like the style of play, it will work for you. If you don't, you wont.

Quote from: Skywalker;683355Does it need to be new to be good? Dungeon World is good at what it does. I don't know if it does anything particularly new or innovative.

Doesn't need to be new, but I'm not hearing anything that any other game can't do. I figured there were some new mechanics that set it apart, but I don't see it. It's 2d6 vs difficulty, right?

Quote from: brettmb;683354Sorry, if I'm sounding a bit thick here, but I can run any module on the fly with any game with which I'm familiar. I still don't get it. Nothing here sounds new. What am I missing?

It's a lightweight, action-oriented game.  The main draw of Dungeon World is that its system is simple that players can pick it up in a few minutes--no worrying about THAC0, Vancian slots, saving throws, and so forth.

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;683358It's a lightweight, action-oriented game.  The main draw of Dungeon World is that its system is simple that players can pick it up in a few minutes--no worrying about THAC0, Vancian slots, saving throws, and so forth.

OK. I've got a bunch of systems that do that. Something must set it apart.

Quote from: brettmb;683356Doesn't need to be new, but I'm not hearing anything that any other game can't do. I figured there were some new mechanics that set it apart, but I don't see it. It's 2d6 vs difficulty, right?

You're saying that all other games have the same style of gaming as DW? I am not sure that's accurate on any level.

Not to sound jaded, but there is very little that is new in RPGs anymore IMO

Quote from: brettmb;683359OK. I've got a bunch of systems that do that. Something must set it apart.

Why can't it just be really good at what it does? By your seeming definitions here, the same can be applied to any RPG.

Quote from: Skywalker;683361Why can't it just be really good at what it does? By your seeming definitions here, the same can be applied to any RPG.

Exactly. That's what it looked like to me - just a regular RPG that seems to take up more pages than it needs. What is so special about the style? What specifically separates this from any other game? Why can't I just play Tunnels and Trolls, for example?

Quote from: brettmb;683362Exactly. That's what it looked like to me - just a regular RPG that seems to take up more pages than it needs. What is so special about the style? What specifically separates this from any other game? Why can't I just play Tunnels and Trolls, for example?

It just a style that suits certain people's preferences. I would say that its a style that has not been well represented in D&D style fantasy RPGs IME.

Sure, you could run a RPG in the style of DW, but that says more about the beauty of the flexibility of RPGs. But T&T would do things differently from DW. Some better and some worse.

Ok, so can you explain the style?

If I had to identify one thing that appeals to me most about my experiences with DW is the way it encourages danger in the game. I find that this increases the tension and makes the play experience exciting.

It does this through various methods. The primary two being how the mechanics are stacked toward success but at cost and the GM Moves. There are others, such as the concepts of dangers and fronts and also how the players were often presented with choices about how things go wrong.

The result was that the PCs were often getting themselves deeply into trouble and yet able to get themselves out again, often setting up the next set of trouble organically from the first. You could replicate this aspect of style in your RPG of choice, but DW does a very good job of supporting and encouraging it, making my job as GM more enjoyable and easier.

Other things I like:

1. Initiative-less combat. I have used this before in Con games for many RPGs, but it was cool to see it embraced in the rules.

2. Ease of conversion. As described above, I like how it provides specific tools for converting AD&D modules in a way that I liked.

3. Broad appeal. I found it appealed to casual gamers, power gamers and method actors alike.

4. Fun mechanics. The rules are generally fun to engage with as players and GM.

Quote from: brettmb;683356Doesn't need to be new, but I'm not hearing anything that any other game can't do. I figured there were some new mechanics that set it apart, but I don't see it. It's 2d6 vs difficulty, right?

Dungeon World doesn't really introduce anything revolutionary compared to Apocalypse World. Apocalypse World does a couple things that are fairly uncommon:

First, it uses a multi-step resolution mechanic. You state your intention, start the resolution, and the mechanics generate an outcome that describes how the situation has evolved at roughly the halfway point. Unless things are going really, really well or really, really poorly for the character, the character makes a decision in response to the evolving situation and then you finish resolving the intention. (This mechanic tends to create more dynamic and detailed conflicts. It's literally impossible for AW games to turn into "I hit it with my sword (roll) I succeed / fail ... I hit it with my sword again".)

Second, it uses mostly player-faced mechanics. The GM basically never touches the dice. (Many GMs find this liberating. Many players find that it increases their engagement with the game.)

Third, the game strongly structures the GM's role at the table. It does this in a way which is ultimately non-constraining on the GM, but which forces a lot of GMs to really think about how they're running their games (in a way that a lot of GMs generally don't).

Fourth, the mechanical structure for Factions creates a unique prep structure for sandbox campaigns. (These made it into DW, right? I'm having a sudden doubt and the rulebook isn't convenient.)

Quote from: brettmb;683359OK. I've got a bunch of systems that do that. Something must set it apart.

The game is very abstract and heavily dependent upon GM interpretation of dice rolls.  There's not a yes/no answer when players roll the dice, and players won't make a move haphazardly because rolling 6 or less is always bad.  The GM is told, "Yes, when the players roll a 6-, you can hurt them, and you should."

A lot of Dungeon World's appeal is how the game is written and how the rules work.  In a tradgame, a player might say, "I want to examine the rune and see if I know anything about it," and the GM will say, "Roll your Spellcraft."  If the player rolls high, he learns some information; if he rolls low, he does not.  Dungeon World takes it a step further--the player gets information if he rolls decently well (7+ gets him a win), but there's a chance he'll roll a 6-.  What happens then?  The glyph of flesh to stone glows with purple energy.  How does he react?  Let's say he dives back from it and rolls +Dex and gets a 7-9.  He doesn't get out of the way entirely, but instead the GM rules his right arm has been turned to stone.

But the thing is that the GM doesn't have to do it like that.  If the player rolled a 7-9, the GM might rule that the triggering glyph awakened the lich from his slumber, or that the rune shot out a blast of violet energy that turned his backpack to stone, or anything else he could think of.

That's the beauty of Dungeon World, in my opinion.  In D&D, if the players trigger a flesh to stone glyph, they all roll Fortitude saves and success means they resist the effect.  There aren't partial successes or failures, and a failure does exactly what the rules says it does.

In my eyes, Dungeon World gives the GM explicit permission to fuck over his players, and that's a good thing.  It's baked into the rules that the GM has the ability to change how things work on the fly.  But, you might say, I already have this power in tradgames.  You'd be right, of course, but when you start making too much up in a tradgame, you're going to piss players off.  (If, for instance, you ruled that a player automatically took sneak attack damage without an attack roll against his AC, he'd probably balk.)

I'll give you a specific example from our game.  The wizard was repeatedly casting invisibility on party members.  He rolled a 6-.  The GM ruled that the arcane energy of the wizard blasted out of control and triggered a reaction within the temple that caused the rooms to shift around, rendering our map useless.

Now, if you're comfortable enough with your tradgame group to pull something like that, go for it.  You probably don't need Dungeon World.  But the overall simplicity of the system is still great for con games.  As I said before, it's probably not the best for a long-running campaign because of how mechanics-light it is.  If you're interested in deeper mechanics and character customization, you'll probably want a tradgame.

Sorry. Still don't get it, but that's OK. Just sounds like any other game to me.

EDIT: Actually, re-reading parts of the previous two posts, it now sounds like the rules mean nothing, as the GM can just screw over the characters whenever he wants. Rolls don't seem to mean much.

Quote from: brettmb;683384Sorry. Still don't get it, but that's OK. Just sounds like any other game to me.

You're being deliberately obtuse, then.

Quote from: brettmb;683384Sorry. Still don't get it, but that's OK. Just sounds like any other game to me.

Tell me any other game that has "sucess at a cost" built-in on the resolution.

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;683386You're being deliberately obtuse, then.

No. I'm just not following anything here. You're telling me a 6 is a failure (or botch) and a 7-9 is a success. So the GM improvised the results. Am I correct or did I miss something again?

Brett, there are 3 possible ranges for each roll of a 2d6:

1-6: shit happens
7-9: you suceed at a cost, or the GM offer you an ugly choice
10+: you suceed

The mid range is where Apocalypse World (and its hack, Dungeon World) differs from most games.

Quote from: brettmb;683384EDIT: Actually, re-reading parts of the previous two posts, it now sounds like the rules mean nothing, as the GM can just screw over the characters whenever he wants. Rolls don't seem to mean much.

No more so than any RPG. DW does more mechanically to get players to buy into complications and costs though.

Quote from: brettmb;683384Sorry. Still don't get it, but that's OK. Just sounds like any other game to me.

EDIT: Actually, re-reading parts of the previous two posts, it now sounds like the rules mean nothing, as the GM can just screw over the characters whenever he wants. Rolls don't seem to mean much.

Then if you're interested, I suggest you download a copy of the rules and see what they say for yourself - the rules don't give the GM to just screw players over, and on a 10+, the characters basically get what they want.

Even better, find someone that's running a game on G+ and join it.

Justin Alexander's description of how the mechanics work is pretty much spot on.

The basic mechanic is you describe your character doing something.  The GM (and you, possibly) figures out which mechanical move that is.  You roll the dice and an a stat modifier.

On a 10+, you generally get what you want.
On a 7-9 you get some of what you want, or you get what you want with complications.
On a 6 or lower, you don't get what you want, and something bad happens to you.

For instance, a 10+ on "Hack and Slash", the "I'm fighting in melee" move, means that you can either do damage to your target with none to you, or you can deal double damage at a cost of the opponent getting to do damage to you.
On a 7-9, you and your opponent both do damage.
On 6 or less, the GM can make a "hard move".  The most common is probably dealing damage to you, especially on a Hack and Slash, but other things are possible.  Offering a hard choice is one I'll often use on a 6-.

If I had to describe the overall feel of the game, I'd probably say "early D&D, 150 proof".  For what it's worth, the last game of DW I ran was an impromptu game because our normal GM was really late.  They were all new DW players, but experienced roleplayers.  The engagement and "energy" of the game was some of the highest I've ever seen, especially from that group.

The scenario?  About a dozen kobolds in a cave.  And they didn't even realize it was "just" kobolds in a cave until I pointed it out later at a different game.

There's some other interesting mechanics in there, too.  Monsters don't really have turns - rather, the GM makes a "soft move" (which is basically "something bad is happening, what do you do about it", as opposed to a hard move which is "something bad just happened to you"), and your response to the soft move determines what happens.  This has some interesting side effects - you don't track initiative in any strict sense, and that's balanced out by the fact that any character that's getting to do a lot of things is *also* put in a lot of danger.  That's an AW thing which DW just inherited, but it's not something I've really seen outside of the *W games.

Quote from: robiswrongyou don't track initiative in any strict sense, and that's balanced out by the fact that any character that's getting to do a lot of things is *also* put in a lot of danger. That's an AW thing which DW just inherited, but it's not something I've really seen outside of the *W games.

I would like to reinforce this statement. Due to this, the *World games tend to empower the players much more than the average game, in my experience.

Quote from: silva;683387Tell me any other game that has "sucess at a cost" built-in on the resolution.

Story Engine and Kult off the top of my head.

Thank you, silva. That helps.

robiswrong, it's too long. I'm a simple man and the rules are all over the map. For rules-lite, it really needs less.

Quote from: brettmb;683399robiswrong, it's too long. I'm a simple man and the rules are all over the map. For rules-lite, it really needs less.

Most of them are GM-facing.

You can mostly just read the "how to play" chapter, skipping anything like hirelings that's beyond the normal.  If the SRD has the "example of play", read that, it gives a good feel for the game.

Beyond that, if you just read the basic moves, and then pick a single class and read its moves, you'll have a good feel of the system from the player's viewpoint.

If you're familiar with RPGs in general, you can probably skim most of "how to play".  There's a lot of explanation of stuff that's been standard for 40 years.

If you really want to cut down to the bare essentials, read the Basic Moves, and then one of the class chapters.

Or, join a game in a G+ Hangout.  The game is simple enough to pick up when playing.

Quote from: brettmb;683390No. I'm just not following anything here. You're telling me a 6 is a failure (or botch) and a 7-9 is a success. So the GM improvised the results. Am I correct or did I miss something again?

Here's what happens.  When a player attempts a task that has a chance of failure, he rolls 2d6 + his relevant stat.  On a roll of 10+, the character gains a particularly good success.  On a roll of 7-9, the character gains a partial success, which means he gets some of what he wants, but not all of it.  On a roll of 6-, the DM gets to make a "move," which means he gets to perform a bit of improvisation that has the potential to harm or hinder the players.

For example, let's use the previous example of the glyph of flesh to stone.  The setup for a tradgame and Dungeon World is alike: you enter the room and see a sigil etched into the floor.  The players then react to this accordingly in both games.  In this example, we'll have the wizard examining it.

Tradgame Scenario #1:

WIZARD: I carefully walk over to the glyph and examine it.  What do I know?
DM: Roll Spellcraft.
WIZARD: I roll 25.  (A good roll, one that can likely provide a fair amount of information.)
DM: You recognize this is a glyph of flesh to stone that triggers whenever a living creature comes into contact with this.  Once it has been activated, it requires one hour to recharge.

Dungeon World Scenario #1:

WIZARD: I carefully walk over to the glyph and examine it.  What do I know?
DM: Roll 2d6+Int.
WIZARD: I roll 10+.
DM: You recognize this is a glyph of flesh to stone that triggers whenever a living creature comes into contact with this.  Once it has been activated, it requires one hour to recharge.  (The move Spout Lore says that the DM must provide information that is both useful and interesting on a 10+.)

Tradgame Scenario #2:

WIZARD: I carefully walk over to the glyph and examine it.  What do I know?
DM: Roll Spellcraft.
WIZARD: I roll 15.  (A mediocre roll, one that provides limited insight.)
DM: You recognize that this is some sort of magical trap, but you're not sure what.

Dungeon World Scenario #2:

WIZARD: I carefully walk over to the glyph and examine it.  What do I know?
DM: Roll 2d6+Int.
WIZARD: I roll 7-9.
DM: You aren't sure exactly what the glyph does, but you recognize the style of the glyph as the sort that are commonplace when guarding a wizard's sanctum.  (On a 7-9, the DM is required to give out a bit of interesting information, but it may not be immediately useful.)

Tradgame Scenario #3:

WIZARD: I carefully walk over to the glyph and examine it.  What do I know?
DM: Roll Spellcraft.
WIZARD: I roll 5.  (A poor roll, one unlikely to provide any information.)
DM: You know the glyph is magical, but nothing else.

Dungeon World Scenario #3:

WIZARD: I carefully walk over to the glyph and examine it.  What do I know?
DM: Roll 2d6+Int.
WIZARD: I roll 6-.
DM: Uh-oh!  While pondering the glyph, you begin walking around it, hoping a different angle will jog your memory.  Unfortunately, you take a step too close and trigger it.  (On a 6-, the DM gets to make one of his moves.  In this example, I'm using "use a danger move," which in this case is the flesh to stone glyph.)  The glyph glows bright purple.  What do you do?
WIZARD: I leap out of the way.  (Defy Danger move using Dexterity.)  I rolled a 7-9.
DM: As you jump backward, an amethyst ray strikes your arm.  You let out a shout as the limb goes numb and turns to granite.  (The DM gives the player a worse outcome on this roll, as per the Defy Danger move.)

Tradgame Scenario #4:

WIZARD: I carefully walk over to the glyph and touch it.
DM: Uh-oh, you've triggered the glyph!  Roll a DC 15 Fortitude save.
WIZARD: I roll a 15.
DM: Lucky for you, you shrugged off that spell.

Or...

WIZARD: I roll a 10.
DM: Uh-oh, you turn to stone.

Quote from: brettmb;683399robiswrong, it's too long. For rules-lite, it really needs less.

Given the books linked in your .sig, I think it's safe to assume at this point that you're blatantly trolling.

Good work, though. You managed to spin this out for several pages.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;683402Given the books linked in your .sig, I think it's safe to assume at this point that you're blatantly trolling.

Good work, though. You managed to spin this out for several pages.

Wow. Really? Books in my sig? I can't have outside interests?

I'm trying to get this explained... finally did. All it seems to come down to is get hurt, succeed but with difficulty, or win. OK. Pretty simple. Hey, if that's what makes the game fun for you, great! That one facet just doesn't seem much different from anything I've played for me to say, "I've got to play this," and that makes me curious as to what it's got that makes other people want to play it.

Quote from: silva;683387Tell me any other game that has "sucess at a cost" built-in on the resolution.

Okay, I'll play. Fate Core. Torchbearer. Mouse Guard.

Each very different from Dungeon World.

@brettmb, "sounds like any other game" is a silly statement. Which games? Does it sound like DnD 4? Does it sound like Fiasco? Does it sound like Dogs in the Vineyard? You mention Kult and Story Engine, does it sound like both of those games simultaneously?

Dungeon World doesn't bill itself as rules lite, but it's not very rules heavy. The GM presents a perilous and fantastical world and the players say what their heroic characters do. The interesting bits of the game revolve around the moves. Sometimes what the players say will fit a character move and the GM will call for a dice roll. On a 10 or better they succeed. On a 6 or less the GM gets to say what happens by making a GM move, listed below:

• Use a monster, danger, or location move
• Reveal an unwelcome truth
• Show signs of an approaching threat
• Deal damage
• Use up their resources
• Turn their move back on them
• Separate them
• Give an opportunity that fits a class’ abilities
• Show a downside to their class, race, or equipment
• Offer an opportunity, with or without cost
• Put someone in a spot
• Tell them the requirements or consequences and ask

So, say Burne is standing over his friend Perkins, shield raised against a Wyvern's aerial assault. The GM says "Cool, you're standing in defense of Perkins, roll +CON (move: Defend)." If Burne rolls at least a 10, he gets to do three of the following:

• Redirect an attack from the thing you defend to yourself
• Halve the attack’s effect or damage
• Open up the attacker to an ally giving that ally +1 forward against the attacker
• Deal damage to the attacker equal to your level

If Burne rolls a 6 or less, the GM gets to make as hard a move as they like, perhaps they want to Deal Damage "One of the wyvern's claws rakes across your face, flaying your cheek to the bone. Roll 2D6 damage." Or maybe show a downside of their equipment, "The wyvern's maw clamps down on your shield as it tosses its head back on forth, leaving the shield a tattered and useless mess hanging from your arm." Or maybe you reveal an unwelcome truth, "As your shield resounds with the tremendous blows from the wyvern's claws, you spy its mate flying up behind it..." It's up to them and those things happen.

GM moves give the GM a lot of power to take things in new directions and to deal out complications and consequences to the characters. I think it plays like its own thing and doesn't feel like most games, although it feels inspired by old school DnD play (not saying it's an Old School game).

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;683232Yeah, the hardcore storygamers are huge douchebags.  Seems like most of the Tumblrites over on RPG.net are big into that sort of thing, probably because the "old school" D&D dredges up memories of Ronald Reagan and being bullied at high school.  I'm normally against "hipster RPGs" and storygames, but damn if Dungeon World isn't a load of fun.  The GM my group played with was a storygamer, but we still had a load of fun.



Uhh, okay.  Here's what happened in our game.  I was an elf fighter.  One of my compatriots was a rogue.  We were facing a door to the dungeon.  The rogue wants to quietly open the door.  The DM says, "How are you going to do that?  It's a huge wooden door."  The rogue thinks for a minute and says he's going to oil the hinges and slowly push the door open, just peeking in.  The DM says he succeeds based on his actions within the game.

EDIT: Actually, forget it.

Quote from: Noclue;683414Okay, I'll play. Fate Core. Torchbearer. Mouse Guard.

Each very different from Dungeon World.

@brettmb, "sounds like any other game" is a silly statement. Which games? Does it sound like DnD 4? Does it sound like Fiasco? Does it sound like Dogs in the Vineyard? You mention Kult and Story Engine, does it sound like both of those games simultaneously?

Dungeon World doesn't bill itself as rules lite, but it's not very rules heavy. The GM presents a perilous and fantastical world and the players say what their heroic characters do. The interesting bits of the game revolve around the moves. Sometimes what the players say will fit a character move and the GM will call for a dice roll. On a 10 or better they succeed. On a 6 or less the GM gets to say what happens by making a GM move, listed below:

• Use a monster, danger, or location move
• Reveal an unwelcome truth
• Show signs of an approaching threat
• Deal damage
• Use up their resources
• Turn their move back on them
• Separate them
• Give an opportunity that fits a class' abilities
• Show a downside to their class, race, or equipment
• Offer an opportunity, with or without cost
• Put someone in a spot
• Tell them the requirements or consequences and ask

So, say Burne is standing over his friend Perkins, shield raised against a Wyvern's aerial assault. The GM says "Cool, you're standing in defense of Perkins, roll +CON (move: Defend)." If Burne rolls at least a 10, he gets to do three of the following:

• Redirect an attack from the thing you defend to yourself
• Halve the attack's effect or damage
• Open up the attacker to an ally giving that ally +1 forward against the attacker
• Deal damage to the attacker equal to your level

If Burne rolls a 6 or less, the GM gets to make as hard a move as they like, perhaps they want to Deal Damage "One of the wyvern's claws rakes across your face, flaying your cheek to the bone. Roll 2D6 damage." Or maybe show a downside of their equipment, "The wyvern's maw clamps down on your shield as it tosses its head back on forth, leaving the shield a tattered and useless mess hanging from your arm." Or maybe you reveal an unwelcome truth, "As your shield resounds with the tremendous blows from the wyvern's claws, you spy its mate flying up behind it..." It's up to them and those things happen.

GM moves give the GM a lot of power to take things in new directions and to deal out complications and consequences to the characters. I think it plays like its own thing and doesn't feel like most games, although it feels inspired by old school DnD play (not saying it's an Old School game).

That's why I say the game has the genre furniture of old school dungeoneering games, but it isn't an "old school game". The fact that consequences come from a meta-game mechanical process rather than in-game logic is the crucial distinction.

Quote from: jeff37923;683020I'm turned off by having this shit constantly pushed at me online.

Fuck Dungeon World and all the rest of the -Worlds.

Quote from: Rincewind1;683093(...) the biggest turn off are the gaming hipsters who praised AW as the next  coming of Homer. (...)

Admittedly however, while I do somewhat like D&D, the peons sung for  it by fans of various editions, are also causing me to sneer and roll  my eyes, especially when the discussions reach the inevitable point of  "Why anything else, when there's D&D". And same rule applies to AW  and it's clones for me.

I agree.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;683027It is a little off subject, but it would be cool (if it isn't already being done) for someone to launch an Old School RPG awards and tie it in with the ennies like the indie rpg awards.

Wouldn't that have the same trouble defining precisely what constitutes an old school game as the Indie RPG Awards have explaining what an indie game is exactly?

Quote from: Justin Alexander;683166When you use the word "style" here, what's your definition of that word? (...)

This does seem to be the crux of the discussion.

Quote from: silva;683387Tell me any other game that has "sucess at a cost" built-in on the resolution.

The Vortex system, used in Doctor Who, Primeval and Rocket Age, defines its levels of success in such terms but doesn't present it as something fantastically unique and innovative, which it probably isn't.

From Primeval (the other games may differ slightly): You roll 2D6 + attribute + skill. If the difference between the result and the difficulty is:

9+            Fantastic Yes, and...
4 to 8        Good Yes!
0 to 3        Normal Yes, but... You've succeeded but the GM *may* add some sort of complication or secondary problem.
-1 to -3    Failed No, but... It could've been worse. The GM *may* allow you to gain something out of the encounter, but it may not be what you'd expected.
-4 to -8     Bad No!
-9 or lower Disastrous No, and...

It's also recommended that you don't roll if failure is boring, if success is vital, if the task is trivial or if you've already rolled.

Quote from: brettmb;683405(...) All it seems to come down to is get hurt, succeed but with difficulty, or win. OK. Pretty simple. Hey, if that's what makes the game fun for you, great! That one facet just doesn't seem much different from anything I've played for me to say, "I've got to play this," and that makes me curious as to what it's got that makes other people want to play it.

Possibly they're unfamiliar with this kind of resolution and susceptible to the way it is presented as if it's something innovative and unique, either by the publishers or by the fans. Also, the scripted GM role may appeal to people.

I agree, though, that there's nothing particularly different or new there.

Quote from: HombreLoboDomesticado;683448Wouldn't that have the same trouble defining precisely what constitutes an old school game as the Indie RPG Awards have explaining what an indie game is exactly?
.

Yes, I am sure people would argue and debate the exact definition of old shool. But I still think it would be nice to have an award venue for such games. We are not going to arrive at a final consensus where everyone agrees old school is X, but that is okay IMO. You can still set criteria for nomination though.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;683450Yes, I am sure people would argue and debate the exact definition of old shool. But I still think it would be nice to have an award venue for such games. We are not going to arrive at a final consensus where everyone agrees old school is X, but that is okay IMO. You can still set criteria for nomination though.

It may be challenging to get a jury that's not biased towards only a certain type of old school game, like with the Indie RPG Awards.

Quote from: HombreLoboDomesticado;683454It may be challenging to get a jury that's not biased towards only a certain type of old school game, like with the Indie RPG Awards.

That is always the challenge with awards. To some degree it can't be helped and is even desireable (the indie rpg awards is for people who like indie rogs and that does have a particular meaning for many people: though I would point out one of my own games did okay in the voting and I believe Lords of Olympus managed to get a runnners up slot). I think if you have the right mix of judges it can be offset. At the same time, you would want something called the RPG awards to select winners that line up with what folks involved in old shool gaming consider old school to be. You could also alleviate any disagreement here by having categories for games a bit more outside the box.

I don't know. Just an idea. I think it beats the current situation, where old school games are judged by the same criteria as modern ones by the same judges.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;683461I don't know. Just an idea. I think it beats the current situation, where old school games are judged by the same criteria as modern ones by the same judges.

I don't think any game should be able to get away with "but this game is old school / new school / yellow school" whatever to dodge flaws or criticisms. Crap games are crap, regardless of design school.

But then again, I also think that some actual "old school" games hold up just as well today, on their own merits - Marvel Super Heroes, for example, which I only started playing this year but really enjoy. I'm willing to concede not everyone is as open-minded on this subject.

Quote from: Ladybird;683467I don't think any game should be able to get away with "but this game is old school / new school / yellow school" whatever to dodge flaws or criticisms. Crap games are crap, regardless of design school.

But then again, I also think that some actual "old school" games hold up just as well today, on their own merits - Marvel Super Heroes, for example, which I only started playing this year but really enjoy. I'm willing to concede not everyone is as open-minded on this subject.

I disagree. Different games have different expectations and conventions. Judging an indie game by the standards of osr is just as unfair as judging an osr game by the standards of indie. Both have different criteria for what is good and bad in a game. True some games are crap across the board. But that doesn't mean design approach and convention is meaningless for somethiing like handing out awards. I am pretty confident if you had a contest between DW and LotFP for best and worst game and had an even mix of judges from the the osr and the indie crowd, you would have a pretty split decision on which is best and which is worst.

I think a game tailored to a particular genre can say "but this is an indie game" or "this is an osr" game against certain criticisms. If the game is intended for a more general audience, then clearly that isnt the case. So who you are making the game for in the first place does matter. Some games, just like movies, will transcend genre or design approach (silence of the lambs was a horror movie but it won a bunch of oscars. Still something could be a great horror movie, suitable for a horror movie award venue, but not likely to win an oscar.

Do people even agree on what a 'crap game' means?

I can see really poorly designed mechanics as 'crap' but mostly people refer to what they do not like as 'crap'

Quote from: noisms;683439That's why I say the game has the genre furniture of old school dungeoneering games, but it isn't an "old school game". The fact that consequences come from a meta-game mechanical process rather than in-game logic is the crucial distinction.

Well, it's on the GM to fit the consequence into what's been established so far, so it has to fit the in-game logic. But, since the game encourages prepping with lots of blanks to leave room for impromptu things to come up, I guess your point is accurate compared to a fully prepped dungeon. It's definitely not trying for an Old School feel, but it is not an old school game, and doesn't try to be.

However, I would point out that Old School GM's have been doing this since before time began when players took an unexpected left turn and veered off into territories the GM didn't foresee.

Quote from: Noclue;683515Well, it's on the GM to fit the consequence into what's been established so far, so it has to fit the in-game logic. But, since the game encourages prepping with lots of blanks to leave room for impromptu things to come up, I guess your point is accurate compared to a fully prepped dungeon. It's definitely not trying for an Old School feel, but it is not an old school game, and doesn't try to be.

However, I would point out that Old School GM's have been doing this since before time began when players took an unexpected left turn and veered off into territories the GM didn't foresee.

Sure, but the GM would in those circumstances make things up based on what would make sense in the game world, rather than as a way of accelerating the narrative or focusing on meta-game concerns.

I'm by no means against the DW way of doing things - I love Apocalypse World - I just think the distinction is important.

Quote from: brettmb;683405Wow. Really? Books in my sig? I can't have outside interests?

Let's review:

(1) You claim that DW is "too long" for a rules lite game.

(2) Your sig contains links to rules lite games that are 3x longer than DW.

(3) You're a troll.

Quote from: Noclue;683515Well, it's on the GM to fit the consequence into what's been established so far, so it has to fit the in-game logic. But, since the game encourages prepping with lots of blanks to leave room for impromptu things to come up, I guess your point is accurate compared to a fully prepped dungeon. It's definitely not trying for an Old School feel, but it is not an old school game, and doesn't try to be.

I've only read the SRD, but the thing that really impresses me is the format it offers for organizations, fronts, dangers, and impulses. There's nothing new or unique there, but the synthesis and presentation of the advice on how to run a dynamic campaign is the best I've come across in an RPG. And it absolutely nails the tropes for things like hordes, cursed places, and arcane enemies. Whether I end up playing Dungeon World (can't seem to find a printed copy), I'm definitely using its structure for running a campaign.

So, the thing about *W, to me, isn't any of the rules, but the cumulative effect that they have on play.

Ditching initiative?  Okay, that's interesting, but GM fiat for turns seems weaker than some kind of 'fair' system, right?  But it works in DW, because of how turns are usually a matter of 'this bad thing is happening, what do you do?'

And the major impact on gameplay is getting rid of the whole tedious 'whose turn is it' crap, getting rid of the whole 'roll for initiative' stage and collating those numbers, and a bunch of other crap related to it.

So, when combat starts in DW, it's like this:

Player:  "Okay, we go into the cave, carefully."
GM:  "Sure."
Player:  "I stop at the entrance to the cave, do I see anything?"
GM: ""
Player:  "Okay, I head towards the crates to check them out."
GM: "As you enter the center of the room, three kobolds scream and charge at you from the side passage, spears aimed at your head.  What do you do?"

The 'degrees of success' mechanic isn't even really 'degrees of success'.  It's mostly about adding tension to the game, ensuring that every roll has some possible danger/cost involved.

The GM moves are the same way - they're really broad 'move categories', but the 'categories' are all ones that add tension, danger, or hard questions to players.

One of the main rules of the game 'to do it, you have to do it' is all about keeping people in the "fiction"/"Theater of the Mind" space as much as possible.  You can't just say "I Hack and Slash".  You don't *declare* moves, you *trigger* them, by describing what your character does.

All of these put together have the effect of massively streamlining play, keeping tension high, and keeping players involved in the "fiction" of the game, rather than playing their character sheets, or their token on a map.

Individually, none of these things are interesting.  It's their combination, and the effect that combination has on the game as a whole, that's interesting.  So looking through DW looking for the one mechanic that will convince you its worth trying won't really work.

That's why I've called DW "D&D Distilled".  If you look at the alcohol as the 'fun' - the interesting decisions, the tension, the good stuff, basically, and make the statement that regular D&D is 50 proof, that's about right in my experience.  There's a lot of bookkeeping and crap that gets in the way of the real *core* of the game.

And if you distill something from 50 to 60 proof, it's not a huge change.  Even to 70 proof isn't super-significant.

But you distill that sucker down to 150 proof?  Hoo-boy.  Now you've got something different.  Maybe not as subtle or complex, but definitely something that will light your ass on fire.

Getting rid of 10% of the bookkeeping/dead time in D&D isn't interesting.  Getting rid of 3/4 of it is - even if doing so cuts out some of the complexity.

(I'm not advocating *W as "the one true game", btw.  It's not even the game I play the most.  I like it, though).

Quote from: Bill;683473Do people even agree on what a 'crap game' means?

I can see really poorly designed mechanics as 'crap' but mostly people refer to what they do not like as 'crap'

No, they don't.  Mechanics, for the most part, aren't 'crap'.  They just have an impact on gameplay.  And if that impact isn't something you like, you won't like the mechanic.

There are crap mechanics, but those are usually just ones that are mathematically broken, or where the effect of the mechanic is contradictory with either itself or the rest of the game.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;683526Let's review:

(1) You claim that DW is "too long" for a rules lite game.

(2) Your sig contains links to rules lite games that are 3x longer than DW.

(3) You're a troll.

And apparently you're an asshole. My sig contains links to some games that I publish, and they are not considered rules-light. My point is that if all it comes down to is a single 2d6 roll and GM fiat, what is all the text for? Because I can't seem to grasp what this game is all about and don't feel like reading it myself, you label me a troll. No one was able to explain what is so special about this game. There have been a few posts that did that - thank you robiswrong, Archangel Fascist, Noclue...

Brett, if you reall want to see what the game does, I recommend taking a look at the original game, Apocalypse World. Its a package of well thought out rules that blend together to result in a very (using tags to facilitate compehension) player-driven, low-prep, rules-light, choice-consequence, intra-party tension, fiction-first little game.

And its much lighter and smaller then its Dungeon World hack.

Quote from: silva;683387Tell me any other game that has "sucess at a cost" built-in on the resolution.

Another one is FU (the game, not you :) ).

Quote from: silva;683570Brett, if you reall want to see what the game does, I recommend taking a look at the original game, Apocalypse World.

I will, thanks.

Quote from: brettmb;683559And apparently you're an asshole.

Don't worry, JA is working his way through the mod/admin team 1 by 1 with his sniper-scope of suck.

Quote from: brettmb;683559My sig contains links to some games that I publish, and they are not considered rules-light.

You should probably let the designers know.

QuoteMy point is that if all it comes down to is a single 2d6 roll and GM fiat, what is all the text for?

See, there's absolutely no way that you could have read this thread and honestly believe that this is what DW is. This is pure trolling.

Some would say that calling out non-trolling as some sort of trolling probably qualifies as a form of trolling.

Some would also probably call JA an obnoxious shit. So there's that.

Quote from: silva;683570And its much lighter and smaller then its Dungeon World hack.

362 pages for DW compared to 284 pages for AW.

Of DW, over one hundred pages are monsters, which have no equivalent in AW.

So an apples to apples comparison would be 262 pages of DW, and 284 pages of AW.

DW is also better laid-out for players - you can pretty well just read from the beginning, get to the characters, and then read the character you want to play and call it a day.  AW spreads info for players throughout the book.

So stop using everything as an excuse to bring up AW.  Really.  It's annoying.

Quote from: brettmb;683559No one was able to explain what is so special about this game. There have been a few posts that did that - thank you robiswrong, Archangel Fascist, Noclue...

You're welcome!

It's funny how when the OMNI system for Talislanta used single-roll degrees of success as a core mechanism it was just another pedestrian d20 system, but now that AW and DW have the same mechanic it's a wonderfully elegant and innovative system. And yes, OMNI also included the bit where the players describe the action and its results in-game.

Quote from: Haffrung;683636It's funny how when the OMNI system for Talislanta used single-roll degrees of success as a core mechanism it was just another pedestrian d20 system, but now that AW and DW have the same mechanic it's a wonderfully elegant and innovative system. And yes, OMNI also included the bit where the players describe the action and its results in-game.

I think it just goes to show how often something that isn't new at all comes across as new to people who don't have a huge amount of experience with traditional games. I understand that's a generalisation, but it's amazing how many times i've seen poster X see the new indie darling and proclaim it as innovative, when in reality it's re-treading ground that half the people playing it didn't even know existed.

Same with all the GM 'advice' that seems to get some people to jizz themselves with excitement. Most of it is either common sense or stuff that's re-heated - yet to these guys, just because it's got a new name and is a G, N or S, it's a 'revelation'.

Quote from: One Horse Town;683645I think it just goes to show how often something that isn't new at all comes across as new to people who don't have a huge amount of experience with traditional games. I understand that's a generalisation, but it's amazing how many times i've seen poster X see the new indie darling and proclaim it as innovative, when in reality it's re-treading ground that half the people playing it didn't even know existed.

Ignorance is part of it. The other part is context. System X presented in a traditional game like Talislanta is meh. But system X presented by a popular indie designer in a hip game is the shit. RPG hipsters don't expect to find anything cool in a game like Talislanta, so they don't find anything cool. But they're strongly biased to acclaim anything that seems even vaguely original in an indie design.

I dunno. It was only a couple of weeks ago that the argument against DW was that it was so strange and dissociative as to not even count as an RPG - 'this isn't roleplaying'. Now that the pundit has decreed it to be an RPG, suddenly all the ideas and mechanics in it are deemed to be old hat - 'lots of roleplaying games do this, what's the big deal'.

Quote from: soviet;683651I dunno. It was only a couple of weeks ago that the argument against DW was that it was so strange and dissociative as to not even count as an RPG - 'this isn't roleplaying'. Now that the pundit has decreed it to be an RPG, suddenly all the ideas and mechanics in it are deemed to be old hat - 'lots of roleplaying games do this, what's the big deal'.

Context, oh warrior in the war. Context.

Quote from: Zachary The First;683601Some would say that calling out non-trolling as some sort of trolling probably qualifies as a form of trolling.

Some would also probably call JA an obnoxious shit. So there's that.

If somebody hit up a thread about, say, Lords of Olympus and spent multiple pages saying, "So it's just like Eclipse Phase? I don't get it. I mean, if it all comes down to don't roll dice and the GM uses fiat, what's with all the text?" that person would be a troll.

Same behavior in this thread? Also a troll.

The gullible will, of course, continue engaging with and defending the troll.

Quote from: soviet;683651I dunno. It was only a couple of weeks ago that the argument against DW was that it was so strange and dissociative as to not even count as an RPG - 'this isn't roleplaying'. Now that the pundit has decreed it to be an RPG, suddenly all the ideas and mechanics in it are deemed to be old hat - 'lots of roleplaying games do this, what's the big deal'.

The group-think is strong on this site. The best part is that it's the exact same mechanics that they were claiming made it "not an RPG" three weeks ago that are suddenly old-hat and used in every RPG this week.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;683658The group-think is strong on this site.

If you strike me down now, i'll become more powerful than you could ever imagine!

So wait a minute. Wondering what differenciates Dungeon World from games that preceded it, like say... D&D, is like comparing Lords of Olympus to Eclipse Phase, but on the other hand, Dungeon World totally plays like... totally "Old School style" and if you say there's a fundamental difference you're a badwrong hater against everything that is good about Dungeon World?

Color me confused. You guys really sound like chills who want to have it both ways.

Quote from: One Horse Town;683663If you strike me down now, i'll become more powerful than you could ever imagine!

Only you could be so bold. The Imperial Senate will not sit still for this.

One thing that's keeps being said is that the game is just 2D6 with degrees of success. But that's an oversimplification if you're trying to differentiate the game from others. First, there's a lot more to playing the game then dice mechanics. I'd point to the section on the GM's Agendas, Principles and Moves as a good place to see where the game really lives. Second, its not just succeed with a cost. It's Succeed, succeed partially or with a cost as explicitly defined in the move you've triggered, and GM fiat.

The fact that the move specifies what happens on a 7-9 result is an important different from simply succeed with a cost. If you're rolling Defend, on a 7-9 you get to pick one from the list of effects rather than three. It's not time for the GM to come up with a complication. If you roll a 6, you don't necessarily fail your defend. The GM makes a move.

Quote from: Rincewind1;683687Only you could be so bold. The Imperial Senate will not sit still for this.

We don't care, GMs have UNLIMITED POWER (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0D8i8QGgz0k).

Quote from: Benoist;683666So wait a minute. Wondering what differenciates Dungeon World from games that preceded it, like say... D&D, is like comparing Lords of Olympus to Eclipse Phase, but on the other hand, Dungeon World totally plays like... totally "Old School style" and if you say there's a fundamental difference you're a badwrong hater against everything that is good about Dungeon World?

Color me confused. You guys really sound like chills who want to have it both ways.

I don't know if I fall into the category of folks you're talking about or not.  But I'll go ahead and respond with *my* opinion.

DW mechanics aren't, in many ways, particularly novel.  The 2d6 mechanic is interesting, but partial success/etc. isn't new.  There's very little that's actually *new*.

What's interesting is how they're put together.  Not any one piece or component, but the thing as a whole.  So if you just say "oh, success with complications, that's been done," you're right.  Absolutely.  And you can say that about any one piece, and it's not interesting.  Much like my hypothetical distilling example earlier - distilling from 50 to 60 proof isn't interesting.  Distilling from 50 to 150 *is*.

The GM advice (which, in some cases, are actually *rules*) is a pretty good primer on running a certain type of old-school game.  What's more is that it makes an expectation of what playing Dungeon World *is*, and what the designers really designed around.  That doesn't mean you can't ignore it, of course, there are no DW police - but a guideline of how the game was designed and 'optimized' is a good thing.

It has an "old school feel" in certain ways.  The players make the same types of decisions.  They do the same things.  A lot of the focus is the same.  The specific dice rolled isn't the same, and the numbers on the papers aren't the same.  But what the players engage with, and the decisions they make, is very reminiscent of old school games.

Except turbo-charged.  A lot of the bookkeeping is gone.  The game does a great job of turning it up to eleven in a lot of ways.

So there's nothing new.  Each individual mechanic has been done before, but how they impact play as a whole is interesting.  The mechanics are different, but end up with an "old school feel".

And I'm not claiming it's the be-all, end-all.  I like it, but it's not a holy crusade.  There's some things it's well suited for, and others it's not suited for at all.

Well first off, congrats to DW for an award.

Next, since the PDF help summary I read only goes so far, what else is there in Agendas, Principles, and Moves? From what I read explaining Moves is that they are pre-fabricated structures on how to judge DoS on an attempt. Agendas were outlines on NPC motivations, roughly structured in a rather linear timeline in the proffered examples, etc. Outside Moves -- pre-fab DoS tables attached to actions  (an idea already extant too I might add) -- being used for almost everything, what novelty am I missing?

I also find the DoS spread and Move structure rather limiting. I mean the DoS results are basically: yes; yes, but (pre-fab); no, and (GM fiat). I guess useful if it's your first time at the rodeo, but not all that for me.

Quote from: Opaopajr;683744I also find the DoS spread and Move structure rather limiting. I mean the DoS results are basically: yes; yes, but (pre-fab); no, and (GM fiat). I guess useful if it's your first time at the rodeo, but not all that for me.

First off, 'no' isn't just GM fiat, though there's an element of that.  There are specific GM Moves that you're supposed to use.  Though as I've said, they're more 'categories' than anything - reminders of interesting things you can do.

As a mechanics-first game, DW fails horribly.  There's not enough there.  That's why the rules place such an emphasis on playing in "the fiction", with rules like "to do it, you have to do it" - which just means that the description of what your character is doing comes *first*, and it's that description that triggers the move.  The idea is to get people mostly engaged in the Theater of the Mind, and to use the rules, dice, and numbers when necessary, rather than having the dice and numbers on the character sheet be the "main" thing, and having them drive the "theater of the mind" stuff.

So I guess I'm saying that if you're judging the game by the depth and complexity of the mechanics, and how interesting it is to engage directly with the mechanics, you're absolutely correct.  That is absolutely not what the game is designed to do.

As far as "first time at the rodeo", well, as I said, a table full of experienced gamers (one was a previous MIB for SJG, most were 40+) found the game crazy fun and engaging when doing nothing but fighting a cave full of kobolds.

And their reaction when I pointed this out later was "It was nothing but a cave of kobolds??  Huh... you're right.  That's pretty cool."

So, I disagree with that bit, but if you're looking primarily for an interesting, complex mechanical system, yeah, it doesn't do that.

I'm starting to believe (based on this thread at least partially) that it's a game you have to really play to understand.  The rules aren't much to read, it's all about what happens at the table.

Actually, like most games, I think it just boils down to the GM and players with which you are playing.

Quote from: Ladybird;683047I'm sure you'll enjoy it, it's a good game, but don't change the subject. If you're going to criticize Dungeon World, criticise it for something it actually does, not just complaining that is has terminology and then making something up about it.

Bless you.  Reading through this thread I kept asking myself "I wonder how many of the haters have actually played the thing?

Hey, I like DW.  It's a lot of fun.  And, it has some weak spots.  And, it does play like how my old games of D&D as a high schooler in the 80's did.  And that's both fun and not fun in some ways.  I do wish there were some slightly more mechanicals to it, but it's a real charm to run.  I also wish there were a few more limits on the players -- because it does get a bit out of hand when the players aren't abiding by any sort of rules of trust. But, you know, that doesn't make it a bad game nor undeserving of this win.  It just makes it something that has to be dealt with, kinda like negative AC values and experience for gold.

I have the game, and I read it.

Quote from: brettmb;683760Actually, like most games, I think it just boils down to the GM and players with which you are playing.

Yep. I pretty said this in my first response to you:

Quote from: Skywalker;683343It captures a particular freewheeling style for playing D&D. If you like that style, or you played D&D in that style, its a lot of fun. There is really not much more to it than that.

Its just a well designed RPG with a particular style that some GM and players gel well with.

Quote from: Skywalker;683793Yep. I pretty said this in my first response to you:
Its just a well designed RPG with a particular style that some GM and players gel well with.

No, I didn't mean that. I think you just need a bunch good role-players and a good GM to pull it off.

Quote from: silva;683570Brett, if you reall want to see what the game does, I recommend taking a look at the original game, Apocalypse World. Its a package of well thought out rules that blend together to result in a very (using tags to facilitate compehension) player-driven, low-prep, rules-light, choice-consequence, intra-party tension, fiction-first little game.

And its much lighter and smaller then its Dungeon World hack.

Yeah, no.

Apocalypse World is a jumbled mess that makes absolutely no sense on first reading. Sure, it probably does go better at the table... but you have to get there first. The non-setting certainly doesn't help.

Dungeon World, and I presume more of the hacks, work better because they provide more structure for the game to play in. The move structure is more intuitive, because the triggers are more obvious. Hit points are simpler than the countdown clock. Sure, AW was first, but DW improves on it.

Quote from: Veilheim;683783Bless you.  Reading through this thread I kept asking myself "I wonder how many of the haters have actually played the thing?

Hey, I like DW.  It's a lot of fun.  And, it has some weak spots.  And, it does play like how my old games of D&D as a high schooler in the 80's did.  And that's both fun and not fun in some ways.  I do wish there were some slightly more mechanicals to it, but it's a real charm to run.  I also wish there were a few more limits on the players -- because it does get a bit out of hand when the players aren't abiding by any sort of rules of trust. But, you know, that doesn't make it a bad game nor undeserving of this win.  It just makes it something that has to be dealt with, kinda like negative AC values and experience for gold.

Freeform powers (Like the Mage's variable spellcasting, or the Druid's shapeshifting) do seem to be balanced out by "the GM gets to fuck you over on a 6-, so roll well" rather more than anything else. I mean, it works, but that's definitely the sort of mechanic a dysfunctional group could have issues with.

So yeah. Don't play DW with jerks, and trust your GM.

Quote from: Benoist;683786I have the game, and I read it.

You should give it a play. It's fun.

Quote from: brettmb;683794No, I didn't mean that. I think you just need a bunch good role-players and a good GM to pull it off.

True. Though as you say the same is true of any RPG.

Quote from: Ladybird;683798You should give it a play. It's fun.

To be clear, I'd play Dungeon World if I could count on having a good time. Being with friends, rolling some dice throwing Monty Python references at each other trumps system. Every time. And I'm not the kind of player to break the game in the middle of a session to bitch about how I think this or that rule might suck. I just play, and if I like the game, I just keep playing. So yes, I would give it a go if the circumstances were right, absolutely.

That doesn't change the fact of the matter: to me, Dungeon World has only a thin patina of "D&D" on top of a game that fundamentally has nothing to do with "D&D", nor anything to do with what I could construe as "old school gaming". It doesn't mean the game's inherently bad, or not fun, or can't possibly be fun for anyone, ever. It is just fundamentally different.

Quote from: Benoist;683813To be clear, I'd play Dungeon World if I could count on having a good time. Being with friends, rolling some dice throwing Monty Python references at each other trumps system. Every time. And I'm not the kind of player to break the game in the middle of a session to bitch about how I think this or that rule might suck. I just play, and if I like the game, I just keep playing. So yes, I would give it a go if the circumstances were right, absolutely.

That doesn't change the fact of the matter: to me, Dungeon World has only a thin patina of "D&D" on top of a game that fundamentally has nothing to do with "D&D", to me, nor anything to do with what I could construe as "old school gaming". It doesn't mean the game's inherently bad, or not fun, or can't possibly be fun for anyone, ever.

Yeah, but remember, Sage doesn't consider it an old-school game either (I'm not dredging back through the thread he posted in for links / quotes, though); it's unfortunately picked up some deeply overly-enthusiastic fans prone to exaggerating the merits of what is just a good fantasy adventure game.

Well, I think it's good, anyway.

I'd really be interested in seeing a play report from you, seeing how it went for your group.

Quote from: Skywalker;683803True. Though as you say the same is true of any RPG.

And baseball. And a rock band. Hard to find a replacement for good players having fun.

Quote from: Ladybird;683798Apocalypse World is a jumbled mess that makes absolutely no sense on first reading. Sure, it probably does go better at the table... but you have to get there first. The non-setting certainly doesn't help.

I love me some Apocalypse World. Our first game had some issues because we brought expectations along from playing lots of Burning Wheel and FATE. Once we adjusted our heads, it played like a song.

Ehh, your statements are true only if rewritten something like this.

Quote from: robiswrong;683727It has an "old school feel" in certain ways.

...claimed mostly by those who never played actual old school games.


If you played all RPGs with a kind of 4th-wall self-aware layer, then...

Quote from: robiswrong;683727The players make the same types of decisions.  They do the same things.

If your view of Roleplaying is playing a character in a game as opposed to a being in a world then...

Quote from: robiswrong;683727A lot of the focus is the same.

Quote from: robiswrong;683727But what the players engage with, and the decisions they make, is very reminiscent of old school games.

...as played by those who see their characters more from a narrative view to begin with.

Now you're spot on 100%.  Of the people on this site who have posted in support of Dungeon World at all, there is exactly ONE, Ramon, who has not shown from posting history a definite lean towards narrative aspects of roleplaying.  There is a reason DW appeals to those players and it isn't the old school aspect.

Old School Player: Blech, DW is too narrative, storygamey, whatever.
Narrative Player: This is what D&D should have been, but wasn't!

Really ain't too hard to figure out if you're not grindin' the axe, :hmm:.

As I've said before, the rules are well-designed, so it's definitely worth the indie win as well as carrying the Rules section of the Ennies.  

Totally off topic, but...

Not sure about the Rules/Best Game split, it seems odd when a movie wins the Best Oscar category, but not the Best Actor/Actress/Director or Screenplay award.  My question is always "well who or what the fuck made it Best Picture then"?  In the case of Iron Kingdoms I assume what kicked it over the top for the Game was art, presentation and the overall package, even if it didn't get Best Rules.  But I don't follow the Ennies enough to know if they split that commonly or not.

Quote from: Noclue;683841And baseball. And a rock band. Hard to find a replacement for good players having fun.

Also true. That doesn't mean that certain sports and music are preferred by some people over others, or that some sports and music may be more popular than others though. Though the players are vital, they aren't everything in the equation.

This is getting a little obtuse :)

Quote from: CRKrueger;683900Random ad-hominems and jackassery

Seriously, man, I don't threadcrap like some people.  I don't pollute threads with stuff that I know isn't welcome.  Hell, I bitch at people when they *do* threadcrap.

I've been nothing but on-topic in this thread, and have done nothing but tried to be helpful.  Disagree with me all you want, but there's really no need to go aggro on me like that.

If there's anyone grinding an axe here, frankly it's you.

I'm happy to talk about anything, debate points, and discuss shit.  I'll even happily admit when I'm wrong.

But this is the last response you'll get from me in response to one of you attacking posts.  If you want to talk about stuff with me, great.  Just talk like an adult.

Quote from: CRKrueger;683900Ehh, your statements are true only if rewritten something like this.

...claimed mostly by those who never played actual old school games.

I'm 45 and started gaming when I was 12. I played and ran tons of old school games.

So it's "no, and (GM fiat w/ pre-fab recommendations)." Which is different from "yes, but (pre-fab DoS)" in that GM has little room for determining player DoS resolution. OK, confining, but whatever.

Engaging the Theater of the Mind is what I've been doing with old school games since the beginning. The mechanics come after description of what I, my PC, is doing. I never had a problem with veterans in "just a cave of kobolds" because Tucker Kobolds put engaging setting over system mechanics. This DW setting engagement is not a novel state of play, as if like one offered but unfulfilled by D&D promises due to its mechanical nature.

The only big difference DW offers, that I can see, is a predominance of pre-fab DoS structures that supersede GM fiat during "yes, but" resolution. Now I believe people can convey just about everything through description. So instead of "you just have to play it," I want to hear a breakdown of Moves, Principles, and Agendas in what it is new they are providing. This shouldn't be hard; if I can struggle playing INS/MV in French and appreciate its mix of madness, though not really like it compared to its American conversion, then I can grok this too.

Quote from: Noclue;683942I'm 45 and started gaming when I was 12. I played and ran tons of old school games.

I'm pretty sure no sample here is going to be acknowledged as anything else but a blip, but I started RPGing in 1982 and I still play and run old school games. Admittedly, I enjoy RPGs with narrative elements, but I also enjoy those without.

Quote from: robiswrong;683937Seriously, man, I don't threadcrap like some people.  I don't pollute threads with stuff that I know isn't welcome.  Hell, I bitch at people when they *do* threadcrap.

I've been nothing but on-topic in this thread, and have done nothing but tried to be helpful.  Disagree with me all you want, but there's really no need to go aggro on me like that.

If there's anyone grinding an axe here, frankly it's you.

I'm happy to talk about anything, debate points, and discuss shit.  I'll even happily admit when I'm wrong.

But this is the last response you'll get from me in response to one of you attacking posts.  If you want to talk about stuff with me, great.  Just talk like an adult.

Ad hominem? Liking narrative games is not equivalent to being a donkey-raping shit eater, retard or anything else I did not call you or anyone else.  Unfortunately DW is becoming the cause celebre of the narrative warriors and advocates.  Unfortunately, not being real fantasy, Numenara won't completely replace it to switch things up a little.  It will become a lot easier to discuss when the salesman go away.  In any case, out of a few similar threads, your post just had that one paragraph where everything was problematic.

In any case, let me try again without the "jackassery".

The problem with the statements that you made are that, when repeated by the couple people in this thread, all are presented as if they were simple facts.  If you don't like the way I rephrased those statements, then just realize that all of those statements are FOR YOU.  Completely subjective, not objective.  If you actually polled all the people on this site, I'd bet good money the number of people for which your statements were false outnumber the ones for which your statements were true.  Either way, it means they are not objective facts.

You say Dungeon World closely resembles the way you play old school games, and the decisions the players make are similar.  I say Dungeon World does not resemble the way I play old school games, in many cases the mindset the mechanics forces the player into are fundamentally different then an old school game.

So, how do we resolve this?
One of us right, one of us is wrong?
One of us is sane, one of us is crazy?
One of us is telling it straight, the other has a meta-agenda?
Or, could it be...
We are both right, sane, and telling it straight?
How is that possible - very easily.

People experience and reference the exact same information in different ways.  Take a look at the neuroscience of learning and experience and you'll see that people's brains just work differently.  It's true of learning, listening, reading, pretty much everything we do, including Roleplaying.

When someone starts asking about DW, it's a lot more accurate to approach it rather like Noisms, who loves AW and DW, but recognizes the core narrative differences that make them not traditional or old school.

When you start saying that DW plays, is in the style of, has you doing the same things as old school games, etc, you have to realize that you probably weren't playing those games the same way as some others whether old school or new school, right?

So, "for people who like or don't mind narrative mechanics or a narrative layer to their games", everything you said about DW was true.  

"For people who do not like or can't stand narrative layers or mechanics in their RPGs" those things you said about DW were false.

Better?

Quote from: brettmb;683794No, I didn't mean that. I think you just need a bunch of good role-players and a good GM to pull it off.

Look kid, I've played RPGs from one end of this planet to the other. Gimmicky rule mechanics are no replacement for a good GM and good Players at your table.


(Goddamn, I knew that some win would show up in this thread!)

Quote from: jeff37923;683960Look kid, I've played RPGs from one end of this planet to the other. Gimmicky rule mechanics are no replacement for a good GM and good Players at your table.


(Goddamn, I knew that some win would show up in this thread!)

Isn't that what I just said? Kid? I've been playing RPGs since the 80s.

Quote from: brettmb;683966Isn't that what I just said? Kid? I've been playing RPGs since the 80s.

Quote from: jeff37923;683960Look kid, I've played RPGs from one end of this planet to the other. Gimmicky rule mechanics are no replacement for a good GM and good Players at your table.


(Goddamn, I knew that some win would show up in this thread!)

Quote from: Skywalker;683949I'm pretty sure no sample here is going to be acknowledged as anything else but a blip, but I started RPGing in 1982 and I still play and run old school games. Admittedly, I enjoy RPGs with narrative elements, but I also enjoy those without.

Quote from: Noclue;683942I'm 45 and started gaming when I was 12. I played and ran tons of old school games.

I'm surprised Werther's Original hasn't yet contacted Pundit about advertisement here.

Quote from: brettmb;683966Isn't that what I just said? Kid? I've been playing RPGs since the 80s.

It's a straight Han Solo quote. "Kid" refers to Luke Skywalker, and I don't think was meant to mean you are a young RPGer.

Quote from: brettmb;683398Story Engine and Kult off the top of my head.

Thank you, silva. That helps.

Alternity did multiple levels of success/failure as well. They were even statted right there on your character sheet. My own Heaven's Shadow does a 'Success with bonus action/success/failure/failure with consequence' thing in the combat rules to emulate a certain style of counterattack and special move heavy combat.

And really, I don't see anything in those made up examples up thread of the 'difference' between the two games that's any different other than in one game there's a stupid mechanic where the DM is 'forced' to do a particular thing.

And I hate those sorts of mechanics.  Storygamers fucking love 'em though.

Quote from: CRKrueger;683959You say Dungeon World closely resembles the way you play old school games, and the decisions the players make are similar.  I say Dungeon World does not resemble the way I play old school games, in many cases the mindset the mechanics forces the player into are fundamentally different then an old school game.

Have you played it?  Do you have actual table experience with it?

Quote from: CRKrueger;683959Or, could it be...
We are both right, sane, and telling it straight?
How is that possible - very easily.

Yeah, it's very easy.  Subjective experience, and all that.

Quote from: CRKrueger;683959When someone starts asking about DW, it's a lot more accurate to approach it rather like Noisms, who loves AW and DW, but recognizes the core narrative differences that make them not traditional or old school.

So... what makes DW narrative, here?  Specifically, not vague statements like "fourth wall breaking"?

I'm not trying to pixelbitch you with this.  I get things like bennies in SW, or Fate Points in Fate drawing that reaction (though, interestingly enough, GURPS has some mechanics similar to bennies via the Luck advantage, and that's pretty damn traditional...).  That's why when I posted a Fate thread I put it in Other Games.

I honestly don't see what in DW draws the same reaction.  There are some things that are more abstracted, yes, like using ammo on a failure.  Doing that instead of counting every shot is more abstract, granted, but the end result is pretty damn close to the same.

I haven't seen any mechanics in DW that allow players to authoritatively declare details in the world or the like.  If that's what you mean by "narrative", then I'd like to know what specifically you're talking about so that we can at least be discussing the same thing.

If you just mean things like "say yes, but" or the like, then I'm afraid I can't get behind that too much.  The fact that something is repeated on The Forge, or originated there, is pretty much irrelevant to me, both positive and negative.  I just don't give a shit.  I do care how the game plays.  That's what I care about.

If you mean the idea that you're mostly dealing with "the theater of the mind" and referring to the 'crunchy bits' when necessary (the whole "to do it, you have to do it" thing, etc.), then er, that's pretty old school.  Back in my day, whippersnapper, we didn't have all them fancy "Feats" and "Skills" and all that.  We had six attributes, an onion on our belts, and we liked it that way!  We described what we did, and the GM told us what to roll!  And we did it!  And sometimes he told us to roll a d12, or a d20, and one time he had me roll a goldfish, goldernit!

I exaggerate for comedic effect, but the emphasis on super-direct manipulation of the mechanics, and the emphasis on grid-based combat wasn't really a "thing" in my experience until 3e.

Quote from: CRKrueger;683959When you start saying that DW plays, is in the style of, has you doing the same things as old school games, etc, you have to realize that you probably weren't playing those games the same way as some others whether old school or new school, right?

Yes.  By definition.  I'd assume that anything talking about subjective experience would implicitly include "in my opinion" or the like.

Quote from: CRKrueger;683959So, "for people who like or don't mind narrative mechanics or a narrative layer to their games", everything you said about DW was true.

Again, what "narrative layer" are you talking about in DW?  You're asserting there's one there, and I haven't seen it.

It's there in other games, which is why I don't make those arguments about things like Fate, or Cortex, or god forbid Fiasco.

So I guess there's two primary points of disconnect that we have (and strangely, I'm not convinced yet that "old school" is one of them).

1) What do you define as a narrative mechanic?
2) What narrative mechanics do you think exist in DW?

Quote from: Rincewind1;683967I'm surprised Werther's Original hasn't yet contacted Pundit about advertisement here.

:rotfl:

Quote from: Rincewind1;683967I'm surprised Werther's Original hasn't yet contacted Pundit about advertisement here.

You remember what it's like to walk down to the corner store and buy a cow?  Werther's Original remembers.

Do you remember a time when that cow followed you into that hole that killed all your friends?
Werther's Orginal knows where the bodies are buried.

Quote from: CRKrueger;683900Now you're spot on 100%.  Of the people on this site who have posted in support of Dungeon World at all, there is exactly ONE, Ramon, who has not shown from posting history a definite lean towards narrative aspects of roleplaying.  There is a reason DW appeals to those players and it isn't the old school aspect.

Old School Player: Blech, DW is too narrative, storygamey, whatever.
Narrative Player: This is what D&D should have been, but wasn't!

Speaking as one of these supposed "narrative-leaning" players, I don't give a shit what D&D is or isn't, as it relates to Dungeon World, because it literally doesn't matter. DW's a fun fantasy adventure game that I like running and playing, and I'm playing it instead of D&D (Or instead of any other fantasy adventure game, really) because there were some others players who wanted to play it. That's all. That's as deep as the agenda goes; play something we want to play.

Quote from: Ladybird;684017Speaking as one of these supposed "narrative-leaning" players, I don't give a shit what D&D is or isn't, as it relates to Dungeon World, because it literally doesn't matter. DW's a fun fantasy adventure game that I like running and playing, and I'm playing it instead of D&D (Or instead of any other fantasy adventure game, really) because there were some others players who wanted to play it. That's all. That's as deep as the agenda goes; play something we want to play.

There does seem to be some confusion over 'right way to play an rpg' and 'personal preference'

If it works for you and your group, I don't see a problem.

Well that was a whole lot of animus following my inquiry... I doubt I'll get any more insight into its distinguishing features now.
:(

Quote from: robiswrong;6839821) What do you define as a narrative mechanic?
2) What narrative mechanics do you think exist in DW?

ATM, all I can do is a TL;DR outline.

1. Mechanics are either IC or OOC, based on whether the player is making the decision as a character or a player.
2. If a mechanic is OOC, it is done for a reason, tactical, social, narrative, etc.
3. "Narrative mechanics" means OOC metagame mechanics concerned with giving a player control, authorship, etc of a character not from the point of view of the character, but from outside.
4. Giving a player control of things outside the character, yet still about or concerning the character is a common OOC narrative metagame mechanic.

When I mean some people play any game with a narrative layer, I mean they automatically include "things outside my character but about my character" as being part of "roleplaying the character".  As such, they don't even realize that what they consider roleplaying is actually two things 1 - roleplaying as the character, 2 - limited authorship of things about the character.  That narrative layer is just natural to them.  

If you can't look at DW and see what I mean now, the rest will have to wait until I can text to look at (and yes I've played it, and yes it was quite different then the normal roleplaying experience).

BTW, answer Opa's question too, would ya?

Quote from: brettmb;683966Isn't that what I just said? Kid? I've been playing RPGs since the 80s.

(http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTOT3EiViQfPhlp4aPZLX6B6qQ_owDNXHa3l5CDATjyJKAgOXq-tg)

AND you made me appreciate a post by jeff37923.  So, you're double punished!

(http://i.stack.imgur.com/jiFfM.jpg)

Quote from: CRKrueger;6840923. "Narrative mechanics" means OOC metagame mechanics concerned with giving a player control, authorship, etc of a character not from the point of view of the character, but from outside.
4. Giving a player control of things outside the character, yet still about or concerning the character is a common OOC narrative metagame mechanic.

So, to use a term some people will probably hate, but I think sums it up neatly, stepping outside Actor stance?  I'm sure there are edge cases where you'd consider something to be in Actor stance, but still "narrative", but is that pretty accurate for painting in broad strokes?

Quote from: CRKrueger;684092If you can't look at DW and see what I mean now, the rest will have to wait until I can text to look at (and yes I've played it, and yes it was quite different then the normal roleplaying experience).

Okay, cool, we're both talking experience.  That makes me happy - it's certainly more useful than experience vs. how someone imagines it will play by reading a book.

And no, I don't really see many things in DW that force you out of Actor stance.  There are some of the "pick 2" mechanics that could conceivably be in that range, if that's what you're talking about.

Quote from: CRKrueger;684092BTW, answer Opa's question too, would ya?

This one?

Quote from: Opaopajr;683948Engaging the Theater of the Mind is what I've been doing with old school games since the beginning. The mechanics come after description of what I, my PC, is doing. I never had a problem with veterans in "just a cave of kobolds" because Tucker Kobolds put engaging setting over system mechanics. This DW setting engagement is not a novel state of play, as if like one offered but unfulfilled by D&D promises due to its mechanical nature.

No, it's not a "novel" state of play.  As you've pointed out, you can certainly do just about anything that DW does with D&D, especially B/X (though I think DW is much "faster").

Quote from: Opaopajr;683948The only big difference DW offers, that I can see, is a predominance of pre-fab DoS structures that supersede GM fiat during "yes, but" resolution. Now I believe people can convey just about everything through description. So instead of "you just have to play it," I want to hear a breakdown of Moves, Principles, and Agendas in what it is new they are providing. This shouldn't be hard; if I can struggle playing INS/MV in French and appreciate its mix of madness, though not really like it compared to its American conversion, then I can grok this too.

What I see the big differences of DW as are:

1) Minimizes bookkeeping and excess looking up of things in a number of ways.  I can detail these out further if you'd like and give examples.  Again, any one of these is not significant, but taken together, the effect is pretty big.

2) Provides play rules that guides GMs more towards "good GMing".  Most of the principles and agendas are just what's generally been good GM advice that have been reified into rules.  The structure of moves themselves is much the same - there's nothing in there really that a good GM couldn't do before, but having them laid out serves as both a mechanical guide and reminder.

3) Focuses on "theater of the mind" at a rule level.  The nature of triggering moves via describing what your character does, as well as other things, is a *mechanical* push towards staying in character that doesn't exist in many other games that I know of.

So these things may have differing levels of value.  For different groups.

1) The cost of this streamlined nature, in some cases, is complexity (though I can get into how I define "complexity" vs. "depth").  Many things just speed up the game, but in some cases there's a flexibility cost.  I think that for *most* groups, the speedup is probably a net positive, unless you just really like hard crunch.

I think the overall 'crunch level' of the game is probably closest to B/X, but with some additional flexibility (so it's not a one-to-one match by any means).  If you're into the whole charop game, etc., then it's not there and you may find the simplification too much.

2) There's nothing here that a good GM isn't doing already.  There's some value in having the rules there to remind you and to help you keep some of those 'best practices' kinds of things going, but there's also some level of restriction due to the 'pre-baked' nature of the DoS stuff.  For newer GMs, I think this is awesome.  For more experienced GMs, it's something of a tradeoff, and they may fall on either side of it.

3) Again, if your players already do play mostly in "the fiction/TotM", then this isn't a big deal, and is essentially irrelevant - it won't cost you anything, but it won't gain you anything, either.  It'll be invisible.  I find that for most players, I end up having to nudge them with "okay, but what do you *do*" semi-frequently at first, my observation is that due to this nature and the overall flow of the game, that players generally stay more "in the fiction" than they do in many other games.

You may be picking up from this that this is a great game for beginner or even moderately experienced GMs to run - and I'd agree with that.  If this site didn't have such a general bias *against* games like DW, "run DW" would have been the advice I'd have given in the thread about making GMs better.

It sounds like what everybody is getting excited about with Dungeon World is playing the way I've always played D&D with my group. Fast, rules-light, in-character, theatre of the mind, big-picture, lots of discretion. I guess it just took a new ruleset and indie buzz to show people they can play that way.

Quote from: Haffrung;684156It sounds like what everybody is getting excited about with Dungeon World is playing the way I've always played D&D with my group. Fast, rules-light, in-character, theatre of the mind, big-picture, lots of discretion. I guess it just took a new ruleset and indie buzz to show people they can play that way.

Basically.  But I do think that the rules in this case make playing that type of game a lot easier, and can help people maintain it.

But for a group operating at a high level of mastery, the big thing that it really offers is some of the rule streamlining - no initiative, attacks between attackers resolving in a single roll (well, plus damage), and a bunch of other minor things really work to speed up the game.

Well thank you for answering, robiswrong!

It sounds -- oh my god, this is going to come out totally condescending but I cannot think of another way to parse it -- like an old school rules light RPG with narrative training wheels. It is for complete novices to the hobby thinking about the theater of the mind, and for detoxing charop minmaxers to start paying attention to the setting. The Moves are this stop-gap measure to leave a button to push and gimp the GM in a "yes, but" roll in an effort to regain trust from the charop group, and to spur imagination and avoid freezing up from the novice group.

Useful for specific audiences. Not a panacea or second coming, like FATE or Savage Worlds were similarly pushed. But just a return to RPG basics (engage the setting, be the character) with a narrative crutch, like a wounded prodigal child coming home.

Quote from: Opaopajr;684167It sounds -- oh my god, this is going to come out totally condescending but I cannot think of another way to parse it -- like an old school rules light RPG with narrative training wheels...

...But just a return to RPG basics (engage the setting, be the character) with a narrative crutch, like a wounded prodigal child coming home.

:hatsoff:

Most of the old school/new school divide comes down to the desired function of the rules.

In an old school game the rules are sort of a necessary evil, a baseline physics engine that the GM consults, adjusts, or ignores as needed to suit the effect he wants.

In a new school game the rules are embraced as a tool, a structure that can directly support and enhance the intended experience for both players and GMs.

That's why system matters more to new school people than old school people. It's why NS people tend to play RAW and not fudge ('system is a good thing and we chose ours  carefully') while OS people tend to treat the rules more like suggestions ('rules are a necessary evil and secondary to our fun''). And it's why NS games tend to put rules in for things ('we'd like to help') that OS games do not ('we'd like to stay out of your way').

Clearly DW is a new school game.

Quote from: Opaopajr;684167It sounds -- oh my god, this is going to come out totally condescending but I cannot think of another way to parse it -- like an old school rules light RPG with narrative training wheels. It is for complete novices to the hobby thinking about the theater of the mind, and for detoxing charop minmaxers to start paying attention to the setting. The Moves are this stop-gap measure to leave a button to push and gimp the GM in a "yes, but" roll in an effort to regain trust from the charop group, and to spur imagination and avoid freezing up from the novice group.

I generally agree with you?  I'd only have two points of contention with your characterization:

1) Even for more experienced groups, I think the game has value in how it streamlines play.  It's *really* fast.

2) I don't necessarily think even the 'training' bits are really useful to just 'beginners'.  I think that probably the vast majority of players or groups could get value from them.  Even if they end up not playing DW long term, it can serve as a good refresher course, like doing training drills in a sport.  Seriously old-school tables that have been playing for a long time are probably the exception.

Quote from: Opaopajr;684167Useful for specific audiences. Not a panacea or second coming, like FATE or Savage Worlds were similarly pushed. But just a return to RPG basics (engage the setting, be the character) with a narrative crutch, like a wounded prodigal child coming home.

Well, I don't really see the narrative crutch, but that's okay.

It's a specific system, with specific things it does well, and specific things it doesn't.  It's well-suited to some things, and poorly suited to others.  I wouldn't ever claim anything differently about *any* system.  I do think it has a certain amount of value, and I think it's probably worth people giving it a shot for a game or two, as it's very quick to pick up.  If nothing else, there's a few ideas in there that might be useful to go forward with.

I don't push any system as a panacea.  I'm a Fate fan, but it's a specific game that does certain things very well.  I wouldn't think about replacing D&D with it.  They do different things.  I think that anybody pushing any system as some kind of second coming, or "One True System" or anything of the like is blind to the vast array of gaming that actually occurs in the hobby.

Quote from: Opaopajr;684167like a wounded prodigal child coming home.

That's not a terrible analogy, though I think the prodigal child may have learned a few things on his journey that are worth sharing ;)

Quote from: soviet;684181That's why system matters more to new school people than old school people. It's why NS people tend to play RAW and not fudge ('system is a good thing and we chose ours  carefully') while OS people tend to treat the rules more like suggestions ('rules are a necessary evil and secondary to our fun''). And it's why NS games tend to put rules in for things ('we'd like to help') that OS games do not ('we'd like to stay out of your way').

Clearly DW is a new school game.

I like the way you suggest by omission that old-schooler's fudge.

Quote from: One Horse Town;684194I like the way you suggest by omission that old-schooler's fudge.

Not all, certainly, but I'm talking in generalities.

I'm curious as to how many of the people who like Dungeon World are looking at it from a 'player-side' perspective, vs. a 'GM-side' perspective.

It seems like for the GM there's less specific definition of how things operate, because they pick a generic 'move' that's relevant and apply an effect from it. The rules don't specify the details, the GM is just supposed to select an appropriate effect using 'the fiction'. That's what separates, say, the Symbol of Death in Archangel's post a ways back from a Symbol of Polymorphing, or something; in one the fiction has you taking damage while the other has you turning into a chicken, but neither symbol is different, or even defined, in DW's rules. (Perhaps this is designed considering that, well, the GM could've put anything in there anyway, so they may as well pick).

In a sense its kind of 'effects-based' GMing - like how in HERO you'd buy a power and reskin it to whatever you want, in DW the GM picks a 'move' and reskins the effect to what they want.

OK, back to the regularly scheduled flamewar.

As someone else mentioned, all the actions you take in Dungeon World are in character and described as such.  It's something I really like.  You don't hear players saying, "I roll to Defy Danger" or "I take an action to Hack 'n' Slash," you hear players describing what their characters do within the context of the game world.

Now, personally, I would like to see a more mechanically robust hack for Dungeon World.  I'd like to see special skill specialties, and I might tweak the dice rolled to 2d8 or even 2d10 to give the game a broader "sweet spot" of where you're supposed to roll.  Once you're rolling 2d6 + 3, you're not often going to get a 6-.

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;684267As someone else mentioned, all the actions you take in Dungeon World are in character and described as such.  It's something I really like.  You don't hear players saying, "I roll to Defy Danger" or "I take an action to Hack 'n' Slash," you hear players describing what their characters do within the context of the game world.

Technically speaking, saying "I Hack and Slash" does *nothing*.  You can't do a move by simply declaring it.  Moves happen when they're triggered by the description.  Sometimes people do say "I Hack and Slash", and the generally suggested response is "Okay, so what do you *do*?"

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;684260I'm curious as to how many of the people who like Dungeon World are looking at it from a 'player-side' perspective, vs. a 'GM-side' perspective.

It seems like for the GM there's less specific definition of how things operate, because they pick a generic 'move' that's relevant and apply an effect from it. The rules don't specify the details, the GM is just supposed to select an appropriate effect using 'the fiction'. That's what separates, say, the Symbol of Death in Archangel's post a ways back from a Symbol of Polymorphing, or something; in one the fiction has you taking damage while the other has you turning into a chicken, but neither symbol is different, or even defined, in DW's rules. (Perhaps this is designed considering that, well, the GM could've put anything in there anyway, so they may as well pick).

In a sense its kind of 'effects-based' GMing - like how in HERO you'd buy a power and reskin it to whatever you want, in DW the GM picks a 'move' and reskins the effect to what they want.

OK, back to the regularly scheduled flamewar.

GM side, primarily.

You just say "yeah, sure" or "no, that won't work" to any situation, as a GM, if you think that's the right call; not everything needs to go to the dice. Not everything should go to the dice.

The symbols would be something most likely written up in the GM's notes (As a "custom GM move"), along with what they did when the players interacted with them. You'd basically prep them like you would any other game; a "custom GM move" is just DW terminology for "something that can happen if the characters do this thing".

DW's moves are less flexible than AW's, they do more particular defined things, but I think that's a strength because it makes the mechanics/narrative link easier to comprehend. It adds gaps, but that's fine because the GM is there to fill them in with rulings and fiction.

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;684260I'm curious as to how many of the people who like Dungeon World are looking at it from a 'player-side' perspective, vs. a 'GM-side' perspective.

It seems like for the GM there's less specific definition of how things operate, because they pick a generic 'move' that's relevant and apply an effect from it. The rules don't specify the details, the GM is just supposed to select an appropriate effect using 'the fiction'. That's what separates, say, the Symbol of Death in Archangel's post a ways back from a Symbol of Polymorphing, or something; in one the fiction has you taking damage while the other has you turning into a chicken, but neither symbol is different, or even defined, in DW's rules. (Perhaps this is designed considering that, well, the GM could've put anything in there anyway, so they may as well pick).

In a sense its kind of 'effects-based' GMing - like how in HERO you'd buy a power and reskin it to whatever you want, in DW the GM picks a 'move' and reskins the effect to what they want.

I've always remarked about this as one of the biggest pros or cons, depending on the side you are looking at, of storygames/new school games. The high abstraction of mechanics and adherence to the importance of story allows for balance to be achieved, since all the different fireballs and ice storms are usually flavours and descriptions, often with little mechanical changes/bonuses to them, rather than 2 whole different things.

QuoteOK, back to the regularly scheduled flamewar.

In the grim darkness of the 3rd millennium, there is only flamewar.

One thing I don't like about Dungeon World is how much is dictated by GM fiat.  In a tradgame, a TPK can happen because of rolls of the dice.  In DW, a TPK can happen because the GM allows it.  The difficulty of each encounter is largely based on how difficult the GM wants it to be.  How often do the PCs have to Defy Danger to get into position?  How often do the monsters deal damage?  Leaving such largely to the GM's whim is troublesome to me.

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;684673One thing I don't like about Dungeon World is how much is dictated by GM fiat.  In a tradgame, a TPK can happen because of rolls of the dice.  In DW, a TPK can happen because the GM allows it.  The difficulty of each encounter is largely based on how difficult the GM wants it to be.  How often do the PCs have to Defy Danger to get into position?  How often do the monsters deal damage?  Leaving such largely to the GM's whim is troublesome to me.

Isn't the difficulty in all rpg's set by the gm?

Quote from: Bill;684793Isn't the difficulty in all rpg's set by the gm?

Exactly. We had a (fairly) huge discussion (once again) about that topic when I wrote a few posts on diceless rpgs on my blog. "GM Fiat" is, basically, a bullshit term. At least in traditional games, the GM is god -- and this is supported by the rules. So, it's not "GM fiat", but rules design.

And, quite frankly: I like it that way. Games with "shared narration" tend to fall apart pretty quick. At least, this is my experience.

Quote from: Archangel Fascist;684673One thing I don't like about Dungeon World is how much is dictated by GM fiat.  In a tradgame, a TPK can happen because of rolls of the dice.  In DW, a TPK can happen because the GM allows it.  The difficulty of each encounter is largely based on how difficult the GM wants it to be.  How often do the PCs have to Defy Danger to get into position?  How often do the monsters deal damage?  Leaving such largely to the GM's whim is troublesome to me.

As a GM who ran games that way for a long time, rules-light + lots of GM latitude has a lot of merit. The issue is that it's very taxing on the GM. When you have to make a judgement call on everything to generate the maximum tension, you carry too much of the weight of the fun at the table. Freedom has a cost.

Indeed.  And sometimes you just wanna have the dice say what happens.  I think there's a lot of value to both tradgames and Dungeon World-style narrative-esque games.

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;682452This.  It's akin to the year that Halle Berry won her Oscar: shit field, weak competition, and the Academy getting shaken down by outside parties wanting some form of payoff.  In other words, it won because it was the least shit of the lot.

RPG companies seem to focused less on RPGs now.  There is money to be made selling Brony merchandise, which takes time/resources away from RPG development.

Quote from: Norbert G. Matausch;684820Exactly. We had a (fairly) huge discussion (once again) about that topic when I wrote a few posts on diceless rpgs on my blog. "GM Fiat" is, basically, a bullshit term. At least in traditional games, the GM is god -- and this is supported by the rules. So, it's not "GM fiat", but rules design.

Traditionally games have recognized two roles for the GM: the GM as designer and the GM as referee.

The GM as designer wields godlike powers and is generally free to do whatever he wants. But then the expectation is that once play begins -- once the GM has "put the ball in play", so to speak -- that the GM as referee takes over, applies the rules, and lets the chips fall where they may.

GM fiat happens when the GM as referee either ignores the rules of play or when the rules of play are inadequate and the GM has to make an arbitrary decision.

In practice, of course, this all gets really, really fuzzy around the edges. But term has clear and distinctive utility.

Quote from: CRKrueger;683900Of the people on this site who have posted in support of Dungeon World at all, there is exactly ONE, Ramon, who has not shown from posting history a definite lean towards narrative aspects of roleplaying.

I love this place.

Everywhere else on the internet I'm known as the grognard who hates STGs and secretly wants extermination camps established for STG players. Only on theRPGsite am I the crazy STG lover who secretly despises traditional RPGs. It's a refreshing change of pace.

Quote from: Benoist;683666

QuoteIf somebody hit up a thread about, say, Lords of Olympus and spent multiple pages saying, "So it's just like Eclipse Phase? I don't get it. I mean, if it all comes down to don't roll dice and the GM uses fiat, what's with all the text?" that person would be a troll.

So wait a minute. Wondering what differenciates Dungeon World from games that preceded it, like say... D&D, is like comparing Lords of Olympus to Eclipse Phase, but on the other hand, Dungeon World totally plays like... totally "Old School style" and if you say there's a fundamental difference you're a badwrong hater against everything that is good about Dungeon World?

Oh, Benoist. I see you're making up stuff I never said and claiming I said it again. That's adorable. At least this time you avoided putting quotation marks around fake quotes (http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=669953&postcount=184), but you did manage to make it even more precious by claiming I said the exact opposite of what I actually said despite the fact that I was explicitly agreeing with you by name (http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=683166&postcount=91).

Quote from: silva;683387Tell me any other game that has "sucess at a cost" built-in on the resolution.

Warhammer 3. LOL

Quote from: Jason Coplen;685019Warhammer 3. LOL

My one nemesis....

Quote from: Jason Coplen;685019Warhammer 3. LOL

WFRP 3e is bad, and I'm pretty sure AW came out before it.

DW has GM Fiat because its an RPG. If you don't like the idea of GM Fiat, you probably don't like RPGs.  

I can understand how this would be confusing to some Storygamers, of course, because DW SOUNDS like it ought to be a storygame; they had been told that DW was a secret storygame masquerading as an RPG to try to snatch the unknowing "unwashed masses" into the new ideology; but it turned out to be an actual RPG, and a huge percentage of the entire storygames community (so dozens, maybe even hundreds of people!) are going around confused as to why the "storygame about dungeon crawling" they thought they were playing is really feeling way too much like an icky old RPG...

RPGPundit