Quote from: Erik BoielleWell, you do like that railroaded piece of shit The Pendragon Campaign...

This makes me wish we had a "Go back to WoW" icon.

Quote from: RPGPunditIf you ever wanted proof that the "storygames" crowd ARE a gang of moral degenerates, so concerned with being hip and fashionable that they have absolutely no sense of social grounding anymore (why should they? They like to pretend that they're a special elite above society's rules!), or even precious little of a basic sense of humanity, this would be it.

RPGPundit

This game is fun.

Let's play!

Quote from: RPGPunditGranted, that campaign also had its own element of sexual controversy, a little later when I had to basically present pederasty in its Roman context during the time of the emperors Trajan and Hadrian.  What's  more, I had to present it in a somewhat positive light, what with the story of Hadrian and Antinous and all.

http://www.therpgsite.com/forums/showpost.php?p=133787&postcount=20

So, your glorifying man-boy love in the name of history is okay but us defending someone else's right to play a game with content that, though many of us are disgusted by, feel that each table should define their own level of squick isn't okay?

This is rather ominous coming from a guy who is marketing his game to the young boys of the third world.

Paka,
 There is NO comparison there.

 That isn't just apples and oranges - thats apples and badly made chicken meatloaf.

- Ed C.

...and Vincent Baker himself has now posted a second time to that thread that got us all talking...here I'll save you time...its post #391.

Take a look:

QuoteLumpley/Vincent Baker said: System matters. My game design created, or at least contributed to, a play environment in which someone had their character commit a horrible murder-rape. I don't see why anyone would argue otherwise. (I'm not sure if anyone has, in fact, argued otherwise - I've found this thread kind of hard to take seriously and I may be missing some arguments. Doesn't really matter.)

If anyone's still curious about the game's rules or whatever, please come ask me in the lumpley games forum at the Forge.

I'm going to keep reading this thread, but I'm not EVEN going to try to have a conversation in it.

-Vincent

Is that a sidestep? or what?


- Ed C.

Quote from: KoltarIs that a sidestep? or what?


- Ed C.

In terms of gleichman's OP, no its not a sidestep at all.  He's frankly stating, in his first two sentences, that it was his system that allowed this Actual Play to occur.  So system matters.

Case settled.

Now if you find that Actual Play morally repugnant and if you conclude that skullfuckers are the kind of people this game attracts, that's your call to make.

I think I'm with Temple on this one. The game itself doesn't seem to be an issue for me as the recent sugar-coating of pirates for kids is a little unsettling. They may have buckled the odd swash, but they also practised murder and rape, so lets not go completely overboard on making heroes of them without some redress.

Quote from: Thanatos02Forget all this morality stuff. When you're playing a game, the worst crime it can commit is to fail to be fun.

ah-fucking-men.  

And I'm not defending the game.  I'm not really interested.  If I want to play vile pirates sacking a defenseless town and doing terrible things to the people, I'll use Pirates of the Spanish main.  I'm attacking all the judgemental and righteous critiquing of the game play going on.  Just seems lame to me.

It's a game.  Most adjusted people understand the difference in fantasy and reality.  I think if this kind of game were the norm for a group, I might have some concerns for them.  But I wouldn't try to say what they were doing is wrong or try and prevent them from doing.

And I would feel the same way about it no matter the system (though I'd probably rather play Poison'd than D20).

Quote from: PeteIn terms of gleichman's OP, no its not a sidestep at all.  He's frankly stating, in his first two sentences, that it was his system that allowed this Actual Play to occur.  So system matters.

Case settled.

That's ridiculous. (Not you, the statement). Just about every game I own would allow me to do that. How can someone claim that it was the system that allowed it - the player, and the GM by proxy, is the one who allowed it.

Still - its an interesting line of attack - the vanity press boys are all about really classy games like RaHoWa and Panty Explosion.

Classy.

Quote from: Kyle AaronWell, either way - that the mods told me I didn't fit into rpg.net no longer feels like an insult.

In my case I consider it a compliment.

Quote from: Thanatos02Do you know what the core mechanics are? The purpose of the game? How is it played?

I know what I've read on the internet, which is probably what everybody else has read.


[Hey, by the way, this whole thing reminds me greatly of the flamewars around the time DitV was released. Funny thing is, Vincent's already got us playing his game.]

Quote from: -E.A lot of rpg theory is based on the idea that games are highly motivated by crude mechanical bonuses -- I'm sure some are (in fact, I think Narrativist mechanics are, in some significant degree, designed to motivate "gamist" gamers to play like Nar gamers).

You're very right, and I think this shows some unspoken assumptions in the theory. Theoretically, it's kind of incoherent to throw these sorts of sops to Gamist play in a supposedly Narrativist game, because according to GNS theory approaching a Narrativist game with a Gamist attitude is acting in bad faith - you're setting up a conflict between the agenda of player and game. And, as a friend of mine point out, games that are designed with the assumption that players are going to approach them with bad faith tend to be clunky. Any game system can be broken if you put your mind to it. The trick is to choose your group such that everyone is coming to the game with good faith, and to have a system which lets you translate that good faith to fun at the gaming table.

I wonder whether many Forge designers worry that there aren't actually enough Narrativists out there to put together all-Narrativist groups, so they slip these mechanics in to tempt the Gamists in and to make them behave once they're there.

Quote from: Aoswhoa! I don't want to get in the way of the personal attacks, or anything, but can we talk about the Evil Poor some more? I think they're cool.

You'll have to ask walkerp about them. He's the one who brought 'em up.

Quote from: PeteIn terms of gleichman's OP, no its not a sidestep at all.  He's frankly stating, in his first two sentences, that it was his system that allowed this Actual Play to occur.  So system matters.

Case settled.

So it would appear to me, he frankly can't argue otherwise without undermining System Matters.

So point 1, down and proven. The designer did intend (unless he wishes to claim he botched his design) to produce these types of events in game.

That leaves point 2, if Edwards is correct about games causing developmental changes in their players (i.e., the Brain Damage post), then it would be very difficult to deny that this game is not also causing developmental changes in its players. And that as a result, Baker is wanting to not only have these types of events happen in his game- but to instill them in other following games and perhaps (like story damage) beyond.

The only problem is that I don't know if Baker agreed with Edwards on his Brain Damage post or not...

But that's certainly how Edwards should view things. Is the Forge singing the praises of this game (I don't visit the place)?

Quote from: gleichmanSo it would appear to me, he frankly can't argue otherwise without undermining System Matters.

So point 1, down and proven. The designer did intend (unless he wishes to claim he botched his design) to produce these types of events in game.

That leaves point 2, if Edwards is correct about games causing developmental changes in their players (i.e., the Brain Damage post), then it would be very difficult to deny that this game is not also causing developmental changes in its players. And that as a result, Baker is wanting to not only have these types of events happen in his game- but to instill them in other following games and perhaps (like story damage) beyond.

The only problem is that I don't know if Baker agreed with Edwards on his Brain Damage post or not...

But that's certainly how Edwards should view things. Is the Forge singing the praises of this game (I don't visit the place)?

They are in full defense mode. So, yes.