Quote from: J ArcaneMan, it'd be awesome if RPGs go as well as billiards.  Played at ever random bar in the country, never a pool table more than a few blocks away where ever you go, leagues of all kinds from casual to professional dotting even the smallest towns, and largely familiar to almost any random Joe or Jane on the street . . .

Shit, that'd be rad.

We are already there.

RPG's, CRPG'S, MMORPG's, and other online adventure games now net more income than full-featured movies have in Hollywood over the last few years.
Games are chosen now to be made as movies, and just about every movie includes a game release as a standard these days, and often, the games are netting more take home dollars for the motion picture production company than the movie did.

The largest grossing film of all times, generating over a 1.2 billion dollars in revenue is.... (drumroll please) the Lord of the Rings Trilogy. The #2 movie is (or recently was) E.T. by Steven Spielberg (I think E.T. was one of the first movies that featured tabletop D&D being played)  The box office receipts for LOTR were like 520 Mill, the rest of that money came in DvD, toy, and game licensing deals.

Without D&D, I don't think the Lord of the Rings movie ever would have been made.

When was the last time you watched a movie that didn't have some CGI special effects sFX in it?

Computer Generated Special Effects is an industry that came about entirely as a result of RPG's, Specifically as the RPG designers pushed to have have special effects and unique scenes added to their computer games, then some folks figured out how to add that movies since the media were so similar. The technology responsible for making this happen? Desktop PC's.

History rolls on, where are you going with it?

There may be a degree of mechanical progress towards more intuitive rules, but that is eclipsed by all the rest of a game's components. Even the interaction of mechanics is a form of self-expression, and that doesn't even go into implied styles of play, setting, character roles, adventures that give you examples of doing things.

QuoteWe are already there.

No, we aren't.  Not even close.  

QuoteRPG's, CRPG'S, MMORPG's, and other online adventure games now net more income than full-featured movies have in Hollywood over the last few years.

You're conflating multiple categories whose success rates are not remotely similar.

Quote from: James J SkachAfter reading the linked jrients post, my first question was - How rules heavy/light would people consider OD&D? In my rough sense (I haven't played it in...what...27 years?) I would assume it would be rules light. Ironically, isn't that a big trend nowa-here-a-days?

I'm not asserting, I'm guessing based on limited evidence - anyone care to set me straight?

Just-the-original-three-books OD&D is light as a feather compared to 3.x or 1st edition AD&D ran as written.  Would a modern "rules light" enthusiast see it that way?  I have my doubts.  Memorization of particular spells and specific dungeoneering procedures kinda make it fall short of the present standards for lightness.

Quote from: J ArcaneI've said it before, and I'll say it again:  RPGs are not technology.

There is no "progress" in RPGs, no "advancement", not even really much "innovation" as far as I'm concerned as most of what's come since the original white box is largely just variations on the same basic concepts.

People need to get the idea in their head that RPGs are an artistic medium, not a field of study or research.

Innovation also exists, but it doesn't equate progress. If that was the case, New Coke would rule the world.

I think that since this is a matter of personal taste, there is no "progress" that can be measured. What you can do is talk about emerging styles, growing diversity of options, market segmentation, and a change in tastes.

I think there's been a ton of progress.  But progress doesn't necessarily imply better.  It just means a wider range of options and technical sophistication (in the case of RPGs, this means mechanics).  But a game from the 70's can be just as enjoyable as one from today, as can a great movie from the 40s be just as enjoyable as one from today.

Quote from: walkerpBut a game from the 70's can be just as enjoyable as one from today,

I hope so! I'll tell you after the 6th April, when I've run the 1/4 Century & Gygax Wake Dungeon Crawl.

Quote from: walkerpI think there's been a ton of progress.  But progress doesn't necessarily imply better.  It just means a wider range of options and technical sophistication (in the case of RPGs, this means mechanics).  But a game from the 70's can be just as enjoyable as one from today, as can a great movie from the 40s be just as enjoyable as one from today.

Walker,
This is what I am looking for. I am not looking to rake you over the coals but could you provide examples of more sophisticated rule sets and what makes them a progression from rules 30/20/10 years ago?

Thanks,
Bill

Quote from: HinterWeltWalker,
This is what I am looking for. I am not looking to rake you over the coals but could you provide examples of more sophisticated rule sets and what makes them a progression from rules 30/20/10 years ago?

This really is coming off the top of the dome, as I haven't spent a lot of time thinking about it, and it is all complemented by my belief that these progressive doesn't mean more fun or better.

Let's take a look at game tokens that give players a re-roll or a freebie ("bennies" in Savage Worlds or "Fate Points" in Fate or Spirit of the Century).  I think these things didn't even exist originally.  There was no way for a player to take a mulligan and I would say that the very idea kind of freaked people out back in the days of AD&D (I know it would have freaked me out as a 13-year old control-freak GM).  When they first came, (and I'm very fuzzy on the actual history here, so anyone can add to it would be very helpful), they were very simple.  Just you have x amount of mulligan chips per session.

Now, with the two examples I know, SW and SotC, these freebies are much more deeply integrated with the mechanics with very specific advantages as opposed to just a straight re-roll.  It makes them a little more complex and work much more closely with both the tone of the game and the mechanics.

So I would say these are more sophisticated in the way that camera work and editing on television shows have become much more sophisticated than they were 30 years ago.

Let's see, what else.  Well, hell, look at D&D.  There definitely has been progress there.  The rules have become more complex, more geared towards encounter balance.  In my opinion, this is negative progress, but I still think it's progressive, as each iteration is based on developments and errors in the edition before.

Feats, for instance.  Did they not arise in 3e?  I think they must have come out of class-specific special abilities that were then pulled from the specific classes, allowing anyone to get them while retaining elements that made them more favourable for one class than another.

Do those work?

Also how about the ideas of collaborative campaign design?  Where the whole group designs the setting together?  I think that is a progressive idea.  Also, some of the more structured character creation techniques (as in Spirit of the Century) used to get around the "you all meet in a tavern" ploy seem like progressive ideas.

Quote from: walkerpThis really is coming off the top of the dome, as I haven't spent a lot of time thinking about it, and it is all complemented by my belief that these progressive doesn't mean more fun or better.

Let's take a look at game tokens that give players a re-roll or a freebie ("bennies" in Savage Worlds or "Fate Points" in Fate or Spirit of the Century).  I think these things didn't even exist originally.  There was no way for a player to take a mulligan and I would say that the very idea kind of freaked people out back in the days of AD&D (I know it would have freaked me out as a 13-year old control-freak GM).  When they first came, (and I'm very fuzzy on the actual history here, so anyone can add to it would be very helpful), they were very simple.  Just you have x amount of mulligan chips per session.

Now, with the two examples I know, SW and SotC, these freebies are much more deeply integrated with the mechanics with very specific advantages as opposed to just a straight re-roll.  It makes them a little more complex and work much more closely with both the tone of the game and the mechanics.

So I would say these are more sophisticated in the way that camera work and editing on television shows have become much more sophisticated than they were 30 years ago.

Let's see, what else.  Well, hell, look at D&D.  There definitely has been progress there.  The rules have become more complex, more geared towards encounter balance.  In my opinion, this is negative progress, but I still think it's progressive, as each iteration is based on developments and errors in the edition before.

Feats, for instance.  Did they not arise in 3e?  I think they must have come out of class-specific special abilities that were then pulled from the specific classes, allowing anyone to get them while retaining elements that made them more favourable for one class than another.

Do those work?

I respect your points but I think I see my problem now. To me, that is not progress. You are describing new features. For instance, a car 50 years ago would have standard brakes, 30 years ago power brakes, and 10 years ago power anti-lock breaks. To me, that is progress. A gps system, no so much. That is a new feature. You might say it is a progress of the car as a whole but to me, it is the addition of something new to the design and thus a way to do something that did not exist before. Some folks might use it, others ignore it.

For RPGs, a similar comparison would be to say "Combat was resolved by rolling a d20 and referencing a chart, now it does not require a chart because of x".

However, under your definition of progress, I would have to admit that there has been much accomplished in the field.

Thanks,
Bill

Quote from: walkerpAlso how about the ideas of collaborative campaign design?  Where the whole group designs the setting together?  I think that is a progressive idea.  Also, some of the more structured character creation techniques (as in Spirit of the Century) used to get around the "you all meet in a tavern" ploy seem like progressive ideas.

This is arguable. I do not think there are quantifiable benefits from this. Again, to me, progress implies benefits. Progression: moving forward, improvement. Collaborative design is more of a sideways move, a different way, IMO. However, I will admit to it fitting my example above in that it is based on the idea of designing a setting and it is a redefining of that process.

Thanks,
Bill

Hmm, a distinction between features and progress on fundamental parts of an rpg.  Maybe you're right.  Maybe we've just been accumulating features (like Microsoft Word, which has certainly not gotten any better since it first came out).

Well, what about separating races and classes?  In basic D&D, an elf was a class.  That got changed.  Is that progress?  I know it's early on.

I suspect that a lot more research has been done on dice odds and because of that, choices of dice mechanics have become more sophisticated.  4th edition of GURPS takes advantage of this, as does Savage Worlds (with the exploding dice; though that's another feature).

Quote from: JongWKInnovation also exists, but it doesn't equate progress. If that was the case, New Coke would rule the world.

I think that since this is a matter of personal taste, there is no "progress" that can be measured. What you can do is talk about emerging styles, growing diversity of options, market segmentation, and a change in tastes.

I agree that style and taste are not subject to progress. RPG presentation and diversity are subject to progress. Innovation has given us a wide set of tools to craft the game we want to run. Years of writing on RPGS has allowed to present complex information in better forms for the GM and players to digest.

OD&D could be improved by having a better format without changing the rules. That would be progress. However if you did what Holmes, the Blue Book, sure you get a better format but it also a different game.

Then there is diversity how many area are covered by rules? To what degrees of complexity? There can be progress in this area as designers find what works and doesn't work say for shipfaring or aerial combat. However remember this doesn't result in the one true answer only in a multitude of choices with different tradeoffs.

Progress is a big word that can cover a wide range of activity.

It can be defined in terms of a market share in the game/entertainment/media industry.

It can be defined as and evolution or improvement of the game itself.

It can be defined as new improved games that overshadow and bring the original game into obscurity.

Is what we are talking about here improvements in a game that make it both more attractive to a larger audience, and easier to play at the same time (more friendly?).

Anyone have any other definitions of progress to add here for consideration?