Quote from: RPGPundit

Quote from: KrakaJakIt wasn't called "Story-Game" vs. "Traditional Play" back then though. It was "Role-Players" vs. "Roll-Players". To this day, every RPG that comes out discourages "Roll-playing". Even the much touted "Traditional Play" Monarch, D&D3.

This is such unutterably unbelievable bullshit that I am flabbergasted. The terms "role play" vs. "roll play" did NOT, in fact, originate with Vampire. It originated in AD&D.  It originated with advice for playing AD&D that suggested players not resolve all issues with dice rolls, especially elements of social interaction, and not ignore these elements in the game.

I can't even tell what he's saying.  KrakaJak:  Are you saying that every RPG (including AD&D2, D&D3, etc.) has discouraged "Roll-playing" (with the exception of parody RPGs)?  There's something to that, I think, since the term "Roll-playing" is pretty derogatory (i.e. implying that you're just rolling dice).  Though what they call "Role-playing" is often vastly different: which could include realistically depicting the world and society; or acting out dialogue; or carefully thinking through plans instead of just blundering in.

Quote from: RPGPunditIt was Vampire that took these terms and created the LIE that all D&D was just "roll-play". A LIE that the Swine have used every time since then to try to denigrate traditional play,

The talk of D&D as "roll-play" long predates Vampire.  You can see similar rhetoric from fans of all sorts of non-D&D games, basically since there were alternatives that had fans.

Quote from: RPGPunditIt was Vampire that took these terms and created the LIE that all D&D was just "roll-play". A LIE that the Swine have used every time since then to try to denigrate traditional play, when in fact the kind of preferences they have for resolving social interations with gimmicky mechanics instead of actually ROLEPLAYING it makes them masters of hypocrisy.

I think you're lumping together different people.  F'rex, I dig social mechanics - I also don't wander around snobbing about "Roll-play".  

And, yes, there are people that have snobbed about "Roll-play" - I've yet to catch one of them digging on social mechanics.

Snobbery, and varying tastes, I've seen, but precious little hypocrisy.

Really? I've been consistently told by people with a straight face that D20 is a "hack n' slash" game BECAUSE it expects you to roleplay social situations rather than having a complex set of rules to govern it with a tiddleywinks-based player-controlled narrativist resolution system or whatever happens to be in fashion this week...

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditReally? I've been consistently told by people with a straight face that D20 is a "hack n' slash" game BECAUSE it expects you to roleplay social situations rather than having a complex set of rules to govern it with a tiddleywinks-based player-controlled narrativist resolution system or whatever happens to be in fashion this week...

*Blink, Blink*

D&D comes off as hack-and-slashy to me because I'm drawn to shiny rules like a fucking magpie, and it keeps all it's shiniest rules in the "beating things up" section.

Not sure if that comes across as meaning the same thing to you.

Quote from: RPGPunditYes, they are NOW. Not then.

RPGPundit

I checked last night and the RMFRP supplements are all copyright 1998-2000.

Ned

Quote from: RPGPunditReally? I've been consistently told by people with a straight face that D20 is a "hack n' slash" game BECAUSE it expects you to roleplay social situations rather than having a complex set of rules to govern it with a tiddleywinks-based player-controlled narrativist resolution system or whatever happens to be in fashion this week...

RPGPundit

Some people like there to be rules for the stuff that interests them, but are aware that others differ on that and like the rules to step back when stuff is interesting.

Some people like there to be rules for stuff that interests them, but absolutely refuse to believe that others might like the rules to step back.

That second category, they're dicks.  Someone might not know there are other approaches, so it's worth politely explaining that you like the rules to fade away on some stuff, but if they won't accept that they're really not worth time talking to.

I don't see this as something profound though, some guys on the internet refuse to accept that tastes vary, in other news bears prefer arboral hygiene facilities.

I find it helpful when someone talks about roll-play versus role-play, it tells me their an idiot who parrots tired cliches in place of thinking and that I need not waste time talking to them.  

Otherwise, back in the 1990s DnD was in a fucking mess.  Vampire was better.  We should be pleased DnD recovered rather than fighting decade old battles that few of us really give a shit about.

Quote from: SettembriniIt´s not. Because it´s all about online discourse, not about  brick-and-mortar-reality. On the internet on the other hand, this culture war is hot and real.

And, as Internet is really irrelevant to most gamers, there is no real war. At least this is my point.

Frankly, Pundit, I'm amazed on how different your experiences and mine differ. I understand that Canada and Spain are very different places, but your experience also doesn't seem to match other North Americans' or Canadians' experiences.

I'm nearer Ned's, or John Kim's positions: D&D kept being the most played game around, and Vampire had a strong second place. But people weren't leaving the gaming in droves. Vampire didn't take over the industry, because it was second place all the time.

And, as John Kim has wisely pointed, a lot of your D20 heroes are by your standards big time Swine traitors, having been involved either in the development of Swine games, or making AD&D totally story - oriented swine. I know that you don't give a shit about coherence when you are in raving mode, but I feel this is important enough to remark:

THE SWINE IS EVERYWHERE: MONTE COOK AND J.TWEET ARE ALSO SWINE. GAMING IS DOOMED.

And the Swine spetnatz will come for you at night, to burn your D20 books and substitute them for copies of Nobilis, MLWM, Sorcerer, and will force you to play them.

On a more positive note, I'm happy that your medical tests have been good. Be careful with that, man.

It is ironic in the extreme that 'roll play vs roleplay' originally advocated "don't rely on rules for social interactions' and now is being used as a bludgeon by people who demand rules for social interactions.

But this is illustrative of why I think this cultural battle is worth fighting. That whole idea about how people "need" social interaction/resolution rules comes naturally from the (wrong) idea that if a game has rules for a thing, than thats all that it is or can be about. So if you have detailed rules for combat in your game, then your game can only be about combat. If you take this to be true, and you want to be taken as a "narrativist" -- then it follows that you must have rules for social interactions. This is just one bad idea following the next because nobody spoke up, or was even allowed to speak up because the conversation took place behind closed gates or was so heavily regulated by a posting policy.

A similar situation was the perversion of the original threefold idea:
1) the gamist roleplays because he likes the challenge of the game.
2 ) the simulationist roleplays to create a simulation of a given thing.
3) the dramatist roleplays because he wants to enjoy a story.

In general you can observe all three motivations (and more) at different times in any gamer. But this idea was (wrongly) quashed.

Now 'simulationist' supposedly means (wrongly) any game with an equipment list or has rules for drowning or falling. I guess. I'm willing to go along with that for a bit- I'm willing to accept that it's important for a guy really interested in a naval battles simulation to know the square tonnage of a frigate vs. a corvette. Sure.

'Gamism' is generally either disregarded or exaggerated. I think they almost get it right sometimes, but by not understanding they are prone to foolish statements such as "the next generation of D&D should just be a boardgame."

A narrativist under the current (wrong) definition should actually fall under #2. What todays 'narrativists' and 'story-gamers' are actually doing is simulating a story. They do this by encouraging 3rd person narration, and also using structures you might see in a story (for example, a theme, premise or moral lesson) and working with those first. They also frown on long-form campaigns for the same reason- you just can't preserve a moral lesson or theme week to week over a 52-session campaign. Then it's all wrapped up in some 'conflict resolution rules' (another simulation). Having predetermined themes and premises and conflict-resolution is the exact same thing as a having square tonnage if what you are trying to simulate is a story. One of the flagship 'narrative games' out there is about trying to simulate a TV series, right down to the fan mail.

My belief is that campaigns are themselves stories- (ask any DM to tell you the story of his campaign) and characters are themselves stories within that larger story. A story can only truly be a 'story game' to the extent that it supports detailed characters and long term campaigns. By not engaging in this battle earlier we let important terms (like 'story' or 'fun') fall into the unworthy hands of people who want to use them against us. We're taking them back.  

So thats why this battle is on.

Ironically enough, if they had just been creating games and selling them and not trying to peddle this bullshit philosophy, there would never be any conflict.

Quote from: Ned the Lonely DonkeyI checked last night and the RMFRP supplements are all copyright 1998-2000.

Ned

I could be off on the dates about RM. I was very much under the impression that there was a period of time when ICE had basically gone under and RM was no longer in production.

Having never been an RM fan, I could be wrong about this.

RPGPundit

Quote from: BalbinusI find it helpful when someone talks about roll-play versus role-play, it tells me their an idiot who parrots tired cliches in place of thinking and that I need not waste time talking to them.  

You mean like the New WoD corebook has done?

QuoteOtherwise, back in the 1990s DnD was in a fucking mess.  Vampire was better.  We should be pleased DnD recovered rather than fighting decade old battles that few of us really give a shit about.

AD&D was a mess, mainly due to corporate mismanagement and intellectual bankruptcy, which is what, in their weakness, allowed WW to come in and take over the ideological vanguard of the hobby.
Vampire was IN NO FUCKING WAY BETTER.
Instead Vampire was a same-old same-old crappy system (that ripped off its basic framework from Shadowrun), and a bunch of pretentious twaddle about "Art" even though they did nothing in either system or setting that was ANY FUCKING DIFFERENT from D&D or any other RPG of the time.

RPGPundit

ICE went down in 2000, but was in bad shape a few years before that. IIRC, that's the reason why they can't use Rolemaster Companion content anymore. As the original ICE went down, the copyright went back to the creators...

Quote from: RPGPunditI could be off on the dates about RM. I was very much under the impression that there was a period of time when ICE had basically gone under and RM was no longer in production.

Having never been an RM fan, I could be wrong about this.

RPGPundit

They went into Chapter 11 bankruptcy (I think what is known as "administration" in the UK, where agents of the creditors oversee the business to ensure they are working to settle debts, I'm no expert) and then sold the company. IIRC, there was no break in production.

Hogshead had stocks of 1st ed WFRP stuff right up until GW yanked the license, I believe.

Regardless of this, I don't give a gnat's tit about a game being "in production" (whatever that may mean - sounds a lot like the live game/dead game dichotomy one encounters on ... other websites). As I stated before these games were all widely available in game shops around where I was. We could say "let's play this!" and everyone was able to get the rulebook if they wanted. As someone interested in playing games rather than following the industry, that's all that mattered to me at the time.

Ned

QuoteInstead Vampire was a same-old same-old crappy system (that ripped off its basic framework from Shadowrun), and a bunch of pretentious twaddle about "Art" even though they did nothing in either system or setting that was ANY FUCKING DIFFERENT from D&D or any other RPG of the time.

Swine == brain damaged gamers.
Really Pundit, it´s the same.
Brain Damage is all about Vampire, and nothing about D&D.

Quote from: ImperatorTHE SWINE IS EVERYWHERE: MONTE COOK AND J.TWEET ARE ALSO SWINE. GAMING IS DOOMED.

This is nonsense when Kim says it in small caps, and bigger nonsense when you say it in larger caps.

Jonathan Tweet has never written a Swiney game in his life. He is a writer of games with real innovative talent (games like Over the Edge, Ars Magica, Everway, Omega World, D&D; the guy is probably the most under-appreciated RPG writer in the industry).

You see, there's a difference:
Jonathan Tweet is a genius.
All the jelly-brained fuckers who make "indie" games are PRETENDING to be geniuses.  They want to have all the respect that Tweet deserves without actually having to FUCKING EARN it.

Its like the difference between a wierd-but-brilliant artist like Dali or Picasso, and some stupid fucker who sprays his own piss on canvas, calls it "art" and demands that the government fund him a fucking museum on our dime for it because he's a genius and all his friends in the vermouth-sipping clove-smoking art-fag crowd say he is too; until any wholesome person would wish that the Holy-fucking-Fire would come down on these ungodly wastes of oxygen just so's we could all see whether their ashes end up smelling of alcoholic clove too.
They are the Swine-scum that end up devaluating the work of people who really have earned praise.

As for Cook, it seems pretty fucking clear that he was, like no doubt many were, stifled while writing under TSR by the savage repression of the Lady of Pain and her underlings.

Again, as you and Mr-fucking-lukewarm Kim have pointed out, for most of the 90s TSR was still ahead of WW, saleswise (though there was supposedly a very brief period where Vampire sales actually outsold AD&D's, the only time ever that D&D wasn't the top seller of the industry).
So what allowed Story-based gaming to take over and nearly destroy the roleplaying hobby was very simply that the brass at TSR allowed it to happen.

Fuck, not just allowed, those brain-addled lumps of shit actually surrendered faster than a frenchman, bent over, and let Rein·Hagen and company fuck them till they cried.  Since actually coming up with original ideas was just too much for these corporate fuckheads, and since Lorraine Williams clearly couldn't think them up herself what with being too busy embezzling funds through destined-to-fail Buck Rogers games, the company as a whole just decided to LET WW set the tone, and just imitate whatever they came up with.
As did most other gaming companies of the time.

TSR was not a place where people with original thinking or ideas were rewarded; on the contrary, TSR was perfectly happy with "doing whatever those other guys were doing" because to come up with something original meant taking a risk, and they were not a risk-taking corporation.  So like good empty-headed corporate fucktards everywhere, they fell for it hook line and sinker when some asshole shows up, declares himself the avant-garde, and seems to have some initial success; and proceeded to try to rip off Rein·Hagen's ideas rather than have to suffer potential headaches of thinking up their own.

RPGPundit

Quote from: SosthenesICE went down in 2000, but was in bad shape a few years before that. IIRC, that's the reason why they can't use Rolemaster Companion content anymore. As the original ICE went down, the copyright went back to the creators...

Ah. Right.

Well, in any case, Rolemaster was not a significant force in the mid-late nineties.

If indeed it ever was.

RPGPundit