Great!
Another over-analysis post.

These are games, Role-playing games  - NOT College term or thesis papers.

- Ed C.

Quote from: Koltar;416732Great!
Another over-analysis post.

These are games, Role-playing games  - NOT College term or thesis papers.

- Ed C.

Granted, I think stuff like this is self-evident to all but the narratives here, but if you read the post, I think you'd agree with everything he said as he's 100% agreeing with your first statement in the other thread.

Quote from: Koltar;416732Another over-analysis post.

These are games, Role-playing games  - NOT College term or thesis papers.

Ed, you seem hostile to the idea of discussing how games work. I don't get it. What is it that bothers you about people analyzing games?

Sure, playing is always better than talking about playing. But you can't always play. (Like, right now, when I am at work.)

No one is writing a thesis paper here. And if they did? I'd be interested in reading that paper. RPGs involve all kinds of interesting things - human dynamics, game theory, reward mechanisms, social interaction, micro-culture, amateurs creating fiction on the spot, all kinds of stuff.

Do you enjoy reading tons of text?

 Or do you prefer actually playing the role playing games?

...and Running the games?

Thesis papers are meant for colleges and universities, they don't make for great reading at a game table or in a role-playing game book.

It mostly boils down to:
1. "If this shit doesn't work - then don't do it"
2. "If this shit doesn't make any sense - then why the fuck are we doing it?"
3. "HUh, this shit is working - lets keep doing this."

...and oh yeah, Real role playing games have a GM in charge.


- Ed C.

I want this thread to be the first to reach 1000 posts without expressly being about 4e.

Quote from: Omnifray;416729Re 3:-

If the contents of the game-world are largely basically retroactively narrated by the players, then there is no substantial pre-existing game-world in any real sense. If there is no substantial pre-existing game-world in any real sense then, and blatantly so, then blatantly you can't have any sense of mystery and suspense about the secrets that the game-world holds, because there aren't any. So, if you want that sense of mystery and suspense, comprehensive player narrative power ruins it. Of course you could have some sense of mystery and suspense about the way other players and the ref will in future use their narrative power, but it's not in any way the same deal. Now maybe you don't want mystery and suspense, but for me at least they are a large part of the fun, and I think they are widely underrated by people who would want them more if they had better experience of them.

Re 4:-

Clearly if you can narrate your way out of unforeseen difficulties by retroactively giving yourself just the gizmo you need for the situation, or just the web of contacts you require, etc., then a considerable aspect of the potential level of challenge to you and your character is immediately negated. I can't see a valid counterargument. Obviously there could be other forms of challenge, e.g. the challenge of coming up with an appealing narrative, but it's not the same thing at all as the challenge of getting your character to survive, succeed or serve the ideals of his faith or whatever.

Hmmm...IME some of the GMless games allow for as much background developement of the setting as the group cares to do so I don't see this as an across the board reality. And IME many times a DM wings it,albeit from a skeletal frame, as well so...

re 4-
er,I was talking about who has the power to present said challenges not the way they are resolved so the example you give is niether here nor there in that regard,though I do see your point about challenges being blunted with those resolution mechanics in play.

seems we are talking about two different things...I am not assuming that a DM-less game is of the "storygame" ilk...are you?
Edit; A GM-less approach can still be Trad. in the sense that the Char. are the focus as opposed to the "story" as a metagame convention...or something like that.

Quote from: RPGPundit;416600ANY Forge game that involves "stakes", for one example; where a player says "if I win the roll, x happens next" and where the GM has to say "well, if I win, then y happens instead", or variations of the same.

I'm not seeing anything that would prevent a GM from countermanding any such declaration.

You could say the rules prevent it, but we know we don't have to listen to the rules or play the game in the manner the designer intended. We both agree - and, if you recall, I specifically asked your opinion on this - that the GM can change the game to suit himself and the group.

You could say that changing the outcome makes the mechanic pointless. Two points here. First, unless it's happening all the time, who cares? If the GM goes along with most of what the players come up with an only occasionally counteracts their declarations, I don't see a problem or any real breach.

Point two: This type of contravention of the mechanics happens all the time in traditional games. Examples including fudging the die rolls, rolling behind a screen and pretending to get some result other than what you did, choosing not to use mechanics in situations for which the rulebook indicates they should be used, altering difficulties for rolls, et al.

Quote from: RPGPundit;416600Nope. This is, outside of the Forge, the mentality of "rules lawyers", which for decades have been utterly derided as examples of BAD players.  It is the Forge types, and a few others with vested interests, who have tried to turn this into a virtue.

So the whole "Tyranny of Fun" was just bullshit? The folks saying that players expected balance, balanced encounters, the rules to be followed, more rules created so there's less GM fiat, etc., are wrong? Because I could have sworn that you sided with them.

Quote from: RPGPundit;416600They didn't even have to produce anything successful, just convince intellectually bankrupt executives that they were the Hip New Thing, and those gaming companies would want to get on the bandwagon.

And that's why we're all playing White Wolf games.

Of course we're not. Because it doesn't matter if the (luxury) product is on the shelves or not - or even the only product on the shelves - because people won't buy it.

You told us that the vast majority of people were as vehemently opposed to the Forge's ideology, but you believe they'll readily purchase and play Forge games just because they're put in front of them?

If they're that opposed to the ideas, if they hold that little value, people will never play them, even if they're the only thing on the shelf. Consider, for example, the biggest, most pervasive, and most popular RPG to ever grace existence, D&D. People are still playing versions printed 30 years ago because they don't agree with elements of the game. You think people are going to capitulate for something lesser?

Now if your argument was that Forge games do have appeal and potential appeal, then I could see some danger of them taking over the market and the hearts and minds of gamers.

Quote from: RPGPundit;416600Let's look at some better examples: Creationism.  The Creationists don't need to convince everyone that God created the earth 6000 years ago and Dinosaurs were wiped out by the flood. They just need a sufficient mass of fanatical lobbyists and voters to get into the local schoolboards, and then have their way with how the next generation of children are taught.

This is another example of a group using power to actually force choices on folks, in this case legislative. What I'm asking - and what you've failed to demonstrate - is how the Forge is forcing anyone to do anything? What power do they have?

You said they might gain control industry leaders and start pumping out Forge games. So what? How's that going to force me to play a Forge game at my table?

Seanchai

Quote from: Seanchai;416764If they're that opposed to the ideas, if they hold that little value, people will never play them, even if they're the only thing on the shelf. Consider, for example, the biggest, most pervasive, and most popular RPG to ever grace existence, D&D. People are still playing versions printed 30 years ago because they don't agree with elements of the game. You think people are going to capitulate for something lesser?

True, however consider the point upthread about not needing to convince the players just the game designers.  If you can convince the gamemakers/designers to kill WFRP2 and make WFRP3, then you don't need to convince 10,000 people, just ten.

I never thought the Forge was going to outsell anything, I did however think it could spread its ideas into mainstream gaming via meme infection.  This it has done, both for a little good and whole lot of ill as I see it.

Quote from: Koltar;416750Do you enjoy reading tons of text?
 Or do you prefer actually playing the role playing games?
...and Running the games?

Thesis papers are meant for colleges and universities, they don't make for great reading at a game table or in a role-playing game book.

I agree absolutely about game texts. I hate big giant books. And I like I said, playing games is ALWAYS preferable to discussing them.

But we're not talking about those things, as far as I can tell. We're talking about posting on a message forum during the day.

So what is it about discussing these things on a message board that you object to?

Quote from: Cranewings;416756I want this thread to be the first to reach 1000 posts without expressly being about 4e.

I assumed we were talking about 4E all this time.

Quote from: CRKrueger;416766True, however consider the point upthread about not needing to convince the players just the game designers.  If you can convince the gamemakers/designers to kill WFRP2 and make WFRP3, then you don't need to convince 10,000 people, just ten.

I never thought the Forge was going to outsell anything, I did however think it could spread its ideas into mainstream gaming via meme infection.  This it has done, both for a little good and whole lot of ill as I see it.

Seanchi's point is still true though. If every game designer started producing these un-fun, un-playable games, due to Forge mind control, people would just turn to new game designers who were making old-school, traditional games.

It's still an obviously circular, made-up problem.

Quote from: CRKrueger;416766True, however consider the point upthread about not needing to convince the players just the game designers.  If you can convince the gamemakers/designers to kill WFRP2 and make WFRP3, then you don't need to convince 10,000 people, just ten.

And then what?

That's the point about people playing OD&D, AD&D, Pathfinder, etc.. Who cares if every designer on Earth only produces Forge games? People will just play older games they do like and ignore the current Forge offering.

Seanchai

Quote from: BWA;416769................. people would just turn to new game designers who were making old-school, traditional games.

...................

Those are the games that people actually PURCHASE and play. The important thing is - the majority of the people prefer those traditional and playable games.

Doesn't have to be new designers tho.

 Could be the old designers getting back into things after feeling rejuvenated.  

- Ed C.

Quote from: BWA;416767I assumed we were talking about 4E all this time.

What would be awesome is if it in a fit of desire to become trendy and relevant, Palladium games put out a new edition of Rifts where the GM role is shared by the players as a means of balancing the wacky power levels.

Quote from: Koltar;416750Do you enjoy reading tons of text?
*snip*
Thesis papers are meant for colleges and universities, they don't make for great reading at a game table or in a role-playing game book.

*snip*
...and oh yeah, Real role playing games have a GM in charge.


- Ed C.

this coming from a man who loves GURPS...?!

Ahem...Role Playing Game;
Role: A character
Playing: Participating,"doing"
Game: Codified approach to fun!

whats your definition?
like assholes we all have our own...and sometimes they stink.

Brings to mind an explanation of certain aspects of "Mara"(the illusory world of "ego") a Buddhist monk related,something like this.
"These "things" you percieve are actually there. What doesn't exist is your interpretation of them."

Quote from: Cranewings;416775What would be awesome is if it in a fit of desire to become trendy and relevant, Palladium games put out a new edition of Rifts where the GM role is shared by the players as a means of balancing the wacky power levels.

Could it perhaps also be combined with some sort of collectible cards maybe?