Quote from: Elliot Wilen;364927So, Ian, you're saying that Vampire games are all supereroes-with-fangs, thus subverting the game's hype and the designer's (apparent) intent? And that Stormbringer follows the same pattern?

Close.  I'm saying that in every Vampire game I've played in, and most of them I've heard about, regardless of the intent of the authors and their mood-enforcing mechanics, the players themselves subvert the game and play it for thrills, not chills.  I don't mean to suggest that a similar thing happens with Stormbringer as it is (there are no real mood-enforcing mechanics), but if a designer were trying to emo-up the game, he'd be up against the same player subversion.

!i!

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;364927Point of clarification:

So, Ian, you're saying that Vampire games are all supereroes-with-fangs, thus subverting the game's hype and the designer's (apparent) intent? And that Stormbringer follows the same pattern?

I haven't played either game but from what I've read, Vampire groups are split between hack & thesp play (to use Kyle's terms), while Stormbringer groups overall seem to be overwhelmingly hack. And also, that didn't really subvert the SB's hype and the designer's intent, although it may have undermined the theme of the original stories to some extent.

If I may add my two copper pieces here, my games of Stormbringer and Vampire turned out quite similarly, though there were completely different in practice. Let me explain.

From the emo-stance of Vampire, the games I got out of it where really sandbox urban campaigns with a wide variety of characters trying to play politics, find out more about the setting, fulfilling this or that background aim (vengeance, finding someone, redemption, whatever) through actual play.

From Stormbringer, I got a lot of action-packed game sessions for sure, and quite a lot of sorcery, amoral behavior etc, but also many sessions of pure character development, trying to pressure some cult to get what they want, or build up credit in this or that group of the Young Kingdoms.

Maybe a narrow focus in theme or game play for any game is doomed to fail, in the end. Maybe that's why Vampire, and to a lesser extent Mage, were the most successful games of the WoD - because their themes could be diverted in favor of more generic, sandbox game play. Maybe that's why D&D is so good, because it is sort of a sandbox adventure game par excellence?

I'm willing to believe that a lot of the narrow Forge games have managed to hit their theme pretty consistently. But that's at least partly because they manage to consistently attract people who want a narrow theme. And also because they aren't designed for long-term play.

I think you're on the money here.  Mood-themed games depend greatly on player buy-in and scenario-based, rather than extended campaign play.

!i!

[Edit:  I was in a hurry when I wrote my reply above, and I realise the thought wasn't exactly complete.  I think the benefit of limited, episodic, scenario-based play is that the chosen themes can really be highlighted and take center stage.  While they can still exist in an extended campaign, a consistent mood may be more difficult to maintain over a protracted period with possibly disjointed continuity.]

Agreed. That's a very good point, Elliot. Food for thought.

Well, fair enough, I withdraw my previous criticism.  It doesn't hurt to repeat, however, that Vampire's "author intent" is angsty pretentiousness, whereas Stormbringer's is not (its high fantasy "amoral" Swords & Sorcery).

RPGPundit

Fair enough.  But it's also worth reiterating that, as pretentious as the authors may have intended it, my experience and familiarity with Vampire has been consistently of the action-packed variety.  And, on the backside, I could imagine Stormbringer being dragged down to mopey introspection by some players, even though the novels succeed in rising above that sort of thing.  Maybe that's what J.K. Rowling was reacting to when she tried to imagine what players could feasibly do with an officially sanctioned RPG interpretation of her imaginary world.

And so we get to the often boardgame-like mechanics seen in many Forge and Forge-ish games (and certain excellent mainstreamish games, like King Arthur Pendragon) that hone the focus on certain expected behaviors, often posing them as mechanical foils to players' metagame ambitions.  The big question, though: Do the mechanics promote roleplaying?  If so, is the resulting roleplay in any way of lesser quality than in a traditional RPG?  Is it better or worse than the roleplay that results from the more skirmish-like traditional RPGs?

!i!

Jesus fuck. As much as I like Elric's moments of doubt and self-loathing, if a GM was trying to force that kind of vibe on me during a Stormbringer game, I think I'd leap from my chair and smother him right there, on the spot.

... that, or I just wouldn't come back for a second round of emo wankery.

Quote from: Benoist;365078Jesus fuck. As much as I like Elric's moments of doubt and self-loathing, if a GM was trying to force that kind of vibe on me during a Stormbringer game, I think I'd leap from my chair and smother him right there, on the spot.

Would you feel anguished about it afterwards?  Because if you did, mission accomplished.

!i!

Quote from: Ian Absentia;365082Would you feel anguished about it afterwards?  Because if you did, mission accomplished.

!i!

I probably would wait for my black pillow to laugh at me before fully revelling in my anguish and self-loathing.

Note: I'm not making any value judgements as to the levels or validity of angst between Elric and Vampire, just using that as a general term for both.

An Elric RPG really can't be angsty/emo to the extent that the novels were.  That's because it's not an Elric RPG, it's a Elric's World RPG.  While Elric's world is dark and gloomy, fated to play out the eventual war between Law and Chaos, most of the VtM-style angst comes from Elric himself, therefore that experience can't be shared by players.

In the WoD, the angst of the Vampire experience is, by definition, shared by every VtM player.

That's why Elric campaigns more often then not end up in combat while VtM can easily lead to lace and blood-tears.

About Forgeite games.  Yes, the Narrative RPG lends itself much better to a one-shot or scenario-based play.  After all, you're telling a specific story based around a specific theme, that story is going to end fairly soon.  If the story you're telling is your character's life, then that's going to be long in the telling (hopefully) and you need an Immersive RPG that can support long-term, sandbox play and is designed to give the GM the systems for doing just that.

Most Forgeite games do exactly what they intend to do...very well.  The problem is, that's all they do, they're a one-trick pony for the most part, which is why they will always be small-press.

Quote from: CRKrueger;365096An Elric RPG really can't be angsty/emo to the extent that the novels were.  That's because it's not an Elric RPG, it's a Elric's World RPG.  While Elric's world is dark and gloomy, fated to play out the eventual war between Law and Chaos, most of the VtM-style angst comes from Elric himself, therefore that experience can't be shared by players.

Excellent post. I think you've nailed it.

Quote from: CRKrueger;365096Most Forgeite games do exactly what they intend to do...very well.  The problem is, that's all they do, they're a one-trick pony for the most part, which is why they will always be small-press.

Hrm...another topic for another thread, but I think you're seeing a problem where none necessarily exists.  The type of game we're describing has, as I suggested earlier, a very boardgame-like focus, which doesn't need to limit them to small press anymore than boardgames are necessarily limited.  That said, I think what you've said is largely true in actual practice.

!i!

Quote from: Ian Absentia;365139Hrm...another topic for another thread, but I think you're seeing a problem where none necessarily exists.  The type of game we're describing has, as I suggested earlier, a very boardgame-like focus, which doesn't need to limit them to small press anymore than boardgames are necessarily limited.  That said, I think what you've said is largely true in actual practice.

!i!

I should have used OTOH or the flip side of the coin, what I meant is with such a specific and narrowly defined focus the audience is going to be small.  Boardgames narrow their focus, but they are starting with the audience of people who play boardgames, which is just a skosh bigger then the audience of people who play tabletop RPGs.

Quote from: Benoist;364936If I may add my two copper pieces here, my games of Stormbringer and Vampire turned out quite similarly, though there were completely different in practice. Let me explain.

From the emo-stance of Vampire, the games I got out of it where really sandbox urban campaigns with a wide variety of characters trying to play politics, find out more about the setting, fulfilling this or that background aim (vengeance, finding someone, redemption, whatever) through actual play.

From Stormbringer, I got a lot of action-packed game sessions for sure, and quite a lot of sorcery, amoral behavior etc, but also many sessions of pure character development, trying to pressure some cult to get what they want, or build up credit in this or that group of the Young Kingdoms.

Maybe a narrow focus in theme or game play for any game is doomed to fail, in the end. Maybe that's why Vampire, and to a lesser extent Mage, were the most successful games of the WoD - because their themes could be diverted in favor of more generic, sandbox game play. Maybe that's why D&D is so good, because it is sort of a sandbox adventure game par excellence?

You may be onto something. My experience both with Vampire and Stormbringer mirrors closely yours.

Those games were dark because the PCs had to do dark stuff as an integral part of the game, and they knew it. So, they had doubts, remorse, and bad consequences coming around to bite them. Also, the world was a dark, grim place, mainly because of the people inhabiting it. People in the Young Kingdoms are not the usual denizens of a fantasy world, they're more decadent, passionate and extreme in their behaviour. Same applies to the WoD denizens.

But at the end of the day, the games were quite sandbox in execution, specially in Vampire (after all, my Stombringer groups love to sail a lot and they made lots of travels).

Quote from: Ian Absentia;365076And so we get to the often boardgame-like mechanics seen in many Forge and Forge-ish games (and certain excellent mainstreamish games, like King Arthur Pendragon) that hone the focus on certain expected behaviors, often posing them as mechanical foils to players' metagame ambitions.  The big question, though: Do the mechanics promote roleplaying?  If so, is the resulting roleplay in any way of lesser quality than in a traditional RPG?  Is it better or worse than the roleplay that results from the more skirmish-like traditional RPGs?!i!

I feel that those mechanics may promote roleplaying the characters according to the goals of the game designer. In the best cases (Pendragon), as the goal is not forcing you in a behaviour, but making yur behviour important, whichever it may be, players don't have to feel foiled. Actually they aren't. This doesn't prevent, of course, that some people will hate Pendragon fierily.

The roleplaying that results from this mechanics is, IME, more intense and relevant to everyone, as you attach some mechanical consequences to your choices, and that makes them stand out. For example, I've used in many RQ campaigns the Traits & Passion rules from Pendragon. I got the idea from the extended RQ PC sheet that was found in the Genertela sourcebook. And frankly, there's a substantial difference on how people roleplay their relationships, ideals and goals.

Quote from: CRKrueger;365096An Elric RPG really can't be angsty/emo to the extent that the novels were.  That's because it's not an Elric RPG, it's a Elric's World RPG.  While Elric's world is dark and gloomy, fated to play out the eventual war between Law and Chaos, most of the VtM-style angst comes from Elric himself, therefore that experience can't be shared by players.

In the WoD, the angst of the Vampire experience is, by definition, shared by every VtM player.

That's why Elric campaigns more often then not end up in combat while VtM can easily lead to lace and blood-tears.

Spot on.

QuoteAbout Forgeite games.  Yes, the Narrative RPG lends itself much better to a one-shot or scenario-based play.  After all, you're telling a specific story based around a specific theme, that story is going to end fairly soon.  If the story you're telling is your character's life, then that's going to be long in the telling (hopefully) and you need an Immersive RPG that can support long-term, sandbox play and is designed to give the GM the systems for doing just that.

Most Forgeite games do exactly what they intend to do...very well.  The problem is, that's all they do, they're a one-trick pony for the most part, which is why they will always be small-press.

Again, I agree absolutely.