Quote from: Itachi on May 28, 2023, 12:03:21 PM
Also, I find it a little weird seeing the Forge and it's offspring criticized when talking about playability, which I agree is the most important atribute in a RPG (and what makes me appreciate OSR too). See, Forgite games always prioritized playability first and foremost: Fiasco, Sorcerer, My Life with Master, Dogs in the Vineyard, The Mountain Witch, Don't Rest Your Head, Lady Blackbird, Apocalypse World, Blades in the Dark, etc, etc. are as much about playability as any OSR game.

Where I DO see the criticism valid is for things like Vampire the Masquerade or those high concept 90s games that presented super cool premises but had everybody scratching their heads saying "okay but... what do I do with this?" Like Everway, Continuum, Unknown Armies, Gurps Transhuman Space, Noumenon, etc.

I think there's a problem with how you're defining "playability" when every single game you listed in the second paragraph got more play and longer continued play than any of the games you posted in the first paragraph (with the possible exception of fiasco, which is really just a party game).

Quote from: Grognard GM on May 28, 2023, 02:02:09 PM

Quote from: RPGPundit on May 27, 2023, 02:26:04 AM
The bad design of the min-maxing point-buy system will allow those players to behave badly, where a well designed system will limit their ability to do so.

This seems a little authoritarian, and condescending. As I said earlier, at least a min-maxer cares enough to min-max, even if at the extremes they can be an annoyance. Rather than tie their hands with locked-down systems, I prefer to only ban the outright broken rules, then let them run wild as long as there's an actual character attached to the stats.

Worse case scenario I can just eject a truly toxic player. Why limit the creative/engaged of character building complexity?

This is a bit like saying "well, at least this corrupt politician cares enough about the procedures of government to bother figuring out how to steal money from it".

Also, lists of "products bought" or "products searched for on google" does not actually say anything about how much they are PLAYED.  I don't deny that some very badly designed games are bought in significant numbers, I said as much in the video. They just aren't played. Usually they aren't bought to be played; they're bought for some other reason (to be read, to put on a bookshelf, or more recently to virtue signal about).

Games played on roll20 is at least slightly more relevant, but that table was fairly biased in that it didn't even bother to categorize non-3.5 non-5e D&D. There's a chance that a huge part of the "uncategorized" and "other" are either older editions of D&D or OSR games.
Beyond that, there's a lot of people who DON'T play online, and some games, particularly old-school games, tend to be played more in person.

Quote from: RPGPundit on May 31, 2023, 02:55:50 AM

Quote from: Itachi on May 28, 2023, 12:03:21 PM
Also, I find it a little weird seeing the Forge and it's offspring criticized when talking about playability, which I agree is the most important atribute in a RPG (and what makes me appreciate OSR too). See, Forgite games always prioritized playability first and foremost: Fiasco, Sorcerer, My Life with Master, Dogs in the Vineyard, The Mountain Witch, Don't Rest Your Head, Lady Blackbird, Apocalypse World, Blades in the Dark, etc, etc. are as much about playability as any OSR game.

Where I DO see the criticism valid is for things like Vampire the Masquerade or those high concept 90s games that presented super cool premises but had everybody scratching their heads saying "okay but... what do I do with this?" Like Everway, Continuum, Unknown Armies, Gurps Transhuman Space, Noumenon, etc.

I think there's a problem with how you're defining "playability" when every single game you listed in the second paragraph got more play and longer continued play than any of the games you posted in the first paragraph (with the possible exception of fiasco, which is really just a party game).

Right?

Imagine gathering a bunch of names most people have barely heard of, and trying to use them to dunk on a game line that was the only one to ever outsell D&D, and had actual cultural impact in the 90's.

Absolute echo chamber thinking.

Quote from: RPGPundit on May 31, 2023, 02:58:13 AM

Quote from: Grognard GM on May 28, 2023, 02:02:09 PM

Quote from: RPGPundit on May 27, 2023, 02:26:04 AM
The bad design of the min-maxing point-buy system will allow those players to behave badly, where a well designed system will limit their ability to do so.

This seems a little authoritarian, and condescending. As I said earlier, at least a min-maxer cares enough to min-max, even if at the extremes they can be an annoyance. Rather than tie their hands with locked-down systems, I prefer to only ban the outright broken rules, then let them run wild as long as there's an actual character attached to the stats.

Worse case scenario I can just eject a truly toxic player. Why limit the creative/engaged of character building complexity?

This is a bit like saying "well, at least this corrupt politician cares enough about the procedures of government to bother figuring out how to steal money from it".

To continue that analogy, your solution is voting cards with one name on them, because you don't trust the electorate to vote 'correctly.'

Quote from: RPGPundit on May 31, 2023, 03:07:53 AM
Also, lists of "products bought" or "products searched for on google" does not actually say anything about how much they are PLAYED.  I don't deny that some very badly designed games are bought in significant numbers, I said as much in the video. They just aren't played. Usually they aren't bought to be played; they're bought for some other reason (to be read, to put on a bookshelf, or more recently to virtue signal about).

Games played on roll20 is at least slightly more relevant, but that table was fairly biased in that it didn't even bother to categorize non-3.5 non-5e D&D. There's a chance that a huge part of the "uncategorized" and "other" are either older editions of D&D or OSR games.
Beyond that, there's a lot of people who DON'T play online, and some games, particularly old-school games, tend to be played more in person.

Ignoring the fact that the argument that games are good because they're played is a form of the bandwagon fallacy, if you step outside the digital platforms (which are getting cited here because they occasionally provide numbers) then what do you really have? Surveys of what games are running at LGSes? At this point I have to conclude that this is pulling figures out of the air, so even if you are correct (and you might be) there's still no reason to concede the point.

I will grant that PbtA, Forged in the Dark, and Lasers and Feelings are super-popular games to design for and less popular to actually play. But right there we have a problem because while Apocalypse World was released in 2010 at the very tail end of the Forge, Lasers and Feelings is 2013 and Blades in the Dark is 2017. These games came years after the Forge, so I really have to ask how solid the assertion that they are Forge games really is. At this point, I think this is less about the substance of the matter and more an impotent family feud between the Carters and the Wakefields.

Quote from: Fheredin on May 31, 2023, 08:14:02 AM
Ignoring the fact that the argument that games are good because they're played is a form of the bandwagon fallacy

A game no one plays is a failure. Are you going to continue to be this fucking retarded?

Quote from: RPGPundit on May 31, 2023, 02:55:50 AM

Quote from: Itachi on May 28, 2023, 12:03:21 PM
Also, I find it a little weird seeing the Forge and it's offspring criticized when talking about playability, which I agree is the most important atribute in a RPG (and what makes me appreciate OSR too). See, Forgite games always prioritized playability first and foremost: Fiasco, Sorcerer, My Life with Master, Dogs in the Vineyard, The Mountain Witch, Don't Rest Your Head, Lady Blackbird, Apocalypse World, Blades in the Dark, etc, etc. are as much about playability as any OSR game.

Where I DO see the criticism valid is for things like Vampire the Masquerade or those high concept 90s games that presented super cool premises but had everybody scratching their heads saying "okay but... what do I do with this?" Like Everway, Continuum, Unknown Armies, Gurps Transhuman Space, Noumenon, etc.

I think there's a problem with how you're defining "playability" when every single game you listed in the second paragraph got more play and longer continued play than any of the games you posted in the first paragraph (with the possible exception of fiasco, which is really just a party game).

I think we're using different definitions of "playability" here. I'm meaning "a game that comes with a clear play loop out of the box, and enough rules substance to be played with by players, that coherently taps into whetever theme there is on the tin". I think it's what the Forge used to call gamism?

By this metric, OSR, Shadowrun and Dogs in the Vineyard are games with good playability, for instance, as they present a play structure with beginning-middle-end, and enough nuts & bolts to be replayable and be "played with"/allow different tactics/choices. While say, Nobilis 2e or Unknown Armies 2e are games full of cool ideas but that struggled to make them playable, either by not providing a clear structure with beginning-middle-end, or enough rules substance for players to "play with". Thus are examples with low playability. The 90s was full of the later.

Quote from: Brad on May 31, 2023, 11:37:12 AMA game no one plays is a failure. Are you going to continue to be this fucking retarded?

Statistically speaking, no game is played outside of official D&D.

Quote from: FheredinI will grant that PbtA, Forged in the Dark, and Lasers and Feelings are super-popular games to design for and less popular to actually play. But right there we have a problem because while Apocalypse World was released in 2010 at the very tail end of the Forge, Lasers and Feelings is 2013 and Blades in the Dark is 2017. These games came years after the Forge, so I really have to ask how solid the assertion that they are Forge games really is. At this point, I think this is less about the substance of the matter and more an impotent family feud between the Carters and the Wakefields.

Fair point. Even if I see a lot of the Forge DNA in those, I think a better label would be Forge-inspired or something like it.

Quote from: Fheredin on May 31, 2023, 08:14:02 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on May 31, 2023, 03:07:53 AM
Also, lists of "products bought" or "products searched for on google" does not actually say anything about how much they are PLAYED.  I don't deny that some very badly designed games are bought in significant numbers, I said as much in the video. They just aren't played. Usually they aren't bought to be played; they're bought for some other reason (to be read, to put on a bookshelf, or more recently to virtue signal about).

Games played on roll20 is at least slightly more relevant, but that table was fairly biased in that it didn't even bother to categorize non-3.5 non-5e D&D. There's a chance that a huge part of the "uncategorized" and "other" are either older editions of D&D or OSR games.
Beyond that, there's a lot of people who DON'T play online, and some games, particularly old-school games, tend to be played more in person.

Ignoring the fact that the argument that games are good because they're played is a form of the bandwagon fallacy, if you step outside the digital platforms (which are getting cited here because they occasionally provide numbers) then what do you really have?

Well, for example, social media and forum posts of people talking about actually playing games. When any of the Forge games are mentioned at all, which is rare, they're talking about some one-shot or some micro-campaign of two or three sessions. Whereas the number of people talking about campaigns of D&D/OSR and other well designed RPGs that they've been running for six months or longer is vastly more.

Now, I suppose you could try to claim that somehow the woke forge/storygamer crowd are just more shy and retiring than normal gamers and so they play decades-long campaigns of the Shab Al-Hiri Roach but just feel way too bashful to ever mention it, but literally EVERYTHING about these narcissists, including how much they love to brag about their KS virtue-signal support and what games they think are so intellectually and morally superior to basically-nazi 5e D&D (to say nothing of Literally-hitler OSR books), as well as every other aspect of their lives including things that are deranged, degenerate or pathetic makes the "they're just shy" argument pretty ridiculous.

Anecdotal evidence, but from my experience I've only seen Stroygames (other then WoD) played at three Conventions despite multiple Conventions I've been to having tables or booths dedicated to them. Meanwhile I've never seen a story game besides one my friend ran played in a LGS, in all the online boards and groups I'm in only myself and two friends actively run games for them. And the only place where I see talk of open games are Roll20 and the Big Purple (in these cases, those games hardly last more then 1 session).

Meanwhile, OSR, 3.5, PF1, WoD, CoC/Delta Green and D&D all have an overwhelming presence of people playing and looking for players. Hell, I've found more Palladium Rifts games online then I have Storygames, that should say something when Palladium has more people playing it.

Something I did find interesting and why I haven't gone to any big events for a few years, the virus aside. There's normally more booths and sellers dedicated to Storygames then anything else at these conventions. And they tend to sell alot of product unless, they had the same product the previous year. In which case they are hard press to sell anything. On the other hand, other games tend to have fewer sales but will still sell the same products the following year.

It all feels like one big echo chamber of these Storygames masquerading as popular due to the cult mentality to support and buy anything associated with them. But then, no one goes off to play the games. You'd think that with how much product is sold (which is alot) you'd see a chunk of games played online looking for players, hundreds of decent sized streamers (1000+ viewers) playing them and the occasional game at a LGS. Instead, you might see a streamer and you might see a game online looking for players.

I just cannot believe that storygames are played out in the wild.

Quote from: Brad on May 31, 2023, 11:37:12 AM

Quote from: Fheredin on May 31, 2023, 08:14:02 AM
Ignoring the fact that the argument that games are good because they're played is a form of the bandwagon fallacy

A game no one plays is a failure. Are you going to continue to be this fucking retarded?

All games start with zero players.

Quote from: Itachi on May 31, 2023, 12:34:10 PM

Quote from: Brad on May 31, 2023, 11:37:12 AMA game no one plays is a failure. Are you going to continue to be this fucking retarded?

Statistically speaking, no game is played outside of official D&D.

Quote from: FheredinI will grant that PbtA, Forged in the Dark, and Lasers and Feelings are super-popular games to design for and less popular to actually play. But right there we have a problem because while Apocalypse World was released in 2010 at the very tail end of the Forge, Lasers and Feelings is 2013 and Blades in the Dark is 2017. These games came years after the Forge, so I really have to ask how solid the assertion that they are Forge games really is. At this point, I think this is less about the substance of the matter and more an impotent family feud between the Carters and the Wakefields.

Fair point. Even if I see a lot of the Forge DNA in those, I think a better label would be Forge-inspired or something like it.

There's definitely an ancestry in The Forge. Apocalypse World was basically a Forge game, Blades in the Dark is an admitted PbtA game, and Forged in the Dark games like Critical Role's Candela Obscura are made from Blades in the Dark. So there's a connection, but it's also three game generations removed from the present.

Quote from: Fheredin on June 01, 2023, 08:11:53 AM

Quote from: Brad on May 31, 2023, 11:37:12 AM

Quote from: Fheredin on May 31, 2023, 08:14:02 AM
Ignoring the fact that the argument that games are good because they're played is a form of the bandwagon fallacy

A game no one plays is a failure. Are you going to continue to be this fucking retarded?

All games start with zero players.

And good ones rise to more than single digits players once enough time passes; it helps immensely if the games allow for campaigns with durations measured in months of play time instead of hours.

@Kahoona:
World of Darkness and Chronicles of Darkness games, despite using the Storyteller System in various incarnations, are not storygames; they tend to be a lot more "character squabbling" friendly than, say, AD&D, but they're still RPGs.
True storygames arose from the Forge as a sort of reaction to the popularity of WoD because, according to good ol' Ronnie himself, playing Vampire and the like caused "brain damage".

Quote from: RPGPundit on June 01, 2023, 06:32:54 AM

Quote from: Fheredin on May 31, 2023, 08:14:02 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit on May 31, 2023, 03:07:53 AM
Also, lists of "products bought" or "products searched for on google" does not actually say anything about how much they are PLAYED.  I don't deny that some very badly designed games are bought in significant numbers, I said as much in the video. They just aren't played. Usually they aren't bought to be played; they're bought for some other reason (to be read, to put on a bookshelf, or more recently to virtue signal about).

Games played on roll20 is at least slightly more relevant, but that table was fairly biased in that it didn't even bother to categorize non-3.5 non-5e D&D. There's a chance that a huge part of the "uncategorized" and "other" are either older editions of D&D or OSR games.
Beyond that, there's a lot of people who DON'T play online, and some games, particularly old-school games, tend to be played more in person.

Ignoring the fact that the argument that games are good because they're played is a form of the bandwagon fallacy, if you step outside the digital platforms (which are getting cited here because they occasionally provide numbers) then what do you really have?

Well, for example, social media and forum posts of people talking about actually playing games. When any of the Forge games are mentioned at all, which is rare, they're talking about some one-shot or some micro-campaign of two or three sessions. Whereas the number of people talking about campaigns of D&D/OSR and other well designed RPGs that they've been running for six months or longer is vastly more.

Now, I suppose you could try to claim that somehow the woke forge/storygamer crowd are just more shy and retiring than normal gamers and so they play decades-long campaigns of the Shab Al-Hiri Roach but just feel way too bashful to ever mention it, but literally EVERYTHING about these narcissists, including how much they love to brag about their KS virtue-signal support and what games they think are so intellectually and morally superior to basically-nazi 5e D&D (to say nothing of Literally-hitler OSR books), as well as every other aspect of their lives including things that are deranged, degenerate or pathetic makes the "they're just shy" argument pretty ridiculous.

This is basically a self-fulfilling prophecy because your feed customizes to your interests, which are OSR, not story games. I can attest that there are plenty of discussions about these games, but I would also say that the discussion is rather lopsided towards design and away from actual play. You really don't need to understand game design particularly well to make a Forged in the Dark game, which leads to a glut of minimum effort products.

Even if you were able to confirm that OSR sees more online discussion, I do not grant that popularity equals good. All games start with zero players, therefore game quality exists in abstraction, before any players actually picked up the game. Appealing to popularity means you understand these factors exist, but rather than actually trying to understand them...you just take popularity on face value.