TheRPGSite

Well, how do you define a swinish game?  What is a swinish game?  Why?

Roleplaying life on a pig farm, using pig-crap rolled into balls as "dice".

...


I got nothin'

The answer I give in another thread:

Almost anything from the Forge.

Typcially mechancs intended to drive Story, light mechanics at that. Often with a pretentious air and especially if the subject drifts into what used to be morally questionable areas.

I tend not to like Forge games.

However, I take issue with the idea that "light mechanics" would make a game "swine".

I would incline myself to think of "heavy mechanics" more for that territory.  Heavy mechanics tend to breed rules-lawyers--who seem more related to swine players than any other.

Quote from: Vellorian;242268However, I take issue with the idea that "light mechanics" would make a game "swine".

Take whatever exception you wish. It still won't change that common characteristic of that type of game.

Quote from: gleichman;242270Take whatever exception you wish. It still won't change that common characteristic of that type of game.

So far, the only "common" element I've heard has come from one source--you.

And you seem to have a proclivity for heavy mechanics, as I recall.

Thus, I'm inclined to suspect that the "common characteristic" is more in your eyes than necessarily so "common".

As I said, the tendency to be boarish, overbearing and having swinish behavior has been (in my experience) more associated with rules lawyers--who are more inclined to like rules-heavy systems.

Quote from: Vellorian;242271So far, the only "common" element I've heard has come from one source--you.

I've been the only person to answer the question so far. What else would you expect?

In the future you shouldn't jump so fast. It shows a biased mind unwilling to examine anything that doesn't agree with it. And this site doesn't lack for those already, it would be cool if you'd do better.

There are quite a few definitions, I suspect for most people it will be "Things I don't like", with a focus on Forge promoted games--including things which are mechanics heavy (to me) like Riddle of Steel, and Burning Wheel.

Quote from: Silverlion;242277ncluding things which are mechanics heavy (to me) like Riddle of Steel, and Burning Wheel.

Neither come close to mechanics heavy, being rather medium at best.

And neither were really Forge games, but rather adopted Forge games. Of course I think D&D 4E is a somewhat adopted Forge game too (or at least should be).

Basically it seems to mean a game designed by people who feel themselves superior to other gamers by virtue of their "more evolved" gaming, or some shit like that, a game designed to make them feel special.

But ask Pundit, he's the one who came up with the term, and the only one who uses it frequently.

If Pundit coined the term, then I'd be most interested to see his definition thereof. :)

Pundit has a "Defining Swine" sticky in his forum. I'm to lazy to make a link, bt you can read his definition there.

With that definition... online, ~systemless~ play-by-posts.

The kind most frequently sourced in the Bad RPers Suck LJ group (http://community.livejournal.com/bad_rpers_suck/).

Swine game=game you don't like, whose author, players, whoever, claims it to be better, than game you like.

Also any game, that claims to have different goals than simply providing you with fun (which means rolling dice, while pretending to be elf), because RPGs are the shitiest form of eskapism, that can never under any circumstances serve any different purpose...

It's a ridiculous classification used primarily (possibly exclusively) by posters on this site to feel like they're better than folks who play games they don't like.

It's like a backwards Forge phenomenon, only people who use the term "swine game" think the Forgies are brain-damaged.

-O

Is Spirit of the Century a 'swine' game? If so, why?

Quote from: obryn;242337It's a ridiculous classification used primarily (possibly exclusively) by posters on this site to feel like they're better than folks who play games they don't like.

I'm just going with the Pundit's definition here and I wouldn't say it's totally unfair or unnecessary. My gaming history is CRPG -> cargo-cult D&D/CRPG homebrew -> White Wolf -> Forge -> D&D -> vaguely forgey/D&D knockoff homebrew, and I can assure you it's a very different feeling whether you're playing for fun or if you're trying to achieve something "above" that.

That said, Gleichman's crapping on anything story-oriented is unfair, if he's ragging on any game where trying to weave the game events into a good story is an important part of play. For some of us, that's just as much a part of the ordinary everyday fun as the tactics or the narrow-sense-of-the-word roleplaying.

EDIT: Though I see he's not, and implicitly limiting his discussion to a subset of the category I'm talking about. But I still disagree with any implication that such rules should be taken as a sign that a game might be swinish.

I would say, although I don't use the term much, that swine game is game designed without considering the players. Game which doesn't expect to provide fun and excitement to its consumers but rather offers some garbage instead pretending that this garbage is important and that it educates you about something and usually, that it is really innovative stuff.

Say, would anyone consider it swinish to be snobbish about how "realistic" a game's mechanics are?

EDIT since no one else has posted after this yet:

Quote from: gleichman;242266especially if the subject drifts into what used to be morally questionable areas.

Like killing? :D

Who cares, Vaecrius? It's like asking whether people consider a game "rules light" or "rules medium" or whatever. It's entirely subjective.

I don't think any single-word description of a game is enough to tell us much about it. There's a reason we have reviews.

Quote from: gleichmanmorally questionable areas.

So Dungeons and Dragons is "swine game" because you can kill people and killing, even in self defense is still considered moraly questionable, or play (and I think in some editions roll) evil character, who do moraly questionable deeds by definition of being evil...

Basicaly you just wrote taht all games in existence are swine games, cos they allow you and have rules for doing moraly questionable deeds.

"Swine" is an attitude nothing more.

Regards,
David R

A "Swine Game" is...is...

...I think it's a lot like "horse feathers".

Between obsession and passion, there is...swine.

new from Calvin Kline.

Quote from: David R;242352"Swine" is an attitude nothing more.

Regards,
David R

This.

Remember how the GNS crowd say no game is narrativist, only players' agendas can be narrativist?

A game cannot be swinish, it's people who can have a swinish attitude. It's no game's fault, it's people's fault.

Liking a Forgie game doesn't make you a swine, just as liking D&D doesn't make you a swine. What makes you a swine is thinking you're somehow better than fans of game y if you play game x.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;242340Is Spirit of the Century a 'swine' game? If so, why?

One of the interesting things that happened during the Brain Damage period, is that Fred from Spirit of the Century denounced Ron as a bigot. Although I think they made up later that year at the following GenCon, what we know now is that "brain damage" was the actual beginning of the end for Ron- the moment that the masked slipped in public, (and his 3 or 4 loyal followers who stood with him have lost credibility right alongside him).

But I agree with Claudius up above.

Quote from: Fritzs;242350So Dungeons and Dragons is "swine game" because you can kill people and killing, even in self defense is still considered moraly questionable,

Note the quote I used was rather specific- "used to be questionable". Killing by itself used to considered a neutral act as it could be either good or bad, while Rape can never be good- only bad.

That is traditional morality. Thus Swine game = abandoning traditional morality as *part* of the defintion.

But being something of a Swine yourself, I know your goal is to claim that they don't exist. Myself, I don't care that much about debating your goal or Pundit's. So I'll leave further debate to you and him.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;242364Between obsession and passion, there is...swine.

new from Calvin Kline.

Win.

gleichman: So, there are wery few swine games, I think i can name all of them:

FATAL, but you could argue, that you don't have to rape and kill in this game...
RaHoWa, there I cannot find any excuse...
Poison'd probably also count but one could argue that you don't need to play insane murderer/rapist...
Kill Puppies for Satan, but killing animals isn't considered bad, cos they are animals, satan worship, as long as it doesn't include murder, rape public obscenity isn't considered bad as well... so I guess this one isn't swine game

So it looks like we ended up just with RaHoWa, for which really no excuse can be found... and I am perfectly OK with calling RaHoWa swine game

The usage of 'swine' when this board first formed was much of why I took one look and didn't come back until recently.

Game fora have enough problems without the gibbering and chest pounding.

If it is made out of pig?

-=Grim=-

A swine game is one in which human garbage plays, such as RaHoWa or F.A.T.A.L.  
 
It could also be defined as a game that attracts a lot of human waste, such as Rifts, or Vampire LARPS.
 
An opened ended system that allows for asshattery w/o consequence.
 
A system that allows for players to buy books that a GM has never heard of and add merits/flaws/talents/feats, etc that said GM has not heard of.
 
Games Republicans play.

From what I've been able to ferret out, from extensive talks with the people who like to use the label:  "Swine" refers to a person who has a certain attitude toward their play ... notably one that elevates a sense of egotism and superiority over fun.  Swine players, by definition, do not play in order to have fun, but for some other (baser) purpose.

The tricky thing is, all swine apparently lie about why they play.  They claim that they're having fun, and that they play the types of games that they do because that's what they find fun.  But people on the outside are able to intuit, from their understanding of human nature, that it's all a lie.  Nobody could possibly have fun playing a Swine game.

So a Swine game would be one that could not possibly lead to fun, for anyone, at any time, but is played nonetheless, by people falsely claiming to enjoy it.

Quote from: shalvayez;242395...or Vampire LARPS.

Does it count if you were only going to hook up with the one attractive chick in the place? If so, fuck... I'm swine.

-=Grim=-

I'd happily call someone who uses a game to engage in violent rape fantasies, like in Poison'd a swine, regardless of how the game is meant to be played. In fact I wouldn't stop at swine either, as such people are clearly mentally ill.

Quote from: GrimJesta;242402Does it count if you were only going to hook up with the one attractive chick in the place? If so, fuck... I'm swine.

-=Grim=-

Dude, when I was in Berkeley in the mid nineties there was way, way more than one attractive girl in that circle. I was invited in, but after having coffee with a couple of them, I realized, that despite my mind numbing lust, there was a limit to my desperation. It made me kind of sad, really.

Quote from: Aos;242408Dude, when I was in Berkeley in the mid nineties there was way, way more than one attractive girl in that circle. I was invited in, but after having coffee with a couple of them, I realized, that despite my mind numbing lust, there was a limit to my desperation. It made me kind of sad, really.

That's why you only go to get your penis wet, not a relationship. And make sure they stay in character. Their made-up personalities are usually way cooler (I had one exception to that).

-=Grim=-

Quote from: shalvayez;242395A swine game is one in which human garbage plays, such as RaHoWa or F.A.T.A.L.  
 
It could also be defined as a game that attracts a lot of human waste, such as Rifts, or Vampire LARPS.
 
An opened ended system that allows for asshattery w/o consequence.
 
A system that allows for players to buy books that a GM has never heard of and add merits/flaws/talents/feats, etc that said GM has not heard of.
 
Games Republicans play.

Everything but that last sentence you got right.

Most of the "Republicans" who stop by the strore tend to play traditional RPGs (D&D, Tunnels & Trolls), Shadowrun)...with a lot of nostalgia for TWILIGHT 2000 and TRAVELLER amongst them.

- Ed C.

Quote from: Koltar;242426Everything but that last sentence you got right.

Most of the "Republicans" who stop by the strore tend to play traditional RPGs (D&D, Tunnels & Trolls), Shadowrun)...with a lot of nostalgia for TWILIGHT 2000 and TRAVELLER amongst them.

- Ed C.

Holy crap! I am a republican.....;)

Bill
Edit: Oh, and never trust the swine that make squirrel games. They are just one step away from pigs. The other other white meat.

I shall henceforth call you Squine.

-=Grim=-

"Swine" is really just convenient shorthand for the typical pretentious, elitist, self-limiting complex found in many fandoms and media, at least as Pundit uses it.  So called "indie" Forge shit tends to fall right into this category, the key hallmark being a sort of "railroad by system", intentially narrowing the focus to try and force the players as best as possible to play exactly the way the designer intended.  This sort of exclusionary philosophy and "cult of the designer" attitude is very much at odds with more traditional gaming models, which tend to be more about providing an open toolkit, and giving final authority to the GM in all matters rule, system, and setting.

Quote from: J Arcane;242451"Swine" is really just convenient shorthand for the typical pretentious, elitist, self-limiting complex found in many fandoms and media, at least as Pundit uses it.  So called "indie" Forge shit tends to fall right into this category, the key hallmark being a sort of "railroad by system", intentially narrowing the focus to try and force the players as best as possible to play exactly the way the designer intended.  This sort of exclusionary philosophy and "cult of the designer" attitude is very much at odds with more traditional gaming models, which tend to be more about providing an open toolkit, and giving final authority to the GM in all matters rule, system, and setting.

But if people play a narrowly focussed game because they enjoy the type of play that it provides, does that make them swine?

Quote from: GrimJesta;242437I shall henceforth call you Squine.

-=Grim=-

I think I will run with this. I am founding a new Squine Nation!

Bill

Quote from: TonyLB;242452But if people play a narrowly focussed game because they enjoy the type of play that it provides, does that make them swine?

Yeah, just as courtesy, I have no intention whatsoever of going round with you again just to help you play Mr. bible salesman some more.

Find someone else to abuse for your own PR purposes, thanks.

Only J Arcane could make not having an answer the other guy's fault.

Quote from: JDCorley;242457Only J Arcane could make not having an answer the other guy's fault.

And only JDCorley would wander blindly into a thread just to make a snarky comment completely ignorant of context of past forum history, just so he can continue to feel all smug and self-satisfied about how much "better" he is than the rest of us.

Fuck off back to RPGnet already.

Quote from: TonyLB;242452But if people play a narrowly focussed game because they enjoy the type of play that it provides, does that make them swine?

In my opinion, no. If they thought their style of gaming is above mine, I would consider them swine, just as one could consider me a swine if I thought my style of gaming is so much better than theirs.

The problem a lot of people (me included) seem to have with certain Forgies (not all) is that they've seen them shit on traditional gaming a lot of times.

Quote from: NotYourMonkey;242256Well, how do you define a swinish game?  What is a swinish game?  Why?

Simple: There are no swine games, as there are no swine.  There are different gamers playing different things.

Swine is a term that comes from the mentally ill brain of The Pundit.   The Pundit only wants to use it to breed hatred and split the gamer community further then it already has been split.

Please don't help try to legitimize a BS term by starting threads like this.

Quote from: Alnag;242342I would say, although I don't use the term much, that swine game is game designed without considering the players. Game which doesn't expect to provide fun and excitement to its consumers but rather offers some garbage instead pretending that this garbage is important and that it educates you about something and usually, that it is really innovative stuff.

Funny though, that The Pundit craps on Forge games and says that they aren't having fun, yet people say they play them and are having fun.

So I guess swine games=games The Pundit doesn't like.

Me, I don't know anything really about Forge games.  They don't interest me in the least bit so I don't pay any attention to them.

Nope, there ARE "Swine Games"  and people can delude themselves into saying they were having fun at something that pretends to be a game.

- Ed C.

Quote from: Abyssal Maw;242372what we know now is that "brain damage" was the actual beginning of the end

What?

So all this talk of Swine games, when is White Wolf going to release Pigfucker: The Shitrolling?

Quote from: Koltar;242466Nope, there ARE "Swine Games"  and people can delude themselves into saying they were having fun at something that pretends to be a game.

Like their brains are damaged or something?

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;242467What?

It's a LONG long story, beginning with a gaming blog, and ending with a topic ban on RPG.net (for a long time), and a general significant lost of credibility for Ron and the Forge.

Quote from: KoltarNope, there ARE "Swine Games" and people can delude themselves into saying they were having fun at something that pretends to be a game

I have fun at playing several Forge games... apparently I only deluded myself... and, well, Koltar, how do you know I haven't had fun...? Do you have some sort of mind reading ability or what...?

Quote from: Koltar;242466Nope, there ARE "Squine Games"  and people can delude themselves into saying they were having fun at something that pretends to be a game.

- Ed C.

Corrected your typo. You really should not rag on the Squine Nation. We will send out or Ninja Squirrels to deal with you. ;)

Bill

Quote from: Mike S.;242464Funny though, that The Pundit craps on Forge games and says that they aren't having fun, yet people say they play them and are having fun.

So I guess swine games=games The Pundit doesn't like.

Me, I don't know anything really about Forge games.  They don't interest me in the least bit so I don't pay any attention to them.

I find it sad and sort of pathetic when people try to "make a stand" for a movement they don't even have any part in, especially when it's a movement that actively loathes them.  

Your pathetic "rebellious" act doesn't make you cool, or even iconoclastic at this point since so few have attempted the same schtick.  It just makes you a tool.  A tool for fucksticks who honestly have a far lower opinion of the rest of us than any of us ever possessed for them.

In seeking to lash out against the big scary (non-)authority figure, you've wound up latching onto a bunch of utter shitheads without realizing it, and for that I pity.  It's like a Jewish kid joining a skinhead gang to rebel against his parents.

Quote from: J Arcane;242480I find it sad and sort of pathetic when people try to "make a stand" for a movement they don't even have any part in

Wow ... between:

• (a) "You're part of the movement, and therefore I devalue your opinion because it's motivated only by your desire to proselytize" and
• (b) "You're not part of the movement, and therefore I devalue your opinion because you clearly don't believe it yourself"

... you've really covered all the bases.  And all without ever once responding to people's actual statements.  Very internet of you.

Quote from: Koltar;242466Nope, there ARE "Swine Games"  and people can delude themselves into saying they were having fun at something that pretends to be a game.

This is just so full of dumb, Ed. I can understand saying something isn't an rpg but assuming people are deludung themsleves.....shit, this is the height of Swine thinking. I've played a few Forge games, some I didn't like, some I did, and in the latter I'm pretty sure everyone was having a good time only because we knew exactly what didn't make the former fun for us.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: TonyLB;242488Wow ... between:

• (a) "You're part of the movement, and therefore I devalue your opinion because it's motivated only by your desire to proselytize" and
• (b) "You're not part of the movement, and therefore I devalue your opinion because you clearly don't believe it yourself"

... you've really covered all the bases.  And all without ever once responding to people's actual statements.  Very internet of you.

Come off it, you miserable sleazebag.  We all know why the fuck you're really here, so just drop the fucking act already.

I said what I said to you and you alone, because it's exactly your fucking purpose here and always has been.  Just like Morningstar and Luke Crane's little "good cop/bad cop" routine the other week, it's nothing more than pathetic guerrilla marketing.

Fuck off back to where you belong, and take your slimy tactics with you.

What Mike S. said.

and I fully support the movement to legitamize and make common practice the use of the term "Squine" to refer to anyone who produces, plays or generally supports games with squirrels in them.

Quote from: Silverlion;242473It's a LONG long story, beginning with a gaming blog, and ending with a topic ban on RPG.net (for a long time), and a general significant lost of credibility for Ron and the Forge.

And you can of course find Uncle Ronny's part in it in the Big List of Links at the top of this forum.

Quote from: J Arcane;242458And only JDCorley would wander blindly into a thread just to make a snarky comment completely ignorant of context of past forum history, just so he can continue to feel all smug and self-satisfied about how much "better" he is than the rest of us.

"past forum history"?! I admit, I tend not to pay attention to that illustrious field, to which no doubt you have dedicated the highest and best efforts of your or any other generation.  Poor me, I just pay attention to what questions get answered and which don't.  Not that you have to answer anyone's questions. Like they do at the Forge, you can just refer people to "past forum history" and be done with it.

(However, I am aware of all Internet traditions.) (http://iamawareofallinternettraditions.blogspot.com/)

QuoteFuck off back to RPGnet already.

Done! Nobody ever has to ask me to leave a place twice.

Quote from: JDCorley;242507"past forum history"?! I admit, I tend not to pay attention to that illustrious field, to which no doubt you have dedicated the highest and best efforts of your or any other generation.  Poor me, I just pay attention to what questions get answered and which don't.  Not that you have to answer anyone's questions. Like they do at the Forge, you can just refer people to "past forum history" and be done with it.

(However, I am aware of all Internet traditions.) (http://iamawareofallinternettraditions.blogspot.com/)



Done! Nobody ever has to ask me to leave a place twice.

A single thread is not a vacuum, and should not be treated as one.  My comment to Tony was in regards to his previous behavior on this forum as that of a slimy and manipulative PR worm.

That's what I mean by context, and your lack of it.  And if you were actually interested in engaging this forum and spending some time actually discussing things, you may well have known that.

But you're not.  You're here to feel all cool and hip and ironic by dropping in at random intervals to snark at the locals before pottering off back to RPGnet where you can brag about how superior you are, despite the fact that you wouldn't even get away with that kind of shit without being banned if you'd posted it there.  

I believe the standard elitist expression for such behavior is "slumming it".  But that may be out of fashion by now, I don't know.  I work for a living these days.

Stop being such an asshole, J Arcane.  There's no need for it now that you are gainfully employed.

All I know is that while Forge people generally sound like nutcases to me, everyone who calls Forge folks swine sound like unbelievably insufferable pricks.

I'm not completely sure which I prefer.

(Mind you, I suspect Ron is both)

Quote from: walkerp;242523Stop being such an asshole, J Arcane.  There's no need for it now that you are gainfully employed.

On full disclosure, I'm mostly annoyed at him now for linking what is probably the lamest "internet meme" I've ever seen.

Quote from: walkerp;242523Stop being such an asshole, J Arcane.  There's no need for it now that you are gainfully employed.

On full disclosure, I'm mostly annoyed at him now for linking what is probably the lamest "internet meme" I've ever seen.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;242285Basically it seems to mean a game designed by people who feel themselves superior to other gamers by virtue of their "more evolved" gaming, or some shit like that, a game designed to make them feel special.

This.

By this definition, RIFTs is swinish game -- which is should be recognized as.  it's lazy, self-indulgent, and it's author has delusions of competency.

That's something Kevin Siembieda and Ron Edwards have in common: both of them think they're God's Gift To Gaming, when in fact they are hacks.  Kevin is a pandering, plagiarizing hack, while Edwards is a pretentious, unoriginal blow-hard of a hack.

But I think the swine term generally refers less to hacks who reel in shitty games, and more to the attitudes of the pretentious end of the pool.

The core of the Forge game designers -- Ron Edwards and Vincent Baker -- both have far more ego than good sense, and while I think a lot of the designers they have inspired are unfairly lumped into the definition of "Forge swine" by association, they have certainly attracted a lot of people into writing games who clearly have no idea what the actual gaming community is made up of.  

There's a handful of "designers" who are writing games that seem like something you'd "play" as part of a "consciousness building exercise" at some sort of retreat, rather than being, well, you know, games.  These designers definitely foster an attitude amongst themselves that what they are doing is more important and thus better than games played "for fun."

They're like NPR hosts who give off that air that the idea of entertaining radio is completely gauche.  It doesn't mean everything on NPR is douchebaggey crap, but I can see why someone would characterize it that way.

Quote from: J Arcane;242570On full disclosure, I'm mostly annoyed at him now for linking what is probably the lamest "internet meme" I've ever seen.

On the other hand, it did lead me to http://www.yearbookyourself.com/

which is quite funny.

Quote from: Fritzs;242474I have fun at playing several Forge games... apparently I only deluded myself... and, well, Koltar, how do you know I haven't had fun...? Do you have some sort of mind reading ability or what...?

I've had fun playing several Forge games.  Don't Rest Your Head was an awesome game, an a fun break from normal gaming fare.  Several other Forge games could easily be fun.

But then there's a "game" like Steal Away Jordan (http://www.indiepressrevolution.com/xcart/product.php?productid=16348).  This is the book's own selling text:    Steal Away Jordan is a role playing game written in the spirit of neo slave narratives like Margaret Walker's Jubilee, Toni Morrison's Beloved, and Octavia Butler's Kindred. Like these fictional accounts of slave life, players explore the social and psychological implications of life in a society where people can be property. Ultimately, players consider slavery's long-term impact on a society and on the descendants of slaves and slave owners.This is not a description of having fun.

Players explore the social and psychological implications and players consider long-term impact on a society?  This is not a game designed to be fun.  If you have fun playing this game is, then you have a decidedly abnormal definition of fun.

This is swine game.  A game that exists only because the author is self-indulgent to the point where she doesn't care if the game is fun, because it will make people think!  Calling this a game is deceptive advertising.  It's a consciousness raising exercise.

Quote from: Jackalope;242619This is swine game.  A game that exists only because the author is self-indulgent to the point where she doesn't care if the game is fun, because it will make people think!  Calling this a game is deceptive advertising.  It's a consciousness raising exercise.

I've got it. Looks like a game to me.

Quote from: droog;242620I've got it. Looks like a game to me.

Yeah, and I've got a lamp that looks like a naked lady.  Doesn't mean I'd fuck it.

So, how many campaigns of Steal Away Jordan have you run?  Sessions?  You get a lot of players signing up to do some exploring of the socio-political implications of slavery?

Quote from: Jackalope;242621So, how many campaigns of Steal Away Jordan have you run?  Sessions?  You get a lot of players signing up to do some exploring of the socio-political implications of slavery?

I only got it a couple of weeks ago, but I do know at least one group who would lap it up. But I've got nothing to prove to you.

Of course that slave thingo is a game. Whether it's a fun game we don't know, and I doubt it. But if a game which isn't fun isn't a game, then we have to exclude quite a few campaigns I've played, and more than one I've run! Which would be silly.

I don't understand this geek obsession with the Not A True Scotsman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman) fallacy. Of course these things are games. Duh.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;242625Of course that slave thingo is a game. Whether it's a fun game we don't know, and I doubt it. But if a game which isn't fun isn't a game, then we have to exclude quite a few campaigns I've played, and more than one I've run! Which would be silly.

I hereby extend an invitation to play Steal Away Jordan to you, Kyle Aaron. I'd extend one to Jackalope, but he lives in that mystical land of freedom and opportunity we call Amerika.

To consider, or otherwise have to, would imply that the participants (and by extension the writer) are not 100% convinced of the ethics surrounding slavery.

Do you want to associate or game with such people?

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;242632To consider, or otherwise have to, would imply that the participants (and by extension the writer) are not 100% convinced of the ethics surrounding slavery.

Do you want to associate or game with such people?

Now that's just a dumb political question, and shows you know nothing about the game. Again, I don't have to justify myself to whippersnappers.

What are you hoping to achieve with this question? Do you think I don't know what I'm doing? Do you think you're going to change my mind somehow?

Quote from: NotYourMonkey;242256Well, how do you define a swinish game?  What is a swinish game?  Why?

It's a game the Pundit doesn't likefor whatever stupid reasons he may have at he moment. Any other explanation tends to be false.

Jackalope: "Game" does not have to be fun:

Quote from: WikipediaKey components of games are goals, rules, challenge, and interactivity. Games generally involve mental or physical stimulation, and often both. Many games help develop practical skills, serve as a form of exercise, or otherwise perform an educational, simulational or psychological role.

So "fun" is no necessary component of game, as game can be used in education and you know, education games aren't usually the most fun...

Quote from: Fritzs;242637So "fun" is no necessary component of game, as game can be used in education and you know, education games aren't usually the most fun...

While that may be true, it really isn't the point. What is the point is what you find enjoyable.

I would rather watch Bergman's Persona for the twelfth time than bother to see The Clone Wars for the first. I would rather read Bukowski's cynical downvibe than any number of fat fantasy books.

Even that, however, is beside the point that Beloved sold hugely and made Toni Morrison a household name. It seems that people do enjoy the types of narratives that inform SAJ.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;242632To consider, or otherwise have to, would imply that the participants (and by extension the writer) are not 100% convinced of the ethics surrounding slavery.

Do you want to associate or game with such people?

Having read the game I can tell you you're 100% wrong ....hmm it just occured to me that using your argument any treatment of this subject matter in any medium would be suspect...whatever. If anything in most of these types of games the designers come of as a bit earnest which I suppose isn't really a bad thing considering the subject matter. I'm just waiting for a game designer to do a Spike Lee polemic....  

Regards,
David R

When I was in elementary school, the teacher would give us homework and call it a game.  I would say "No, this is homework." and the teacher would say "No, no, it's a game.  It'll be fun.  Really."

Yeah, didn't fool me then, doesn't fool me now.

But yeah, okay, technically games don't have to be fun.  Which is basically cedeing the point that Steal Away Jordan is not a fun game.  If you take the game seriously, it's not going to be fun, it's going to be depressing and sad.  If you take the piss out of the game, and have fun while playing it, you're going to be an ass.

So it's a game in some strictly technical sense, but it's not a game in the sense that D&D, Traveler, GURPS, Hero System, Villains & Vigilantes, Toon, Call of Cthulhu, Justifiers, Werewolf, or hell, even Breaking The Ice is a game.

Seriously, if you're having a party, and you can whip out a game about exploring the socio-politicial ramifications of America's history of slavery and suggest everyone play, and that isn't instant party death, then you are associating with the most humorless, self-flagellating bunch of liberal douchebags imaginable.

In fact, you are almost certainly swine.  You would certainly fit in with the Forge Swine, who seem to enjoy getting together and wallowing in their own self-righteous sense of superiority, and are amongst the most obnoxious group of humorless, self-flagellating liberal douchebags I've ever met.

Quote from: droog;242633Now that's just a dumb political question, and shows you know nothing about the game. Again, I don't have to justify myself to whippersnappers.

What are you hoping to achieve with this question? Do you think I don't know what I'm doing? Do you think you're going to change my mind somehow?

Why would I want to know anything about the game? The purpose of it seems to be, at best, an exploration of slavery. Why do I need to do this, I know slavery is bad. It is wrong, immoral and something that should be relegated to history. I don't need to 'consider' slavery or Stealing Away Jordan to know this. Therefore I don't see the point of the game at all, unless you are so stupid you actually don't yet know whether slavery is good or bad. If you are that stupid, please remove yourself from my presence.

Quote from: David R;242640Having read the game I can tell you you're 100% wrong ....hmm it just occured to me that using your argument any treatment of this subject matter in any medium would be suspect...whatever. If anything in most of these types of games the designers come of as a bit earnest which I suppose isn't really a bad thing considering the subject matter. I'm just waiting for a game designer to do a Spike Lee polemic....  

Regards,
David R

So it isn't about slavery?

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;242645So it isn't about slavery?

Yes it is, but this "would imply that the participants (and by extension the writer) are not 100% convinced of the ethics surrounding slavery." is where you are 100% wrong.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: Jackalope;242642But yeah, okay, technically games don't have to be fun.  

100% don't agree. I and everyone I have ever known do not want to play such games. If it's not fun, i'm not interested.

Quote from: Jackalope;242642the most obnoxious group of humorless, self-flagellating liberal douchebags I've ever met.

Lips...don't unpurse...

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;242644If you are that stupid, please remove yourself from my presence.

Here I am, in yer face.

Shucks, Bob, slavery sure is bad! Better not talk about it. How 'bout them Steelers?

Quote from: JackalopeBut yeah, okay, technically games don't have to be fun.

So, then it is not swinery to call unfunny game "game"... my whole point.

Quote from: JackalopeIn fact, you are almost certainly swine. You would certainly fit in with the Forge Swine, who seem to enjoy getting together and wallowing in their own self-righteous sense of superiority, and are amongst the most obnoxious group of humorless, self-flagellating liberal douchebags I've ever met.

I don't want to play that game, I usually want my game to enjoyable, which does not necessary mean fun at any cost. I think I am not completely humorless and I do not count myself among liberals... but, well several peole called me nihilist, which I found to be pretty fiting my personality and believs... so does nihilist=liberal...? And one more question, how do you know... Koltar style mind probing...?

Quote from: droog;242651Here I am, in yer face.

Shucks, Bob, slavery sure is bad! Better not talk about it. How 'bout them Steelers?

I think it was fairly clear that the word 'you' was being used objectively and not personally.

Quote from: Jackalope;242619I've had fun playing several Forge games.  Don't Rest Your Head was an awesome game, an a fun break from normal gaming fare.  Several other Forge games could easily be fun.

But then there's a "game" like Steal Away Jordan (http://www.indiepressrevolution.com/xcart/product.php?productid=16348). *Snip text*

This is swine game.  A game that exists only because the author is self-indulgent to the point where she doesn't care if the game is fun, because it will make people think!  Calling this a game is deceptive advertising.  It's a consciousness raising exercise.

All arguments aside, this does meet what I see as Pundy's traditional definition of a Swine game. Like Jackalope said, this game is being marketed not as a fun exercise, but as a means to play an RPG while feeling superior to all of those phillistines killing orcs and looting dungeons.

Quote from: droog;242630I hereby extend an invitation to play Steal Away Jordan to you, Kyle Aaron.

No thanks.

Now, if you were running some nice HeroQuest in a nice heroic sort of setting, or even a gritty one, nothing too thespy...

Quote from: Fritzs;242637Jackalope: "Game" does not have to be fun:

It doesn't have to be fun to be a game, but it does have to be fun for most of us to play it more than once.

And seriously, don't go quoting wikipedia if you want to look like you have your shit together.

JamesV: Why should I feel superior to them...? And what's wrong with me if I feel...? Well, I am just asking, cos I am not buing this "all the fun, all the time, let's sacrifice roleplaying, genre, style, seriousness on the bloody altars of most holy fun" thing.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;242658No thanks.

Gutless!

Absolutely! Only my characters are brave. It's a compensation thing. My characters are also all hung like a horse, even the women.

Quote from: Fritzs;242662JamesV: Why should I feel superior to them...? And what's wrong with me if I feel...? Well, I am just asking, cos I am not buing this "all the fun, all the time, let's sacrifice roleplaying, genre, style, seriousness on the bloody altars of most holy fun" thing.

IMO you really don't have to buy it. I'm just trying to explain the philosphy behind the ideas of "Swine", and at least in these instances, I can sympathize with it. If I want to learn more about a serious subject, I'll read about it, or even watch a well made documentary. As marketed, games like these put forth the pretty pretentious idea that through play you can really experience (in a way) the reality behind the subject matter. Not only do I not buy into that idea, but sometimes I think it's a little demeaning to the genuinely serious and, often sad and terrible, subjects they try to portray.

Another  recent example of this type of game that I'm really dubious about and also pretty well fits the Swine criteria is Grey Ranks (http://www.bullypulpitgames.com/games/index.php?game=grey_ranks).

Edit: Now I feel like I ought to say, that when it comes to games, I think of them as matters of taste, you can love them or hate them, but no one is some kind of fiend for that. But there are points at which I do think that some games do things that don't sit well with me, and this is one situation, mainly because of the subject matter.

Quote from: JamesV;242667As marketed, games like these put forth the pretty pretentious idea that through play you can really experience (in a way) the reality behind the subject matter. Not only do I not buy into that idea, but sometimes I think it's a little demeaning to the genuinely serious and, often sad and terrible, subjects they try to portray.

Get it straight. The game is marketed by its writer (who happens to be a black woman and one who actually does think about slavery) as a fictional presentation of its subject matter. She references fictional presentations such as Toni Morrison's.

You know, I had rather hoped that by this point most adult gamers would get over the idea that 'games I don't enjoy are objectively not fun.'

It's really sad to see it so prevalent here. For fuck's sake, can you guys really not get your head around some people finding games fun that you and the folks you hang with don't?

I don't enjoy watching golf. I don't get on some high moral ground and start coming up with terms about what horrible stupid fucks watch golf despite it objectively not being fun.

Jesus.

Quote from: droog;242673Get it straight. The game is marketed by its writer (who happens to be a black woman and one who actually does think about slavery) as a fictional presentation of its subject matter. She references fictional presentations such as Toni Morrison's.

The source doesn't matter to me as much as the vehicle. If a Lakota wrote a RPG about the atrocities of the westward expansion, which includes the very state I live in so you learn a thing or two about it, I would still think it a bad idea. I'm not much of a pundit of race/ethnic issues, but I do think that few things are worse than a bunch of white people who think that playing a RPG will let them "get it" in regards to the numerous bad things that have happened in the past out of ignorance and sheer racism. In short, I'll freely concede that the lady's intent may not be artistically pretentious, but I think that the majority of those who will buy it and play it will be quite the opposite about it. The game will be a title dropped by clueless, pretentious morons to show how enlightened and advanced their gaming is beyond a night of D&D, RIFTS, or just about any other RPG out there.

I prefer sending that message out through direct non-fictional presentation like books, lecture, film, and artifact.

Quote from: JamesV;242680The game will be a title dropped by clueless, pretentious morons to show how enlightened and advanced their gaming is beyond a night of D&D, RIFTS, or just about any other RPG out there.

Well, if you say so, it must be so, I suppose.

Quote from: Will;242675For fuck's sake, can you guys really not get your head around some people finding games fun that you and the folks you hang with don't?

No, doesn't happen much.

Quote from: droog;242683Well, if you say so, it must be so, I suppose.

Not must, just the most likely outcome in my opinion, especially when it comes to the internet. One I'd much rather be proven wrong about, but I don't think I have been yet.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;242658Now, if you were running some nice HeroQuest in a nice heroic sort of setting, or even a gritty one, nothing too thespy...

You already blew it by being narrow-minded, I'm afraid.

Quote from: Will;242675You know, I had rather hoped that by this point most adult gamers would get over the idea that 'games I don't enjoy are objectively not fun.'

It's really sad to see it so prevalent here. For fuck's sake, can you guys really not get your head around some people finding games fun that you and the folks you hang with don't?

I don't enjoy watching golf. I don't get on some high moral ground and start coming up with terms about what horrible stupid fucks watch golf despite it objectively not being fun.

Jesus.

Yep.  People who have this attitude are the same people claiming that The Forge is destroying gaming.  The Forge is barely a blip on the radar.

People with this attitude are doing more to segment the hobby then The Forge could ever be blamed for.

This kind of attitude, this 'games I don't enjoy are objectively not fun' attitude has to stop and it really needs to stop now.  The gamer pool is already shrinking at it is and things in the hobby aren't good (granted, the economy isn't helping).  

It was bad enough when the hobby was being damaged by the false claims of satanic crap against D&D, now the hobby is getting damaged from the inside by it's own participants.

It's sad.

I derive endless amusement from it, but that's probably because I'm one of those swine-types that loves a bit of misery.

No, that's not it.

Quote from: Mike S.;242687This kind of attitude, this 'games I don't enjoy are objectively not fun' attitude has to stop and it really needs to stop now.  

Actually, I'm with droog on this one:  It's mostly funny.

Geek rage is neither (a) new nor (b) a crisis.  The solution isn't to try to fix the people who say "This thing I don't like is objectively no fun!" ... the solution is to go out and have fun.

Fun always wins, in the long run.

Quote from: Mike S.;242464Funny though, that The Pundit craps on Forge games and says that they aren't having fun, yet people say they play them and are having fun.

I pretty much don't care what Pundit craps about or not. I have write how I see the term. So your guess is wrong. On the other hand I never mentioned that swine games = Forge games.

I still think, that main criteria is designer's intention as it is perceived by public. If the perceived design goal is fun and entertainment it is OK. If it is teaching a lesson on morality or self-expression of deepest passions and fears of designers... well I tend to think about pork meat...

Quote from: Alnag;242700I pretty much don't care what Pundit craps about or not. I have write how I see the term. So your guess is wrong. On the other hand I never mentioned that swine games = Forge games.

To be fair, neither has Pundit, as demonstrated by his lengthy rants about Nobilis as one of the swiniest swine games that ever swined, even if it has nothing to do with the Forge crowd. (On the other hand, it doesn't really fit your criteria either since the book makes no bones about the paramount importance of the players having fun.)

Quote from: Will;242675You know, I had rather hoped that by this point most adult gamers would get over the idea that 'games I don't enjoy are objectively not fun.'

It's amazing, isn't it?

This site, more than most other sites, is really, really obsessed with categorization.  Objectively Fun vs. Objectively Un-Fun.  RPG vs. Not-RPG.  Sandbox vs. Railroad.  D&D vs. Not-D&D.

It's like "I have made these boxes.  I believe stuff about things in these boxes.  Here, allow me to push things into those boxes so I know what to believe about them."

It gets downright pathetic.

-O

Quote from: GrimGent;242710To be fair, neither has Pundit, as demonstrated by his lengthy rants about Nobilis as one of the swiniest swine games that ever swined, even if it has nothing to do with the Forge crowd. (On the other hand, it doesn't really fit your criteria either since the book makes no bones about the paramount importance of the players having fun.)

Well I think the term is a moving target that can be adjusted to games that he doesn't like, regardless of whether they are forge games or not.

Which of course muddles the definition and makes the term "Swine"  wortheless.

Quote from: Will;242675You know, I had rather hoped that by this point most adult gamers would get over the idea that 'games I don't enjoy are objectively not fun.'

Oh get off your high horse, you pretentious half-wit.  No one is saying that games we don't enjoy are objectively not fun.  What you're doing is pretending that there is no common definition of fun, and that therefore anything that someone subjectively finds fun is universally fun.

All that were saying is that games like these don't match the definition of fun that most people have: light in tone, escapist, mirthful.  Look at the definition of fun:   fun  –n
1. something that provides mirth or amusement: A picnic would be fun.
2. enjoyment or playfulness: She's full of fun.
–verb (used without object), verb (used with object)
That's what we're talking about.

Most people don't consider slavery fun, most people don't find it a source of mirth or amusement, they don't consider it to inspire feelings of playfulness or enjoyment.  Now you may consider exploring the socio-political ramifications of slavery fun.  Maybe it amuses you, or provides mirth.

To me, it sounds like misery tourism.

'We don't enjoy X games. People who state they are are clearly lying.'

Yes, I'm the one on the sky pony.

Quote from: AlnagI still think, that main criteria is designer's intention as it is perceived by public. If the perceived design goal is fun and entertainment it is OK. If it is teaching a lesson on morality or self-expression of deepest passions and fears of designers... well I tend to think about pork meat...

So if I, for example, draw and write angsty webcomics about my deepest fears and hopes it would be swine webcomics, but if I write and draw action one about badass hero kicking alien asses it would not be swinery...? Or are RPGs different than everything else, that only thing they are allowed to provide is "fun"...?

Well in the end I would probably draw and write webcomics about angst ridden antihero, who probably will end up sharing some of my own fears and hopes (it's easyer to write about something you know, than to make things up) fighting similarly fucked up people... would this be swinery...?

Quote from: Will;242759'We don't enjoy X games. People who state they are are clearly lying.'

Yes, I'm the one on the sky pony.

No, you're the one shooting down straw men.

Most people don't enjoy tormenting those less fortunate than them.  They don't consider it fun.  Thus, I feel comfortable saying that, generally speaking, abusing the less fortunate is not fun.

You can blow a lot of smoke up people's asses about objectivity and subjectivity, and pretend I'm making some fancy philosophical point when I'm really just pointing out common sense, but at the end of the day, I'm still going to be comfortable with saying that abusing the less fortunate is not fun, and that people who think it's fun have issues.  Issues that separate them from the average and ordinary person.

Likewise, most people, especially white people, don't think of creating a black character and then telling the horrible story of the abuses and degradations that person was forced to survive, and the brutal impact it had on them, as very fun.  That's seriously guilt and anxiety inducing material to have to deal with.  It takes a special sort of emotional masochist to find amusement and mirth in that.

Quote from: Fritzs;242764So if I, for example, draw and write angsty webcomics about my deepest fears and hopes it would be swine webcomics, but if I write and draw action one about badass hero kicking alien asses it would not be swinery...?

As a general rule, yes.

QuoteOr are RPGs different than everything else, that only thing they are allowed to provide is "fun"...?

Riiiight, because nobody ever calls books, movies, comics or music pretentious angst-ridden crap.

You want an example of swinery from outside comics?  Everything Garth Ennis has ever written, but most specifically his superhero works.

QuoteWell in the end I would probably draw and write webcomics about angst ridden antihero, who probably will end up sharing some of my own fears and hopes (it's easyer to write about something you know, than to make things up) fighting similarly fucked up people... would this be swinery...?

Could be.

Take Garth Ennis as an example.  Garth Ennis writes the Punisher MAX series.  This series basically steals liberally from z-grade action and mobster movies, features gratuitous profanity in place of witty dialog, and make gratuitous use of exploding head shots.  And that's tame for Ennis. His more hardcore series make light of rape, feature brutality as humor, and celebrate moral depravity.

And yet, Garth Ennis has the audacity to consider himself a more mature and sophisticated writer than the hacks who churn out stories about "guys in tights."   He thinks stories about good guys fighting bad guys is beneath him, he's more interested in showing how all the good guys are really just bad guys.

Ed Brubaker (Daredevil, Captain America) is writing awesome, gritty, psychologically realistic action/adventure stories that both build on what other earlier writers laid out, and cleave to the moral core of what makes good superhero mythology.  Garth Ennis pisses all over superhero comics because he can't do what Ed Brubaker does, which is keep the genre fresh and exciting.

Ed Brubaker's stories are heart-wrenching.  Garth Ennis's stories are stomach-turning.  That's because Ed Brubaker is a great writer, and Gath Ennis is a swinish hack.

Quote from: Will;242759'We don't enjoy X games. People who state they are are clearly lying.'

Yes, I'm the one on the sky pony.

Well this is relatively new actually. If I'm not mistaken it was something that had it's beginning in Theory. Before it was "We don't enjoy x games. People who do are wankers".

But you're right. All of it is rather silly. I do however think that if you're going to explore certain subject matter with this medium, then you better be up for some hard core criticism.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David R;242785I do however think that if you're going to explore certain subject matter with this medium, then you better be up for some hard core criticism.

This hardcore criticism is pretty lame if you ask me. These rubes haven't even read the game.

I didn't mean anything on this thread, droog. The objections here seem to be with the subject matter itself.

Regards,
David R

Evening all, first time posting here, I figure why dip your toe to see how the water is when you can just jump in and freeze/scald or get eaten by the sharks :lol:.
 

Quote from: Jackalope;242756All that were saying is that games like these don't match the definition of fun that most people have: light in tone, escapist, mirthful. Look at the definition of fun:
   fun –n
1. something that provides mirth or amusement: A picnic would be fun.
2. enjoyment or playfulness: She's full of fun.
–verb (used without object), verb (used with object)
That's what we're talking about.

I'll absolutely agress that looking at the implications of slavery is not my cup of tea for an RPG. But when I'm looking at light in tone and mirthful, I'm coming up with a handful of rather popular games over the years that aren't exactly light-in-tone or mirthful in their content such as Shadowrun, CoC, Amber, Cyberpunk 2020, anything from the general Horror genre...
 
I went from RPG's as a kid to acting in high school and college, which brought me right back to RPG's again. There are times I want to grab the dice, slay the monster and sit at the bar with a "wench" in my lap and count my gold and XP and figure out what cool new power I can add to my magical weapon. There are other days I enjoy "so the drama" where by the end of the session we all sit around mentally exhausted with our jaws dropping because we can't believe the story we just told and I'm sitting in some kind of high from the revelation or carthasis (sp?) that just hit all of us.
 
So maybe "fun" isn't the word to be looked for. Maybe something more along the lines of "enjoyment" or "fulfillment" or "gratification". There are a lot of times I banged my head against the wall in frustration at planning a run in SR, but when the night was over I had a great feeling of accomplishment. So in that sense it was fun, though by no means light or mirthful.
 
Maybe that is a little closer to a definition that could be worked with, for those that get their "fun" from something that isn't so lighthearted? ... still, I can't see a lot of people finding the use of a slavery-RPG for "fun", though certainly possible to perhaps be educational.
 
:: prepares for the razor-blades and and gnashy teeth::

Quote from: David R;242807The objections here seem to be with the subject matter itself.

And the objections, as you know, are rather dumb.

Quote from: droog;242811And the objections, as you know, are rather dumb.

Well what I think is dumb are the assumptions made about the people who don't have a problem with the subject matter.

Regards,
David R

Dumb squared.

Personally, I've never read Morrison's books. Have you?

Quote from: droog;242813Personally, I've never read Morrison's books. Have you?

Most of them. She is one of America's greatest living authors.... I think. Sure this sounds rather dramatic but her writing is problematic in the best possible way.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: himsati;242808Evening all, first time posting here, I figure why dip your toe to see how the water is when you can just jump in and freeze/scald or get eaten by the sharks :lol:.
 

 
I'll absolutely agress that looking at the implications of slavery is not my cup of tea for an RPG. But when I'm looking at light in tone and mirthful, I'm coming up with a handful of rather popular games over the years that aren't exactly light-in-tone or mirthful in their content such as Shadowrun, CoC, Amber, Cyberpunk 2020, anything from the general Horror genre...
 
I went from RPG's as a kid to acting in high school and college, which brought me right back to RPG's again. There are times I want to grab the dice, slay the monster and sit at the bar with a "wench" in my lap and count my gold and XP and figure out what cool new power I can add to my magical weapon. There are other days I enjoy "so the drama" where by the end of the session we all sit around mentally exhausted with our jaws dropping because we can't believe the story we just told and I'm sitting in some kind of high from the revelation or carthasis (sp?) that just hit all of us.
 
So maybe "fun" isn't the word to be looked for. Maybe something more along the lines of "enjoyment" or "fulfillment" or "gratification". There are a lot of times I banged my head against the wall in frustration at planning a run in SR, but when the night was over I had a great feeling of accomplishment. So in that sense it was fun, though by no means light or mirthful.
 
Maybe that is a little closer to a definition that could be worked with, for those that get their "fun" from something that isn't so lighthearted? ... still, I can't see a lot of people finding the use of a slavery-RPG for "fun", though certainly possible to perhaps be educational.
 
:: prepares for the razor-blades and and gnashy teeth::

Yawn.  Typical pretentious claptrap.  Note the jumping to terms like "lighthearted" and the neat dualism.  The underlying implication being "I'm better than you because I like 'serious games', instead of those childish 'lighthearted games'.  You aren't capable of appreciating my game, woe is you."

Pathetic, and really, pretty much a total re-run.

Go shill your crap somewhere else that isn't so wise to the real purpose of these little "slumming it" outbursts.

Quote from: J Arcane;242821Yawn.  Typical pretentious claptrap.  Note the jumping to terms like "lighthearted" and the neat dualism.

Pathetic, and really, pretty much a total re-run.

Yep, and "Oh, yawn.  I've seen all this before.  It's not even worthy of a response" is somehow atypical, innovative, and something other than pathetic.

-O

Quote from: J Arcane;242821Yawn.  Typical pretentious claptrap.  Note the jumping to terms like "lighthearted" and the neat dualism.  The underlying implication being "I'm better than you because I like 'serious games', instead of those childish 'lighthearted games' you aren't capable of appreciating."

Pathetic, and really, pretty much a total re-run.

Go shill your crap somewhere else that isn't so wise to the real purpose of these little "slumming it" outbursts.

I think somebody needs to get laid.

Quote from: himsati;242808I'll absolutely agress that looking at the implications of slavery is not my cup of tea for an RPG. But when I'm looking at light in tone and mirthful, I'm coming up with a handful of rather popular games over the years that aren't exactly light-in-tone or mirthful in their content such as Shadowrun, CoC, Amber, Cyberpunk 2020, anything from the general Horror genre...

It's not so much an issue of content, as where that content takes you.

Yes, Shadowrun is dark, gritty and grimey full of sinister secrets and corrupt corporations and strange transhumanist themes.  But it's still ultimately D&D with cyberware.  It's got Elves and Trolls and people throwing spells around.  You can go to a really serious dark place with Shadowrun...but you can do that with any game.  You can also play Shadowrun as a straight-up crime action thriller, which is how the vast majority of people I've met play it.

I've played a lot of Cyberpunk 2020, and for all it's grittiness, it's still a game where you play heroes.  I played "Smilin' Jack", a nomad outrider whose face was scrapped off when bandits dragged him down the blacktop, for a couple of years, and I assure you the game was way more about power fantasy and high octane thrills than any serious introspection of socio-political issues.  This was a game where you could play a rock star and change the world with a microphone and a casiotone.

Call of Cthulhu?  Insanity as a joke.

Horror?  Being scared silly is an entirely different

Seriously, you could make Auschwitz the Role-Playing Game, where you take turns describing your characters slow collapse before being sent to the furnace, but it's not going to be fun the way that losing your mind to Things Man Was Not Meant To Know is fun.  It's just sad.

There's a very huge difference between gritty and realistic as an aesthetic gloss over what is still heroic adventure fiction, and making a game out of Toni Morrison's work.

Okay, so we should all read nothing ever except for comics.

Quote from: droog;242834Okay, so we should all read nothing ever except for comics.

Who are you even addressing that at?  Do you honestly think anyone in this thread is espousing a point remotely resembling that comment?

Explain to me again how this isn't telling other people they're having fun wrong?

Quote from: Jackalope;242836Who are you even addressing that at?  Do you honestly think anyone in this thread is espousing a point remotely resembling that comment?

Yes--you. Among others.

Quote from: Will;242844Explain to me again how this isn't telling other people they're having fun wrong?

Because it's ALSO telling people that they're responsible for the Liberatarian Party's lack of electoral success.

Age of Fable's online gamebook is fun. I would enjoy roleplaying in that world, the multiple choice bit just whet my appetite :)

I'm not really interested in exploring the pathos of suffering of this or that group or anything like that. If I had to play a slave I would be most interested in starting a slave rebellion. If I had to play a Jew in Nazi Europe I would be most interested in starting a rising. And so on.

It's okay if we're very likely to ultimately fail, so long as we get to have a go :) If I want a predetermined outcome where all I get to do is explore the sad daily details then I can read a book.

Quote from: J Arcane;242821Yawn. Typical pretentious claptrap. Note the jumping to terms like "lighthearted" and the neat dualism. The underlying implication being "I'm better than you because I like 'serious games', instead of those childish 'lighthearted games'. You aren't capable of appreciating my game, woe is you."

I just used lighthearted as a simpler compliment to "mirth", that's all. I like everything from serious dark supernatural to zany 40's noir and even the occasional game of "Muppet Hero" at Gen Con when I can fit it in. I may not personally do a lot of "crunch" in my games these days for example, but I still wholly appreciate it. Same for serious vs. lighthearted, and I certainly don't brand all lighthearted games as "childish".  But I might have come across wrong and for that I'm sorry. I was just thinking that another term might be better to use than just fun, or at least go with one of the other definitions since about half of all RPG's are not light-hearted or mirth-inducing by their content.
 
As to "slumming", I did just find the site a few weeks ago. Yes I found it from rpg.net which I re-found several weeks ago:  I've been away from any kind of RPG forums for years now.  But I don't think of this place as some kind of "lower" forum; obnoxious, crude, and loud at times yeah, but not lower. ;)  As to my seriousness and contempt of the lighthearted... I was a huge fan of Toon and Teens From Outer Space back in college when it came out. I also regularly played Paranoia until about 5 or 6 years ago, and knew what a "Ringworld" was long before a system capable of running Halo ever existed.
 
As to the Forge, I lost a few friends to Ron Edward's particular style of design theory.  So when Precedence closed their doors I just walked away from the whole industry until Immortal's original creator asked me to fix the game that Precedence had horribly mutilated (that's what happens when you don't edit the game and then try to redo it into a new version to try and sell the game as story to a TV producer).  The first place I found myself at when I was ready to put it out there was the Forge.  Got the same kind of reaction I got here, but with fancier words and a lot of venom.  I walked away again for the last few years, my mistake, shouldn't have let it get to me.  So I may be "independent" but that doesn't mean I'm part of that particular crowd.
 
... but, to Machine Gun Blue...  In response to the 2nd whole post of your illustrious career here that you made using the "follow-the-leader-so-I-can-look-cool" shtick. I got a gorgeous wife and the three great kids, why would I want to get laid by a dork like you? :p

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;242851If I had to play a slave I would be most interested in starting a slave rebellion.

I believe you can in SAJ.

Quote from: himsati;242852... but, to Machine Gun Blue...  In response to the 2nd whole post of your illustrious career here that you made using the "follow-the-leader-so-I-can-look-cool" shtick. I got a gorgeous wife and the three great kids, why would I want to get laid by a dork like you? :p

Dude, I was referring to J Arcane. Did I say I wanted to lay you? The guy has been like a rabid pitt bull the whole thread. Looked like he needed to get laid or lost his meds.

Quote from: Jackalope;242833It's not so much an issue of content, as where that content takes you.

Point taken.
 

Quote from: Jackalope;242833There's a very huge difference between gritty and realistic as an aesthetic gloss over what is still heroic adventure fiction, and making a game out of Toni Morrison's work.

Agreed, and no argument against that. The thread just seemed to be starting to lean towards all "serious" games falling in line as "swine" games. And being someone who likes both (serious and light-hearted), I thought a different term might be better in terms of how folks were representing the viewpoints.
 
Toni Morrison .. Beloved? Figuring that you might be bringing her up in connection to the slavery thing? Otherwise I'm going to play stupid and have zero idea who you are talking about. :o

(http://blogs.technet.com/photos/gray_knowlton/images/2998979/original.aspx)

Because it can't be posted too much.

Quote from: Machinegun Blue;242860Dude, I was referring to J Arcane. Did I say I wanted to lay you? The guy has been like a rabid pitt bull the whole thread. Looked like he needed to get laid or lost his meds.

My bad.. :rotfl:
 
Just tell me you saw the tongue-smiley at the end of it.  I am one of those nut-cases that uses them, because I got taken waaaay too seriously before those things existed:  back in ancient times when we communicating using intricate things called BBS's and the Internet was a mystical thing that only worked between a couple of universities and government institutions.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;242851Age of Fable's online gamebook is fun. I would enjoy roleplaying in that world, the multiple choice bit just whet my appetite :)

I'm not really interested in exploring the pathos of suffering of this or that group or anything like that. If I had to play a slave I would be most interested in starting a slave rebellion. If I had to play a Jew in Nazi Europe I would be most interested in starting a rising. And so on.

It's okay if we're very likely to ultimately fail, so long as we get to have a go :) If I want a predetermined outcome where all I get to do is explore the sad daily details then I can read a book.

I just have no sympathy whatsoever for this stupid middle-class-boredom induced "I cut myself to feel alive" type endless misery porn.  It's pathetic whether it's Battlestar Galactica, Passion of the Christ, this week's latest "Holocaust game", or whatever.  

It's shallow, and lame, and exploitative.  Disliking it doesn't have anything to do with wanting my gaming "more lighthearted" or an inability to play a "more serious" game, it comes from finding that sort of emo-wallowing exercise to be sad and masturbatory rather than entertaining.  

And as has been pointed out time and time and time again every time the latest emo-tourism game comes to fore, the idea that you can gain any kind of insight from such an exercise is utterly contemptible.  It's just you and your pretentious buddies sitting around playing out your own internal stereotypes, and nothing more.  

And do you notice how often it's always something patently offensive?  There's how many Holocaust/Nazi Germany "games" like this now?  I can think of at least three examples off hand, and one of those is actually lumping together what's really a whole LARP genre into a single example.  Now we've got a bunch of white liberal college students sitting around pretending they're black slaves?  Seriously?  

It's beyond abominable in my book.

Quote from: J Arcane;242865Now we've got a bunch of white liberal college students sitting around pretending they're black slaves?  Seriously?  

Written by a black woman whose mother studies the history of slavery and helped her with the game. Hmmm.

Funnily enough, all these same concerns got aired on Story Games when SAJ came out. You white liberal kids!

Quote from: J Arcane;242865And do you notice how often it's always something patently offensive?  There's how many Holocaust/Nazi Germany "games" like this now?  I can think of at least three examples off hand, and one of those is actually lumping together what's really a whole LARP genre into a single example.  Now we've got a bunch of white liberal college students sitting around pretending they're black slaves?

I don't think it's only those really extreme examples. We also have games of being low-class teenaged girls, LARPS where they're locked up in an old fallout shelter for the weekend and told the bombs have dropped, and so on.

They really run the whole range of human misery. Sure, some bits get a bit more focus, but you can't say they don't try to encompass all of human misery.

Though there's a lot missing, a lot of possibilities. We could have Chemo, the game of undergoing treatment for being riddled with cancer. Or Lonely, the game of having just been dumped. Or perhaps Baghdad, the game of being a civilian in modern-day Baghdad, dodging death squads, US Marines coming to drag you away as an "insurgent", and suicide bombs in marketplaces.

Though perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned those possibilities, someone might be inspired by them. You know that internet law that if you think of some crazy sex kink and then mention it publicly, that public mention of it summons a web page about it into existence? I fear the same might happen for fucked-up rpg ideas.

Maybe you'd like The Fluffy Bunny Game (http://crowtracks.blogspot.com/2005/12/fluffy-bunny-game.html).

Quote from: Kyle AaronThough perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned those possibilities, someone might be inspired by them. You know that internet law that if you think of some crazy sex kink and then mention it publicly, that public mention of it summons a web page about it into existence? I fear the same might happen for fucked-up rpg ideas.

Increasingly, I think you may be right.  Sort of a Rule 34 for RPGs.

I guess you guys are right and I should play games that compensate for the lack of excitement in ordinary life today and the fact that I feel helpless and small in the face of the world. Luckily there are plenty....

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;242872Or perhaps Baghdad, the game of being a civilian in modern-day Baghdad, dodging death squads, US Marines coming to drag you away as an "insurgent", and suicide bombs in marketplaces.
Though perhaps I shouldn't have mentioned those possibilities, someone might be inspired by them.

Sorry Kyle....but I think you just gave me an idea for the sequel to my Day of Living Dangerously - http://www.therpgsite.com/showpost.php?p=46788&postcount=1  - campaign.

Regards,
David R

You're a fucking swine, pal.

Quote from: J Arcane;242865It's shallow, and lame, and exploitative. Disliking it doesn't have anything to do with wanting my gaming "more lighthearted" or an inability to play a "more serious" game, it comes from finding that sort of emo-wallowing exercise to be sad and masturbatory rather than entertaining.

Okay, put that way I definitely get your point; misery porn and emo-wallowing pretty much cleared it up... It's not serious vs. lighthearted, it's a beef with "Hi, let's roleplay through lots of suffering for the serious sake of just roleplaying through suffering, and see how that makes you feel. You are screwed, you know how this is going to end and no matter what you do... it isn't going to change anything. Okay, ready to have fun?"
 
Hence why in any game I like that has something along those lines as part of its setting, I generally ignore that part.

Quote from: J Arcane;242865I just have no sympathy whatsoever for this stupid middle-class-boredom induced "I cut myself to feel alive" type endless misery porn.  

....

And as has been pointed out time and time and time again every time the latest emo-tourism game comes to fore, the idea that you can gain any kind of insight from such an exercise is utterly contemptible.

Seems like fodder for a separate thread (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=11735).

Quote from: J Arcane;242865And do you notice how often it's always something patently offensive?

Uh ... not really, no:  Games like Shooting the Moon, Breaking the Ice, Under the Bed, Bliss Stage, Contenders and Misery Bubblegum all deal with these same issues of heartbreak and strength, and do so without pushing anyone's panic buttons about inherently squicky material.

I mean, I've noticed that the examples that get bandied about are usually the most patently offensive ones, but I just chalk that up to observer bias.

Quote from: TonyLB;242883I mean, I've noticed that the examples that get bandied about are usually the most patently offensive ones, but I just chalk that up to observer bias.

Wait a minute. Explain to me why SAJ is 'patently offensive'. Without simply asserting it.

Quote from: droog;242884Wait a minute. Explain to me why SAJ is 'patently offensive'. Without simply asserting it.

>shrug<  I just meant that it's the stuff that people can easily take offense at.  Feel better if I say "obviously controversial"?

Quote from: TonyLB;242885Feel better if I say "obviously controversial"?

No, because I disagree that it's any such thing. I thought the debate was stupid on SG and I think it's stupid here.

Quote from: droog;242887No, because I disagree that it's any such thing. I thought the debate was stupid on SG and I think it's stupid here.

You don't think that a game about slavery is more likely to incite hot feelings than a game about first dates?  Uh ... okay.  Agree to disagree, I suppose.

Quote from: TonyLB;242890You don't think that a game about slavery is more likely to incite hot feelings than a game about first dates?  Uh ... okay.  Agree to disagree, I suppose.

No, Tony. Intelligent people (or people fully using their intelligence) do not look at a 'game about slavery' and go 'OMG that's so offensive!', same as intelligent people don't look at books or films about the same and say the same.

The incitement of hot feelings has everything to do with the Forge connection and nothing to do with the game. Again, I'll point out that nobody except me, David, and possibly you, has actually read it.

Quote from: droog;242892No, Tony. Intelligent people (or people fully using their intelligence) do not look at a 'game about slavery' and go 'OMG that's so offensive!', same as intelligent people don't look at books or films about the same and say the same.

I think highly intelligent people are just as prone to making snap judgments as anyone else.  Maybe more so.

I'm not even trying to make a point about stuff that might or might not be controversial ... I'm making a point about the several heartbreaking games of character suffering that have nothing I could even conceive of as inciting controversy, even to a knee-jerk snap judgment.  Under the Bed is about children's TOYS for pete's sake.  The subject material seems unlikely to offend at a glance.

The argument has been made that all of the character-suffering games are also about controversial (and perhaps even offensive) material.  I've got evidence that I think just shows flat out that isn't so.

Any chance you could redirect your rage about people's treatment of SAJ toward somebody more focussed on that aspect of the discussion?

Quote from: TonyLB;242906Any chance you could redirect your rage about people's treatment of SAJ toward somebody more focussed on that aspect of the discussion?

I'm not angry. But if you say things I disagree with and I have the slightest amount of respect for you, I'll argue.

UtB is about PUTTING CHILDREN IN DANGER. OMG!!!!!!

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;242851Age of Fable's online gamebook is fun. I would enjoy roleplaying in that world, the multiple choice bit just whet my appetite :)

Thanks!

I actually have plenty of slavery and transexuality in there, if anyone's interested. :)

Look, I think you're all completely missing the REAL point here, which is...

um...

wait, we're talking about which games are best. There isn't a real point.

Quote from: Age of Fable;242912Thanks!

I actually have plenty of slavery and transexuality in there, if anyone's interested. :)

Have you given thought to writing it up as a worldbook?

I mean, you wouldn't have to do much new writing, you could just have a skeleton of description of each town, and all those encounters you wrote up could be example/random encounters.

So I have the following definitions:

1) A swine game is a game that Pundit Doesn't like.

2) A swine game is a game that is rules-lite.

3) A swine game is a game that is rules-heavy.

4) A swine game is a game that attempts to be the gaming equivalent to literature.

5) A swine game is a game played by people who want to think they are better than you.

1) is useless.  2) is useless, because I don't think Amber is a bad game.
3) is useless, while Hero System is not my bag, I've had fun with 3.5.
4) is idiotic.  I sometimes learn things watching the History Channel, it is still fun.  I enjoy some literature.  5) is kinda useless.  I've met duchebags like that that only play D&D.

So, "swine game" is a useless term, unless you are playing a pig.

Quote from: NotYourMonkey;242945So, "swine game" is a useless term, unless you are playing a pig.

Have I got the game for you!

the farm (http://www.chimera.info/daedalus/articles/halloween2004/thefarm.html)

Quote from: himsati;242861Toni Morrison .. Beloved? Figuring that you might be bringing her up in connection to the slavery thing? Otherwise I'm going to play stupid and have zero idea who you are talking about. :o

Beloved is a book by Toni Morrison about a female freed slave raising her daughter in relative seclusion.  A young woman calling herself Beloved comes to the main character, and joins her family.  "Beloved" is what the main character wrote on the tombstone of her own two year old daughter, whom she murdered to spare her from a life of slavery.  The book makes it unclear if Beloved is a ghost of the dead daughter, or just a girl with a mysterious past.  it's very, very sad.  Very much a weepy Oprah type flick.  in fact, i think Oprah was in it.  (checks)  Yes, she played the main character.

Beloved is inspired by slave narratives (stories written by former slaves to explain what slavery is like from the perspective of the slave), as is the game Steal Away Jordan.

Quote from: droog;242947Have I got the game for you!

the farm (http://www.chimera.info/daedalus/articles/halloween2004/thefarm.html)

Wow.  Why am I totally unsurprised that Jared Sorenson of all people has made the vegetarian propoganda game.

:rolleyes:

Quote from: TonyLB;242883Uh ... not really, no:  Games like Shooting the Moon, Breaking the Ice, Under the Bed, Bliss Stage, Contenders and Misery Bubblegum all deal with these same issues of heartbreak and strength, and do so without pushing anyone's panic buttons about inherently squicky material.

I mean, I've noticed that the examples that get bandied about are usually the most patently offensive ones, but I just chalk that up to observer bias.

Of the games you've mentioned, I've only read Breaking The Ice.  And I would strongly object to anyone who called Breaking the Ice a swine game.  It's extremely light-hearted, funny and easy to play.  it doesn't present itself as being daring or original or superior to previous games.  It let's its originality speak for itself.

Breaking the Ice isn't about misery tourism, and it isn't about pretentious hyperbole covering for incomplete, partial rules.  Sure, it's not typical gamer fare, and you're average gaming group can't get anything out it.  But unlike D&D, I can actually see how BTI could get you laid.  And that's impressive.

BTI is a prime example of why it's important to recognize the difference between a Forge game and a swinish game.  Just because Emily Care Boss was introduced to the idea that she could design a game by that crowd doesn't mean that her game has been compromised by the more asinine elements of that crowd.

Quote from: Fritzs;242764Or are RPGs different than everything else, that only thing they are allowed to provide is "fun"...?

Of course one has different criteria for different products. Or let me know, next time, you buy fridge to cook your dinner and toaster to clean your room. Also it is interesting how you change the meanings and use such words - allow - to draw other persons with evil intent. I am not supposed to allow or disallow anything. I am talking about how I assess the game quality. Why I choose what I choose. And for me, fun factor is very important. Yes. I believe, that game should serve its buyers...

BTW: I really don't care about your webcomics of about your personal problems, that you sublty present in your post.

Quote from: AlnagAnd for me, fun factor is very important.

Not so much for me... that probalbly make me psychotic motherfucker, who deserve lobotomy, to be put in line with "normal" fun loving people...

Quote from: AlnagI believe, that game should serve its buyers...

And what if buyers (be it minority) want to buy depresive and unfunny game...

BTW:Oh great analysis of my personality... I wanted to draw webcomics year ago, but what I don't get is the part with personal problems, where I was refering to someones previous post, not to myself... perhaps you should read less Freud.

So what motivates someone to want to play a game like this? What is the thought process involved?

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;242986So what motivates someone to want to play a game like this? What is the thought process involved?

Why would you choose to read a book like Lolita? Why would you choose to watch a film like Wild Strawberries?

What is the thought process involved?

Why not answer the question, if you can. Or not, if you can't. This isn't an answer at all.

Use your imagination. Aren't you a roleplayer?

Quote from: droog;242987Why would you choose to read a book like Lolita? Why would you choose to watch a film like Wild Strawberries?

What is the thought process involved?

And this ladies and gentleman, is why we call them swine.

Notice that we're talking about a handful of vanity press games with less than 5,000 in sales.  But what does droog compare them to?

Lolita, widely recognized as one of the greatest examples of modern literature, and Wild Strawberries, one of Ingmar Bergman's greatest films.  

Nabokov, Bergman, and Vince Baker? Seriously?  Seriously?  What the fuck makes you think any thing the Forge has ever produced comes even remotely close to works by world-renowned writers and directors?

I'll tell you what: you're a pretentious shitweasel.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;242986So what motivates someone to want to play a game like this? What is the thought process involved?

The subject matter is interesting. Compelling. It's certainly not a beer & pretzels game, but for some not every game has to be.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: Jackalope;242995I'll tell you what: you're a pretentious shitweasel.

Mouthing off again, son.

I chose those examples as examples of dark and controversial subject matter, as it happens. I suppose I should have gone with GI Joe or Star Wars or something.

Quote from: David R;242996The subject matter is interesting. Compelling. It's certainly not a beer & pretzels game, but for some not every game has to be.

Now I know you're a swine!

Quote from: droog;243000Now I know you're a swine!

Only here, comrade. Anywhere else, I'm just a gamer with diverse taste in games.

Regards,
David R

Jackalope: Question is: Do you like Wild Strawberries, because it's great movie or because "they" (teachers, society, whatever) told you to like it...? Or because it is ever popular self-evident fact that don't need explanation...?

I've seen people who were criticising Wild Strawberries as boring movie, filmed by pretentious wank, who wanted to look "intelectual" and "deep"... basicaly, the subjected it to same criticism as you, when you are criticising so called "swine" games...

Yes, my wife doesn't like Bergman at all. Frank Capra's more her style.

Quote from: David R;243001Only here, comrade. Anywhere else, I'm just a gamer with diverse taste in games.

You are the Gadarene Swine. Or is that me?

Quote from: David R;242996The subject matter is interesting. Compelling. It's certainly not a beer & pretzels game, but for some not every game has to be.

Regards,
David R

Plenty of games aren't beer and pretzels, and plenty of games are also not purporting to be about slavery. I just don't get stuff like this at all.

I think it's you ! (droog)

Matthew 8.30-32 (cf. Mark 5.11-13 and Luke 8.32-33) wrote:
And there was a good way off from them an herd of many swine feeding. So the devils besought him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine. And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine: and, behold, the whole herd of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea, and perished in the waters.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: obryn;242721It's amazing, isn't it?

This site, more than most other sites, is really, really obsessed with categorization.  Objectively Fun vs. Objectively Un-Fun.  RPG vs. Not-RPG.  Sandbox vs. Railroad.  D&D vs. Not-D&D.

It's like "I have made these boxes.  I believe stuff about things in these boxes.  Here, allow me to push things into those boxes so I know what to believe about them."

It gets downright pathetic.

-O

Yep.  It's taking "a game I don't want to play" and turning it into an ideology, which is basically the mirror image of turning "a game I want to play" into an ideology, which is what they are accusing the so-called swine of doing.

It's amazing to me how many people have actually bought into RPGPundit's rhetoric.  Don't they see it's simply a ploy to generate hits for his blog?

Quote from: Jackalope;242995And this ladies and gentleman, is why we call them swine.

Notice that we're talking about a handful of vanity press games with less than 5,000 in sales.  But what does droog compare them to?

Lolita, widely recognized as one of the greatest examples of modern literature, and Wild Strawberries, one of Ingmar Bergman's greatest films.  

Nabokov, Bergman, and Vince Baker? Seriously?  Seriously?  What the fuck makes you think any thing the Forge has ever produced comes even remotely close to works by world-renowned writers and directors?

I'll tell you what: you're a pretentious shitweasel.

When I see bad roleplayers put on dodgy accents, I cringe. When I see obese cos players squeeze into a dress four sizes too small for them, I cringe. And your problem with these swine games is that you don't think the authors, or the players have the intellectual prowess nor the emotional depth to treat the subject with the reverence it's due. It's the delusion that is offensive, that these people deign to ignore the immensity of an issue and consider themselves capable and worthy of dealing with concerns that tax the best of humanity and have destroyed the most unfortunate.

Am I reading you correctly?

Dodgy accents. Aaah ha ha ha!

I had a wonderful time playing a gunslinger in a TORG (ish) game trying to figure out why the rest of the group wanted to meet with the Queen of the Ferries.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;243009I just don't get stuff like this at all.

I don't get Exalted. And yet I don't feel the need to start a WAR about it or appropriate someone else's term - Swine - to describe it's fans.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: walkerp;243017It's amazing to me how many people have actually bought into RPGPundit's rhetoric.  Don't they see it's simply a ploy to generate hits for his blog?

Some of us more than others. ;) The real question is if you find it disgusting and disreputable. Some find it clever and admirable. Others actually believe the script as doctrine. You can decide what is scarier.

Bill

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;242916Have you given thought to writing it up as a worldbook?

I mean, you wouldn't have to do much new writing, you could just have a skeleton of description of each town, and all those encounters you wrote up could be example/random encounters.

I'd like to do something with the game, once I finish it, if it gets popular enough.

I think I'd do it as a set of things GMs could put into their game worlds, rather than a worldbook (so there'd be no maps).

I'd also like to do a printed version of my tables collection...I even had a name picked ("Sobekhotep's Stochastic Cornucopia")...but there wasn't really enough interest :(

Quote from: J Arcane;242953Wow.  Why am I totally unsurprised that Jared Sorenson of all people has made the vegetarian propoganda game.

:rolleyes:

Does that make him Vegan Swine Substitute?

Quote from: Buceph;243023When I see bad roleplayers put on dodgy accents, I cringe. When I see obese cos players squeeze into a dress four sizes too small for them, I cringe. And your problem with these swine games is that you don't think the authors, or the players have the intellectual prowess nor the emotional depth to treat the subject with the reverence it's due. It's the delusion that is offensive, that these people deign to ignore the immensity of an issue and consider themselves capable and worthy of dealing with concerns that tax the best of humanity and have destroyed the most unfortunate.

Am I reading you correctly?

That is a spectacular and eloquent way of describing exactly my objection to such emo-tourism claptrap.  

Thank you sir, and welcome to theRPGsite.

Quote from: Fritzs;243002Jackalope: Question is: Do you like Wild Strawberries, because it's great movie or because "they" (teachers, society, whatever) told you to like it...? Or because it is ever popular self-evident fact that don't need explanation...?

I've never seen Wild Strawberries.  I have no opinion on it.

I have never been a big fan of strawberries, but I do prefer wild ones to store-bought, when I can find them.  Yes, there is a lot of picking and not a lot of fruit (those wild ones are so small, especially in the mountains), but it's better than the tasteless pulp that are most commercial strawberries these days.

Quote from: Buceph;243023When I see bad roleplayers put on dodgy accents, I cringe. When I see obese cos players squeeze into a dress four sizes too small for them, I cringe. And your problem with these swine games is that you don't think the authors, or the players have the intellectual prowess nor the emotional depth to treat the subject with the reverence it's due. It's the delusion that is offensive, that these people deign to ignore the immensity of an issue and consider themselves capable and worthy of dealing with concerns that tax the best of humanity and have destroyed the most unfortunate.

Am I reading you correctly?

Yes!  Exactly!

Toni Morrison did a tremendous amount of research before writing Beloved.  She read a great many slave narratives, studied the history, developed her characters and her plot, and put them all together slowly and built a grand and wonderful novel.

No group of average, ordinary people with no previous background in slave narratives or this body of literature is going to sit down around a table and come up with a grand tale that illuminates the heart-wrenching effects of slavery on the human soul thanks to a an 81 page book of game mechanics.

I could see the game being useful as part of a larger curriculum that involved reading Toni Morrison, reading some actual slave narratives, and studying the time period the stories involve.  I could definitely see how the game could be very thought-provoking and rewarding in rigorous academic setting.

But the notion that you could get a productive result and really learn something fundamental without actually studying the premise of the game, that you could make up a character, roll some dice, and come to some sort of deep understanding?

HOGWASH!!!  Pretentious, self-important HOGWASH.

Quote from: Jackalope;243226I've never seen Wild Strawberries.  I have no opinion on it.

'one of Ingmar Bergman's greatest films'

Quote from: walkerp;243233I have never been a big fan of strawberries, but I do prefer wild ones to store-bought, when I can find them.  Yes, there is a lot of picking and not a lot of fruit (those wild ones are so small, especially in the mountains), but it's better than the tasteless pulp that are most commercial strawberries these days.

I prefer to dig for truffles.

Quote from: droog;243243'one of Ingmar Bergman's greatest films'

Never claimed it was my personal opinion.  Just based that off what the film historians say, which they base off the amount of positive press the film gets, public reaction, industry awards, and other factors.

Uh huh.

Quote from: droog;243277Uh huh.

God, I hate you.

Quote from: Jackalope;243279God, I hate you.

Never mind. I'm sure lots of people do.

Quote from: Age of Fable;243107I'd like to do something with the game, once I finish it, if it gets popular enough.

Pffft! Don't be so wet and woolly! Get writing!

Quote from: Age of FableI think I'd do it as a set of things GMs could put into their game worlds, rather than a worldbook (so there'd be no maps).

No maps?! Are you insane?

Here's the thing, while I think making a whole game about trying to escape being farm raised as a polemic against meat eating is silly, I don't see a reason why you couldn't use an existing system for this, might even be fun if your in the mood for horror. (nWOD maybe?)

Or it might be an idiotic mess.  I figure YMMV.

And I'm certainly not going to try and say that someone other than me isn't having fun with it.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;243330No maps?! Are you insane?

I know that'd make it much less sell-able.

But if you have maps. then you have limits on what you can have in your game.

For example you might want an adventure where the characters leave Karrakara, and on the way to Atnos they come across a lost city. But then the map shows that there's no room for a lost city there...:(

I've sort of decided that the world is a bit like the one in 'The Never-Ending Story', in that the geography isn't fixed. Also it's meant to be connected to other fictional worlds, which 'explains' how hobbits are there.

Maybe it could have maps of things like individual villages, or a suburb of Karrakara.

But yeah, everyone loves their huge colour world maps...

Quote from: NotYourMonkey;243561Here's the thing, while I think making a whole game about trying to escape being farm raised as a polemic against meat eating is silly, I don't see a reason why you couldn't use an existing system for this, might even be fun if your in the mood for horror.

Who said it was a polemic against meat-eating? Oh, J Arcane said it....

It's just a classic sort of horror scenario. As to why you couldn't do the situation in another system, obviously you could.

Maybe I miss-typed.

It seemed silly to me to create a purpose built system for that game.

It would make more sense to me as, say, a nWOD adventure.

As for the anti-meat polemic, I basically went with the most extreme interpretation I'd seen for what the game is meant for.

Doesn't matter if it is or isn't, if that is something that somebody is going to find worth doing on a Saturday night, more power to them.

Quote from: Age of Fable;243577I know that'd make it much less sell-able.

But if you have maps. then you have limits on what you can have in your game.

That's fair enough. Either way, get it out there! You've got all the ideas already, and they're half-written up - in that it's just a slight change from the Fighting Fantasy-style entries to a page an encounter. So get going! I want to buy this product! Or even get a freebie for being so inspirational?

...

No?

Oh well. I want to buy it!

Quote from: NotYourMonkey;243738It would make more sense to me as, say, a nWOD adventure.

In the end, though, you can do everything with GURPS, right? Jared Sorenson writes more games than I eat breakfasts.

Quote from: Age of Fable;243577I know that'd make it much less sell-able.

But if you have maps. then you have limits on what you can have in your game.

For example you might want an adventure where the characters leave Karrakara, and on the way to Atnos they come across a lost city. But then the map shows that there's no room for a lost city there...:(

I've sort of decided that the world is a bit like the one in 'The Never-Ending Story', in that the geography isn't fixed. Also it's meant to be connected to other fictional worlds, which 'explains' how hobbits are there.

Maybe it could have maps of things like individual villages, or a suburb of Karrakara.

But yeah, everyone loves their huge colour world maps...

I've been thinking about this same subject for a quite a while. I love to look at maps, I like to draw maps. I hate to be constrained by them  My solution: have the maps, but make it a guiding principle of the setting that the maps are wrong. How wrong, ranging from a bit inaccurate to completely goofy is of course up to the individual GM, and, indeed can vary from location to location on the same map.

Quote from: droog;244009In the end, though, you can do everything with GURPS, right? Jared Sorenson writes more games than I eat breakfasts.

Sure you could.  It just seems odd to me to make a whole system for one very particular scenario.  YMMV of course.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;243960That's fair enough. Either way, get it out there! You've got all the ideas already, and they're half-written up - in that it's just a slight change from the Fighting Fantasy-style entries to a page an encounter. So get going! I want to buy this product! Or even get a freebie for being so inspirational?

...

No?

Oh well. I want to buy it!

Do you think it should be systemless - or if not what system?

Quote from: Age of Fable;245045Do you think it should be systemless - or if not what system?

I think systemless would be fine, if you were just writing up the encounters. But maybe you should start a new thread in the Design section?

done (http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?p=245275).

Quote from: Buceph;243023When I see bad roleplayers put on dodgy accents, I cringe. When I see obese cos players squeeze into a dress four sizes too small for them, I cringe. And your problem with these swine games is that you don't think the authors, or the players have the intellectual prowess nor the emotional depth to treat the subject with the reverence it's due. It's the delusion that is offensive, that these people deign to ignore the immensity of an issue and consider themselves capable and worthy of dealing with concerns that tax the best of humanity and have destroyed the most unfortunate.

Am I reading you correctly?

I can mostly agree with this, but there's some nuance involved:

Gaming is done mostly behind closed doors, as it were. What people do in their bedrooms or parent's basements or whatever is pretty much their business.

However, once you (note: not the poster I'm replying to -- a more general 'you') make your business public by a) publishing a game or b) posting an Actual Play report, you invite response -- including critical response and ridicule.

A lot of people aren't up for that -- no reason they should be. The answer is simple: if you want to play Incredibly Repulsive Game and you don't want people to laugh at you, just do it with your pals and don't publish.

If you decide to publish, man up and be ready for people to, you know, judge your fun. If you're dealing with serious themes (rape, the Holocaust, slavery, etc.) expect people to generally set a higher bar than if you're dealing with elves and Dragons. I think most people expect serious material to be dealt with seriously and with respect -- certainly that's true with other forms of media.

I think the role of the game designer is a bit more ambiguous -- I think it's possible for a game to do a reasonable, respectful treatment of a tricky subject. Even in a best-case scenario, though, the designer is inviting people to walk into a (taste) minefield with extremely limited tools (e.g. likely the people playing will not have the background to handle the material correctly). Ultimately the designer isn't responsible for what people do with the game, but if you'd prefer not to be laughed at for making a pretentious or tasteless game, it's probably better to stick to elves.

Cheers,
-E.

Quote from: J Arcane;242953Wow.  Why am I totally unsurprised that Jared Sorenson of all people has made the vegetarian propoganda game.

:rolleyes:

You do know that not only do I eat animals, I eat BABY ANIMALS?

UNBORN BABY ANIMALS?

(http://upcm89.files.wordpress.com/2008/02/balut1.jpg)

eating unborn baby animals doesn't make you not a vegetarian, it only makes you not a vegan.