TheRPGSite

As above.  It can be for any reason:  easy learning curve, your own familiarity with that system, availability, whatever.

Personally, I've used games from Rifts to D&D to HARP with new players;  right now, I'm thinking all things being equal, Iron Gauntlets would be my RPG of choice (assuming their interest is traditional fantasy), basically because its extremely easy to learn, and simple to change around to get whatever sort of character you're looking for.  But I think I really could (and have) introduce folks to gaming with plenty of different titles, so another question is, does it really matter, so long as you do a good job of it?  I don't think it does, so consider this just a curiousity as to personal preference more than anything.



(Oh, HinterWelt's Squirrel Attack! might also be a fun intro).

Quote from: Zachary The First(Oh, HinterWelt's Squirrel Attack! might also be a fun intro).

I have used DND many times as well as MERPS a few times. I stopped using MErps because I often had to follow up the session with "Really, it is not that hard".

I have used my Iridium System mostly in the form of Tales and Shades. Also, I have used SA! to great effect. It really does the job well with pregens. I think that is often the key, make it painless. Sometimes veteran gamers get all into the character creation process and it leaves a lot of newbies cold. That said, I have had a few newbies be passionate about the idea of creating a character for the story.

Bill

D&D or FUDGE. Pretty much for different reasons.

D&D... because it's most likely to be the game that they will run into groups for, and that I'll be playing. I think tales of its inpenetrability are overstated, but would keep it low level.

Fudge... because I could fairly easily scrape together any concept they might be interested in and it is light but otherwise pretty much sticks to principles of traditional games (again, that familiarity with potential future games thing).

Quote from: HinterWeltI have used DND many times as well as MERPS a few times. I stopped using MErps because I often had to follow up the session with "Really, it is not that hard".

Bill

I think I'm going to have at least one newbie for my weekly/bi-weekly Rolemaster FRP campaign (starting in October, God willing), and I'm about as prepared as I can be.  I've ginned up a step-by-step character creation guide, and I always do group chargen.  That's really an easy game for newbies AFTER character creation, just not before. :)

It really depends on the person.

For a true novice, someone who doesn't even play computer and/or console games, and isn't a scifi/fantasy fan at all, I might be inclined just to drag out my old beat-up Holmes edition D&D book (maybe with a tiny bit of tweaking). The average person has only heard of D&D as far as RPGs are concerned, so I think it'd be nice to give the newb at least this touchstone of familiarity at first.

For someone who is more predisposed to scifi/fantasy, and who seems more likely to grasp more complex game rules right off, I'd just use core D&D 3.5. I'd likely use pregens created with the starting packages from the PHB II so gaming can start right away.

In general, I'd leave character generation for later, assuming the person would want to play again on a longer-term basis. Nothing kills momentum for a true newb than to spend an hour or more rolling up a character. Yeah, I know a lot of gamers like to do it, but I've seen the eyes of true novices to RPGs glaze over as tedious bookkeeping and dice rolling is done before the real game starts.

That does depend very much on the interests of the players. In the past, I've enjoyed success with Call of Cthulhu and Nobilis.

Quote from: ColonelHardissonIn general, I'd leave character generation for later, assuming the person would want to play again on a longer-term basis. Nothing kills momentum for a true newb than to spend an hour or more rolling up a character. Yeah, I know a lot of gamers like to do it, but I've seen the eyes of true novices to RPGs glaze over as tedious bookkeeping and dice rolling is done before the real game starts.

You bring up a really interesting point.  I've seen people fidget during chargen, and I've seen folks really get into the idea of having this game where they can create the ultimate in character customization.  If it's a demo or a one-shot with any sort of chargen longer than say, Risus, I would likely have pregens.  Elsewise, my deafult is to make chargen a fun, group activity, where they can sort of get into the feel of things, have their intial steps seen to, and have a greater sense of character ownership.

The answer is always going to be 'It depends', but I do have some general ideas.

I ran a game of Nicotine Girls (http://www.halfmeme.com/nicotinegirls.html) for a non-gaming friend of mine, and she was so impressed she's still talking about it to other non-gamers. NG would still be my game of choice for many of the people I know. For the same people, I would also consider Bacchanal (http://www.halfmeme.com/bacchanal.html), My Life with Master (http://www.halfmeme.com/master.html) or It Was a Mutual Decision (http://www.indiepressrevolution.com/products.php?publisherLink=adept&PHPSESSID=54806ad4129e09f3d55ad1a04b4d5995).

If somebody specifically wanted fantasy I would be highly inclined to use Trollbabe (http://www.adept-press.com/trollbabe/), or possibly Prince Valiant (http://www.panix.com/~sos/rpg/princval.html).

I've used Space Opera, Traveller, DnD 1e, and Earthdawn all to good effect. Right now  I'd use True20 because it is really simple.

In the past I've used a lot.  Right now, hands down, I would use Primetime Adventures.  Everyone understands TV.

If the person in question is already geeky, I'd use InSpectres, one of my favorite games ever.  It's also very simple.

1) Marvel Saga. I've taught a huge number of people the system (including complete newbies who were under the age ten--even making their own characters)

2) Tunnels and Trolls. Simple dungeoncrawling wackiness.

Really it depends on the person is question. SF fhans would obviously like a SF game, people who've heard of D&D might want to try it or another S&S setting, etc.

As for systems, I'd have to go with gurps because the name is so silly it can't be considered threatening so it won't scare anyone off like the dreaded D&D lable can.

As long as I keep new gamers off the SJG forums for a while they should be fine with it.

I generally have only introduced players who have asked for it.

They invariably ask for DnD.

It's probably just that they haven't heard of anything else.

Quote from: beejazzI generally have only introduced players who have asked for it.

They invariably ask for DnD.

It's probably just that they haven't heard of anything else.

Well, just as advice from one gamer to another, I'd suggest asking people what genre's they like, and if they like SF I'd inform them of the existance of SFRPGs and ask them if they wanted to try one of them instead.

Quote from: Dominus NoxWell, just as advice from one gamer to another, I'd suggest asking people what genre's they like, and if they like SF I'd inform them of the existance of SFRPGs and ask them if they wanted to try one of them instead.

I have to admit, I haven't had much experience with other stuff anyway. I pretty much just modified a couple of gamerules so that I could include multiple genre elements and played it by ear after that.

This after they had learned the basics, of course.

It doesn't matter. Seriously.

All that matters is that a newbie learns that an RPG is a game where you take the role of a fictional character in a shared, imaginary world.

The mechanics don't matter until they're ready to sit down and read a rulebook. Just run whatever you like and teach the players enough rules for them to deal with the situations you are going to throw them into.

I just sat my newbie friend down and we played Lacuna. She grokked it and dug it. I think it's excellent intro game because it's pretty traditional -- you roll dice, there's a bastard GM and you have to act in your character -- but also because it's incredibly imaginative and wide open for what happens in play.

-L

I suppose if you want to game with giths and get them into it, you could use WoD games or maybe Wraethu.

Quote from: Dominus NoxI suppose if you want to game with giths and get them into it, you could use WoD games or maybe Wraethu.

I think that WoD-style games would be a poor choice if you're gaming with giths.  They seem to rooted in human concerns, and I'm no sure if themes of alienation or adolescence metaphors would be interesting to an alien mindset.  If you're playing with githyanki, instead I'd recommend RIFTS or maybe Amber.  I'm not sure what kind of game githzerai would like though.

I don't think I've ever intentionally introduced anyone to "the hobby" (whatever the heck that is), but I've helped to introduce probably over a hundred people now to D&D. Some of them go on from there and try new things. Most of them were pretty much mainly interested in D&D style fantasy to begin with, though.

If you have answered anything other than "D20" (though not necessarily D&D); you are doing a tremendous disservice to the person in question.

You also might very well be a Swine, depending on which game you mentioned.

I mean honestly, why would you want to introduce someone to "Roleplaying" with the hopes that they will become a regular and well-rounded participant in the hobby by presenting them with anything other than the single most popular, most played RPG system in the known universe?

Otherwise its like taking someone who's never heard Rock music before, and presenting, say, the Blue Aeroplanes or Broken Social Scene and telling them "this is what Rock music is like", instead of showing them The Beatles or Led Zeppelin, or U2.  I mean, you'll not just warp their whole idea of what "rock music" is but you are showing them stuff that only a very marginal group of people have even heard of, much less would consider (good) Rock.

RPGPundit

I've always used either HERO System or Age of Heroes depending upon their genre interest (fantasy is the latter, all else gets the former).

Quote from: RPGPunditI mean honestly, why would you want to introduce someone to "Roleplaying" with the hopes that they will become a regular and well-rounded participant in the hobby by presenting them with anything other than the single most popular, most played RPG system in the known universe?

Because I think D20 is crap.

I do let them know however that my games are different than the norm. Oddly that seems to help ease them into them...

Quote from: RPGPunditIf you have answered anything other than "D20" (though not necessarily D&D); you are doing a tremendous disservice to the person in question.

You also might very well be a Swine, depending on which game you mentioned.

I mean honestly, why would you want to introduce someone to "Roleplaying" with the hopes that they will become a regular and well-rounded participant in the hobby by presenting them with anything other than the single most popular, most played RPG system in the known universe?

Otherwise its like taking someone who's never heard Rock music before, and presenting, say, the Blue Aeroplanes or Broken Social Scene and telling them "this is what Rock music is like", instead of showing them The Beatles or Led Zeppelin, or U2.  I mean, you'll not just warp their whole idea of what "rock music" is but you are showing them stuff that only a very marginal group of people have even heard of, much less would consider (good) Rock.

RPGPundit

Really, who gives a fuck whether the game is mainstream or not? The important thing to get across to a new player is the fun that can be had playing said games. If the person introducing the game enjoys 'Ferret Farming RPG', then his enjoyment will come across and may just hook another player. Whether the game is mainstream or not is absolutely irrelevant in gaining a players interest. It takes all types of folks to play all types of games. What is important is that the game is fun and that is subjective.

Honestly, I'd use Savage Worlds.  It's quick and easy to gen a character.  It's got a fast combat system.  It focuses on getting players into the action and keeping them there.  It's very good at creating a first time experience.

Unfortunately, it's not very good at holding one's attention.  You can't have long campaigns before you've totally exhausted available advancements and the skill system is crude (and I'm being kind).

Still, it's a great system for introducing new people to the hobby.

The absolute last thing I'd ever show someone new to the hobby is anything related to D20 or D&D.  D20 is massively complex, kills any desire to roleplay and is downright tedious in the extreme.  And, of course, there's the negative feelings the world has in general about D&D.  Anytime D&D comes up in conversation, all I can say is, "D&D is the Model T of the gaming world.  This is a Ferrari.  Let me take you for a spin..."

Quote from: RPGPunditIf you have answered anything other than "D20" (though not necessarily D&D); you are doing a tremendous disservice to the person in question.

I totally disagree on this

Quote from: RPGPunditYou also might very well be a Swine, depending on which game you mentioned.

I am not sure why you feel that you need to insult or label people who disagree with your feelings.   This kind of thinking is what gives gamers a bad name.

Quote from: RPGPunditI mean honestly, why would you want to introduce someone to "Roleplaying" with the hopes that they will become a regular and well-rounded participant in the hobby by presenting them with anything other than the single most popular, most played RPG system in the known universe?

RPGPundit

Because like gleichman I think D20 is crap.   I also don't think it matters if a game is mainstream or not, it matters that if they play the game they are having fun.

It's better for gamers to learn more then one game system and know what options they have.   Plus, it's better for the industry as a whole.

If I were to introduce someone to RPGs, I'd probably use Heroquest.

Yes, I'd use the old Milton Bradley boardgame.

Alternatively, if I had to use something current, I'd use Heroscape and insist they have to use the same troop mix every time they play.

Quote from: Gabriel...Heroquest ... the old Milton Bradley boardgame [or]Heroscape

This is exactly how I introduced my daughter to roleplaying.  Her first RPG after this was Savage Worlds and she quickly graduated to playtesting the game my buddies are putting out.

I allowed her access to read through all the RPGs in my library and my chest swelled with pride with she read the D&D PHB (3.0) and said, "People actually try to roleplay with this?"  She put it down in disgust, picked up WEGs Star Wars and begged me to use it for the next game...  :)

CoC/BRP is pretty good because most of what they need is on one page.  I've handed someone a character sheet, explained things for five minutes and started playing.  Then the mechanics get out the way until they want to do something requiring a roll.  Then I can tell them "find X on your sheet, if you roll under that, you succeed."

After they've completed their first adventure or died, then I offer to help them roll their own character.

A low level D20 adventure would work decently as well.

I'd have to ask why in the world the person wants to get into the hobby, and if they do, why they're asking me.

If it's a random person who's just looking for entertainment, my current thought would be to either try running My Life with Master or to play a game of Werewolf (aka Mafia; not the WW game by the same name). That's only because I know those games; from what I've heard here and elsewhere, I'd certainly consider PTA as an option, basically a possible answer to the question "How might I get my wife or close non-gamer friends to give an RPG-like game a try?"

If it's someone who's already into boardgaming or wargaming, though, yet who somehow hasn't ever been exposed to an RPG, I'd consider The Fantasy Trip or maybe even an obscure game I own called "Men Against Fire", designed by Paddy Griffith and published in The Book of Sandhurst Wargames.

Basically I'd look at the types of activities which they enjoy mechanically as much as the imaginative content that intrigues them, and pick an appropriate game based on that.

Quote from: VellorianThe absolute last thing I'd ever show someone new to the hobby is anything related to D20 or D&D.  D20 is massively complex, kills any desire to roleplay and is downright tedious in the extreme.

Oddly enough, it still is the most popular RPG system. Plus, the notion it kills any desire to roleplay is ridiculous. It flies in the face of the fact that there are countless people who use the system to do just that.

Quote from: VellorianAnd, of course, there's the negative feelings the world has in general about D&D.

What world is this? Here on Earth where I'm at, D&D is pretty much the only RPG known to non-gamers. Except for a few isolated hold-outs from the 1980s, D&D has about as negative a connotation to non-gamers as comic books.

Quote from: VellorianAnytime D&D comes up in conversation, all I can say is, "D&D is the Model T of the gaming world.  This is a Ferrari.  Let me take you for a spin..."

This is the mindset that I call "geeks calling geeks geeks." It's the kind of thing that makes RPG players look bad.

I think D&D would be fine if you used pre-generated characters and low-balled the competition.  EL = APL encounters and all that.  Probably using feat cards and spell cards as well.

Quote from: VellorianThe absolute last thing I'd ever show someone new to the hobby is anything related to D20 or D&D. D20 is massively complex, kills any desire to roleplay and is downright tedious in the extreme.

Quote from: LostSoulI think D&D would be fine if you used pre-generated characters and low-balled the competition.

It's time for my daughter anecdote.

My daughter, when 7, expressed an interest in the game (having seen it played).

I started her with a 1st level rogue using the "all skills are maxed out" simplification to keep her from worrying about allocating skill ranks (something I know can be tedious.)

By the time the 2nd level came around, I intended on just upping all her ranks. But she quickly caught on to the "full" way to buy things, and insisted on being able to allocate all her ranks as she saw fit.

In short, I see bluster to the effect of "nobody can roleplay using D&D" or "D&D is too complicated for begginers" to be overstated bluster and wishful thinknig by those with different preferences.

Quote from: Caesar SlaadIn short, I see bluster to the effect of "nobody can roleplay using D&D" or "D&D is too complicated for begginers" to be overstated bluster and wishful thinknig by those with different preferences.

Exactly. I wish I still had the exact wording of Maddman's quote I used as a sig for a while, but here is as close as I can get: "Don't get on your high horse and tell me yours is the best way to play a gay-ass elf."

Quote from: ColonelHardissonWhat world is this? Here on Earth where I'm at, D&D is pretty much the only RPG known to non-gamers. Except for a few isolated hold-outs from the 1980s, D&D has about as negative a connotation to non-gamers as comic books.

The corporate world, to be exact.  Where even the slightest mention of D&D garners rolled eyes and drops you about a dozen rungs down the ladder you were hoping to climb for a promotion.

In fact, I've taken to telling people, when they ask about my roleplaying hobby, that it's "nothing like D&D."  Usually the exchange goes something like this:

Colleague: What are you doing this weekend?
Me: I've invited some friends over to roleplay this weekend.
Colleague: Roleplay?  What is that?
Me: It's where we gather together, create imaginary characters, run them through a scenario or adventure and try to exercise problem solving skills to find the most advantageous outcome.
Colleague: (Disgusted look on face) It's not like Dungeons and Dragons, is it?
Me: Absolutely not. Although D&D may be a type of roleplaying game, too, it shares little or nothing with the activities that my friends and I enjoy.
Colleague: (smiling now) I'm interested in what you've described, perhaps I could join you sometime?

The corporate world considers Dungeons and Dragons, and anyone who would think to participate with it, to be the equivalent of telling folks you go home and smash puppies and kittens with sledgehammers for fun.

I don't know what world you come from, but that's the standard attitude I get everywhere I go in Corporate America.

EDIT: Let me also clarify, that although I don't find any enjoyment from D20 or D&D (nor my daughter, apparently), I specifically avoided tainting her perceptions.  

Nor do I consider anyone else who uses the games to be "damaged" or "different."  To each their own. :)

However, to the rest of the world, I would never admit to involvement with D&D or D20.  It labels you as a social misfit who is unworthy of participating in the "real world."  

Since my advancement in my career requires that I appease these people, I cannot afford to admit to any sort of involvement (nor would I actually desire any sort of involvement, my every experience with D&D and D20 has been radically bad and I wish you all well who can stomach it, but I cannot).

Complication is actually attractive.  

For example.  Here's a game.  Both players roll 1d6.  High roll wins.  On a tie, roll again.

The only thing you can do to affect this game is roll the die (or cheat).  Now, let's add a little bit more complexity to this game.

Each player has 1 fudge points.  A game is played in three rounds.  Each round, both players roll 1d6.  High roll wins the round.  On a tie, roll again.  A fudge point can be expended to alter a die roll by 1 point.  The player who wins two or more rounds wins the game.

Now, not much complexity has been added, but the game now has more options to make play more interesting and engaging.  The "fudge points" hypothetically add a strategic element to the game.  They can create a win from a tied roll, or force a tie when the rolls are close enough.  So, there could be a certain strategy to their use.  Even the wording of the rules adds complexity.  For example, "A fudge point can be expended to alter a die roll by 1 point."  Does this mean a player can alter the other player's roll?  So, this point can be argued.

Complication will keep people playing a game.  The more complex it is, the harder it is to see all potential options, and therefore have exhausted the potential of the game.

The trick is to balance complication against intimidation.  If the game is so intimidating as to put everyone off (SFB with all the expansions), then no one will ever experience the most basic version of the game to get hooked.

I'd use whatever game I was playing, usually one of my own. Seems to work just fine, most of the time.

-mice

Quote from: VellorianHowever, to the rest of the world, I would never admit to involvement with D&D or D20.  It labels you as a social misfit who is unworthy of participating in the "real world."

To steal a quote, the "rest of the world" doesn't know a D20 from a Dee Snider. ;)

Quote from: Caesar SlaadTo steal a quote, the "rest of the world" doesn't know a D20 from a Dee Snider. ;)

One would think that to be the case.  However, one of the Senior VPs, when we talked about roleplaying specifically said, "Is this like D&D ... or are they calling it D20, now?"

The "rest of the world" may not be aware of nuances and details, but many of them are waking up to the fact that there are relationships.  

To add insult to injury, I have a few friends in HR who told me about experiences with certain managers who gave them instructions to "lose" resumes that mentioned D&D or D20.  (Yes, some fools still insist on putting their hobbies on their resumes...)

Quote from: VellorianTo add insult to injury, I have a few friends in HR who told me about experiences with certain managers who gave them instructions to "lose" resumes that mentioned D&D or D20.

:eek:

I don't know what wierds me out more... that people would put that on their resume unless they are applying to WotC or something, or that anyone would screen for it.

I have enough trouble fitting everything on my resume and enough fear that someone is going to have a stick up their arse about it.

Honestly, unless I were hiring a writer or someone in the hobby, I would drop anyone who listed D&D on their resume, too.

I work in an insurance company.  Anyone who sees D&D as important enough to throw on their resume is worth overlooking.

-O

You know, hobbies on resumes were initially supposed to give an indication of talents which the BS of the rest of the resume might be overshadowing.

For example, someone who is a collector will probably have above average organizational abilities, and might be good at cataloguing things.  A person into model trains might have some construction and mechanical skills.

A hobby of D&D can indicate better than average math skills, and a better than average memory.  It also indicates a degree of reading skill that, quite frankly, is becoming rarer in the US.

But, you're right, the negative connotations probably overwhelm that.  And since resumes are largely intended nowadays to provide information to NOT hire someone, many bosses will look at hobbies not as an insight into a potential employee, but as "well, he doesn't have the same interests I do.  Into the trash he goes."

Quote from: VellorianOne would think that to be the case.  However, one of the Senior VPs, when we talked about roleplaying specifically said, "Is this like D&D ... or are they calling it D20, now?"

The "rest of the world" may not be aware of nuances and details, but many of them are waking up to the fact that there are relationships.  

To add insult to injury, I have a few friends in HR who told me about experiences with certain managers who gave them instructions to "lose" resumes that mentioned D&D or D20.  (Yes, some fools still insist on putting their hobbies on their resumes...)

Hey, this could lead to a gamer suing a major corporation for discrimination someday.:D

Assuming that all the players were new to role-playing games:

The Moldvay version of the D&D Basic Rules (the one with the Erol Otus cover).

Either that, or the Castles & Crusades box set (the 'basic rules' with only 4 classes).

OTOH, if a new player were joining a group that already had experienced players in it, I would help him/her create a new character (probably the 'most simple' kind of character possible), and let him/her join the game!

One of my own.

Quote from: Caesar SlaadIt's time for my daughter anecdote.

My daughter, when 7, expressed an interest in the game (having seen it played).

I started her with a 1st level rogue using the "all skills are maxed out" simplification to keep her from worrying about allocating skill ranks (something I know can be tedious.)

By the time the 2nd level came around, I intended on just upping all her ranks. But she quickly caught on to the "full" way to buy things, and insisted on being able to allocate all her ranks as she saw fit.

In short, I see bluster to the effect of "nobody can roleplay using D&D" or "D&D is too complicated for begginers" to be overstated bluster and wishful thinknig by those with different preferences.

So you did pretty much what I recommended.

Quote from: Caesar SlaadIn short, I see bluster to the effect of "nobody can roleplay using D&D" or "D&D is too complicated for begginers" to be overstated bluster and wishful thinknig by those with different preferences.

I quite agree. And this is one reason why I don't use D&D or some other D20 game to introduce new players. Well, that, and the fact that I don't much like D&D (taste issue, not quality).

As someone else said, my first choice is Primetime Adventures. Pretty much everybody understands TV, and most people have at least one show (past or present) that they enjoy. It's easy to explain, easy to relate to, easy to get into and get playing.

If someone, before or after playing in my group, would like to try something more along the lines of D&D, I'll point them off to one of the groups or clubs in town. Like Ceasar says, a 7 year old can easily pick it up, so they wouldn't really gain anything from learning it from me first.

Quote from: RPGPunditIf you have answered anything other than "D20" (though not necessarily D&D); you are doing a tremendous disservice to the person in question.
......................
I mean honestly, why would you want to introduce someone to "Roleplaying" with the hopes that they will become a regular and well-rounded participant in the hobby by presenting them with anything other than the single most popular, most played RPG system in the known universe?

I can tell you with absolute certainty that my friend Clive would never become a regular participant in the roleplaying hobby as it exists. He might be interested in the occasional game of something like Bacchanal, but the structural properties and subject matter of most roleplaying games would have him out the door in thirty seconds.

Then there's my friend Annabel, who scoffed sweetly at HeroQuest, but was highly impressed by Nicotine Girls – so impressed she's become a roleplaying proselyte. Or my dear wife, who would only play NG out of the games I had.

I could have tried them on D&D (if I owned it) and lost them. These are not people who are interested in the things D&D does. But they are my friends, and I'd like to play a game with them now and then. It would be doing myself a disservice to introduce them to a game I don't play, that they wouldn't enjoy, and that would turn them off roleplaying as an activity. I think that roleplaying is a broad and rich form of self-entertainment; the limits of which we have only begun to explore. I'd like them to see that too.

There are more things in heaven and earth, Pundidio, than are dreamt of in your d20.

Quote from: Dominus NoxI suppose if you want to game with giths and get them into it, you could use WoD games or maybe Wraethu.

O.o

o.O

Wait....what?

Quote from: Dominus Nox...or maybe Wraethu.

Huh. Yeah, that's what you said.

...I can't think of circumstances under which a) Your typical gamer has this on their shelf, b) Your typical non-gamer would want to play this, or c) Why in the name of Holy Damn-It Christmas you would decide to make this someone's first exposure to RPGs.

Unless I've fallen through the rabbit hole and there's some other game entirely which happens to have that name and doesn't involve flower-cocks.

Quote from: ColonelHardissonD&D has about as negative a connotation to non-gamers as comic books.

That would be the negative one he is talking about.  Even as the public eats up movies Spawned from comic books, they widely look down on the original medium and associate it with the worst kind of "lawncrapper" and basement dwellers. :(

Quote from: droogThere are more things in heaven and earth, Pundidio, than are dreamt of in your d20.

Highlighted because it needs to be.    Note droog I agree with the rest of what you said as well.

Quote from: RPGPunditIf you have answered anything other than "D20" (though not necessarily D&D); you are doing a tremendous disservice to the person in question.

Hardly, if someone is introduced using Call of Cthulhu, or Vampire, or PTA and they enjoy it then we're golden.

Quote from: RPGPunditYou also might very well be a Swine, depending on which game you mentioned.

Oink.

Quote from: RPGPunditI mean honestly, why would you want to introduce someone to "Roleplaying" with the hopes that they will become a regular and well-rounded participant in the hobby by presenting them with anything other than the single most popular, most played RPG system in the known universe?

I've nothing against it, but I don't play d20, why would I introduce someone with a game I don't know how to run?

Anyway, surely it depends on what they want.  If they want something with a particular tone or style then it's best to find something like that, not say "hey, that's cool, we can totally do Pride and Prejudice using DnD3.5.  For this game Mr Darcy is an elf, ok?"

Quote from: BalbinusI've nothing against it, but I don't play d20, why would I introduce someone with a game I don't know how to run?

Don't know how to run or don't want to run.    The goal of running games is to have fun.   This is something I think Pundit seems to miss.   If I introduce a new gamer (or gamers) to say Vampire and they enjoy it they are free to expand their game knowledge and learn D&D and D20.   Doesn't mean I have to teach it to them if it's not something I have interest in.

And Pundit's "Swine" comment is elitisim at it's worst and is why gamers get a bad name.

If I were a person who had never gamed but was interested in learning, walked into a game store and talked to Pundit to get more information about gaming and I was hit with his "elitist attitude" (Note: I am not calling people who play D20/D&D Elitist, I am mentioning Pundit because of his Swine Comment) I would turn and walk away.

This kind of elitist attitude needs to stop and needs to stop now.   We have a shrinking pool of gamers and we need to make gaming hobby worth getting into, not come across as a elitist cult.

Quote from: Geek MessiahAnd Pundit's "Swine" comment is elitisim at it's worst and is why gamers get a bad name.

It's his own special brand of "anti-elitism" elitism.

Quote from: Geek MessiahDon't know how to run or don't want to run.

Indeed, though I don't rule out the possibility of finding d20 games I might want to run, it just wouldn't be because they were d20.  I don't hate d20, but nor is it a selling point for me.

Quote from: NicephorusIt's his own special brand of "anti-elitism" elitism.

Regardless it's the wrong thing to do and gives gamers a bad name.  It's also why he has been banned from almost all of the other game forums.

I am not sure what pendit gets from calling people names other then to boost his own Self-Esteem.

Quote from: RPGPunditIf you have answered anything other than "D20" (though not necessarily D&D); you are doing a tremendous disservice to the person in question.

:lol:

Quote from: BalbinusIndeed, though I don't rule out the possibility of finding d20 games I might want to run, it just wouldn't be because they were d20.  I don't hate d20, but nor is it a selling point for me.

I totally agree.   It doesnt rule you finding d20 games you want to run, nor does learning rpgs through another system rule out the new gamers will find a D20 game they want to run or play.

Quote from: BalbinusAnyway, surely it depends on what they want.  If they want something with a particular tone or style then it's best to find something like that, not say "hey, that's cool, we can totally do Pride and Prejudice using DnD3.5.  For this game Mr Darcy is an elf, ok?"

Who the fuck would be interested in RPGs in the first place to play Pride and Prejudice??!

Someone I don't particularly want in the hobby, to start with.  I think your example is absurd.

You are also using the old strawman/swine-tactic of overlapping D20 with D&D.

You could start a player with just about any iteration of D20 around, something that would mean that they'd be capable of conversing in the most universal "language" of the RPG hobby, and yet find something that suits them.  Everything from True20 to Traveller T20 to Mutants & Masterminds to Babylon 5 to whatever... you get my point.

Otherwise its a little like taking someone interested in learning International Business and insisting that they learn Hungarian, rather than English. They'll be pretty fucking confused when they learn that everyone else is speaking English.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Geek MessiahAnd Pundit's "Swine" comment is elitisim at it's worst and is why gamers get a bad name.

If I were a person who had never gamed but was interested in learning, walked into a game store and talked to Pundit to get more information about gaming and I was hit with his "elitist attitude" (Note: I am not calling people who play D20/D&D Elitist, I am mentioning Pundit because of his Swine Comment) I would turn and walk away.

I find it hilarious that you're calling the guy trying to defend the mainstream game that 99% of gamers play the "elitist" here. I would say that if a 15 year old kid walks into a gaming store, and I'm the one saying "here, kid, this is D&D, you'll find tons of people to play with, and there's ton of other cool games that use the same basic rules, that a ton of people also play", and then there's some shrill motherfucker in black eyeshadow saying "that game system is just an evil corporate plot made for ignoramuses and mouth-breathers! You should learn Gay Cowboys Eating Pudding by R. Bumquist·Unknowndude because its clearly superior", I would not be too concerned with which of us would come through as the real elitist.

QuoteWe have a shrinking pool of gamers and we need to make gaming hobby worth getting into, not come across as a elitist cult.

I agree, which is why I think we should promote the game that most people actually play, enjoy playing, and want to play.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditYou could start a player with just about any iteration of D20 around, something that would mean that they'd be capable of conversing in the most universal "language" of the RPG hobby, and yet find something that suits them.  Everything from True20 to Traveller T20 to Mutants & Masterminds to Babylon 5 to whatever... you get my point.

Otherwise its a little like taking someone interested in learning International Business and insisting that they learn Hungarian, rather than English. They'll be pretty fucking confused when they learn that everyone else is speaking English.

(http://users.gmpexpress.net/adkohler/agree.gif)

This is sort of half of what I was getting at with my first post in this thread.

Of course, it's unreasonable to expect someone to teach someone a game they don't run well or enjoy, so I think Balbinus' point is well taken, too.

It also probably depends on where you live... I'm given to understand that in Germany, D&D/d20 are not king of the hill.

But yeah... you might try some other game for a first game, but learning some iteration of d20 gives the player more options. Yes, I said that. Games that don't have groups playing them in your area aren't options.

Quote from: RPGPunditWho the fuck would be interested in RPGs in the first place to play Pride and Prejudice??!

Someone I don't particularly want in the hobby, to start with.  I think your example is absurd.

You are also using the old strawman/swine-tactic of overlapping D20 with D&D.

You could start a player with just about any iteration of D20 around, something that would mean that they'd be capable of conversing in the most universal "language" of the RPG hobby, and yet find something that suits them.  Everything from True20 to Traveller T20 to Mutants & Masterminds to Babylon 5 to whatever... you get my point.

Otherwise its a little like taking someone interested in learning International Business and insisting that they learn Hungarian, rather than English. They'll be pretty fucking confused when they learn that everyone else is speaking English.

RPGPundit

You are using hyperbole to prove your argument. In introducing someone to RPGs you want a combination of two things, a setting or subject they are interested in and a system that introduces the basic concepts of system backed story telling. I have introduced literally hundreds of people to RPGing and I used to try to force a system or setting on them in the beginning but quickly learned that if you get a feel for the persons likes and dislikes you can fit the introduction to them.

In my stores in the 90s, we (my staff and I) mostly used WOD products since they had a simple system and Vampires and the like were the rage then. It was truly strange to have people later come in saying their first RP experience was Vampire. I had always heard DND before that. BTW- we also used a lot of other games like Shadowrun, Palladium and to a far lesser extent DND 2nd.

In the end, it is less like a language, IMO, and more like a hobby (or a box of chocolates..mmm) ...er, it is a hobby;i.e. people need to sample to find what they want to settle with. Some of us just keep sampling...:)

Bill

Quote from: RPGPundit... Gay Cowboys Eating Pudding ...

By itself, this game isn't that great.  But if you combine it with Toon, it is the prefect game to seduce ... er, introduce new people to gaming!
:p

I would use True20 with a simplified, on-the-fly version of whatever genre might interest the player(s).

I was just talking about how I was agreeing a lot with the pundit lately, then I read this thread.

You are doing noone a disservice by introducing someone to a non-D&D RPG over D&D.

If you are going to introduce someone to an RPG, pick the one you like the most. New players will pick up on how much you like the game and it will show in your games.

If you intorduce somone to RPGs through a game you don't like all that much or don't know very well, that is a disservice.

Quote from: RPGPunditWho the fuck would be interested in RPGs in the first place to play Pride and Prejudice??!

Me.  Quite seriously, I'd buy that instantly.

Quote from: RPGPunditSomeone I don't particularly want in the hobby, to start with.

Good for you.

Quote from: RPGPunditI find it hilarious that you're calling the guy trying to defend the mainstream game that 99% of gamers play the "elitist" here. I would say that if a 15 year old kid walks into a gaming store, and I'm the one saying "here, kid, this is D&D, you'll find tons of people to play with, and there's ton of other cool games that use the same basic rules, that a ton of people also play", and then there's some shrill motherfucker in black eyeshadow saying "that game system is just an evil corporate plot made for ignoramuses and mouth-breathers! You should learn Gay Cowboys Eating Pudding by R. Bumquist·Unknowndude because its clearly superior", I would not be too concerned with which of us would come through as the real elitist.

This isn't about you defending D&D or D20, this is about you making an elitist comment.   When you call people who think a certain way swine you are being elitist.

There are plenty of people who don't play D&D or any of the various D20 off-shoots.   Noone in my very large group plays D20.  A few of them dont even like it.

And you know full and well I am not saying "WOTC is an evil corporation nor amd I saying people who don't play D20 or D&D are superior to those who do.  You are being overdramatic on this point.

Quote from: RPGPunditI agree, which is why I think we should promote the game that most people actually play, enjoy playing, and want to play.

RPGPundit

There are plenty of other good games out there and I think A verity of games is a good thing.

I think playing one system is not a good way for this hobby to go.

Quote from: AkrasiaBy itself, this game isn't that great.  But if you combine it with Toon, it is the prefect game to seduce ... er, introduce new people to gaming!
:p

He has mentioned this twice so far in a couple different threads.  Very interesting :D

Quote from: McrowYou are doing noone a disservice by introducing someone to a non-D&D RPG over D&D.

If you are going to introduce someone to an RPG, pick the one you like the most. New players will pick up on how much you like the game and it will show in your games.

If you intorduce somone to RPGs through a game you don't like all that much or don't know very well, that is a disservice.

I totally agree.   As I have said before if they want to play D&D or one of the many incarnations of D20 noone is saying that they can't move on to them.

There are so many good games out there that aren't D20 that I wish that the people who play D20 would broaden their horizons.   I know that not all D20 players play D20 and that's all but I know there are some out there and it's sad.

Quote from: Geek MessiahThere are so many good games out there that aren't D20 that I wish that the people who play D20 would broaden their horizons.   I know that not all D20 players play D20 and that's all but I know there are some out there and it's sad.

I agree people should braoden their horizons. But based just on this forum alone, there seems to be a lot of people who will play anything but d20. Oftentimes this is because of some misconception of what the game is or how it can altered to fit a genre. Sometimes it's just because they prefer another system. But, sometimes it's just because of some kind of principle - they hate Hasbro, they hate D&D/d20 because it's the big game out there, etc. That's also sad.

Quote from: RPGPunditI find it hilarious that you're calling the guy trying to defend the mainstream game that 99% of gamers play the "elitist" here.

What you are actually doing is promoting the status quo. "Oink!" cries Hunter S. Thompson.

QuoteI agree, which is why I think we should promote the game that most people actually play, enjoy playing, and want to play.

News flash. Most people actually don't play D&D, or any RPG.  D&D has been the first and foremost face of RPGs that these people would have made that choice based on. Hrmmmm, maybe providing and promoting some more alternatives (beyond goth vamps, likely the second biggest public face of RPGs) might be in order?  You know, instead of closing the doors to keep out the unwashed masses like those Pride & Prejudice freaks out?

Quote from: ColonelHardissonOftentimes this is because of some misconception of what the game is or how it can altered to fit a genre. Sometimes it's just because they prefer another system.

I've seen D20M, and I have shivered in revulsion. :(

Don't try to tell me Monopoly makes a good Candyland.

Quote from: ColonelHardissonI agree people should braoden their horizons. But based just on this forum alone, there seems to be a lot of people who will play anything but d20.

I have a slightly different perception.

I play, and enjoy, d20 and D&D.  I have written OGL stuff.  I don't see any need to talk about it because I'm not excited about any of their stuff at the moment - most of their new products make me shrug and wander off, nothing more.

I also don't see any need to slag on them, because I'll bet money that they will put out something that makes me excited again in the not-too-distant future.

So, for the time being, I just leave it alone.  And my perception is that this is a pretty common thing for many gamers to do.

Quote from: blakkieI've seen D20M, and I have shivered in revulsion. :(

Don't try to tell me Monopoly makes a good Candyland.

I like d20 Modern. It's all about subjectivity when it comes to games.

Quote from: ColonelHardissonI agree people should braoden their horizons. But based just on this forum alone, there seems to be a lot of people who will play anything but d20.

News to me.  It seems the D20 defenders are coming out in groves.  It seems like more people who just play D20 then other Non-D20 systems.

Quote from: ColonelHardissonOftentimes this is because of some misconception of what the game is or how it can altered to fit a genre. Sometimes it's just because they prefer another system.

I like games that have systems built specifically for them.   Not games that have generic systems bent and pulled to fit (That's D20 *AND* a host of other generic systems- Fuzion, Action!, Fudge, the list goes on and on so this is not a D20 Hate-On).   I find games that have their own system instead of having a generic system bent to fit work better and get the genre feel.

Quote from: ColonelHardissonBut, sometimes it's just because of some kind of principle - they hate Hasbro, they hate D&D/d20 because it's the big game out there, etc. That's also sad.

I agree with you on this point.   I don't hate D20 because of Hasbro, I don't hate D20 because it's the big dog, I hate it because I think it's a very poor system.

I have/am getting rid of a D20 game (Spycraft 2.0) which I gave a try and do not like.   I have given it a chance and it's not for me.

Quote from: blakkieHrmmmm, maybe providing and promoting some more alternatives (beyond goth vamps, likely the second biggest public face of RPGs) might be in order?  You know, instead of closing the doors to keep out the unwashed masses like those Pride & Prejudice freaks out?

I agree.  I think broading gamers and introducing them to more games then just D&D is the best thing to do and it's better for the industry.

There are people out there who do not like D20 (Either never liked it or played it and got burned out on it).

What if everyone was introduced to just D&D and/or D20 and everything else fell to the wayside and those who like other gamers could no longer find players?

This is unlikely to happen.  While D20 is still a popular system it is losing steam (as the market has gotten so flooded less people are doing it and game stores are so flooded with D20 stuff they are buying it but much less).

You think the industry is shrinking now?  I am sure many of the people who don't like D20 would end up leaving the hobby.   Now your hobby just got smaller and this is not the direction we need to go (ok this is very unlikely and a bit dramatic but you get where I am going with this).

I've always found Call of Cthulhu good.

a) Pretty simple system.
b) More folks are familiar with the horror genre and its conventions than the fantasy one.
c) 1920's setting is close enough to the real world that they understand how things work without you needing to stop and explain things every five minutes.
d) 1920's setting is far enough in the past that they don't go trying things like escaping danger by buying a ticket from a low cost airline.
e) Character's are closer to there own experience, average humans, than in other settings, with elves or vampires or what have you. Thus they can roleplay them a bit easier, as they understand their motivations.
f) They get use to the idea that a character can die, and that character death can actually be an enjoyable experience.

But often it depends on the person, if they are into superheros I'ld consider something like Mutants and Masterminds; if they like martial arts movies then Feng Shui; if they like fantasy the D&D.

For friends not into aspects of geek culture Call of Cthulhu seems to work for the reasons I've mentioned above.

Quote from: Geek MessiahI like games that have systems built specifically for them.   Not games that have generic systems bent and pulled to fit (That's D20 *AND* a host of other generic systems- Fuzion, Action!, Fudge, the list goes on and on so this is not a D20 Hate-On).   I find games that have their own system instead of having a generic system bent to fit work better and get the genre feel.

Again, I think that's more a matter of perception than anything else. Reinventing the wheel everytime is usually unnecessary. Take Babylon 5 and Conan. Each had systems specifically designed for them in earlier RPG incarnations - TSR did Conan in the mid 80s, Chameleon Eclectic did B5 some years back. The current d20/OGL versions have received quite a bit of praise, where their forebears sank with nary a trace. I've seen complaints about both earlier games that they just didn't fit the setting. I actually have both versions of each game, and while the earlier versions aren't awful (well, OK, maybe in the case of CE's B5 game), they don't seem to fit their respective settings any better than the d20 versions. So there's no guarantee that starting from scratch is really going to result in the perfect fit.

Quote from: ColonelHardissonSo there's no guarantee that starting from scratch is really going to result in the perfect fit.

A better example, in my opinion, was Starship Troopers.

Which was OGL, and way better than it had any right to be.

But that's my opinion.

Quote from: Geek MessiahYou think the industry is shrinking now?  I am sure many of the people who don't like D20 would end up leaving the hobby.   Now your hobby just got smaller and this is not the direction we need to go (ok this is very unlikely and a bit dramatic but you get where I am going with this).

It was shrinking before the advent of d20. d20 simply gave the industry, such as it is, a shot in the arm. Even if most of the people who jumped in to RPGs through d20 left, you'd likely be left with more gamers than there were before d20.

Quote from: Levi KornelsenA better example, in my opinion, was Starship Troopers.

Which was OGL, and way better than it had any right to be.

But that's my opinion.

There was an earlier ST RPG? I wasn't aware of it.

Mongoose's ST RPG just never caught my interest. If you say it's good, I'll take a closer look at it.

Quote from: ColonelHardissonI like d20 Modern.

Compared to what?

Quote from: blakkieCompared to what?

Compared to most modern-themed games. That doesn't mean I dislike those other games, just that I like d20 Modern also.

Quote from: blakkieI've seen D20M, and I have shivered in revulsion. :(

Don't try to tell me Monopoly makes a good Candyland.

So this is what the monopoly candyland thing was about? D20 Modern is an excellent game for any party-based adventure that involves a lot of action. I've done the futuristic (D20 Future) version of it plenty.

Quote from: ColonelHardissonCompared to most modern-themed games. That doesn't mean I dislike those other games, just that I like d20 Modern also.

D20M just screams modern ranged combat shoehored into a medieval melee and magic combat paradigm.

The use of Feats in the system? Eep.

Then D20's Skills system is largely a side-system instead of being part of the system proper. I guess I'm just spoiled expecting a somewhat more robust skill systems to cover breadth of things that I expect to be part of a more modern game.

The idea that bullets only exist along a limited section of their tragectory supercedes my comfort level in suspension of believe.

And that's just the tip of my beefs. Sure with the muzzle of a 9mm handgun pressed to my temple I'd use it. But my preference would fall elsewhere.

Quote from: blakkieD20M just screams modern ranged combat shoehored into a medieval melee and magic combat paradigm.

The use of Feats in the system? Eep.

Then D20's Skills system is largely a side-system instead of being part of the system proper. I guess I'm just spoiled expecting a somewhat more robust skill systems to cover breadth of things that I expect to be part of a more modern game.

The idea that bullets only exist along a limited section of their tragectory supercedes my comfort level in suspension of believe.

And that's just the tip of my beefs. Sure with the muzzle of a 9mm handgun pressed to my temple I'd use it. But my preference would fall elsewhere.

Ok, I'm totally convinced. Your'e retarded.

Quote from: Abyssal MawOk, I'm totally convinced. Your'e retarded.

Correct on details, but retarded?

Quote from: blakkieCorrect on details, but retarded?

Nope. Just retarded.

Quote from: blakkieThe idea that bullets only exist along a limited section of their tragectory supercedes my comfort level in suspension of believe.

Oooh that reminds me of something I need to post in the "Magic Deer" thread.

It's probably one of the main things that kills D20 Modern for me, which is a shame as I actually like the classes based on attributes concept, no matter how weird it is.

Quote from: blakkieThe use of Feats in the system? Eep.

Then D20's Skills system is largely a side-system instead of being part of the system proper. I guess I'm just spoiled expecting a somewhat more robust skill systems to cover breadth of things that I expect to be part of a more modern game.

Spoiled how? Sheesh... if anything I consider D20's skill system underplayed in D&D and am glad that other game were developed that made better use of it.

And feats somehow inappropriate outside D&D? Don't tell Steve Jackson or Pinacle.

:idunno:

I will cop that the firearms rules in d20 modern, succinctly put, sucks ass (though my particular bugbears differ from yours, though I suspect you might be talking about one I hate but for different reason. The main thing I hate about autofire spray is somehow it ignores armor.) Fortunately, but the time d20 modern came out, several other d20 authors put out decent takes on firearms, which were fairly easy to swap in.

Quote from: ColonelHardissonAgain, I think that's more a matter of perception than anything else. Reinventing the wheel everytime is usually unnecessary. Take Babylon 5 and Conan. Each had systems specifically designed for them in earlier RPG incarnations - TSR did Conan in the mid 80s, Chameleon Eclectic did B5 some years back. The current d20/OGL versions have received quite a bit of praise, where their forebears sank with nary a trace. I've seen complaints about both earlier games that they just didn't fit the setting. I actually have both versions of each game, and while the earlier versions aren't awful (well, OK, maybe in the case of CE's B5 game), they don't seem to fit their respective settings any better than the d20 versions. So there's no guarantee that starting from scratch is really going to result in the perfect fit.

But the problem there is that both companies could have done a really poor job on the game and used the incorrect system for the game.

Done right with it's own system we would get an actual comparison that we could really work with.

Is starting from scratch going to result in the perfect fit?  No.  But D20 wont always be a perfect fit either.

I know gamers like the whole "D20 for everything so I don't have to learn a new system" but D20 can't do everything perfectly.  Neither can any other generic system.

Quote from: Geek MessiahI know gamers like the whole "D20 for everything so I don't have to learn a new system" but D20 can't do everything perfectly.  Neither can any other generic system.

A perfect system, santa claus, and easter bunny have a race. Which wins? A ha, trick question, none of them exist! :D

If he had a preference, and I knew the game, that's what we'd play. Otherwise I'd use an old adhoc system I cobbled together years ago.

A character has three traits: Mental, Physical, and Spiritual. Value of each is determined by rolling 2d10 and adding 30. Each trait has associated skills, with those rated as a percentage of the governing Trait. Ratings range from 10% of Trait to 75% of Trait depending on the player's conception. All else we'll fake as we go along. Obviously a low roll percentile system. Emphasis on adventure and other neat stuff.

That should give 'em a good idea of what RPGs are all about. :D

Quote from: Caesar Slaad(http://users.gmpexpress.net/adkohler/agree.gif)
It also probably depends on where you live... I'm given to understand that in Germany, D&D/d20 are not king of the hill.

Yup, you got a point there. In Germany, it would make sense to teach a player Shadowrun or DsA or CoC first.  In the UK it might make as much sense (though not more) to teach them WFRP first.
But those are really exceptions to the general rule. In North America, and in most of the rest of the world, its D20 that is tops.

Still, let's take the exception into account and say this: you should teach the beginners from the point of view of what is actually popular where you are.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditStill, let's take the exception into account and say this: you should teach the beginners from the point of view of what is actually popular where you are.

RPGPundit

Pundit,

I have agreed with you on many things but this I will disagree with you on forever.

Quote from: RPGPunditStill, let's take the exception into account and say this: you should teach the beginners from the point of view of what is actually popular where you are.

I suppose that means that we here on the Internet need to teach them Forge games, assuming we're training them to join our online community and all...

Quote from: mythusmageIf he had a preference, and I knew the game, that's what we'd play. Otherwise I'd use an old adhoc system I cobbled together years ago.

A character has three traits: Mental, Physical, and Spiritual. Value of each is determined by rolling 2d10 and adding 30. Each trait has associated skills, with those rated as a percentage of the governing Trait. Ratings range from 10% of Trait to 75% of Trait depending on the player's conception. All else we'll fake as we go along. Obviously a low roll percentile system. Emphasis on adventure and other neat stuff.

That should give 'em a good idea of what RPGs are all about. :D

That reminds me of nothing so much as my little black book version of Recon....

Quote from: SpikeThat reminds me of nothing so much as my little black book version of Recon....

Little Black Book Version?

Quote from: Geek MessiahYou think the industry is shrinking now?  I am sure many of the people who don't like D20 would end up leaving the hobby.   Now your hobby just got smaller and this is not the direction we need to go (ok this is very unlikely and a bit dramatic but you get where I am going with this).

The number of people who left roleplaying forever because they lost the ideological war for the heart of the hobby, ie. because D20 won, are a tiny minority of extremists, who are infinitessimally smaller than the number of people who have come back to roleplaying since D20 came out, after they'd been driven out by that very same tiny minority that had hijacked gaming in the 1990s.

Not to mention the number of people who have started playing RPGs for the first time since D20 came out!

RPGPundit

I've never seen Palladiums version of Recon, but I know it decends from a little black pamphlet, about fifty pages at most, which I happen to have. Sweet, simple little game about dying in vietnam, over and over again...

Quote from: RPGPunditThe number of people who left roleplaying forever because they lost the ideological war for the heart of the hobby, ie. because D20 won, are a tiny minority of extremists, who are infinitessimally smaller than the number of people who have come back to roleplaying since D20 came out, after they'd been driven out by that very same tiny minority that had hijacked gaming in the 1990s.

Not to mention the number of people who have started playing RPGs for the first time since D20 came out!

RPGPundit

The pool of gamers is shrinking.   Game industry insiders have said it "Ken Hite, GMS, Others" and you can say whatever you want but disputing facts provided by industry insiders is pointless.

As for the number of gamers who don't play D20 the number isn't as small as you think.   Even so this hobby with it's gamer pool shrinking on a constant basis really cannot afford to loose many gamers.

Quote from: gleichmanI suppose that means that we here on the Internet need to teach them Forge games, assuming we're training them to join our online community and all...

No, the Forge games aren't in the majority, not even on the internet. They just have a bigger percentage. Even among online gamers, the most popular RPG system by FAR is D20.

RPGPundit

Quote from: SpikeI've never seen Palladiums version of Recon, but I know it decends from a little black pamphlet, about fifty pages at most, which I happen to have. Sweet, simple little game about dying in vietnam, over and over again...

Ah Cool.   Interesting to know.

I am not a Palladium fan but Recon is actually an interesting game.  The only reason I got rid of it is because I couldn't find people in my group to play it.

Quote from: RPGPunditNo, the Forge games aren't in the majority, not even on the internet. They just have a bigger percentage. Even among online gamers, the most popular RPG system by FAR is D20.

You'd be hard pressed to prove that.

Quote from: Geek MessiahAh Cool.   Interesting to know.

I am not a Palladium fan but Recon is actually an interesting game.  The only reason I got rid of it is because I couldn't find people in my group to play it.

In the version I have you have four attributes, which are percentile rolled, that form the basis of everything else. You have skills, which are purely based on your attribute, maybe modified a bit (10% say) by being the right 'profession', you health is equal to your strength stat...

presto, complete game, more or less. The rules take up about three pages, the rest is 'setting'.

Quote from: SpikeIn the version I have you have four attributes, which are percentile rolled, that form the basis of everything else. You have skills, which are purely based on your attribute, maybe modified a bit (10% say) by being the right 'profession', you health is equal to your strength stat...

presto, complete game, more or less. The rules take up about three pages, the rest is 'setting'.

Cool to know

The Palladium version (The Deluxe Version I got for $5 and sold on Ebay for more) had a good bit of setting, equipment, traps, weapons and more.

It was really good and pretty easy to understand.   I am sure that would be a fun game to run, I just wonder if it's the kind of game you can sustain for awhile.

Quote from: RPGPundityou should teach the beginners from the point of view of what is actually popular where you are.

And I should also take my friend who likes Charles Dickens to see a modern action movie instead of even considering renting, say, Oliver Twist.

Yeah, right.

Quote from: Geek MessiahThe pool of gamers is shrinking.   Game industry insiders have said it "Ken Hite, GMS, Others" and you can say whatever you want but disputing facts provided by industry insiders is pointless.

As for the number of gamers who don't play D20 the number isn't as small as you think.   Even so this hobby with it's gamer pool shrinking on a constant basis really cannot afford to loose many gamers.

If you count the people who are playing World of Warcraft, the pool of gamers is expanding massively. The types of people interested in what Ken Hite and GMS have done is shrinking though. (i.e. the 90s is over). Which, is kinda a shame, because I kinda like both of those guys.

Quote from: Abyssal MawIf you count the people who are playing World of Warcraft, the pool of gamers is expanding massively. The types of people interested in what Ken Hite and GMS have done is shrinking though. (i.e. the 90s is over). Which, is kinda a shame, because I kinda like both of those guys.

Those are Computer RPGS which I don't count in the "pool of gamers" and neither do the industry people who are saying the pool is shrinking.

What they are refering to are people who play the pencil and paper rpgs.  They are shrinking because gamers are going off to do other things.

Interesting that you mention World of Warcraft because MMO's like that are part of the problem and where gamers are going.    But when you look at it a traditional rpg you have to purchase the items you need and then get a schedule together where gamers can get together.

With WOW you install the software, log in and play.   It's no wonder gamers are going to the easier way to game.

Quote from: gleichmanYou'd be hard pressed to prove that.

You just have to go to the Enworld and Wizards forums and count the activity. People who hate d20 certainly do rule here, and also rule at RPGnet and generally anywhere the focus is on commentary about "the hobby". But the point is- it's all commentary, and none of it matters.

In places where the membership actually talks about playing (like the comparison would be to Pyramid's GURPS forum), you can see whats going on a lot clearer. Enworld gets partial credit for it's rules forum and the massive, active play by post area.

Quote from: Abyssal MawYou just have to go to the Enworld and Wizards forums and count the activity. People who hate d20 certainly do rule here, and also rule at RPGnet and generally anywhere the focus is on commentary about "the hobby". But the point is- it's all commentary, and none of it matters.

I have seen plenty of D20 love on rpg.net.   Maybe there was a time where there was a great deal of hate but with the moderation at the level it is at rpg.net none of the moderators tollerate the d20 crapping that used to happen.

Quote from: Abyssal MawYou just have to go to the Enworld and Wizards forums and count the activity. People who hate d20 certainly do rule here, and also rule at RPGnet and generally anywhere the focus is on commentary about "the hobby". But the point is- it's all commentary, and none of it matters.

I've seen a bit of an upswing of d20 love on RPGnet. Which is a bit of a shock for me considering I've been part of RPGnet since the old "phorum" software. Its like while people elsewhere were burning out on D&D, people at RPGnet were getting over their kneejerk reactions and using the system.

Quote from: Geek MessiahThose are Computer RPGS which I don't count in the "pool of gamers" and neither do the industry people who are saying the pool is shrinking.

What they are refering to are people who play the pencil and paper rpgs.  They are shrinking because gamers are going off to do other things.

Interesting that you mention World of Warcraft because MMO's like that are part of the problem and where gamers are going.    But when you look at it a traditional rpg you have to purchase the items you need and then get a schedule together where gamers can get together.

With WOW you install the software, log in and play.   It's no wonder gamers are going to the easier way to game.

Well, theyre being brought in that way, sure. But I am suggesting that some of those people can become Tabletop gamers pretty easily, given the opportunity.

The "industry people" don't matter.

Yeah, it's easy to play World of Warcraft, and you can do it completely alone. But if your'e already liking the idea of playing in a fantasy world, and you get the idea of gear and hit points, your'e ripe for being brought in. And I know this because why? Because I got two players in my current campaign who sought out a demo I ran at the local gamestore, specifically interested in playing D&D after they got into Final Fantasy.

What you see as a "problem" I see as an awesome opportunity. I can give people the World of Warcraft experience, (linked quests, cool characters, gear, crafting, raids.. "instances") but I can make it much more awesome. I can personalize it. I can tailor fit it to their interests.

Of course the caveat is- theyre only going to go from World of Warcraft to (something like) D&D. Because theyre not playing to emote all over each other and ponder their navels. They want adventure and they want to build their characters.

Quote from: Abyssal MawYou just have to go to the Enworld and Wizards forums and count the activity.

Those numbers don't mean as much as one would wish. I for example visit EnWorld just to check up on things. I haven't playing D&D in decades and wouldn't touch D20 with a ten foot pole. But I could be counted as a D20 supporter by you.

Quote from: Geek MessiahI have seen plenty of D20 love on rpg.net.   Maybe there was a time where there was a great deal of hate but with the moderation at the level it is at rpg.net none of the moderators tollerate the d20 crapping that used to happen.

Oh I dont care if anyone hates it or loves it or anything. I just think it's all pointless. I will make fun of certain criticsms that I find nonsensical, though.

Quote from: Caesar SlaadI've seen a bit of an upswing of d20 love on RPGnet. Which is a bit of a shock for me considering I've been part of RPGnet since the old "phorum" software. Its like while people elsewhere were burning out on D&D, people at RPGnet were getting over their kneejerk reactions and using the system.

Again, with the moderation ramp up the crap that people used to get away with (Threadcrapping D20 threads, posting D20 Flames, Etc) arent tollerated anymore.

So the people who did that are either gone (by choice or not) or are minding their P's and Q's and not getting themselves banned from the forum.

Quote from: gleichmanThose numbers don't mean as much as one would wish. I for example visit EnWorld just to check upon on things. I haven't playing D&D in decades and wouldn't touch D20 with a ten foot pole. But I could be counted as a D20 supporter by you.

I would never tar you with such an association!

But seriously, I'd only count you if you were a prolific poster in the rules forum and the play by post area. Those are the only people who count because you can tell they are actually involved in regularly playing the game. Same thing with the Wizards boards.

Quote from: Abyssal MawOh I dont care if anyone hates it or loves it or anything. I just think it's all pointless. I will make fun of certain criticsms that I find nonsensical, though.

I understand.  For me as far as D20 is concerned I just dont play it and I dont talk about it 99% of the time.   it's only here I even talk about it.

Luckily for me I am in a large group of like minded people who will not play D20 so I can play the games I like and be happy.

Quote from: Geek MessiahLuckily for me I am in a large group of like minded people who will not play D20 so I can play the games I like and be happy.

I couldn't get anyone I know of who games to play D20 if I tried. They were too turned off by the common culture they encountered in the area when looking at rpgs.

Quote from: gleichmanThose numbers don't mean as much as one would wish. I for example visit EnWorld just to check up on things. I haven't playing D&D in decades and wouldn't touch D20 with a ten foot pole. But I could be counted as a D20 supporter by you.

Be that as it may, if you don't think that their is at least a qualitative correlation between the net memberships of WotC boards, ENWorld, RPGnet, and the forge and the online segment of those who are catered to by the respective topic areas of those boards, I rather think you are in denial.

Looking at sales figures (as they exist) also tell a similar story.

Quote from: Abyssal MawWell, theyre being brought in that way, sure. But I am suggesting that some of those people can become Tabletop gamers pretty easily, given the opportunity.

Right, they can be brought in pretty easily (hopefully), however the MMO's are drawing people away from the hobby because of their easy.   Sure some people do both but many are leaving to go to MMO's because of the lack of overhead involved in playing.

Quote from: Abyssal MawThe "industry people" don't matter.

The industry people do matter.   They give us real numbers on how our hobby is doing.   Right now we are in a slump.  Right now we are loosing people faster then they are coming in.

Is the hobby dying?  Of course not.  But I would like to see it in better health.

Quote from: Abyssal MawYeah, it's easy to play World of Warcraft, and you can do it completely alone. But if your'e already liking the idea of playing in a fantasy world, and you get the idea of gear and hit points, your'e ripe for being brought in. And I know this because why? Because I got two players in my current campaign who sought out a demo I ran at the local gamestore, specifically interested in playing D&D after they got into Final Fantasy.

But the thing is getting together gamers is as pain.  There are conflicting schedules, lives, work, many things that can get in the way.  An MMO you turn on and play.   You dont have to schedule it around other people.  This it is not surprising we are loosing people to MMO's, Miniature Games and whatever diversions are grabbing people's attention

Quote from: Caesar SlaadBe that as it may, if you don't think that their is at least a qualitative correlation between the net memberships of WotC boards, ENWorld, RPGnet, and the forge and the online segment of those who are catered to by the respective topic areas of those boards, I rather think you are in denial.

There is likely some.

*Assuming* all things are equal, RPGNet when I checked was about a third of the total between them and EnWorld.  

I'm thinking it's perfectly acceptable to teach people games liked by a third of the population under RPGPundit's values.

Quote from: RPGPunditYou could start a player with just about any iteration of D20 around, something that would mean that they'd be capable of conversing in the most universal "language" of the RPG hobby, and yet find something that suits them.  Everything from True20 to Traveller T20 to Mutants & Masterminds to Babylon 5 to whatever... you get my point.

Speaking anecdotaly, I don't think this is as effective as advertised.  People interested in learning other games will learn other games.  People not interested in learning other games won't.  The only companies which have achieved any degree of cross-pollenization between games are Palladium and TSR, and both did so more effectively by cross marketing.  Palladium puts advertisements in every book and also puts little blurbs in the text about how you need such and such other product.  TSR did something similar but much lower key in the early 80s.

Quote from: Geek MessiahRight, they can be brought in pretty easily (hopefully), however the MMO's are drawing people away from the hobby because of their easy.

It's more than the fact they are easy, they also provide a great deal of the same return for a large segment of the gaming crowd- mostly those who used to find those returns in D&D (lots of people to play with, straight-forward dungon crawls, etc.).

Add "easy" on top of that, and it's a better product than pen and paper RPGs.

Quote from: gleichmanIt's more than the fact they are easy, they also provide a great deal of the same return for a large segment of the gaming crowd- mostly those who used to find those returns in D&D (lots of people to play with, straight-forward dungon crawls, etc.).

Add "easy" on top of that, and it's a better product than pen and paper RPGs.

Yep.   And while some gamers do both some move on to MMO's and leave rpgs which adds to the large gap in gamers we have.

Quote from: Geek MessiahRight, they can be brought in pretty easily (hopefully), however the MMO's are drawing people away from the hobby because of their easy.   Sure some people do both but many are leaving to go to MMO's because of the lack of overhead involved in playing.

But the thing is getting together gamers is as pain.  There are conflicting schedules, lives, work, many things that can get in the way.  An MMO you turn on and play.   You dont have to schedule it around other people.  This it is not surprising we are loosing people to MMO's, Miniature Games and whatever diversions are grabbing people's attention

I don't believe gamers are leaving tabletop roleplaying behind to play MMOs. Seriously. I believe that gamers who have been kind of out of the hobby for a while, may pick it up as a substitute and I know gamers who play MMOs and still show up to the weekly game every week. I don't imagine anyone saying "well.. I could play the weekly campaign.. or I could play World of Warcraft...but it has to be one or the other. " Anyone who has ever played, knows that World of Warcraft is the substitute for the real thing, and not the other way around.

If anything, for the hobby to be more healthy, people should just organize more games and play regular weekly campaigns that are as regular as poker nights.

And (IMO) if they really want to be successful as games that people will come back to week after week--, they should try and emphasize fun and teamwork rather than emoting all over each other.

Quote from: gleichmanIt's more than the fact they are easy, they also provide a great deal of the same return for a large segment of the gaming crowd- mostly those who used to find those returns in D&D (lots of people to play with, straight-forward dungon crawls, etc.).

Add "easy" on top of that, and it's a better product than pen and paper RPGs.

See, I don't believe this, it's not better at all. I should know, I play them constantly :) (Anvilmar server, I have a 30th level rogue, and I'm working on my low-level Mage right now. )

Theyre fun, but theyre no substitute for the real thing.

Quote from: Geek MessiahYep.   And while some gamers do both some move on to MMO's and leave rpgs which adds to the large gap in gamers we have.

I expect it will worsen as MMO reach a point where they are able to react and respond to individuals and groups with respect to a persistent world visible only to them. Currently that's their major limit.

At some point in the future I expect RPGs will be much like wargames are today. A very tiny hobby. It will be a while I think. Software is slow to advance.

Quote from: Abyssal MawI don't believe gamers are leaving tabletop roleplaying behind to play MMOs. Seriously. I believe that gamers who have been kind of out of the hobby for a while, may pick it up as a substitute and I know gamers who play MMOs and still show up to the weekly game every week. I don't imagine anyone saying "well.. I could play the weekly campaign.. or I could play World of Warcraft...but it has to be one or the other. " Anyone who has ever played, knows that World of Warcraft is the substitute for the real thing, and not the other way around.

Some gamers have left the hobby to move to MMO's due to disinterest in gaming and time issues.  Minature Games, Time/Life Issues, etc play into the slump.

Are MMO's the cause of the slump the hobby is in?  No.  It's more then just MMO's that are drawing people away.   We as gamers need to find ways to get people back in the hobby.

Quote from: Abyssal MawIf anything, for the hobby to be more healthy, people should just organize more games and play regular weekly campaigns that are as regular as poker nights.

That is wishfull thinking but people who are married, have kids, have jobs cant always get together on a regular basis.  It happens.   A group I was in fell apart because of time/schedule issues.  Otherwise we were having a ball with the game (Even though I couldnt roll worth a crap but thats for another thread).

Quote from: Abyssal MawAnd (IMO) if they really want to be successful as games that people will come back to week after week--, they should try and emphasize fun and teamwork rather than emoting all over each other.

Yep but as I said issues do get in the way.   People don't always leave because they aren't having fun or MMO's are easier.   Some people leave their groups or the hobby due to time constraints.

Quote from: Abyssal MawSee, I don't believe this, it's not better at all. I should know, I play them constantly :)

When you leave PnP, then you should know- before that you're just an old timer who can't get out of his rut :)

Quote from: Abyssal MawSee, I don't believe this, it's not better at all. I should know, I play them constantly :) (Anvilmar server, I have a 30th level rogue, and I'm working on my low-level Mage right now. )

Theyre fun, but theyre no substitute for the real thing.

As much as I hate to do this (Kidding)  I totally agree with you.

MMO's are fun but I think P&P rpgs are much better.  Besides MMO's are a set world where RPGS you can actually expand on the world around you.

Quote from: gleichmanI expect it will worsen as MMO reach a point where they are able to react and respond to individuals and groups with respect to a persistent world visible only to them. Currently that's their major limit.

At some point in the future I expect RPGs will be much like wargames are today. A very tiny hobby. It will be a while I think. Software is slow to advance.

Meanwhile we have to come up with a way to get more gamers in the hobby.  It would be nice to be able to convert those MMO players into rpg players.  Show them that both are fun and they can do both.

Quote from: gleichmanIt's more than the fact they are easy, they also provide a great deal of the same return for a large segment of the gaming crowd- mostly those who used to find those returns in D&D (lots of people to play with, straight-forward dungon crawls, etc.).

Add "easy" on top of that, and it's a better product than pen and paper RPGs.

I once had this friend named Jason.  He was a casual gamer.  He was what I'd call a "hanger on."  He played out of a lack of anything better to do with his immediate time.  I think a lot of young teenagers are like that.  They don't play because they really enjoy RPGing, but they play because it's a way to burn time.

Jason's brother, Ben, was the more dedicated gamer in the household.  That wasn't a good thing as Ben tended to run the same adventure over and over.  Anyone who has gamed for any period of time has probably played it.  You start off nude in a 10x10x10 cell, and have to wait for a NPC to let you out.  Then everyone goes off on random tangents either trying to destroy whatever town the party happens to be in or attempting to kill all the other members of the party.  You never encountered an monsters besides your fellow players in a game run by Ben.

Of course, this was back in the 80s, personal computers were becoming big.  People today call the computers of the era "toy computers," but they actually had a lot of advantages.  Anyway, Jason managed to somehow get hold of a Commodore 64 and a disc drive which was like a MAJOR teenage coup of the time.  Soon after he managed to acquire two games: Bard's Tale and Neuromancer.  He played them to DEATH.  He became an avid computer RPGer.

I still remember something he said while playing Bards Tale.  I was trying to convince him to play in my D&D game I was getting ready to run.  He replied, "Why would anyone want to play D&D when you can just play it on the computer?"

The computer games delivered the entire experience he was after.  He never looked back.

Alittle off topic

MMO's are addictive.

I heard of a guy (Havent been able to varify this, but if its true its scary) had a friend who was a teacher.

The friend who was a teacher quit his job so he could play Worlds of Warcraft full time.

I understand enjoying MMO's but if you quit your job and choose MMO's over your job you need to get your priorities stright.

Quote from: Geek MessiahMeanwhile we have to come up with a way to get more gamers in the hobby.  It would be nice to be able to convert those MMO players into rpg players.  Show them that both are fun and they can do both.

For the forseeable future PnP still presents advantages.

The classic campaign reacts directly to the players, changes they make are true changes- and the players matter more and longer than they ever would online. They can also act with much greater freedom in a world that responds to them instead of presents to them.

This is one reason why I consider the Forge style games such a failure. They don't only throw this advantage away, they actively seek to remove it.


Also currently being face-to-face with people who are real-life friends beats online people you've never met.

And you have the ability to control the game mechanics, something that is impossible online.


I generally find that a good GM and group has no problems picking people way from MMO in their current state.

The question is if the hobby has enough good GMs and groups to stop the bleeding of gamers.

Quote from: gleichmanThere is likely some.

*Assuming* all things are equal, RPGNet when I checked was about a third of the total between them and EnWorld.  

I'm thinking it's perfectly acceptable to teach people games liked by a third of the population under RPGPundit's values.

Sure.

I was only nodding because as likely as not, it's the most accessible.

If you can find 2 indie groups, 3 WoD groups, and 5 d20 groups in your area, it really doesn't matter so much which you prefer.

If you can only find one guy who would really like to play indie games, 1 WoD group, and 3 d20 groups, it begins to matter.

Quote from: gleichmanYou'd be hard pressed to prove that.

Not really, consider the size of the Wizard board alone; plus ENWorld (which is still mostly D20) plus all the D20 related corporate boards.  The fact that rpgnet and the Forge are anti-D20 doesn't really count for much if you look at the whole bigger picture.

And its certainly even fucking easier to prove that Forge games are not the "most popular" with gamers online.

RPGPundit

I would use the D&D Rules Cyclopedia.

Quote from: Levi KornelsenAnd I should also take my friend who likes Charles Dickens to see a modern action movie instead of even considering renting, say, Oliver Twist.

Yeah, right.

How is that in any way a similar comparison?

A more accurate way of putting it is like this: your friend is interested in playing chess. Do you teach him the Enochian variant first, or do you teach him CHESS first, and then give him the option of looking at variants?

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditHow is that in any way a similar comparison?

First, I have friends-of-friends that like romance movies.  I own Breaking the Ice.  I have friends that like Anime.  I own Exalted and The Mountain Witch.  I have friends that like morality-type westerns, like Unforgiven. I own Dogs in the Vineyard.  Why wouldn't I give them something they like?

Second, in the course of my time gaming, I've introduced about a dozen new people into tabletop RPGs, and about twice that many into LARP, that stuck arounf for at least three games (the number of just-one-try people I've seen at bigger demos I've run, I'm not actually sure about).  The way I do it works.  Why on earth should I change?

Quote from: Levi KornelsenWhy on earth should I change?

Because the fewer people playing those games the better :)

Quote from: gleichmanBecause the few people playing those games the better :)

Fuck that.

The more people I have 'on tap' to play with, the better.

I'm in this for me.

Quote from: Levi KornelsenI'm in this for me.

I guessed that :)

Quote from: gleichmanI guessed that :)

:D

Consider it, man.

Who else would I be in it for?  Or anyone else among us?

Do we game to please this guy?  :pundit:

I think not.

More on-topic, and arguments about the morality of "doing a grave disservice" to new gamers with Forge games - beg pardon while I make sure where I'm posting - I'd introduce them with pared-down Heroquest converted to a genre they enjoy (or Questworlds when it comes out). This is assuming, of course, they don't ask for something specific - "I'd like to learn that D&D game I hear about", f'rex, in which case I'd send them elsewhere, because I have a job and a fiancee and a life and I can't devote 20 hours to stat blocks in a week any more. But at least they're learning.

I can get Heroquest going inside half an hour and it provides a really handy way for me to get a look at what about the hobby interests them. If they direly need "more game" to play with, I'll bust out True20 and do the genre thing again. Because ultimately, if I'm introducing someone to the hobby, I'm probably bringing them in to play at my table. Why teach them something we'll never play? I'm not trying to introduce them to the rules they'll see most often if they jump from group to group looking for a game they like, I'm trying to introduce them to the fun roleplayers derive from roleplaying.

A notice: Before anybody decides to take up the pitchfork and torch, I don't hate d20. I do, however, think it's more exceptions, discreet rules chunks, and mechanical fiddly bits than I feel like engaging with to enjoy my hobby. Because you know what? Fuck the industry, fuck the hobby, fuck what Pundit demands we do. My gaming doesn't go any farther than my table, and that's the fun I'm concerned about.

Quote from: RPGPunditIf you have answered anything other than "D20" (though not necessarily D&D); you are doing a tremendous disservice to the person in question.

You also might very well be a Swine, depending on which game you mentioned.

I mean honestly, why would you want to introduce someone to "Roleplaying" with the hopes that they will become a regular and well-rounded participant in the hobby by presenting them with anything other than the single most popular, most played RPG system in the known universe?

Otherwise its like taking someone who's never heard Rock music before, and presenting, say, the Blue Aeroplanes or Broken Social Scene and telling them "this is what Rock music is like", instead of showing them The Beatles or Led Zeppelin, or U2.  I mean, you'll not just warp their whole idea of what "rock music" is but you are showing them stuff that only a very marginal group of people have even heard of, much less would consider (good) Rock.

RPGPundit

*SIGH*

Once again the dreaded "Swine" title comes out when even the possibility of someone disagreeing with pundy is raised.

I do not play d20, I do not like d20 and I would not introduce anyone to RPGing with d20, and I happen to resent the implication that by not getting someone into d20 I am doing them a disservice.

I would use gurps to introduce someone into gaming even tho I hate jackson and his 'friend" hackard, because gurps is a better system in most ways and easier to learn, but still loaded with enough options to do everything from cinematic to hardcore reality.

I suppose now I'll be forever on pundy's dreaded "swine" list. So be it, who cares?

Quote from: Dominus Nox*SIGH*

Once again the dreaded "Swine" title comes out when even the possibility of someone disagreeing with pundy is raised.

I do not play d20, I do not like d20 and I would not introduce anyone to RPGing with d20, and I happen to resent the implication that by not getting someone into d20 I am doing them a disservice.

I would use gurps to introduce someone into gaming even tho I hate jackson and his 'friend" hackard, because gurps is a better system in most ways and easier to learn, but still loaded with enough options to do everything from cinematic to hardcore reality.

I suppose now I'll be forever on pundy's dreaded "swine" list. So be it, who cares?

Isn't the pundit's anti-swine rant on this thread a bona fide threadcrap? Jeez louise! ;)

People want a Forge game, I'll run them a Forge game. And if the :pundit: shows up and complains about it, I'll hand him paper, pencil, and some dice, tell him to sit his ass down, and he can show the newbies how it's done. You want to opine on how it should be done, by God you're going to show people how it's done.

Quote from: RPGPunditWho the fuck would be interested in RPGs in the first place to play Pride and Prejudice??!

I dunno.  Regency romance sounds like a fantastic gaming genre and I know two of my players would practically squeal with delight if I proposed it.  My wife would obviously want her character to have the opportunity to shag Colin Firth, but that's another story

If they're a Buffy fan, we'd play Buffy.  If they like superheroes, Truth and Justice would be a good place to start

If they wanted Dungeons and Dragons I'd run it

Quote from: Levi KornelsenFirst, I have friends-of-friends that like romance movies.  I own Breaking the Ice.  I have friends that like Anime.  I own Exalted and The Mountain Witch.  I have friends that like morality-type westerns, like Unforgiven. I own Dogs in the Vineyard.  Why wouldn't I give them something they like?

The reason why not? The simplest reason is because romance movies aren't games, and people interested in romance movies aren't necessarily interested in gaming at all. There's a huge leap between the two (from enjoying a genre to convincing a total non gamer into playing a game about the genre). Likewise with westerns and everything else.

But the leap between online gamers and tabletop is much easier. Heck, they already call themselves 'gamers'.

Here's what 12 million World of Warcraft players seem to be enjoying: It's like a top ten list of the things hipster gamers hate the most:

levels.
classes.
hit points.
fantasy races.
spells. use of modular tactics ("feats") to defeat encounters.
building their character from novice to superhero.
quests. raids. dungeons.
battling monsters.
gear. magical gear. crafting your own gear.
playing the same character regularly, for months.  

Now, given all of that.. and given this huge potential pool of people who are interested in the subject of 'gaming' but perhaps haven't played tabletop before.... What game should I then introduce?

Breaking the Ice?

See, this is why I laugh at you guys.

Quote from: RPGPunditWho the fuck would be interested in RPGs in the first place to play Pride and Prejudice??!

I suspect quite a few people actually.  And it's a real example, some folk on rpg.net tried to create a d20 version of it (which I think could work fine potentially) but the thread kept getting crapped on until they gave up.  A lot of posters seemed to find the possibility of the game somehow threatening, which was kind of sad.

Also, bear in mind that although our hobby tends to overlap with sf and fantasy fandom, it doesn't have to be that way.  We can keep all the sf and fantasy fans and get fans of other genres too, some of whom may well end up getting into the sf and fantasy stuff anyway if that matters.

Quote from: RPGPunditSomeone I don't particularly want in the hobby, to start with.  I think your example is absurd.

Why?  What the fuck do you care if a bunch of people you're not playing with play something that doesn't interest you?  I don't see the point of mecha, but I've no desire to chuck the mecha fans out of the hobby.  What business is it of mine that they like giant anthropomorphic robots?

Anyway, I'll bet you in that Pride and Prejudice group there will be one player sitting there thinking "you know, this is fun and all, but it would be better if we could kick Mr D'Arcy's ass.  I wonder if anyone has created a game similar to Pride and Prejudice but with more action and none of this historical romance crap."  

Quote from: RPGPunditYou could start a player with just about any iteration of D20 around, something that would mean that they'd be capable of conversing in the most universal "language" of the RPG hobby, and yet find something that suits them.  Everything from True20 to Traveller T20 to Mutants & Masterminds to Babylon 5 to whatever... you get my point.

Yeah, because nothing will persuade someone to join the hobby better than my running a game for them that I don't particularly enjoy or know that well.  Most rpgs have pretty similar concepts, if they're down with Runequest or whatever I don't think it will boggle most minds to see afterwards what other games are about and if they want they can get into d20 then.

Quote from: Abyssal MawBreaking the Ice?

See, this is why I laugh at you guys.

I think the point being made is to tailor the game to the person.  If the potential new gamer is into romance stuff and is interested in rpgs, then Breaking the Ice might be a good choice (I don't really know it).  If they're into WoW, then I would personally go for DnD and Breaking the Ice is a crap choice.

I think that's the only point being made, that there isn't one answer and that for some people who currently don't consider the hobby at all there may be games that would get them in that aren't quite as obvious as the ones that got us in.

Quote from: Hastur T. FannonRegency romance sounds like a fantastic gaming genre and I know two of my players would practically squeal with delight if I proposed it.

Well, there's always Tromeur's Wuthering Heights Roleplay...

Character generation: "choose a feature floating in the wind (hair / coat / scarf / kilt)" and "check the boxes corresponding to 'Worried' & 'Tired', the default mental & physical states".

Quote from: BalbinusI think the point being made is to tailor the game to the person.  If the potential new gamer is into romance stuff and is interested in rpgs, then Breaking the Ice might be a good choice (I don't really know it).  If they're into WoW, then I would personally go for DnD and Breaking the Ice is a crap choice.

I think that's the only point being made, that there isn't one answer and that for some people who currently don't consider the hobby at all there may be games that would get them in that aren't quite as obvious as the ones that got us in.

I remain unconvinced that such people will be interested in gaming at all. I've introduced hundreds of people to playing, but those people either came to me, visited a demo, or showed up at an event. They expressed interest in gaming first. We got around to genre later.  

My wife is one of those people who doesn't game. She is totally cool with it, but it's not her thing. I kinda think most non-gamers are like her. And further, I think even if you can somehow trick/lure/coerce/convince a non-gamer to trying out gaming, they aren't going to become part of the hobby unless they really want to be.

Part of the loaded question "what game would you use to introduce non gamers into the hobby" is "what non gamers are we talking about here?"

Here's what I think:

People who express interest in gaming (online, crpg, neopets, whatever, otherwise) can probably become gamers.

People who never express interest in gaming but are fans of certain dramatic or literary genres are simply unlikely to pick up the hobby. Even if they get tricked or convinced into trying it once or twice.

Things I Have Seen Bring Most People Into the Hobby (In descending order of magnitude).

These are the significant ones.
1. White Wolf LARP Games.
2. Vampire.
3. Fighting Fantasy
4. A shared interest in the greater hobbysphere (SF/Fantasy).

D&D hovers around the same level as computer RPGs.

Quote from: Abyssal MawPeople who never express interest in gaming but are fans of certain dramatic or literary genres are simply unlikely to pick up the hobby.

On the other hand, I've been requested to run Nob for librarians and lit students who had never played RPGs before but became intrigued after seeing the book, so those preferences definitely can play a role in the matter.

Quote from: Caesar SlaadSpoiled how? Sheesh... if anything I consider D20's skill system underplayed in D&D and am glad that other game were developed that made better use of it.

Mostly I think the problems flow from Skills being a side-stat that increases with each level instead of at the center of the system. The way it tends to work out is you have cappy little skills to start with, instead of having a mix of pretty good skill in some areas and weaker in others.  Another thing I miss in D20M (and some other games), and this should have been in that features of systems you'd like to see more of, is how Shadowrun has cheap Knowledge skills in a different pool. Having a pile of different types of knowledge skills really gives characters, well, character and are useful for forwarding a game in an info-intense setting without making the characters uber powerful.

To be fair part of my issue also is with how the probability curves work, and this ties back into the level ups. The single d20 roll just lays this huge swing out there, and when you want to handle graduants of success it's kind of a pain because you've got to identify the increments (because increments of 1 basically make zippo sense) and then determine which increment with the result of whatever bonus+d20 roll.  It feels clunky to say the least.  I suppose if you don't roll very often then it's fine, but that goes back to Skills being off to the side of the game. Or perhaps running closer to 'diceless', which just isn't my personal cup of tea....as far as I know of.

Then you have opposed rolls, and once again that probability curve is just yuck, and degrees of success become clunkier yet.

QuoteAnd feats somehow inappropriate outside D&D? Don't tell Steve Jackson or Pinacle.

Sorry, I was just talking about D20M here and how it reads like those initial little "gamelets" that first came out from the SRD. You know, the bullies in school things and stuff like that.  I just stared at it and blinked when I saw those.  You really have to do serious rewrites of tracts of the SRD to even have a chance. As flyingmice pointed out, 3e is wound too tightly to easily mould.

QuoteFortunately, but the time d20 modern came out, several other d20 authors put out decent takes on firearms, which were fairly easy to swap in.

Which ones of these do you find work better, and why?  I've wanted to get in and play Spycraft 2.0 for some time, just never got anyone together for it.  It sounds like they've done a lot of interesting replumbing of the D20 systems to make it more workable.  But I don't think they even fall under D20 anymore, right? At least I thought it was OGL, because they have really taken the ol' Bob Vila sledge hammer to among other things the Skill system.

P.S. Thanks for a far more informative, or even sapient, response than Abyssal Maw seems capable of. :rolleyes:

Quote from: GrimGentWell, there's always Tromeur's Wuthering Heights Roleplay (http://philippe.tromeur.free.fr/whrpg.htm)...

A word of warning guys - that link had a popup that tried to install something.  I'll check again when I'm on a machine with Mozilla

Quote from: Hastur T. FannonA word of warning guys - that link had a popup that tried to install something.

Really? I'm not seeing anything.

...And Mozilla only shows two cookies, one from the site itself and one from "person.estat.com".

Hmm. Ad-Aware and AVG didn't turn up anything, either. Perhaps I should remove the link as a precaution, though: I've had the page bookmarked for a good long while, but it's easy enough to find through Google.

Quote from: blakkieMostly I think the problems flow from Skills being a side-stat that increases with each level instead of at the center of the system. The way it tends to work out is you have cappy little skills to start with, instead of having a mix of pretty good skill in some areas and weaker in others.

Well, I'll meet you halfway on this one.

As I alluded to in the old point-gen thread, I prefer systems that limit the over-specialization. This is one of the appeals that d20 has for me.

That said, I can sort of see where you are coming here if you are talking about first level characters. I don't share the loving of starting with 1st level characters that much of the d20 fanbase has. I find that the distribution of a mixed bag of skills similar to that you see in other systems is pretty common when you are talking about 4th+ level character.

Another thing to keep in mind is that while you can do a lot with the d20 skill system, it's really a skill system built for a class based game. In games that don't bank a lot of the skill system, it's not going to be leveraged a lot. Games like Traveller d20 and Spycraft 2.0 leverage the skill system more, and there is more "behind the scenes support" for the skill system in those games. (Frex, both of those games feature classes with class abilities that extend how many ranks go into a skill. Even d20 modern gets its digs in here; the savant talent makes for a good knowledge specialist.)

QuoteAnother thing I miss in D20M (and some other games), and this should have been in that features of systems you'd like to see more of, is how Shadowrun has cheap Knowledge skills in a different pool. Having a pile of different types of knowledge skills really gives characters, well, character and are useful for forwarding a game in an info-intense setting without making the characters uber powerful.

I can't argue with that. Again referring back to the point-gen thread, I like pooled resources in character gen, and this sounds like a good example of exploiting that. I don't think that structure is necessarily compulsory, but it sounds like a nice feature.

FWIW (yeah, it's always back to a Spycraft example with me...), Spycraft features focuses, fortes, and interests, which are basically little skill areas and adders, instead of splitting your skill ranks between divergant skills. I think that sounds somewhat similar to what you are getting at here and resembles the separate pool you speak of in shadowrun.

QuoteTo be fair part of my issue also is with how the probability curves work, and this ties back into the level ups. The single d20 roll just lays this huge swing out there, and when you want to handle graduants of success it's kind of a pain because you've got to identify the increments (because increments of 1 basically make zippo sense) and then determine which increment with the result of whatever bonus+d20 roll.  It feels clunky to say the least.  I suppose if you don't roll very often then it's fine, but that goes back to Skills being off to the side of the game. Or perhaps running closer to 'diceless', which just isn't my personal cup of tea....as far as I know of.

I can't relate to that at all, sorry. Linear odds are, to me, the easiest to manage odds with in the game. I don't run diceless. Quite the contrary. Having the odds layed out in a linear manner make me much more confortable in invoking odds on the fly. OTOH, I see running "near diceless" to be the result of using a dice system with nearly inpenetrable odds. (OWOD stands as a shining example of this... they even go so far to give you diceless guidelines for what different pip-levels mean. Exalted 1e did too, come to think of it.)

QuoteSorry, I was just talking about D20M here and how it reads like those initial little "gamelets" that first came out from the SRD. You know, the bullies in school things and stuff like that.  I just stared at it and blinked when I saw those.

Not sure what you are talking about here, so I'll move along...

QuoteWhich ones of these do you find work better, and why?

The one I swapped in for d20 modern was the one in a little third party product called Arsenal. (Fumbles around for a link... ah, here (http://shop.rpg.net/product_info.php?products_id=31772&).) It used about the same number of feats as d20 modern did in its autofire tree. But
1) Instead of the rule that makes it so untrained characters get zero benefit from burst fire, it uses the same autofire rule that every d20 third party and its dog used since Deadlands d20 came out. To wit: One additional hit every 5 points you roll over the base, every 3 if you have the feat.
2) Instead of an autofire spray being modeled as a box that requires reflex saves (thus bypassing armor) as in d20 modern, Arsenal models a spray as a cone, with to-hit rolls against targets in the cone.

Traveller d20 also had a pretty slick autofire mechanic as well, but it's been a while since I ran it so I don't remember the specifics. :o As I recall, traveller had things like gauss weapons that had highly varying ROFs. To model this, a certain ROF gave you a certain number of potential targets, and a bonus that you could either apply to hit (representing spraying an area, thus having a better chance that one bullet would hit) or to damage (representing concentrated fire.) This worked because Traveller d20 let armor reduce damage.

Spycraft 2.0 also uses the old Deadlands/Dragonstar burst mechanic, but for sprays, uses the "pick targets/waste bullets between targets" sort of thumb rule I've seen in non-d20 games.

QuoteI've wanted to get in and play Spycraft 2.0 for some time, just never got anyone together for it.  It sounds like they've done a lot of interesting replumbing of the D20 systems to make it more workable.  But I don't think they even fall under D20 anymore, right? At least I thought it was OGL, because they have really taken the ol' Bob Vila sledge hammer to among other things the Skill system.

Yeah, it's OGL. Accordingly, they've changed things they couldn't have under the d20 STL (i.e, chargen basics and conditions). The skill system is something they could have changed under the d20 STL; I think it was more a matter of opportunity and experience about what works. I personally think that the skill cap thing they add goes overboard for what it acheives (it's effectively munchkin management), but it's fairly easy to ignore.

Quote from: blakkieWhich ones of these do you find work better, and why?  I've wanted to get in and play Spycraft 2.0 for some time, just never got anyone together for it.  It sounds like they've done a lot of interesting replumbing of the D20 systems to make it more workable.  But I don't think they even fall under D20 anymore, right? At least I thought it was OGL, because they have really taken the ol' Bob Vila sledge hammer to among other things the Skill system.

P.S. Thanks for a far more informative, or even sapient, response than Abyssal Maw seems capable of. :rolleyes:

Man. Picking on you is too easy.

But yeah, Spycraft 2.0 is OGL. I don't know if it still carries the d20 trademark, but it's totally OGL.

It's "medieval", hoho.  

http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/11/11724.phtml

Quote from: GrimGentReally? I'm not seeing anything.

It was one of those ads for a computer clean-up program that wouldn't close until you killed IE.  No biggie