Quote from: CRKrueger;796258But then again, I'm one of those neo-fascists who think roleplaying involves playing a role (cue soviet). ;p

Excellently put -- save for the last part. What constitutes playing a role? Acting according to in-game logic I would also call role-playing in this context, even if you're not talking in character.

Maybe I'm just misunderstanding you; if so, my apologies.

Quote from: Certified;796246Anyway, I'm not sure any other that means anything. If I was to sum things up, I would say, it's probably better to not slice off huge swaths of the role playing community because it doesn't fit one's personal view of what an RPG has to be. When I go to cons I try to play at least one new game just to see what's out there. It's really opened up new ideas and I do recommend trying new games when possible. And, in conclusion, be excellent to each other and party on dudes.

It has nothing to do with cutting off anybody -- or at least it shouldn't.
Look at it this way: I love RPGs, but I am also a board game enthusiast, once I even was a miniatures gamer, and in the last ten years I have grown to like heavy wargames, too. This doesn't mean I can't enjoy the occasional game of Poker, nor that anybody will be hurt if I don't call HeroQuest an RPG.

Quote from: Nerzenjäger;796267It has nothing to do with cutting off anybody -- or at least it shouldn't.
Look at it this way: I love RPGs, but I am also a board game enthusiast, once I even was a miniatures gamer, and in the last ten years I have grown to like heavy wargames, too. This doesn't mean I can't enjoy the occasional game of Poker, nor that anybody will be hurt if I don't call HeroQuest an RPG.

The part that hurts the community as a whole is the exclusionary nature of the statement. "That's a story game, it's not a real RPG." This is just as exclusionary as John Wick saying D&D isn't a real RPG. If you are playing a role, in a game, isn't that a role playing game? It shouldn't matter if it is a strict simulation experience or allows you to operate in the meta-fiction if the end result is the same. By stating something like Fate or Leverage isn't a "True RPG" you are implicitly saying this is the wrong way to game. While it may not be your cup of tea, that doesn't make it less of an RPG.

Quote from: Certified;796270The part that hurts the community as a whole is the exclusionary nature of the statement. "That's a story game, it's not a real RPG." This is just as exclusionary as John Wick saying D&D isn't a real RPG. If you are playing a role, in a game, isn't that a role playing game? It shouldn't matter if it is a strict simulation experience or allows you to operate in the meta-fiction if the end result is the same. By stating something like Fate or Leverage isn't a "True RPG" you are implicitly saying this is the wrong way to game. While it may not be your cup of tea, that doesn't make it less of an RPG.

This might be true if I said any of the things you stated. Hate to be quoting myself, but aparently, you were missing some of the things I was saying:

Quote from: Nerzenjäger;795895I guess some people are offended by the notion that their Storygame fundamentally is not a RPG. If they view their beloved Fiasco as a RPG (as many people do, like Wil Wheaton) and someone comes along and tells them "that's not a RPG", what they hear is "that's not a true RPG". But that's not what is being said -- it's just objectively a different thing. It seems similar, because it's often published in the same manner by people who are often associated with both hobbies.

Categorisation is important. I played a good amount of Storygames and there I some I even like, but I only seek them out if I want that specific gaming experience. If I was new in an area and searched for a group to play a RPG with, I would want to know if what they play is actually a RPG or a Storygame, because I have no long-term interest in the latter.

Quote from: Nerzenjäger;Fate Core (other implementations I have neither read nor played, except for Starblazer Adventures) is an RPG which relies on dissociated mechanisms (The Alexandrian wrote an excellent essay on the matter, which mostly reflects my views*). Can't comment on Cortex+, owned Marvel at one point, but didn't read it. Cortex Classic though? Totally a Cinematic RPG.

And lastly, in response to your definition of role-playing game:

Quote from: Nerzenjäger;I think it gets extra murky the moment one is using "role-playing game" not just as a marketing term -- as intended for games like D&D -- but as a scientific one, like it existed way before and still does beyond that. If we are talking in purely technical terms, I wholly agree. Then also Diplomacy is not just a board game and Cops & Robbers absolutely is a role-playing game and we can discuss the degree to which a game has elements of role-playing.
But since we are talking hobby, RPG -- for me at least -- means: "games that follow the D&D model".

In conclusio: the distinction made between RPG and Storygame is not a statement about quality of one above the other.

Quote from: Nerzenjäger;796279In conclusio: the distinction made between RPG and Storygame is not a statement about quality of one above the other.

   On the other hand, given our host's history and public statements, can you see why some people might be sensitive and see the implication even where it's not implied?

   Personally, I think it's like distinguishing between blue and indigo in the spectrum--yes, there's a difference, but it can be very hazy and hard to see, and sometimes may not be useful.

To go back to the post that originally spawned my questions for a moment:

Quote from: RPGPundit;795454Just to note: people don't get banned for talking about storygames on this site.  They can, however, get banned for intentionally bringing in talk about storygames into unrelated threads, or starting threads about storygames in the RPG forum rather than the other-games forum.

The statement here is that story games are not to be their own topic in the RPG forum. This is why I wanted to understand what was being defined. The implication is that the games we have discussed as examples could result in being banned from the site if brought up as their own topics. If starting a thread to discuss an upcoming Fate product would result in being removed from the site for calling it an RPG, there is a clear exclusion.

Quote from: Certified;796282To go back to the post that originally spawned my questions for a moment:



The statement here is that story games are not to be their own topic in the RPG forum. This is why I wanted to understand what was being defined. The implication is that the games we have discussed as examples could result in being banned from the site if brought up as their own topics. If starting a thread to discuss an upcoming Fate product would result in being removed from the site for calling it an RPG, there is a clear exclusion.

If in doubt, post a thread to Other Games. We move the very rare thread to Other Games as well, but no-one is stopped from talking about storygames.

I think what Pundit is referring to is constant derailing of threads on the RPG board (which does have the sub-title for "discussion of traditional rpgs").

Quote from: Nerzenjäger;796262Excellently put -- save for the last part. What constitutes playing a role? Acting according to in-game logic I would also call role-playing in this context, even if you're not talking in character.

Maybe I'm just misunderstanding you; if so, my apologies.

Doing what your character would do by making choices your character could conceivably make.  THe last sentence was a joke because, in the past, some of the definitions of roleplaying have been...quite vehemently different.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;796281On the other hand, given our host's history and public statements, can you see why some people might be sensitive and see the implication even where it's not implied?

   Personally, I think it's like distinguishing between blue and indigo in the spectrum--yes, there's a difference, but it can be very hazy and hard to see, and sometimes may not be useful.

Well of course there's always that. But don't forget that it's also more present to us, who are regular readers of the Pundit. While I don't see any big conspiracy in the Storygamer crowd going on, there are and always have been voices that claimed their type of games superior to traditional RPGs. This may be a false equivalency, especially given that the RPG hobby is bigger, but I think we can recognise, that apart from fringe voices, there's also those people, who have a genuine interest to objectively differentiate. If people weren't so touchy about these subjects, honest debate would be way easier, but I am positive that people are smart enough to get to that point, even if it takes them a while.

Other than that, I disagree with your statement, that the distinctions are "often very hazy". But of course that's according to my criteria of what constitutes an RPG and not your's. So no biggie.

Quote from: Emperor Norton;796213Sorry for the misunderstanding. I said "would be considered by this board", I meant that the general consensus on the board was that some games that were more murky (such as Cortex+ games) are storygames. I wasn't meaning to say you specifically believe that.

Personally, my opinion, a game is kind of on a sliding scale. And it also matters why certain rules are in place. Like for instance the Leverage flashback mechanics, which a lot of people see as reality warping, and therefore storygame mechanics, I see as more genre emulation, which I don't consider storygame.

QuoteI also agree with Philip that a game can indeed be both. Also, I think the concept of removing some level of world control from the GM and giving it to the players, is indeed the defining nature of storygames, but its a lot more difficult to say how much is too much.

I look more at purpose, intent of use, which may be one thing to a designer and another to someone playing the game. Anything a player can get hold of can be used from a strategy-game viewpoint that has no concern with roleplaying or storytelling per se; or from two or three of those perspectives.

In the broad sense I favor, something such as the Dragonlance Saga series used as the designers intended is an stg simply because the purpose is to tell a story. What are more commonly called story games here developed in reaction against such "railroad" games, but less collaborative narrative construction is actually more like the usual non-game prototypes of fiction.

Quote from: Nerzenjäger;796262Maybe I'm just misunderstanding you; if so, my apologies.

Everybody misunderstands CKreuger! That's why he shreds his shirt with his pecs, turns green, and bounces a kilometer at a time.

Quote from: flyingmice;796457Everybody misunderstands CKreuger! That's why he shreds his shirt with his pecs, turns green, and bounces a kilometer at a time.

Damn right!

Quote from: Certified;795620They clearly are, but are you saying that you don't role-play in Fiasco?

Role-play can happen in a storygame; role-play can happen in a lot of things.  That doesn't make it a role-playing game, in the sense we're using, because the MAIN goal is not the immersive playing of a character in a credibly emulated world, but rather the creation of a "story", or narrative, or whatever.  The roleplaying is secondary at best; and, in many cases, the immersion and emulation is treated with outright contempt or hostility.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;797564Role-play can happen in a storygame; role-play can happen in a lot of things.  That doesn't make it a role-playing game, in the sense we're using, because the MAIN goal is not the immersive playing of a character in a credibly emulated world, but rather the creation of a "story", or narrative, or whatever.  The roleplaying is secondary at best; and, in many cases, the immersion and emulation is treated with outright contempt or hostility.

RPGPundit

Yep. If the main role everyone at the table is playing is the author of the story, then you're playing a fundamentally different kind of story than when the players take on the role of characters in the story.

Quote from: RPGPundit;797564Role-play can happen in a storygame; role-play can happen in a lot of things.  That doesn't make it a role-playing game, in the sense we're using, because the MAIN goal is not the immersive playing of a character in a credibly emulated world, but rather the creation of a "story", or narrative, or whatever.  The roleplaying is secondary at best; and, in many cases, the immersion and emulation is treated with outright contempt or hostility.

RPGPundit

Bold for emphasis.

So, to be clear, story games, are not role playing games, despite being a game in which the primary activity is to play a role, based solely on your personal interpretation of what it means to be a role playing game and not the lack of role playing involved?

As I've posted previously, this seems both limited in scope and exclusionary to other people in the hobby.