Quote from: RPGPunditbecause 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,

Quote from: Certified;797687So, 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?

Bold for emphasis.

For a different perspective:

Quotehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rectangle

In Euclidean plane geometry, a rectangle is any quadrilateral with four right angles. It can also be defined as an equiangular quadrilateral, since equiangular means that all of its angles are equal (360°/4 = 90°).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Square

In geometry, a square is a regular quadrilateral, which means that it has four equal sides and four equal angles (90-degree angles, or right angles).[1] It can also be defined as a rectangle in which two adjacent sides have equal length.

It seems to me, what is being broadly defined as story games, Fiasco, Fate, games Powered By The Apocalypse are a Square, they meet all the requirements of a Role Playing Game, the Rectangle, but their focus is on narrative over simulationist aspects.

It also seems like the definition being used here is also a square within the larger RPG Rectangle that says you must be in the head of your character at all times. (No RPG characters shall be existentialists. (Joke)).

Neither of these are necessarily wrong, they are both types of RPGs. However, when you say, RPGs must only fit into a narrower definition you exclude all the other games and more importantly gamers that may enjoy different RPGs.

Quote from: Certified;797697For a different perspective:



It seems to me, what is being broadly defined as story games, Fiasco, Fate, games Powered By The Apocalypse are a Square, they meet all the requirements of a Role Playing Game, the Rectangle, but their focus is on narrative over simulationist aspects.

It also seems like the definition being used here is also a square within the larger RPG Rectangle that says you must be in the head of your character at all times. (No RPG characters shall be existentialists. (Joke)).

Neither of these are necessarily wrong, they are both types of RPGs. However, when you say, RPGs must only fit into a narrower definition you exclude all the other games and more importantly gamers that may enjoy different RPGs.

The distinction is pretty basic and obvious, even if you're chosing to ignore it. A roleplaying game is a game where the primary goal is to play a role. A storygame is a game where the primary goal is to tell a story. Why are these mutually exclusive? Because one interferes with the other. "Telling a story" requires viewing the game from a third-person perspective. "Roleplaying" requires mainting a first person perspective.

Making that distinction in no way prevents someone from enjoying either type of game. Not making that distinction can prevent someone from getting the experience they're seeking from a game. "Specificity, Dubby, is the essence of good communication."

And really, pushing Forge Tri-fold theory? Here? lol. Good luck with that.

Quote from: TristramEvans;797702The distinction is pretty basic and obvious, even if you're chosing to ignore it. A roleplaying game is a game where the primary goal is to play a role. A storygame is a game where the primary goal is to tell a story. Why are these mutually exclusive? Because one interferes with the other. "Telling a story" requires viewing the game from a third-person perspective. "Roleplaying" requires mainting a first person perspective.

Making that distinction in no way prevents someone from enjoying either type of game.

The distinction you have laid out seems to suffer in two areas.

One, when you move from narration to mechanics there is a break in immersion, regardless of game. Checking the rules for a combat maneuver and rolling dice is divorced of the narrative. We don't check our Feat Lists or Special Abilities before attempting something anyone could possibly do, but in classic or traditional RPGs  you have to look up your advantages.

Two, even if the goal of a story game is to tell a collaborative story you as a player still take on a specific role.  The player has a character and persona, just like other RPGs. While these games may have more Meta-Rules they are no more or less immersion breaking than any other rule set. Spending a Fate Point to insert an open fire hydrant is no less immersion breaking than checking the grappling rules in D&D or Pathfinder. You can even make the argument that it is less disruptive because it's resolved faster.

There are countless examples of checking range, radius and any number of other rules only to reconsider one's actions slowing down game play.

Forget it, Certified; it's TheRPGSite.

  The motto here could be: "Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise immersion/Actor stance."

Quote from: Certified;797703The distinction you have laid out seems to suffer in two areas.

One, when you move from narration to mechanics there is a break in immersion, regardless of game.

That's not necessarily true. I cn drink a soda, and still be immersed. I can eat chips and still be immersed. And I can roll dice and still be immersed.

Bt even if that is true to one extent or another, you're describing two contrary design goals: one to minimize the amount of rules interference with immersion, the other to maximize the amount of third person perspective and how that interacts with the game.

QuoteChecking the rules for a combat maneuver and rolling dice is divorced of the narrative. We don't check our Feat Lists or Special Abilities before attempting something anyone could possibly do, but in classic or traditional RPGs  you have to look up your advantages.

I play RPGs that dont require any of that.

QuoteTwo, even if the goal of a story game is to tell a collaborative story you as a player still take on a specific role.  The player has a character and persona, just like other RPGs. While these games may have more Meta-Rules they are no more or less immersion breaking than any other rule set.

I think you're very wrong on that assertion. They are much more immersion-breaking in numerous ways.

QuoteSpending a Fate Point to insert an open fire hydrant is no less immersion breaking than checking the grappling rules in D&D or Pathfinder. You can even make the argument that it is less disruptive because it's resolved faster.

There are countless examples of checking range, radius and any number of other rules only to reconsider one's actions slowing down game play.

First off Fate is not a storygame. So your example doesn't support your argument very well. However, you are correct in that engaging the Fate point economy of Fate 3rd is a meta-mechanic that breaks immersion. The thing is, you have to do that in Fate, as a player. In D&D, at least in classic D&D, a player is not responsible for any of the rules you describe. But then, there's a reason I also dont play Pathfinder or 35d-4th edition D&D. Too many disassociative mechanics interfering with roleplaying.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;797705Forget it, Certified; it's TheRPGSite.

  The motto here could be: "Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise immersion/Actor stance."

So it seems.

TristramEvans, do you hand your character sheet over to the GM at the start of each session and rely on them for all resolution? Every number out side of weights and inventory counts is an abstraction.

Quote from: Certified;797708TristramEvans, do you hand your character sheet over to the GM at the start of each session and rely on them for all resolution? Every number out side of weights and inventory counts is an abstraction.

Have you ever played any games besides D&D?

Quote from: TristramEvans;797709Have you ever played any games besides D&D?

Does D20 modern count? I kid, I kid. Yes, I've played a number of different games. Even designed and published one, see links below.

It's one thing as a player to be aware of game mechanics and abstractions that your character is not aware of. It's another thing entirely as a player to be able to create and decide things in the game world that are beyond the control of your character.

Quote from: Certified;797710Does D20 modern count? I kid, I kid. Yes, I've played a number of different games. Even designed and published one, see links below.

Okay, so then you wold understand that a system is, in essence, a language. The more familiar one is with that language the less effort (i.e. "breaking immersion") required to communicate using it. I can read a (classic) D&D character sheet and instantly translate that into terms identifiable to the character I'm playing. Yes, "Str: 18" is an abstraction, but I can look at it and instantly know I am a big strong, mother-freller. The abstraction almost helps in a way, because how would I know the exact mearurement of that sort of thing? Especially assuming a pre-industrial setting.

It helps that classic D&D meant the "player sheet" was an index card.

But, I don't play D&D anymore (except once in a blue moon as a lark). I've since discovered other systems that facillitated immersion much better. And then, for the last fifteen or so years, I've almost exclusively used my own system. The character sheets for it look something like this:

Robin Hood
Origin: Legend  Archetype: The Archer  Occupation: Outlaw Chief

DARING: Exceptional
AGILITY: Legendary
MIGHT: Good
WITS: Exceptional
INTELLIGENCE: Normal
COURAGE: Legendary

TALENTS: Archery x2, Chicanery, Ride, Subterfuge, Survival, Swordsman
LIMITATIONS: Pride (Cannot refuse a challenge)
OBLIGATIONS: Merry Men of Sherwood (Leader), Maid Marian (Love), King Richard the Lionheart (Duty)

Thats about it. All of it is in plain English, no numbers around to break immersion, just a basic guide to who I'm playing. And it all fits easily on an index card.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;797705Forget it, Certified; it's TheRPGSite.

  The motto here could be: "Not even in the face of Armageddon. Never compromise immersion/Actor stance."

Quote from: Certified;797708So it seems.

Or more correctly, understand what the terms mean, and when mechanics apply to them, and when they do not.

Whichever.

Quote from: Certified;797703The distinction you have laid out seems to suffer in two areas.

One, when you move from narration to mechanics there is a break in immersion, regardless of game. Checking the rules for a combat maneuver and rolling dice is divorced of the narrative. We don't check our Feat Lists or Special Abilities before attempting something anyone could possibly do, but in classic or traditional RPGs  you have to look up your advantages.

False. Hard to get more "classic" or "traditional" than the original, I think, and I didn't need to learn a bit of mechanics when I first played. Nor does anyone; but many people prefer to learn at least some.

Then there's the Twilight 2000 ( 2nd ed.) I played not long ago as the only player who knew anything about it going in. Some of the others liked to look up skills on the character sheet, while another just wanted the GM to tell him what to roll. But the GM could easily have handled the abstraction in its entirety.

QuoteTwo, even if the goal of a story game is to tell a collaborative story you as a player still take on a specific role.  The player has a character and persona, just like other RPGs. While these games may have more Meta-Rules they are no more or less immersion breaking than any other rule set.

Your immersion obviously is not some other folks'. Is it Joe Character's goal to tell a collaborative story?

QuoteSpending a Fate Point to insert an open fire hydrant is no less immersion breaking than checking the grappling rules in D&D or Pathfinder. You can even make the argument that it is less disruptive because it's resolved faster.

Is it not necessary for the player to spend the Fate point? Is that not indeed the very point of the point? Players don't need to look up grappling rules in the D&D I play; indeed, the Dungeon Masters Guide advises that they should not look up anything in there, which includes the combat rules.

Which is more "immersion breaking" is a personal matter, but taking 3e/4e D&D culture as your baseline, or Fate as your exemplar of "storygames",  isn't likely to score points.

QuoteThere are countless examples of checking range, radius and any number of other rules only to reconsider one's actions slowing down game play.

Again, the question is what the heck you're talking about, and how you get the notion that's where "immersion" people are coming from.

"Let there be a fire hydrant" is role-playing only for certain roles: God, Neo, Green Lantern,  Zatanna, a Lord of Amber, etc.. Mortal firefighters don't have that power, unfortunately. They can, however, grapple.

Edit: But now I see you wrote "no less" - which is like arguing for the H-bomb as being no less destructive than a hand grenade. Typo or Cthulhoid Null-A?

Quote from: Phillip;798037"Let there be a fire hydrant" is role-playing only for certain roles: God, Neo, Green Lantern,  Zatanna, a Lord of Amber, etc.. Mortal firefighters don't have that power, unfortunately. They can, however, grapple.

Edit: But now I see you wrote "no less" - which is like arguing for the H-bomb as being no less destructive than a hand grenade. Typo or Cthulhoid Null-A?

It seems fairly classic to ask the GM "is there a fire hydrant here?" and get a response of "I don't know; say, 20% chance" and rolls, maybe yes and maybe no.  But if the player never asked, there might not have been.  Maybe there was Schrodinger's fire hydrant there, and the wave function only collapsed once a player asked about it; but the act of asking brought it into being.  It's not much of a step from there to having that question given an 80% chance instead of 20% because the player threw a poker chip onto the table or whatever while asking.

The only game I've played along those lines is Monster of the Week, and I'm satisfied that there's a reasonable genre explanation for that game's mechanism (you really can be Doomed in that world).