TheRPGSite

Hi, sometime lurker, first time poster.

Ive read around the site, and attempted to form an opinion on the community here. Thats proved quite difficult, possibly because the community is so diverse. On one hand I can hardly say I agree with the Pundit. I think that elitism is a problem (admittedly I see it as a problem in both the "indie camp" and the "mainstream camp" of the supposed conflict, but hey!), but thats about where the agreement ends.
On the other hand, I do like the unmoderated nature of theRPGsite,which is what drew me to register here.

I like Storygames. I like thematic games, games that are about something. Games that make me feel.
In the same vein, I cant bring myself to listen to musicI feel is without artistic content or watch movies that dont give me anything on an emotional level.
So I listen to Tool, watch Pans Labyrinth and play Dogs in the Vineyard.

Why is that wrong? Is it wrong?

I get that it is wrong to present some rpgs as objectively "better" than others because of content like this. I can think that Tool, Pans Labyrinth and Dogs in the Vineyard are better, but claiming that they are better in an objective sense can never be anything other than wrong.

That is the essence I am able to draw from the Pundits rants.

Am I "Swine?" Im an aspiring game designer, and I design indie games together with the (rather small) norwegian community. I want people to play these games, both mine and others, and to enjoy them and what they offer.

So, why cant roeplaying games be anything other than the traditional model, according to you?* Why cant they be about something?

*The "you" I am adressing here are the Pundit and anyone else who feel like this is adressed to them.

This might not be aimed at me, but i have a simple rule of thumb for you.

Write what you want.

Play what you want.

Like what you want.

Do not denegrate others in doing so.

Simple.

Only the notion that every game should be RLY ABOUT SOMEHTING, is what let´s us raise the war-banners.

This, to me, is a bit like the question chaosvoyager asked in another thread "do you think desigining new games is bad for the hobby?"

I mean, who really thinks there's anything objectively wrong with "wanting a role-playing game to be about something," anyway?

I think it has to do with a set of folks who want to define that as the "right" way to think about gaming. Or the underlying assumption that to play DnD,for example, means that you don't want your game to "mean anything."

It's all a reaction to that, IMHO...

What the fuck is it with these newbie posters lately and their introspective posts?

Mate, get your nose out of your navel, and let's talk about rpgs. Maybe some people will like what you like, maybe some will hate it, maybe some of either group will be moderators, or what you perceive be "therpgsite as a whole". Doesn't matter.

Just talk about rpgs. That's what therpgsite is for, believe it or not.

Now, your one question - who said it's wrong for an rpg to be about something? I don't see anyone here saying rpgs have to all be setting-less universal systems...

Pardon?

Trad or indie: ALL games are about something.

5 out of 10.

IMO, the key point is saying certain games are objectively better. You can say "these are subjectively better for me and/or my gaming group" but saying a game is objectively better leads to bizarre results like the infamous "brain damage" quote.

If you and your buddies like playing forge-style games, and you like designing them, that's no skin off anyone's nose. You want to talk about them, you're welcome here. But claiming them - or any game or game-type- to be objectively better is insulting to those who prefer the other games and game-types. In other words, your right to swing your fist ends at the point of my jaw. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and such value judgements are always subjective.

Other people may have different feelings, but that's mine.

-clash

Quote from: TempleHi, sometime lurker, first time poster.

Ive read around the site, and attempted to form an opinion on the community here. Thats proved quite difficult, possibly because the community is so diverse. On one hand I can hardly say I agree with the Pundit. I think that elitism is a problem (admittedly I see it as a problem in both the "indie camp" and the "mainstream camp" of the supposed conflict, but hey!), but thats about where the agreement ends.
On the other hand, I do like the unmoderated nature of theRPGsite,which is what drew me to register here.

I like Storygames. I like thematic games, games that are about something. Games that make me feel.
In the same vein, I cant bring myself to listen to musicI feel is without artistic content or watch movies that dont give me anything on an emotional level.
So I listen to Tool, watch Pans Labyrinth and play Dogs in the Vineyard.

Why is that wrong? Is it wrong?

I get that it is wrong to present some rpgs as objectively "better" than others because of content like this. I can think that Tool, Pans Labyrinth and Dogs in the Vineyard are better, but claiming that they are better in an objective sense can never be anything other than wrong.

That is the essence I am able to draw from the Pundits rants.

Am I "Swine?" Im an aspiring game designer, and I design indie games together with the (rather small) norwegian community. I want people to play these games, both mine and others, and to enjoy them and what they offer.

So, why cant roeplaying games be anything other than the traditional model, according to you?* Why cant they be about something?

*The "you" I am adressing here are the Pundit and anyone else who feel like this is adressed to them.

I think it's wrong to think that any game can't be "about" something if the players choose to make it so. Traditional RPG's can be "about" anything the folks playing them want them to be, right?

Thinking otherwise -- that games that make you 'feel' need special mechanics or non-traditional GM's, or whatever -- is elitist. And wrong.

When you ask "why can't roleplaying gmaes be anything other than the traditional model" I would say there's no problem with that so long as

• You're not saying the traditional model is broken, or causes damage, or is full of tyrany
• You're not saying that other games are somehow "better" in any objective way at evoking feeling or depth or making statements about human nature

Enjoying non-traditional games is fine; looking down on mainstream games or gamers isn't likely to get a positive reaction.

I think what I've said above might be confusing to some folks; some people in the indie community don't see the indie perspective as being hostile to mainstream gamers. If I've just described you, then you should be especially wary about

• Using terms or core concepts from RPG theories that claim games cause on-going power struggle or brain damage
• Any point of view that believes game systems are objectively better if they're narrowly trying to do one thing
• Any point of view that believes traditional GMing is problematic or believes Rule 0 is somehow indicative of objectively "bad design"

There's others as well, but those are perspectives that come up often in the indie dialog and are pretty insulting to people who enjoy traditional, broadly focused game systems like D20 or White Wolf.

Cheers,
-E.

What Clash said!

Well, with a successful game, if you ask eight people what its about you'll get twelve answers.

Games that last are all about situation and whatnot - where it goes from there is left as an exercise for the reader.

Dogs in the Vineyard, for instance, sets up characters with a mission - how that mission plays out, and what happens and what the story is about is more or less up to the people playing it.

I love the black powder firearms for instance

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fPMr8ix3aZ0

and the funky feel of the world and theres certainly room for that in there, which is what makes it good.

Another example is Delta Green - on Yog Radio one of the guys who wrote it was saying 'I often run in to people who say 'Dude! I love Delta Green! Its like Ghostbusters and we all have proton packs!' and I thinking 'er, thats not what I had in mind at all' ' and he then goes on to say that so long as people are enjoying it what does it matter what they do with it but that learning that is sometimes hard.

So, you can make your game about something, but if you succeed only half a dozen people are gonna like it.

Quote from: flyingmiceIf you and your buddies like playing forge-style games, and you like designing them, that's no skin off anyone's nose. You want to talk about them, you're welcome here. But claiming them - or any game or game-type- to be objectively better is insulting to those who prefer the other games and game-types. In other words, your right to swing your fist ends at the point of my jaw. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and such value judgements are always subjective.

What he said. Just don't pass these games off as being something that ascends traditional RPGs or that those who play them have ascended. Just play and be happy - just don't tell anyone else how to play.

You know, sometimes I like games I play to be about--nothing.

Not in a big dramatic, tense, plot and character driven way.

Sometimes, "nothing", is about spending 4 hours sitting at a table having players  "play" the personality of the character while the character shops, or drinks or woos the girl that the character likes. There isn't in essence a moral, a power play, a world shaping event. Just a little being and doing.


Now I like plots going on around PC's, I like terse dramatic moments that build from the things PC's do (or don't do.), but I also like the characters to have emotional weight. Which comes from sometimes, nothing, that is game sessions where the character is just being that person. Not making world shaking proclamations, not struggling with inner conflicts and demons, just you know futzing about.


Maybe I'm strange.

It's all in the definition, I guess. The thing that rubs me, for instance, the wrong way is -as other have already said- trying to hold up one style of game over another, just because it' "about" something.

Technically, even the most blood-soaked rough-and-tumble dungeon crawl is "about" something:

Kicking ass and taking stuff.

I don't care if your task resolution in involves handfuls of dice or picking flowers.  Have fun doing it but don't get uppity, because you are wrong, wrong wrong.

That said -- welcome, Temple!

Quote from: Dr Rotwang!I don't care if your task resolution in involves handfuls of dice or picking flowers.

It just so happens that in one of my little works-in-progress all actions are resolved with exactly those: flowers, that is, not dice...

And 'ello, Temple.

Well this post was, more than anything, a test. I wanted to see what kinds of responses I got (not that it wasnt a question I didnt want an answer to from theRPGsites forumites), to see if this was a forum I could post in regularly.

Im satisfied, and I like the replies so far, which for me amount to:

Objective= Bad.
Subjective = Good.

So thats cool then!
Now that the waters are tested, I can get to posting about actual roleplaying games!

Welcome aboard Temple. Sorry I'm late to the party, but I would add that the REAL problem is with the idea that ONLY Forge-style Storygames are "About" something.

Pretty well every campaign I ever run is "about" something.

The idea that you need a storygame to be "about" something, and that Regular RPGs are not "about" anything, that's where the problem lies, that's what's insulting (not to mention incorrect).

RPGPundit

Quote from: TempleObjective= Bad.
Subjective = Good.

The horror.

I blame his youthful age, our contemporary mores, bad pop music, the government, and of course the internet.

I'm never sure if the claim that forgie games are "about" something should be taken at face value. It's been pointed out- all roleplaying games are "about" something.

What I see a lot of is actually "I want to play (or at least go through the motions of) games that reaffirm my belief system".

Which really can be shorthanded into "I'm actually not so sure what I'm doing in this hobby but I kinda want to be some kind of activist!"

that's right, it's the internet's fault!

http://www.citizensunitednegatingtechnology.com/

Quote from: Abyssal MawWhich really can be shorthanded into "I'm actually not so sure what I'm doing in this hobby but I kinda want to be some kind of activist!"

I've always read it as 'Finaly! A game that forces people to play my way!'

Quote from: beeberthat's right, it's the internet's fault!

http://www.citizensunitednegatingtechnology.com/

And it's all true. Fortunately, there's a remedy:

http://www.getafirstlife.com/

Quote from: Pierce InverarityAnd it's all true. Fortunately, there's a remedy:

http://www.getafirstlife.com/

killer!

Quote from: getafirstlife.comWhy can't I build a dirigible with my mind?

i've frequently wondered that, myself

Blimey, a test to see if we're worthy! I ain't never seen an elephant fly though.

Quote from: beeberi've frequently wondered that, myself

The mask falls: beeber is really Leonardo da Vinci.

Quote from: Pierce InverarityThe mask falls: beeber is really Leonardo da Vinci.

heh, i've lost the key to my own code!  maybe it's in this bottle of rum. . . .

(accidentally knocks lit candle onto pile of parchment drawings)

The key problem is a misunderstanding about the tabletop RPG as a medium.  It's not a console or PC single-player RPG, where you get both a ruleset and a campaign scenario all in one product.  It's not literature, meant to communicate a profound idea to the audience, or popular writing meant purely to entertain it in a passive mode.  (Or, for that matter, drama or comedy.)  It is a ruleset, no more, with no inherent content; you have to either procure it seperately, or you have to create your own using the tools provided.  Thus it's a medium where the users determine what the game--the content--is about, regardless of whatever intention (if any) that the publisher or designer had in mind when they created it.  If the users and the creators maintain any dialog over this use of the ruleset, it's likely that the most visible uses of the ruleset will influence later iterations of the ruleset's creator-produced content; the evolution of Exalted over its lifespan is one clear example.

Quote from: beeberheh, i've lost the key to my own code!  maybe it's in this bottle of rum. . . .

(accidentally knocks lit candle onto pile of parchment drawings)

"It's a simple head code. Any English schoolboy could catch it."

Hemlock Stones, The Giant Rat of Sumatra

-clash

Quote from: Bradford C. WalkerIt is a ruleset, no more, with no inherent content; you have to either procure it seperately, or you have to create your own using the tools provided.  Thus it's a medium where the users determine what the game--the content--is about, regardless of whatever intention (if any) that the publisher or designer had in mind when they created it.  If the users and the creators maintain any dialog over this use of the ruleset, it's likely that the most visible uses of the ruleset will influence later iterations of the ruleset's creator-produced content; the evolution of Exalted over its lifespan is one clear example.

I've always thought about gaming at the [on-the-ground session] level v. [written content] to be analogous to the relationship between a music composition and its performance or a play and its performance.  I'm not talking about anything like artistic content or lack thereof, so just put down the pitchforks.  

Everybody knows that there are as many approaches to interpreting the written content as there are interpreters.  Some musicians/actors/directors are strict constructionists, aiming for the exact intent of the playwright/composer, and others want to roll up their sleeves and get greasy.

I could care less if the books were used as hats, bacon trays and poop scoopers if that's what floats the group's boat.  Samuel Beckett's estate, on the other hand, apparently pays agents to travel the known world seeking out Beckett productions of plays like Waiting for Godot and making sure that the interpreters are living up to his idealized vision of the performance.  WTF?  Are they afraid the Upper Pitneck community players are going to destroy society's vision of the great man by casting a woman or excising a (Pause)?

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker. . . the evolution of Exalted over its lifespan is one clear example.

not being an exalted player, could you elaborate?

What are some of your games about? Examples would be really nice. I always like to hear what's going on in people's games.

Regards,
David R

About "no game is better than any other, I just like this one more".

Actually you can do a little bit more than fall back on subjectivity: you can recognize your biases and explain how they inform your evaluation of a given game. And when someone says your favorite game is horrible, consider that they may be coming from a different set of biases; this is an opportunity if you wish to learn about their biases, but you're unlikely to prove to them that their opinion is wrong.

Quote from: TempleSo, why cant roeplaying games be anything other than the traditional model, according to you?* Why cant they be about something?

The problem here I think is you're assuming that what non-trad gaming offers is "being about something" when if you look at experiences of folks, trad gaming offers the same thing.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: TempleHi, sometime lurker, first time poster.

Hi Temple!

Quote from: TempleI think that elitism is a problem (admittedly I see it as a problem in both the "indie camp" and the "mainstream camp" of the supposed conflict, but hey!), but thats about where the agreement ends.

That is quite common development acutally, that in reaction to the elitism of one party, the other might became elitist as well...

Quote from: TempleI like Storygames. I like thematic games, games that are about something. Games that make me feel.
(...)
Why is that wrong? Is it wrong?

There is nothing wrong, until... until you will begin to claim, that only (chose several games) are the games, that make people feel. That would create false dichotomy serving only one purpose. The elitism mentioned above.

Quote from: TempleI get that it is wrong to present some rpgs as objectively "better" than others because of content like this. I can think that Tool, Pans Labyrinth and Dogs in the Vineyard are better, but claiming that they are better in an objective sense can never be anything other than wrong.

No. You can feel that the games are better for you, that's all right. Everybody has his favourite. But thinking that these game are objectively better is not only nonsense (what do any human being alone without some measure know about objectivity anyway), it is elitism nevertheless. The fact, that you might only think it, not say it is just hiding your elitism inside you, that doesn't rid you of it.

Quote from: TempleAm I "Swine?" Im an aspiring game designer, and I design indie games together with the (rather small) norwegian community. I want people to play these games, both mine and others, and to enjoy them and what they offer.

I don't think that a Swine is defined by designing games. Every other gamer design a game. And they are usually independent, because he owns them unless some publisher wants to print them. So what?

Quote from: TempleSo, why cant roeplaying games be anything other than the traditional model, according to you?* Why cant they be about something?

Now, you are creating false dichotomy... Roleplaying games are. Period. You might distinguish them by genre, by page count, by ownership, by approach, but they exist and in most cases one has no doubts if it is RPG or not. They can exist in any form an author wish. And as long as author accepts the reality that he stands on the shoulders of his predecesors, that his game is not THE ONLY ONE, that it has its merits and its flaws, that it will suit to few but not everybody, that all the games are in some sense equal, I see no problem.

The problem is, that the above is not usually the case.

(That is my personal opinion, others might have their own...)

Quote from: David RThe problem here I think is you're assuming that what non-trad gaming offers is "being about something" when if you look at experiences of folks, trad gaming offers the same thing.

Regards,
David R

The way I see it, "being about something" is a thing you can put into any roleplaying game. Any game where you take on roles can be used to explore themes in chararacters and events.

Games that "are about something" are games that take this thing, and makes the game about achieving that thing. So its not that traditonal games cant be "about something," its just that games that were designed to "be about something" do it differently. Its all they were designed to do after all!

Quote from: TempleGames that "are about something" are games that take this thing, and makes the game about achieving that thing. So its not that traditonal games cant be "about something," its just that games that were designed to "be about something" do it differently. Its all they were designed to do after all!

Let's say, they claim, that they are "about something". You should probably be more specific, but in my experience several of those (be about something) games are actually about something completely different, than they claim they are about. And even those, that are about the thing, they claim they are about, might do a worse job for some specific group of people wanting that one thing that those so called "traditional games" used for same purpose. But maybe I am talking about something completely different then that your "something". :confused:

Quote from: AlnagNo. You can feel that the games are better for you, that's all right. Everybody has his favourite. But thinking that these game are objectively better is not only nonsense (what do any human being alone without some measure know about objectivity anyway), it is elitism nevertheless. The fact, that you might only think it, not say it is just hiding your elitism inside you, that doesn't rid you of it.

See, I feel you might bemissing my point. OTOH my first language is norwegian and your first language is (I believe) czech,so it might be a language barrier thing.

When I say that I think my favourite game/band/movie is better than some other game/band/movie, Im talking in subjective terms. Tool is, to me, a better band than the Pussycat Dolls, for example. Or Westlife.
Its apreference. I realise that there are people (lots of people) who think Tool is a whining piece-of-shit bandn and that their songs and lyrics are meaningless drivel, and I respect their right to not like Tool. Same goes for other things I like. Just like I see no need to try to convince you that Tool is the bestest band ever,I see no need to preach about Dogs in the Vineyard to you.

Its not about hidden elitism, its about personal preference.

To me, indie games are a lot like modern jazz music.
Its kinda weird, not what most people expect from music and certainly not for everyone.
You cant dance to it (the way you can to a waltz or a polka), it requires some effort on the part of the listener and there are indeed some people who are elitist sons of bitches and claim that jazz is better than any other form of music.
But jazz isnt harmful to the music industry.

Quote from: AlnagLet's say, they claim, that they are "about something". You should probably be more specific, but in my experience several of those (be about something) games are actually about something completely different, than they claim they are about. And even those, that are about the thing, they claim they are about, might do a worse job for some specific group of people wanting that one thing that those so called "traditional games" used for same purpose. But maybe I am talking about something completely different then that your "something". :confused:

Ok, Im talking about theme.
Ill use examples from DitV, if you dont mind.

DItV is "about" how far you are willing to go for your beliefs. Are you willing to cut off the arm to save the body, is one of the phrases I believe the book uses.

Now, it is completelypossible to tella story about this same theme with another game. You could tell it using D&D or Qin: The Warring States for example.

But DitV takes that theme and integrates it into the rules. Through Raises and Sees the rules support the theme. Te game is "about something," and that something is the theme of "how far are you willing to go for what you believe in?"

As I said, any tradtional game can be played about that theme. But the games themselves arent "about something." They can be, but they arent from the beginning.

Did that make sense?

QuoteTemple said: I see no need to preach about Dogs in the Vineyard to you.

Please don't. There are Mormons in my family ....don't feel the need to play fictionalized version of that religion.

Quote"Temple" also said this stuff: To me, indie games are a lot like modern jazz music.
Its kinda weird, not what most people expect from music and certainly not for everyone.
You cant dance to it (the way you can to a waltz or a polka), it requires some effort on the part of the listener and there are indeed some people who are elitist sons of bitches and claim that jazz is better than any other form of music.
But jazz isnt harmful to the music industry.

 I don't see that analogy at all.

 The "Indie" games seem more like really BAD "Goth" or "Emo" bands that got one hit wonders and radio play. While D&D , TRAVELLER and games from that era are more like Big Band music or even the Beatles and the Rolling Stones. (Picck your age bracket)

 "Jazz" to me equates more to the RPGs that came after the initial burst of RPGs that were still recognizable as RPGS - games like HERO, GURPS, Shadowrun , Call of Cthulu possibly.

Oh and you CAN dance to Jazz. There are all sorts of JAZZ to choose from . Usually its a slow dance and she and I have quite a few smiles on our faces later in the night.


- Ed C.

Quote from: KoltarI don't see that analogy at all.

 The "Indie" games seem more like really BAD "Goth" or "Emo" bands that got one hit wonders and radio play. While D&D , TRAVELLER and games from that era are more like Big Band music or even the Beatles and the Rolling Stones. (Picck your age bracket)

 "Jazz" to me equates more to the RPGs that came after the initial burst of RPGs that were still recognizable as RPGS - games like HERO, GURPS, Shadowrun , Call of Cthulu possibly.

Oh and you CAN dance to Jazz. There are all sorts of JAZZ to choose from . Usually its a slow dance and she and I have quite a few smiles on our faces later in the night.


- Ed C.

This I would call nitpicking.

First of all, the comparison you make to indie games is selected solely for the purpose of making them look juvenile or of poor quality.

Secondly, when I made a comparison to jazz I didnt mean a historical comparison. I didnt mean that you could look at the history of jazz and say "look,this mirrors the evolution of indie games!"
I also specifically said "modern jazz music." By which I mean contemporary jazz, which is its own genre.*

What I ment was that just like contemporary jazz, indie games are not for everyone. And furthermore, that they are not a threat to the hobby as a whole.

*After consulting wikipedia its become apparent to me that the term "contemporary" seems to only be used to classify genre in my own language; Im talking about experimental jazz, sorry for the confusion.

Temple, you are fueling the fire you claim to be fighting.

Thematic Gamewrights == Jazzmusicians?
That´s actually not even one step away from "beat poets".

Quote from: TempleAs I said, any tradtional game can be played about that theme. But the games themselves arent "about something." They can be, but they arent from the beginning.

Did that make sense?

This makes sense, but it runs into a problem (which may be due to language).

DitV is designed to be "about something". But what this means is that the author of the game has an "aboutness" that he wants to convey and which he's tried to embed in the rules-text. It doesn't mean the rules actually succeed in conveying that "aboutness" to a given player, in anything more than a trivial sense (that is, receiving the author's opinion of his own game). For some subset of players, the "aboutness" they find in a traditional game may be perceived more clearly and strongly--more convincingly--than what they get from DitV.

Quote from: TempleGames that "are about something" are games that take this thing, and makes the game about achieving that thing. So its not that traditonal games cant be "about something," its just that games that were designed to "be about something" do it differently. Its all they were designed to do after all!

QuoteTemple wrote:
But DitV takes that theme and integrates it into the rules. Through Raises and Sees the rules support the theme. Te game is "about something," and that something is the theme of "how far are you willing to go for what you believe in?"

(Bolding mine) Two points, Firstly IMO the intergration of rules and theme is not the sole domain of indie games.

Secondly just because a game is designed to "do something" does not mean it actually does it.

Regards,
David R

@Jazzmisicians: Even though they might be elitist jackasses, Jazzmusicians have one thing that sets them apart from Thematic Gamewrights:

Objective virtuosity with their instrument. Even Jazz-haters must acknowlegde that.

Quote from: SettembriniTemple, you are fueling the fire you claim to be fighting.

Thematic Gamewrights == Jazzmusicians?
That´s actually not even one step away from "beat poets".

No. Thats not me fueling the fire, thats you looking for a fight where there is none.

Honestly, youre reading my posts like the devil reads the bible.

Im not comparing indie game designers to brilliant jazz musicians. And if I was, then Id compare traditional gameauthors and designers as classical virtuosos.

Im comparing indie games as a whole to jazz music: Just one genre out of many, albeit a weird one that isnt for everyone.
Anything else you find in that statement Im afraid you have edited in your self.

No, bucky. Jazzmusic is universally accepted as the intellectuals refined music taste and the real outlet for talented and virtuose musicians.

You already subverted the hip/cool image of the label "Indie", now you are aiming for more.

Your sophistry and weaseling will not help. If Jazz music was used by you, "just to make a non-value statement", then let it be heard Jazz music was a wrong choice. Because Jazz music has values attached to it.
If the example was really just an example, you needn´t insist on the Jazz music comparison.

Chose another one. I propose twelve-tone technique.

Quote from: Elliot WilenThis makes sense, but it runs into a problem (which may be due to language).

DitV is designed to be "about something". But what this means is that the author of the game has an "aboutness" that he wants to convey and which he's tried to embed in the rules-text. It doesn't mean the rules actually succeed in conveying that "aboutness" to a given player, in anything more than a trivial sense (that is, receiving the author's opinion of his own game). For some subset of players, the "aboutness" they find in a traditional game may be perceived more clearly and strongly--more convincingly--than what they get from DitV.

Im not sure I understand what you are trying to say.

Are you saying that even though a game is designed around a theme, theres no guarantee that the game will be played around that theme? Because thats completely true.

There is also not any guarantee that a trumpet will be played by blowing through the mouthpiece by a person attempting to play it, or that a chessboard will be used to play chess on (and not checkers, for example). But that hardly matters, because the games are intended to be played in that way.

I dont understand the complaint, to be honest.

Quote from: David R(Bolding mine) Two points, Firstly IMO the intergration of rules and theme is not the sole domain of indie games.

Secondly just because a game is designed to "do something" does not mean it actually does it.

Regards,
David R

1.No, no its not. That is, in fact, the point I am making.

2. No, thats right. Why is that important?

Quote from: SettembriniNo, bucky. Jazzmusic is universally accepted as the intellectuals refined music taste and the real outlet for talented and virtuose musicians.

You already subverted the hip/cool image of the label "Indie", now you are aiming for more.

Your sophistry and weaseling will not help. If Jazz music was used by you, "just to make a non-value statement", then let it be heard Jazz music was a wrong choice. Because Jazz music has values attached to it.
If the example was really just an example, you needn´t insist on the Jazz music comparison.

Chose another one. I propose twelve-tone technique.

Also what he hasn't acknowledged is that "People like me" can enjoy Jazz as well.

 I'm not a 'Jazz-lover" ...but I can dance to it or enjoy it.

 Can't say the same about most of those "Indie/Forger" games.

- Ed C.

Quote from: Temple1.No, no its not. That is, in fact, the point I am making.

2. No, thats right. Why is that important?

Huh?

It´s important because if number 2) is answered negatively, the whole IPR-bag viral marketing of "certain style of games" would be a propagandistic lie.

Quote from: KoltarAlso what he hasn't acknowledged is that "People like me" can enjoy Jazz as well.

 I'm not a 'Jazz-lover" ...but I can dance to it or enjoy it.

 Can't say the same about most of those "Indie/Forger" games.

- Ed C.

That´s why I think twelve-tone technique fits the bill very nicely.

Quote from: SettembriniNo, bucky. Jazzmusic is universally accepted as the intellectuals refined music taste and the real outlet for talented and virtuose musicians.

You already subverted the hip/cool image of the label "Indie", now you are aiming for more.

Your sophistry and weaseling will not help. If Jazz music was used by you, "just to make a non-value statement", then let it be heard Jazz music was a wrong choice. Because Jazz music has values attached to it.
If the example was really just an example, you needn´t insist on the Jazz music comparison.

Chose another one. I propose twelve-tone technique.

Like I said, you are reading my posts like the devil reads the bible, looking for a fight.

Also, I personally have never subverted anything, and I hardly think that my comparing indie games to jazz music (and traditional games to classical music, I might add)is the start of a trend in the indie community. So hah.

But I concede that to some people, the jazz-music carries value. I apologise for any confusion I might have caused.

Heres what I ment:

Indie rpgs are a subset of rpgs in general.
I think appreciation of indie games is a matter of taste.
I dont believe indie games to be harmful to the hobby as a whole any more than genres of music are harmful to music as a whole.

Better?

Quote from: TempleThat is, in fact, the point I am making.

Where? I mean seriously, where did you make this point. You mentioned story/thematic games...told us why you like DitV, but where exactly did you say, that the intergration of rules and themes were not the sole domain of indie games. You mentioned something about games designed to be about something and then dove right into DitV.

Quote2. No, thats right. Why is that important?

I dunno, it seemed important enough for you to start a thread about games being about something. Is it such a stretch that when the dscussion gets rolling the claim is tested?

Regards,
David R

@temple:
You just need to replace the indie. Because surely, you aren´t talking about FtA! or DeGenesis here, do you?

No, you´re talking about an aesthetic/design category, not a mode of publishing, correct?

Quote from: KoltarAlso what he hasn't acknowledged is that "People like me" can enjoy Jazz as well.

 I'm not a 'Jazz-lover" ...but I can dance to it or enjoy it.

 Can't say the same about most of those "Indie/Forger" games.

- Ed C.

Umm.. What? What are you saying here?

That you like jazz? Well, congratulations! Youve proven that people who like jazz like jazz, while people who dont like Forge games dont like Forge games...

Quote from: Settembrini@temple:
You just need to replace the indie. Because surely, you aren´t talking about FtA! or DeGenesis here, do you?

No, you´re talking about an aesthetic/design category, not a mode of publishing, correct?

Ok, point taken.

Ill try and steer clear of the term "indie" to help fascilitate a better discussion.

Quote from: SettembriniHuh?

It´s important because if number 2) is answered negatively, the whole IPR-bag viral marketing of "certain style of games" would be a propagandistic lie.

How so? WHat the game actualy does at the table is wholly dependant on the players, no? I mean, the game certainly cant play itself, and if I choose to play a game a certain way nobody (except my fellow players) is in a position to stop me are they?

So I dont understand the complaint.

Quote from: David RWhere? I mean seriously, where did you make this point. You mentioned story/thematic games...told us why you like DitV, but where exactly did you say, that the intergration of rules and themes were not the sole domain of indie games. You mentioned something about games designed to be about something and then dove right into DitV.



I dunno, it seemed important enough for you to start a thread about games being about something. Is it such a stretch that when the dscussion gets rolling the claim is tested?

Regards,
David R

1. Right where I said that not only Forge (formerly indie) games can be about something.

2. Games on their own do nothing.
Players need to play the games for anything to happen.
Players can play games any way they damn well please.
If you play Forge games in other ways than the way they where designed to play, the games break down.
Broken games are not fun to play.
To have fun with Forge games, you play according to the design philosophy.

I think thats pretty obvious, actually.

Quote...Broken games are not fun to play.
To have fun with Forge games, you "must" play according to the design philosophy.

I think thats pretty obvious, actually.

Mind my edit. It's the inserted, bolded word, but I think you implied this strongly.



This is a tacit admission of something important.

Quote from: Temple1. Right where I said that not only Forge (formerly indie) games can be about something.

No, you said all games can be about something and some games (Forge games I assume because you didn't give any trad examples) were designed to be about something.

Quote2. Games on their own do nothing.
Players need to play the games for anything to happen.
Players can play games any way they damn well please.

Yeah, this is pretty obvious.

QuoteIf you play Forge games in other ways than the way they where designed to play, the games break down.
Broken games are not fun to play.
To have fun with Forge games, you play according to the design philosophy.

I think thats pretty obvious, actually.

Really? I'm gonna get back to you on this...broken Forge games...somewhere Uncle Ron feels a distrubance in the force...

Regards,
David R

Quote from: TempleDItV is "about" how far you are willing to go for your beliefs. Are you willing to cut off the arm to save the body, is one of the phrases I believe the book uses.

Ok. So, the author expects that the game is about this theme. I can get it. That is common for theme-focused games (I prefer this term, because game might be independent and still traditional or universal, or it might be published by big house and alternative and or focused... so let's talk in more exact terms. They don't create false dichotomies and so do not lead to elitism and war.)

Quote from: TempleNow, it is completely possible to tella story about this same theme with another game. You could tell it using D&D or Qin: The Warring States for example.

Right. And if you are used to the system (so it runs somewhere in the background) it is pretty easy.

Quote from: TempleBut DitV takes that theme and integrates it into the rules. Through Raises and Sees the rules support the theme. Te game is "about something," and that something is the theme of "how far are you willing to go for what you believe in?"

Or, to be exact, the author belives that it is so. And maybe not only author. Lot of people expects that it is so. That theme-focused game is really and even through rules focused on the presented theme.

Just one question. What if it is not? How do you find out? Sometimes the lack of rule-support for the theme can be successfully covered by accompaying fluff. And it works! It works great for some players. Some players react well to the simple conditioning - you behave as intended = you will get your reward. Some hate it. Some like mechanical expression of social and psychical traits and processes, some don't. These games are choosing one approach. Approach working for some but not all players. I have no problem with that.

I've played DitV once and I didn't like it. (I like the idea of conflict resolution alone, but not the way it was incorporated to the game). I didn't like the theme either. But I can understand, why somebody prefer it. I've tried half-dozen of those focused-games only to return the more wider-scope games, because I and my friends prefere them better. We choose the theme ad hoc as the game continues and that brings yet another element of surprise and fun to us.

Quote from: TempleAs I said, any tradtional game can be played about that theme. But the games themselves arent "about something." They can be, but they arent from the beginning.

Yes. I agree, that traditional approach is to let players choose the theme themselves. That doesn't mean, that the product of the game will be about anything, but that "something" (theme) must be defined by the players in the course of the game.  Which suits some and not all of them. I respect the other approaches as long, as they respect mine. Does that make sense?

Quote from: David RReally? I'm gonna get back to you on this...broken Forge games...somewhere Uncle Ron feels a distrubance in the force...

Regards,
David R

Going for the pun and really weak analogy :

 Aren't broken metal things usually repaired in a Forge?

So why does the gamer version sound like the opposite of that ?

Quote from: David RReally? I'm gonna get back to you on this...broken Forge games...somewhere Uncle Ron feels a distrubance in the force...

At a guess, Temple is talking about behaviour like a player suddenly saying "forget it, I'm not going up that mountain" during a game of The Mountain Witch. Of course that would break up the session.

Quote from: AlnagJust one question. What if it is not?

Well.. It is.

Im really sorry for being so adamant, because I really do see your point. Illsee if I cant get back to you with concrete examples of game text that supports DitVs theme, but I cant right now. Were packing to catch a flight, you see, and Im technically watching the kids whileI type this.. Technically...

Quote from: TempleIm not sure I understand what you are trying to say.

Are you saying that even though a game is designed around a theme, theres no guarantee that the game will be played around that theme? Because thats completely true.

There is also not any guarantee that a trumpet will be played by blowing through the mouthpiece by a person attempting to play it, or that a chessboard will be used to play chess on (and not checkers, for example). But that hardly matters, because the games are intended to be played in that way.

I dont understand the complaint, to be honest.

You almost got it, but then you veered off into error.

I'm saying just because a game is designed around a theme, there's no guarantee that the theme will actually "appear" at the game table, even if the rules are followed exactly.

It's hard enough with a book or movie: the author might feel the story is deeply imbued with meaning; that doesn't mean the audience is going to "buy it". It's even harder with an RPG, since the nature of the format is that you're asking the audience to make the story for themselves, using instructions which are subject to the vagaries of language and context.

(Working from the trumpet analogy, you might somehow be able to write a set of instructions which will enable a buyer to play all the notes perfectly; you could also include a book on music theory; but neither of these is going to turn the owner into Dizzy Gillespie.)

In both cases it's possible for the author to give away the show as it were and just say, "This is what my book is about, so now you know, I'm a genius." The audience's reply: "Who gives a damn about your message, we want to read a story, not a didactic allegory or an essay on morals." So that rarely works, unless the reader suffers some sort of cognitive dissonance about his self-image, i.e., if the reader's conned into thinking, "If I enjoy this great work, then I must be a genius!"

Tangent!

Elliot,
that´s what I think is so great about the "GDW-school" (will we continue to call it that?, BTW even if you don´t think it´s great it´s idiosyncratic): they aren´t explicitly telling you anything. It´s all open for you to figure out, or do what you want. This is different from Gygax, Rein-Hagen, and Pondsmith for example.

EDIT: waita minute! aren´t FGU games pretty much written in a similiar manner?

I'm tired of this thread and will no longer read it.

Quote from: TempleHi, sometime lurker, first time poster.

Hello and welcome to the boards.

I've waited a while to post to this thread, it seems to have taken off. A lot of the discussion seems to have focused on semantics, and by the end, I wasn't entirely sure what everyone was debating. I'll limit my comments to a few points from the original post.

Quote from: TempleIve read around the site, and attempted to form an opinion on the community here. Thats proved quite difficult, possibly because the community is so diverse.

Yes, it's a diverse lot, don't bother trying to stereotype the posters here as a unified group.

Quote from: TempleOn one hand I can hardly say I agree with the Pundit. I think that elitism is a problem (admittedly I see it as a problem in both the "indie camp" and the "mainstream camp" of the supposed conflict, but hey!), but thats about where the agreement ends.

I think, at the heart, that is Pundit's main stance.

It's also my stance. I get irked by publishers criticizing my style of playing as wrong, or insinuating that their style of play is better. I definitely feel like there is a bit of snobbery coming from a few people who write and/or play certain thematic small press games.

If, for example, you post here and imply that the games you like are more sophisticated than mine, and that I simply haven't evolved enough to a level of gaming where I could enjoy them, then I will get peeved. I'm not saying you're doing this, just saying that's the type of attitude that starts the whole "swine wars" mentality.

Quote from: TempleOn the other hand, I do like the unmoderated nature of theRPGsite,which is what drew me to register here.

It really is refreshing.

Quote from: TempleI like Storygames. I like thematic games, games that are about something. Games that make me feel.

Here, I'm not sure what you mean. I like a good story in my games. Interesting characters (both PC and NPC) that players get attached to, exciting cliffhangers, hidden conspiracies or connections, and a plot that people actually care about. If I can write a summary of a session afterward and it makes an interesting read, that was a good session.

I achieve story, theme and a feel of being "about" something with games like D&D, D20 Modern, Shadowrun, Legend of the 5 Rings, and Savage Worlds.

While not exactly stated here, it comes off that you are implying that these things (story, theme, about something, games that make you feel) are only (or best) achieved with narrativist, story-now, indy games like DitV or Sorcerer.

[

Quote from: TempleSo I listen to Tool, watch Pans Labyrinth and play Dogs in the Vineyard.

Why is that wrong? Is it wrong?

I don't think anyone here would tell you that is wrong.

Quote from: TempleAm I "Swine?" Im an aspiring game designer, and I design indie games together with the (rather small) norwegian community. I want people to play these games, both mine and others, and to enjoy them and what they offer.

Nope, so far, you aren't swine.

Quote from: TempleSo, why cant roeplaying games be anything other than the traditional model, according to you?* Why cant they be about something?

No one is saying games can't be about different things. I personally don't care for narrow-themed games like DitV, but there's nothing wrong with it. It doesn't bother me simply by existing.

Asking "why can't they be about something" implies that traditional games aren't about anything, which is incorrect. D&D (to use a common example) is about playing the role of someone in a fantasy world and using the tools at your disposal to overcome obstacles. It's fairly generic in what it covers. You can effortlessly make it "about" more specific issues if you want, like racism for example, if you run a campaign focusing around pogroms against elves.

Certain indie games are "about" a more narrow theme. DitV is about seeing how far you will go... and has mechanics specifically designed to support this theme. Both D&D and DitV are about something, DitV is about a much more narrow theme than D&D, but D&D certainly is "about" something.

Cheers,
Jeff

Quote from: TempleIndie rpgs are a subset of rpgs in general.

Terminology gets confusing here. Especially indie games. There are all sorts of variations of games that fall under the generic term "indie". Small press games like Clash's Starcluster can be very traditional in overal approach (with some clever innovations). Is this an indie game? What is is "about"?

Then you have games like Burning Wheel. A forge favorite, very crunchy, feels much more D&D like to me than other small-press fantasy games like The Shadow of Yesterday. Is this an indie game? It really feels like a much more traditional game to me.

Then there are games like Spirit of the Century. It has more of a free-form character generation process, and has a few player-directed-narrative mechanics, but lacks the "about something" that you speak of. IMO, it's about the same thing as any D20 game would be - it's about adventure! Yet there are no narrow themes like in Sorcerer or DitV.

Take Inspectres - a very player-directed-narrative story game. What is it about? It's about running a supernatural detective agency and solving mysteries. Can I do this with D20 modern? Easily. The difference lies in the mechanics used to achieve those ends. Is this an "indie" game? Most people would probably say so. Is is "about something" in the same sense that Sorcerer, or DitV is? Not really. So then is it "about anything" in your definition?

One last example is the World of Darkness. It's certainly "about something" in the sense of a narrow theme - it's about the struggle of man against the monster in himself and various morality plays. Is this an indie game? Not by most people's standards, yet it certainly has a more narrow theme than other games usually considered indie like Burning Wheel.

Quote from: TempleI think appreciation of indie games is a matter of taste.

I don't think anyone would argue this point, but then again it is an extremely vague statement. I think appreciating D&D 3.5 vs AD&D 2nd edition is also a matter of taste. Appreciating Eberron vs. The Forgotten Realms is a matter of taste. Pretty much everything is a matter of taste.

Now where you are going to get into trouble is insinuating it's a matter of good taste vs. bad taste. Or that it indicates a more evolved or mature level of gaming.

If you can say "I think appreciation of indie games is a matter of taste, and appreciation of traditional games is also a matter of taste" then no one will argue with you. Of course, there really isn't much point in such a blanket statement.

Quote from: TempleI dont believe indie games to be harmful to the hobby as a whole any more than genres of music are harmful to music as a whole.

I can't see how anyone would think that a particular game or group of games could be bad for the hobby. I think someone telling people that the way they play games is causing them brain damage isn't good for sales of your product, but isn't necessarily hurting the hobby.

-Jeff

Quote from: GrimGentAt a guess, Temple is talking about behaviour like a player suddenly saying "forget it, I'm not going up that mountain" during a game of The Mountain Witch. Of course that would break up the session.

Actually a player can do this in any game..right (depending on how focused the setting is)? I just find it a little odd that if you don't follow the design philosophy the (Forge) game breaks down and is not fun. I mean it's assumed there's a buy in but following the "design philosphy"...there's something else to Temple's statement.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RActually a player can do this in any game..right (depending on how focused the setting is)?

But in this particular game, your character is explicitly there only to meet the witch at the mountain, although initially you alone know why that is so. Sure, you could lose the whole samurai flavour and instead play some other band of fellow travellers on the road, thrown together by a common final destination; but if you are not interested in anything like that at all, then why are you playing the game?

Quote from: GrimGentBut in this particular game, your character is explicitly there only to meet the witch at the mountain, although initially you alone know why that is so. Sure, you could lose the whole samurai flavour and instead play some other band of fellow travellers on the road, thrown together by a common final destination; but if you are not interested in anything like that at all, then why are you playing the game?

Very true, which is why I said "depending on how focused the setting/game is". But I think there's more (I could be mistaken - I'll wait for Temple to elaborate) to "following the design philosophy" than just buying into the setting/game.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RBut I think there's more (I could be mistaken - I'll wait for Temple to elaborate) to "following the design philosophy" than just buying into the setting/game.

Well, in Witch the players have a degree of narrative control over those setting elements which are somehow related to their characters' reasons for being at the mountain in the first place: for instance, they can introduce new NPCs. That might tie the themes of the game into the mechanics in a way which perhaps is not to everyone's taste.

Quote from: GrimGentThat might tie the themes of the game into the mechanics in a way which perhaps is not to everyone's taste.

Hmm, that might be it.

I find it interesting that most trad games with themes tied to mechanics are extremely robust and flexible whereas Forge games (IMO) seem extremely rigid. This of course is a drawback and perhaps why Forge games are not very popular...IMO of course. The design philosophy is too intrusive.

Regards,
David R

Like I say, as with any good game, Dogs in the Vineyard is about a lot of things -

Theres musings on the nature of authority, an excuse to be an evil facist bastard and burn people at the stake, an excuse to be to voice of reason and liberal acceptance in a world that, a funky world with quirky characters to explore and an outlet for someone with a black powder revolver fetish.

And thats just what I like - other people may like other things.

Thats why its far and away the most popular thing to come out of the forge - because its a great premise that speaks to lots of people in lots of ways.

Quote from: Erik BoielleLike I say, as with any good game, Dogs in the Vineyard is about a lot of things -

Theres musings on the nature of authority, an excuse to be an evil facist bastard and burn people at the stake, an excuse to be to voice of reason and liberal acceptance in a world that, a funky world with quirky characters to explore and an outlet for someone with a black powder revolver fetish.

And thats just what I like - other people may like other things.

Thats why its far and away the most popular thing to come out of the forge - because its a great premise that speaks to lots of people in lots of ways.

Not to mention gaming the system - or so I've heard...

Quote from: James J SkachNot to mention gaming the system - or so I've heard...

You have to remember that with a Story Game(tm), the system isn't profoundly broken, it is simply intended to highlight certain aspects of the story.

Honest. No really. It may look broken, but its not. Its supposed to be like that. Honest.









No, really.

Quote from: Elliot WilenYou almost got it, but then you veered off into error.

I'm saying just because a game is designed around a theme, there's no guarantee that the theme will actually "appear" at the game table, even if the rules are followed exactly.

It's hard enough with a book or movie: the author might feel the story is deeply imbued with meaning; that doesn't mean the audience is going to "buy it". It's even harder with an RPG, since the nature of the format is that you're asking the audience to make the story for themselves, using instructions which are subject to the vagaries of language and context.

(Working from the trumpet analogy, you might somehow be able to write a set of instructions which will enable a buyer to play all the notes perfectly; you could also include a book on music theory; but neither of these is going to turn the owner into Dizzy Gillespie.)

In both cases it's possible for the author to give away the show as it were and just say, "This is what my book is about, so now you know, I'm a genius." The audience's reply: "Who gives a damn about your message, we want to read a story, not a didactic allegory or an essay on morals." So that rarely works, unless the reader suffers some sort of cognitive dissonance about his self-image, i.e., if the reader's conned into thinking, "If I enjoy this great work, then I must be a genius!"

This is a good point, and well made -- I think "aboutness" happens at the table and I suspect that players will manipulate even the most restrictive games to be "about" whatever they feel like making them about.

Likewise, even the most broadly-based games (GURPS) that have little inherent "aboutness" are made "about" something in the hands of the players.

I see this phenonema in games that try to capture genre feeling in rules through tricks (e.g. using a card-based mechanic to capture the "feel" of the wild west) -- this works for some people and not others; I suspect there's a very limited connection between the author's intent and the results (less than in static media).

Cheers,
-E.

Quote from: David RActually a player can do this in any game..right (depending on how focused the setting is)? I just find it a little odd that if you don't follow the design philosophy the (Forge) game breaks down and is not fun. I mean it's assumed there's a buy in but following the "design philosphy"...there's something else to Temple's statement.

Regards,
David R

There is indeed.

What Im saying is that itscompletelypossible for someone to play My Life With Master without the basic assumption that they are going to play a story of rebellion against a horrible master.
A group might concievably sit down with the assumption that being a slave to the Master is cool, and play scenes of gore and killing completely devoid of any sense of personal horror. Its very possible.

What MLWMs rules (and other games with a narrow theme and rules that support it) do is help players achieve the thematic content the author envisioned. But of course they have to agre beforehand that that is what they want to do.Otherwise its actually a waste of time to play MLWM.They would probably enjoy another system better, one that didnt constrain their choice of content to one pre-set theme.
And theres nothing wrong with that!

Yep!

As a result you either need to

1: Get over yourself

or

2: Accept no one is ever going to play your game!

QuoteAs with any kind of art, you can't really tell the audience what it's about. You have to somehow give them just enough information for them to be able to decide what it's about for themselves. It's a tricky proposition to say the least, and it can be somewhat uncomfortable for an artist when an audience decides that the work means something other than they intended (which is almost all the time :p).

But that's the trouble with art: an audience has to make it theirs to appreciate it.

Quote from: TempleAnd theres nothing wrong with that!

No there isn't. But there's something dodgy about claiming that your game is about something and hence different - better, sophisticated ...art - when in reality it does not "play" differently then any other rpg. I don't think this is what you're saying (some examples using trad games would be nice...but I understand the difficulty in this, I mean trad games don't have such a narrow focus even when their themes are tied up with their system...I'm thinking Unknown Armies & Underground, to name just two) but I do think it's a reason why some folks get riled up.

Regards,
David R

Whom are you quoting, Erik? It's very well put.

Can I fly a Spaceship in MLWM?

Quote from: SettembriniCan I fly a Spaceship in MLWM?

Actually, you can. Because in that game players define the setting. But you will have no stat like "Pilot" or such. Unless it is part of the task of your master or your own agenda, it really doesn't play any importantance in the system.

What I actually don't like about MlwM game is the fact, that the end of the game (winning condition, if you wish) is well known and will happen sooner or later. Also it is pretty restrictive in that how your character is defined.

It looks pretty much like psychoteraphy in the book not a game of fun...

Well, Forger games can be deceiving little bastards!
The TELL you that your input is valued, but lok at BE!

It would be obvious to have space battles in there, but they are not!

So, can I really fly a spaceship in MLWM?

Quote from: TempleAm I "Swine?" Im an aspiring game designer, and I design indie games together with the (rather small) norwegian community. I want people to play these games, both mine and others, and to enjoy them and what they offer.

Hi Temple.  Glad to see you here.  

Games that mean something are fine.  Games that suggest other games are inferior because they're somehow less meaningful are not okay.  But really, what I want to know is what the hell is all this talk about games that mean something?  You're Norwegian.  You guys invented "kill them all and take their stuff."  Stick with what you know.

:)

Welcome aboard.  

Pete

The Norwegians of recent also invented the:
"onanistic mysery tourism"-RPG about the Shoah!

Quote from: SettembriniThe Norwegians of recent also invented the:
"onanistic mysery tourism"-RPG about the Shoah!

 You HAD to remind us of that - didn't you??

- Ed C.

Quote from: SettembriniSo, can I really fly a spaceship in MLWM?

Well, as Alnag said, the group essentially defines the important elements of the setting before the beginning of the game; and while MLwM is by default set in some remote corner of Europe in the 19th century, there's no real reason why you can't play, say, Heralds of Galactus in the modern day.

Tough shit. So I can only fly a starship if I convice everybody else that we really need a starship?
I must convince everyone else to drop the proposed setting?
Well you can do that with any game.

I fear MLWM belongs into the starship-free category of RPGs, then.

Or can I introduce Starships, no matter what everyone else says?

AhAH! So it's a game about not having a spaceship!

See, they're all about something.

I want my games to be about starships.
It can be hidden deep in the end of the campaign, or locked for the Epic levels, or be totally commonplace.
But starships must be there, because without, the game will most likely suck.

Is there a thematic game centered on Starships?
I might like that.
Heck, I´d buy it at a moments notice.
Double the possibility if it has pictures of the starships.

Quote from: SettembriniOr can I introduce Starships, no matter what everyone else says?

Not really. Technically, though, even in the default setting you could play a minion who dreams of learning enough from his brilliant Master's work to build a small ship that would take him to the stars.

OK.
Victorian VernePunk StarVessels DO count.

So, what do I have to do, to get that thing built and zoom into the great void with it?

Quote from: SettembriniSo, what do I have to do, to get that thing built and zoom into the great void with it?

You must kill you f*cking master! Because that is what that ****ing game is all about. But first you must go through the phases of love and anger and fear and whatever ***ing emotional state you are able to, so you will be strong enough to oppose him. Than kill him, jump into the ship... And the end. Yes, that is very funny... especially when you play it more than once. Hell it is just variation of the same boring topic all over. Serve, socialize, opppose, kill.

Hell, I like BW more than MlwM...

Quote from: AlnagYou must kill you f*cking master! Because that is what that ****ing game is all about.

One of the minions must do that, anyway, but yes, the Master must die in the end. Once the endgame has been played out, the conditions of your epilogue determine what may happen to your character afterwards: he might escape, or find a new Master to serve, or become a Master himself.

Huh?
So when I actually get the ship started, it´s over?

No fun in my book.

Quote from: SettembriniSo when I actually get the ship started, it´s over?

Oh, you can have the ship ready even as the game begins, sure, but unless you stand up to your Master and refuse to serve him, he will tell you what to do with it. And once a minion successfully opposes the Master, the endgame begins.

That definitely sucks in regards to piloting spaceships.

Mmmm ... but what if the Master is the Starship?  And you are the vicious thugs who have to do increasingly dodgy things in your quest to keep it flying?

Frank Miller takes on Firefly ... or ... something :D

Quote from: TonyLBMmmm ... but what if the Master is the Starship?  And you are the vicious thugs who have to do increasingly dodgy things in your quest to keep it flying?

Frank Miller takes on Firefly ... or ... something :D

Like a wierd cross between Andromeda & Event Horizon...hell Tony you just gave me an idea for my next one shot...

Regards,
David R

Quote from: TonyLBMmmm ... but what if the Master is the Starship?  And you are the vicious thugs who have to do increasingly dodgy things in your quest to keep it flying?

Frank Miller takes on Firefly ... or ... something :D

It was either Balbinus or GBSteve who played MLWM as My Life With Prime Minister, so I don't see how you couldn't play My Life With Darth Vader/Father as well. Still, where are the rules for 8-G acceleration?

Quote from: TonyLBMmmm ... but what if the Master is the Starship? And you are the vicious thugs who have to do increasingly dodgy things in your quest to keep it flying?

Frank Miller takes on Firefly ... or ... something :D

There really is a story like that. It was wtitten by Harlan Elison and A.E. Vn Vogt and the title is "THe Human Operators". Year ago, during the SHOWTIME years of OUTER LIMITS they did an episode adapting the story. Malcolm McDowell was the voice of the ship , Jack Noseworhy and Polly Shannon played the Human crewmembers.

 The epilogue of what happened would make a nice set up for a 2 player and 1  GM reffing as the opening session RPG that expects to add new players gradually.

Here is the imdb description:
http://imdb.com/title/tt0667972/


Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Human_Operators_%28The_Outer_Limits%29


- Ed C.

A storygame with spaceships, that would be Full Light Full Steam.

Quote from: SettembriniThe Norwegians of recent also invented the:
"onanistic mysery tourism"-RPG about the Shoah!

If its "We All Had Names" youre referring to there, I would have you know that Ive playtested it, and it was a really intense and powerful event.

Also, the author is a friend of mine, and in my opinion hes brilliant.

Quote from: KoltarThere really is a story like that. It was wtitten by Harlan Elison and A.E. Vn Vogt and the title is "THe Human Operators". Year ago, during the SHOWTIME years of OUTER LIMITS they did an episode adapting the story. Malcolm McDowell was the voice of the ship , Jack Noseworhy and Polly Shannon played the Human crewmembers.

 The epilogue of what happened would make a nice set up for a 2 player and 1  GM reffing as the opening session RPG that expects to add new players gradually.

Here is the imdb description:
http://imdb.com/title/tt0667972/ (http://imdb.com/title/tt0667972/)


Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Human_Operators_%28The_Outer_Limits%29 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Human_Operators_%28The_Outer_Limits%29)


- Ed C.

Very cool, Koltar! Thanks for the info!

Quote from: ImperatorVery cool, Koltar! Thanks for the info!

Same story & episode described at the Sci-Fi channel web site :
http://www.scifi.com/outerlimits/episodes/season5/507humanoperators.html

 If you want bto read the original story in print, here is where I found it :
THE MAGAZINE OF Fantasy AND Science Fiction (a.k.a. F&SF) the January 1971 issue - its the cover story. The cover illo features artwork by Vaugn Bode.

The intro text for the story says that it was written for an anthology of stories called:
PARTNERS IN WONDER
...which was a collection of stories by writer teams collaborating.

Either one of the above you might find in a decent used book store.

- Ed C.

I couldn't tell you what any of the settings I've tried to design are about, other than the ideas appeal to me as settings. I don't think they need to be about anything, or teahc us something about our 'inner beast' or 'inner jedi' or whatever.

Starship = Master, the fuck?

I want to pilot one, nothing else will do.

And it´s pretty clear that even with huge collaborative consensual powers, MLWM does not deliver in any meaningful way.
And there´s sure not even stats for starships.

Careful Sett....,


 

QuoteStarship, Master, fuck

 Same line of text - sounds like a different kind of "roleplay".
(not that theres anything wrong with that.......)


 Although in the actual story, the humans DO get to pilot the starships at the end of it all.



- Ed C.

Quote from: KoltarCareful Sett....,


 

 Same line of text - sounds like a different kind of "roleplay".
(not that theres anything wrong with that.......)


 Although in the actual story, the humans DO get to pilot the starships at the end of it all.



- Ed C.

But only after they rebel and destroy the computer controlling the starship, which was using the humans as slaves.

Screw MLWM, this sounds more like TNE.

Quote from: jeff37923But only after they rebel and destroy the computer controlling the starship, which was using the humans as slaves.

Screw MLWM, this sounds more like TNE.

It was a GOOD story...both the text version and the TV adaptation of it.
 PLUS, Polly Shannon looks a lot like a girl I used to date.


- Ed C.

Back to the original title of this thread...

Why is it wrong for a roleplaying game to be about something?

Its not wrong, but if the roleplaying game isn't ultimately about having fun then it probably isn't a game - its something else disguised as a game.


EDIT: Am I a Master of the Obvious, or what.

Quote from: AlnagHell, I like BW more than MlwM...

Meaning you don't like Burning Wheel?

Quote from: BrantaiMeaning you don't like Burning Wheel?

Not that much... Le't stick with I like several dozens of RPGs more than Burning Wheel. ;)

Quote from: AlnagNot that much... Le't stick with I like several dozens of RPGs more than Burning Wheel. ;)

Then why the Q&A thread with Luke?  Just curious to see what makes him tick?

Quote from: BrantaiThen why the Q&A thread with Luke?  Just curious to see what makes him tick?

It is pretty easy... this made him tick:

Quote from: lukeWhat facts would like? I've got plenty of facts. I like facts.

I was really curious about those facts. Anyone can now consider, how many facts the Q&A acutally produced. Also, despite I am not fan of BW design, that doesn't necessary mean, that game designer doesn't have much to say to me. Rather the oppossite, I guess...

Quote from: TempleWell this post was, more than anything, a test. I wanted to see what kinds of responses I got (not that it wasnt a question I didnt want an answer to from theRPGsites forumites), to see if this was a forum I could post in regularly.

Im satisfied, and I like the replies so far...

How can you not know how incredibly insulting and arrogant this is? What kind of life could have led you to the day where you thought, "You know, I might consider posting at this internet forum, but I loathe sprinkling my sparkling insights on unworthy plebes. So I will devise a cunning test, and if they pass, only then will I deign to share my wisdom. Then I will tell them about it, so that they know exactly how far below me I think they are."

If you want to know what elitism is, the Forge-smell that drives people off, it's this. This and extensive pointless metaphors. I'm not particularly an old-school fan, but holy hell I hate being talked down to. :mad:

Quote from: ghost ratHow can you not know how incredibly insulting and arrogant this is? What kind of life could have led you to the day where you thought, "You know, I might consider posting at this internet forum, but I loathe sprinkling my sparkling insights on unworthy plebes. So I will devise a cunning test, and if they pass, only then will I deign to share my wisdom. Then I will tell them about it, so that they know exactly how far below me I think they are."

If you want to know what elitism is, the Forge-smell that drives people off, it's this. This and extensive pointless metaphors. I'm not particularly an old-school fan, but holy hell I hate being talked down to. :mad:

Well, what youve just read in to my post was not something I put into it. Im sorry, but my intention was never to insult anyone (and indeed it seems from the other responses in this thread that you are the only one to take offense; not that this lessens the gravity of it, but its an observation).

I never thought "You know, I might consider posting at this internet forum, but I loathe sprinkling my sparkling insights on unworthy plebes. So I will devise a cunning test, and if they pass, only then will I deign to share my wisdom. Then I will tell them about it, so that they know exactly how far below me I think they are."

You inserted that into my post, because you were either looking for it or expecting it in some way.

Its the same as the jazz thing from earlier. Some people expect classical, elitist Forge bastards, and so they find them everywhere.

Now,I dont blame you. Forgespeak can be quite condescending, and there are some realpricks among the Ron Edwards fanboys out there on the interwebs.

But, again, I didnt put that in there. You did.

Quote from: TempleWell, what youve just read in to my post was not something I put into it.

I never thought "[snip ghost rat's angry interpretation]."

You inserted that into my post, because you were either looking for it or expecting it in some way.

Yes, my reply was an exaggeration written in anger, which has not yet faded. But you did "test" us. Like we were lab monkeys. That grates on a person.

QuoteIts the same as the jazz thing from earlier. Some people expect classical, elitist Forge bastards, and so they find them everywhere.

The "jazz thing" is another example of empty, pointless metaphor. It's incensing and communicates nothing that couldn't be said directly.

QuoteNow,I dont blame you. Forgespeak can be quite condescending, and there are some realpricks among the Ron Edwards fanboys out there on the interwebs.

Yeah, I guess I shouldn't worry my pretty little head about it.:rolleyes:

I do not think at this point that you are actively malicious. I do wish that you got why I'm irritated by some of your comments.

Quote from: ghost ratYes, my reply was an exaggeration written in anger, which has not yet faded. But you did "test" us. Like we were lab monkeys. That grates on a person.

The "jazz thing" is another example of empty, pointless metaphor. It's incensing and communicates nothing that couldn't be said directly.

Yeah, I guess I shouldn't worry my pretty little head about it.:rolleyes:

I do not think at this point that you are actively malicious. I do wish that you got why I'm irritated by some of your comments.

Hey, I get it. I tried to say that I got it, but I guess it didnt come out right.

My intention was not to test you like lab rats.

Rather, I just wanted to test the waters.Id heard some pretty bad things about this board, and the prospect of being called"Swine" isnt exactly tempting.
So I decided to go straight to the heart of the matter, pose a question I knew could get some harsh answers and see just how harsh they were.

I quickly found that there was no need for concern, because there are many more reasonable people here than there are "extremists," so to speak.

I also agree with the basics of the Pundits, and thus the community at larges (because lets face it, hes the reason most people are here, including me) views about equality and the value of traditional roleplaying games. Just not, you know, all the extreme stuff.

So thats the kind of testing I was talking about. :)

Okay, that I can agree with. My opinions are the same as they were re: elitism, but I will now shed my hostility for the day.:)

Quote from: ghost ratOkay, that I can agree with. My opinions are the same as they were re: elitism, but I will now shed my hostility for the day.:)

Nice to know! :)

I really hate being misunderstood, and whenever it happens I work my ass off to fix it. Glad to see it was easy to mend this time.

Quote from: AlnagI was really curious about those facts. Anyone can now consider, how many facts the Q&A acutally produced. Also, despite I am not fan of BW design, that doesn't necessary mean, that game designer doesn't have much to say to me. Rather the oppossite, I guess...

I'm confused.  I noticed you asking him a lot of questions, and he gave a lot of answers, most of which were direct.  What's wrong with that?

Incidentally, over here in Finland Mike Pohjola is about to release his next RPG, Tähti, which apparently will be marketed to non-gamers as well and no doubt will draw at least some attention from the mainstream press. What is it about, you ask? The lives and loves of sexy mutant popstars in a girl band of the near future, with a diceless resolution system based on fortune cookies.

Quote from: GrimGentIncidentally, over here in Finland Mike Pohjola is about to release his next RPG, Tähti, which apparently will be marketed to non-gamers as well and no doubt will draw at least some attention from the mainstream press. What is it about, you ask? The lives and loves of sexy mutant popstars in a girl band of the near future, with a diceless resolution system based on fortune cookies.

Now there's a game that's about something...

...that something is my abject confusion. :confused:

Quote from: ghost ratNow there's a game that's about something...

...that something is my abject confusion. :confused:

There's probably not much of a chance that it will catch on and completely transform the public image of roleplaying... That would make explaining what goes on during a typical session kind of different, though.

Quote from: Pierce InverarityTrad or indie: ALL games are about something.

Yeah, in the sense that when you've got a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

Academics. ;)