Dave Arneson used "Tree of Life" to refer to a decision tree because he'd never heard the term decision tree.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;981511Dave Arneson used "Tree of Life" to refer to a decision tree because he'd never heard the term decision tree.

Thanks.

I'm fond of decision trees. (I still miss my now expired free student copy of the Precision Tree add on for Excel.) A decision tree is a better model for designing a scenario than a simple linear series of scenes.

re: What is a story game. So long as the definitions are reasonably clear to any educated, reasonable person I think discussions would be more productive if people who describe their own games as story games got to define their term. And by the same token these discussions would be more productive if people who value in character, first person immersion were allowed to define what they mean by immersion.

Quote from: Bren;981474Your definition is almost uniquely yours which is going to cause confusion when you try to communicate with other people.

OK well now I know it has a new definition somewhere along the line. You remember the little books that would guide you from page to page.  Back when those were out that I would have called a story game. You got your choice of railroads in those little books. I remember looking at one once and tossing it down in disgust.

Justin defined storygames for me this way

Quote from: Justin Alexander;981434But that's not what "story game" or "storytelling game" means in general usage. Storytelling games feature narrative control mechanics which either determine who controls a particular chunk of the narrative or they're actually about determining the outcome of a particular narrative chunk. Generally speaking it's impossible for a storytelling game to have the kind "predetermined story" that you're talking about because their mechanics are usually explicitly about splitting narrative control between the players, making it impossible for any single player (or GM) to enforce a predetermined story.

Are you using that definition ffliz or some other definition?

You said

Quote from: ffilz;981490I happen to be in the same camp as at least some other "story gamers" (taking the meaning for story gamers as those who find the discussions in storygames.com relevant to their gaming) who include D&D as a story game...

In fact, some of the techniques in some story games are actually reaching back across the era of World of Darkness/Storyteller into the era of sandbox D&D, finding techniques that worked, and describing them differently.

Now are you talking D&D as in 3E and later or as you saying that Old School D&D is a story game? Because if you are using Justin's definition and talking OD&D I do not understand where you are coming from since I do not see anything in that definition that is even remotely compatible with a sandbox game.

Quote from: ffilz;981490On the other hand Ron Edwards did a lot of damage with his brain damage crusade (though which was actually aimed at the type of railroady "the GM has a story to tell gosh darn it" play that the folks here who are anti-story game are against).

Which is kind of funny in way, since he did not parse it that way, everything I read he was ranting about OD&D and old school play as a great evil, but old school is incompatible with any type of railroad. If he had ranted against railroaded gameing and recognized that is not related in any way to old school play he might have gotten a different response from the DIY/MIY folks.

Quote from: ffilz;981490(taking the meaning for story gamers as those who find the discussions in storygames.com relevant to their gaming.

I looked at that forum a long time ago and decided after reading some of it that they are anti-anything I like in playing OD&D.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;981511Dave Arneson used "Tree of Life" to refer to a decision tree because he'd never heard the term decision tree.

That is the best way to describe a decision tree I have ever heard.

Quote from: WillInNewHaven;981477To the extent that they are fighting over revenue, they are trying to get a bigger share of the industry. That is the motivation for discounting the trad games. Of course, they can argue that the art form has left traditional games behind and no one can really refute them because that is a matter of definitions and movable goal-posts.

Before I retired, I was in marketing and our discussions would sometimes touch on making the pie bigger but usually we talked about getting a bigger slice, even though we were the industry leader. Now I am marketing a crunchy trad RPG and expect to become a dozenairre soon.

Someone linked an article in one of these threads where some story-gamer was whining about the OSR because, as he saw it, so-called "story games" are "new technology" that have eclipsed D&D and made it obsolete. People who spend a lot of time online (myself included) need to beware of the echo chamber effect, where participating in a forum makes something seem like a much bigger deal than it is.

I guess on these story-gamers' forums, it feels like D&D is dead and busted, because everyone on the forum is playing something else. You can find 3.x-oriented forums where the participants are talking about how D&D is "dying" because "nobody" is playing 5e. What we're really talking about is a tiny group of people who made big waves in a slightly less tiny group of people online...but ultimately, they're really not a big deal.

Quote from: Crimhthan;981532Justin defined storygames for me this way

Are you using that definition ffliz or some other definition?

You said

Now are you talking D&D as in 3E and later or as you saying that Old School D&D is a story game? Because if you are using Justin's definition and talking OD&D I do not understand where you are coming from since I do not see anything in that definition that is even remotely compatible with a sandbox game.

Which is kind of funny in way, since he did not parse it that way, everything I read he was ranting about OD&D and old school play as a great evil, but old school is incompatible with any type of railroad. If he had ranted against railroaded gameing and recognized that is not related in any way to old school play he might have gotten a different response from the DIY/MIY folks.

 I looked at that forum a long time ago and decided after reading some of it that they are anti-anything I like in playing OD&D.

Hmm, I hate only having one level of quotes...

That would not be my definition, and honestly, my definition of story game would include all RPGs and probably more games... But I've always appreciated that story-games.com IS inclusive of old school D&D play. One poster I always follow is playing old school D&D (well, I think they use Lamentations of the Flame Princess). Probably not exactly the same way we played back in the 70s, but in much the same spirit. Now I know not all who frequent that site would include old school D&D in story games, but I've always felt the admins are friendly.

As to what Ron Edwards said in his brain damage, I read it as coming from his frustration with what World of Darkness and other very scripted/railroaded games did to the hobby. My impression was that he in fact was supportive of old school D&D (separately, there was the Fantasy Heartbreaker deal, but that was more about designers of games he labeled as such putting their heart into something that didn't offer enough new to do well enough in the marketplace to break even, and more the shame, the new ideas they did have in their game got lost as a result of being buried in this otherwise D&D ripoff). The publishing opportunities we have today make it much more possible to publish such a game and get enough attention to justify the investment in money and time. In any case, the brain damage post did a lot of damage to the Forge community and the games that came out of it.

Frank

Quote from: ffilz;981539As to what Ron Edwards said in his brain damage, I read it as coming from his frustration with what World of Darkness and other very scripted/railroaded games did to the hobby.

It was a specific attack on Vampire: The Masquerade which, he argued, caused physical brain damage due to the 'incoherence' of it's design, and was akin to child abuse.

His frustration was largely with 'brain damaged' Vampire players who didn't appreciate that his games were so much better.

Quote from: Crimhthan;981532Which is kind of funny in way, since he did not parse it that way, everything I read he was ranting about OD&D and old school play as a great evil...

No he wasn't. He was ranting about White Wolf '90s Railroading as a great evil, as several people have told you.

I believe this is the source, from 2006  - http://www.indie-rpgs.com/archive/index.php?topic=18707.0 - he starts off quoting himself saying:

If you say "creative social interaction" instead of "walking," in that paragraph, then that's what early-to-mid 1990s role-playing procedures concerning so-called "storytelling" were like - Vampire leading the pack, as well as a number of other offspring of a particular application of Champions. You've seen these role-playing experiences too, Jesse. You know all about the social and creative equivalents [of dealing with a badly-designed prosthetic -RE.

Then

All that is the foundation for my point: that the routine human capacity for understanding, enjoying, and creating stories is damaged in this fashion by repeated "storytelling role-playing" as promulgated through many role-playing games of a specific type. This type is only one game in terms of procedures, but it's represented across several dozens of titles and about fifteen to twenty years, peaking about ten years ago. Think of it as a "way" to role-play rather than any single title.

Quote from: Crimhthan;981529OK well now I know it has a new definition somewhere along the line.

And knowing is half the battle...

QuoteYou remember the little books that would guide you from page to page.  Back when those were out that I would have called a story game. You got your choice of railroads in those little books. I remember looking at one once and tossing it down in disgust.

I must have had lower expectations for those books. They remind me a bit of the solitaire board games (SPI, Avalon Hill, etc.) and solo scenarios for a multi-player games from back to the 1970s. They were no where near as much fun as actually playing against another person, but they were more fun than watching Happy Days or Laverne and Shirley on the TV and they did help learn the wargame rules. Similarly I've seen a few of those numbered paragraph branching solo adventures that were better than a sharp stick in the eye as a way to help new players learn a new system. WEG D6 had one or two of those. I think I remember seeing some for Runequest and Call of Cthulhu back in the 1980s. Alone Against the Wendigo was mildly fun and it was amusing to see how L.C. Nadelmann (your character) was going to get borked this time.

Spoiler

Quote from: TrippyHippy;981540It was a specific attack on Vampire: The Masquerade which, he argued, caused physical brain damage due to the 'incoherence' of it's design, and was akin to child abuse.

His frustration was largely with 'brain damaged' Vampire players who didn't appreciate that his games were so much better.

That definitely was a brain fart on his part and as far as I know he never backed down from his position. I remember reading a thread where someone was trying to defend him by reinterpreting the words, and Ron figuratively smacked him down. I respect the integrity of that, even though the position is patently moronic.

By the way, does anyone know if self-publishing in the OSR predates the Forgite self-publishing?

Quote from: Crimhthan;981532Which is kind of funny in way, since he did not parse it that way, everything I read he was ranting about OD&D and old school play as a great evil, but old school is incompatible with any type of railroad. If he had ranted against railroaded gameing and recognized that is not related in any way to old school play he might have gotten a different response from the DIY/MIY folks.

I'm certainly not going to try and explain old what's-his-name nor justify his rantings. But my recollection is that a lot of his ire was originally directed at Vampire the Masquerade. From there he expanded the crazy to include more games.

Quote from: ffilz;981539Hmm, I hate only having one level of quotes...

So add another level. You just nest one quote inside of the other.

Quote from: ffilz;981539That would not be my definition, and honestly, my definition of story game would include all RPGs and probably more games...

But if you define story games that way the label is useless for helping someone who doesn't want to play something like Dogs in the Vineyard when they are looking for an RPG to play.

QuoteMy impression was that he in fact was supportive of old school D&D...

My read of what Ron Edwards wrote leads me to conclude that he never understood the appeal of playing a character in a simulated imaginary world that responds in a naturalistic way to the character's actions, of exploring such a world as the character, nor of GMs who wanted to create and run such a simulated world.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;981552By the way, does anyone know if self-publishing in the OSR predates the Forgite self-publishing?

It does. Self publication or amateur publication was somewhat common in the 1970s and early 1980s. Often it took the form of APA fazines like Alarums and Excursions, but it also included game rules. Here's one example of a game a friend of mine self published in 1980.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]1237[/ATTACH]
And apparently it's now available again on Amazon.