Looking for Advanced Role-Playing Content

Riley37 · May 2, 2018

Simon T. Vesper said:
Am I the only one who finds this insulting?

Well, if Celebrim takes offense, I trust he'll say so. I read his passage, and I hope that you did. I'm nudging you to consider his point about means and ends, methods and goals.

Simon T. Vesper said:
The failure in this example isn't the methodology the GM used, it's being obvious about the process and the presentation.

I'm not asserting failure. I'm asserting that I would walk away from the table. If the DM didn't *announce* the process, I would still leave. There is some better way I can spend my evening, than a D&D session featuring five no-investigation no-negotiation no-wider-consequences no-story-arc zombie fights.

Simon T. Vesper said:
The players have a right to know that you're going to play fair.

You and I have a fundamentally divergent understanding of fairness, in TRPG and elsewhere. If you saw me picking grains of wheat in a field, directly from the stalk to my mouth, on the Sabbath, would you consider my action unfair, because I violated Rules As Written?

Simon T. Vesper said:
I'll say it again, for everyone who doesn't seem to be paying attention: the term "advanced" has been clearly defined. I appreciate that others may disagree with the term as I'm using it (even though I didn't make it up out of thin air), but so far, no one has offered a better definition.

If you walk into a library and ask the librarian for "advanced" books, you can define the term however you like. Few librarians will argue; they will mostly leave you alone, so that they can help library visitors who express their requests in more concrete terms.

Simon T. Vesper · May 2, 2018

Riley37 said:
Well, if Celebrim takes offense, I trust he'll say so.

Fair enough. The internet holds different standards, it seems. You're correct, he was the one who wrote it, so I guess it's no skin off my nose if he doesn't take offense.

Riley37 said:
I'm not asserting failure. I'm asserting that I would walk away from the table.

I know. I'm asserting that that presentation would be a failure because the GM lost a player at the table. Is there another measure for success we should be considering? (Apart from "everyone having fun," that is.)

Riley37 said:
You and I have a fundamentally divergent understanding of fairness, in TRPG and elsewhere. If you saw me picking grains of wheat in a field, directly from the stalk to my mouth, on the Sabbath, would you consider my action unfair, because I violated Rules As Written?

Adherence to religious rules is not comparable because religion isn't a game. If you were to it to rolling twice in Monopoly because you didn't like the outcome of the first roll, I would call that unfair ~ actually, I'd call it cheating and we would no longer play games together.

Riley37 said:
If you walk into a library and ask the librarian for "advanced" books, you can define the term however you like. Few librarians will argue; they will mostly leave you alone, so that they can help library visitors who express their requests in more concrete terms.

(Emphasis is mine.)

I'm struggling to understand. At first blush, I want to say that simply saying something doesn't make it so. I recognize that language is an ever evolving thing and that there's a constant dialogue going on when people are discussing stuff like this.

Waitaminute, let me check the thread...

Nope. No clarification on what "advanced" should mean. Just a lot of blank stares (metaphorically speaking) when I try to explain it.

Maybe a different approach...?

Advanced: ahead or far or further along in progress, complexity, knowledge, skill, etc.
Progress: forward or onward movement toward a destination
Complexity: the state or quality of being intricate or complicated
Knowledge: facts, information, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject
Skill: the ability to do something well; expertise

Since I'm asking for examples of role-playing material that meets this criteria, are we agreed that these definitions are clear? Do we need to discuss additional examples in order to establish clarity?

Wicht · May 2, 2018

Simon T. Vesper said:
Since I'm asking for examples of role-playing material that meets this criteria, are we agreed that these definitions are clear? Do we need to discuss additional examples in order to establish clarity?

I've read through the entire thread, and all your definitions, and I am still not quite clear on what you are looking for. I think you are wanting graphs and charts to provide versimilitude, but at times it sounds like you might be wanting something a little different. The problem is that you are using words assuming a definition, aka. Progress means movement towards a destination, but not necessarily clarifying what destination you are wanting so as to make the definition meaningful to the rest.

That being said, I think you might be wanting to check out Raging Swan Press, if you have not already. They may be producing material you will find useful.

pemerton · May 3, 2018

Simon T. Vesper said:
if you game has advanced beyond the need for encounter tables, what does that look like? How do you go about determining what encounters should occur, and where or when?

I'm not [MENTION=46713]Jhaelen[/MENTION], but I can answer for my part: when I use systems that don't involve encounter tables (which is every system I run except Classic Traveller), I determine what encounters occur based either on adjudication of player action declarations for their PCs, and/or based on what I thik the demands of pacing, theme, etc require.

CubicsRube · May 3, 2018

Are you guys still feeding the troll?

It must be barely able to move by now..

Jhaelen · May 3, 2018

Simon T. Vesper said:
Or, to put it another way: if you game has advanced beyond the need for encounter tables, what does that look like? How do you go about determining what encounters should occur, and where or when?

Okay, I lied: I still sometimes use (encounter) tables. But I never use them during a game session. I use them to prepare for a session. I use them for what they're best suited: to generate ideas. I then flesh out these ideas and create 'real' encounters from them. During the game I pick the encounters that make the most sense given the PCs current location and the actions they've taken.

See, roleplaying games are first and foremost games that feature a healthy amount of roleplaying, hence the name. They're not, nor are they intended to be, simulations. You sound like you strife after a 'perfect' game that doesn't involve any conscious choices. Well, somewhat surprisingly that doesn't necessarily translate into an engaging and entertaining gaming experience.

Striving for 'realism' in your encounter tables actually robs you of the most interesting kind of encounters: those that seem strangely out of place. It's the unusual encounters that spawn great stories.

But considering the gist of this thread, none of this will mean anything to you. I don't have anything to contribute to your quest for 'advanced' role playing content.

Simon T. Vesper · May 3, 2018

Wicht said:
I think you are wanting graphs and charts to provide versimilitude, but at times it sounds like you might be wanting something a little different.

I think the discussion involving encounter tables took us that direction.

Charts and graphs are useful because they can be placed in a program which can automate the process. This automation means we can increase the complexity of our game; we can apply the knowledge we have available to us; but of course, all of this is just mental masturbation unless we have a clearly defined goal or end-state.

That said, we don't need to keep focusing on "graphs and charts" as the only example of advanced play.

Wicht said:
The problem is that you are using words assuming a definition...

Yes. That's what people do when they communicate. The difference is that I've provided a definition and I'm asking if it's acceptable as-is.

Wicht said:
... Progress means movement towards a destination, but not necessarily clarifying what destination you are wanting so as to make the definition meaningful to the rest.

Yes. Correct. 100%

This is a critical piece to this conversation: I accept that progress is a requirement for something to be counted as advanced, but I'm not married to any one specific concept of "destination." The examples I've provided were intended to illustrate what I consider is a desirable end-state; but if you want to propose something else, please do so. And then demonstrate how a particular product/author/creator/game/whatever manages to achieve that goal.

Wicht said:
That being said, I think you might be wanting to check out Raging Swan Press, if you have not already. They may be producing material you will find useful.

I will do that, thank you.

Simon T. Vesper · May 3, 2018

pemerton said:
I'm not [MENTION=46713]Jhaelen[/MENTION], but I can answer for my part: when I use systems that don't involve encounter tables (which is every system I run except Classic Traveller), I determine what encounters occur based either on adjudication of player action declarations for their PCs, and/or based on what I thik the demands of pacing, theme, etc require.

Can I to assume, given the context, that you would call your approach "advanced?" If so, why? What makes it advanced? What can you share about your game that might be of help to others?

Simon T. Vesper · May 3, 2018

Jhaelen said:
... considering the gist of this thread, none of this will mean anything to you. I don't have anything to contribute to your quest for 'advanced' role playing content.

Part of this is due to the impression I've given, that I'm looking for something very specific and that that specificity is best embodied by the examples I've provided. That's my failure. Far as I'm concerned, you have the chance to go, "This is what I think progress looks like, this is how I apply knowledge and skill to my game, and therefore this is the kind of material we should count as advanced."

Jhaelen said:
See, roleplaying games are first and foremost games that feature a healthy amount of roleplaying, hence the name. They're not, nor are they intended to be, simulations.

I agree that RPGs feature acting, getting into character, playing pretend and so on. Are you saying this the destination? That the purpose of RPGs is to immerse ourselves in our characters and act the part, as though performing on a stage?

Simon T. Vesper · May 3, 2018

CubicsRube said:
Are you guys still feeding the troll?

In keeping with the rules for this forum, I'd prefer if you keep these opinions to yourself. I'm not here to troll. I want to engage in a discussion about our hobby. Your comment does nothing to contribute to the conversation and, indeed, goes very far to undermine it.