Authenticity in RPGing

[AnotherGuy]

I can see attendant difficulties in the term for sure as it comes across as containing a value judgement. I suspect that creating an us and them dichotomy wasn't @pemerton 's program, but rather to index something that one family of games does more explicitly and which other families of games imply or suggest (or possibly even just expect). All games can do the thing, or at least that's my impression here.

I'm not sure how this response actually answers the query posed in Umbran's post you quoted.
All you have done is substitute the word authenticity with something and the thing without defining anything.

 

[TwoSix]

I'm uncomfortable with the term "authentic" being used a characteristic of certain frameworks of play, that necessarily frames other modes of play as "inauthentic" which strikes me as a bit too pejorative.

 

[Fenris-77]

I'm not sure how this response actually answers the query posed in Umbran's post you quoted.
All you have done is substitute the word authenticity with something and the thing without defining anything.

Yup! That's exactly what I did. The word authenticity is, I'll freely admit, perhaps somewhat weighted. I don't think the notion at hand is one of good and bad though, just one of different. So I elided the word in question to try and sidestep the (probably inevitable) kvetching about RPG tribalism and whatnot, which I'm 100% sure isn't what @pemerton was getting at.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Yup! That's exactly what I did. The word authenticity is, I'll freely admit, perhaps somewhat weighted.

Somewhat weighted?

"Other than that, how was the play, Mrs. Lincoln?"

I don't think the notion at hand is one of good and bad though, just one of different. So I elided the word in question to try and sidestep the (probably inevitable) kvetching about RPG tribalism and whatnot, which I'm 100% sure isn't what @pemerton was getting at.

This is the issue so many people have with invented jargon. I feel like ... there's been a conversation about this? Here, let's see it in action-

(1) For me, what those RPGs - with all their variations in details of technique, principles, etc - is authenticity. (2) That players and GMs make genuine choices, in play, that say something - individually and, if it's working properly, together.

(3) The flipside of this is that the effect of railroading and all its variations (the "three clue rule", GM-enforced alignment, adventures that work by the players figuring out what the GM has in mind as the solution, etc) is to squelch authenticity. The parameters of play have already been set.

Here's how it works-
(1) Come up with a term that is laden with a positive connotation to describe your preferred games/playing styles/etc.
Here, we have the use of the term "authenticity." Is authenticity and authentic laden with positive connotations? Oh, you betcha! Let's see it in another context ...
"I like authentic Mexican food, not the other stuff you get at the supermarket."
"You need to be your authentic self, not some fake person."

(2) Then define it in a nebulous way that both gloms on to other good terms (being authentic means making "genuine choices") while also not saying anything at all ... being authentic just means ... saying something. What? Something. How? Together. When? When it's working properly. Right!

(3) Then define other things within the "negative space" of the jargon you have just created. Make sure you use pejorative language as well. When you aren't playing "those RPGs" then what happens .... you "squelch authenticity."

So what have we really learned? Absolutely nothing. Anyone who already generally agrees with the above will just nod their head sagely and say, "Well, of course. These games are different! I'm not sure what any of this means, but obviously there's something there. I mean, he even says ... something."

Meanwhile, anyone who is likely not to agree will probably not think very highly of someone who chooses to ascribe "authenticity" to their own favored styles of games, while saying other people prefer to "squelch authenticity."

It is both provocative and meaningless, and serves only to highlight a desire for conflict. It ascribes (as Umbran correctly notes) a pseudo-morality to play that is inappropriate.

Non-GM driven games (which is a fine phrase) are very different, and have much to recommend them for some people. "Authenticity" isn't it.

 

[Fenris-77]

Well, frankly, I don't think @pemerton is coming up with a positive word to describe his favorite games at all, nor is he attempting to be provocative, nor attempting to foment conflict. I think he's indexing something that all games do to some extent, and that certain families of games perhaps showcase or make explicit more obviously than others.

So I guess other than all the unnecessary and snarky finger pointing I probably agree with you.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Well, frankly, I don't think @pemerton is coming up with a positive word to describe his favorite games at all, nor is he attempting to be provocative, nor attempting to foment conflict. I think he's indexing something that all games do to some extent, and that certain families of games perhaps showcase or make explicit more obviously than others.

So I guess other than all the unnecessary and snarky finger pointing I probably agree with you.

I honestly don't know how to address this. Anyone who has ever played various styles of TTRPGs understands that there is a difference between, say, OD&D, 3e, V:TM, Fiasco, Dogs in the Vineyard, and BiTD.

Labeling one subset of games as "authentic" while other games "squelch authenticity" is ... well, it's certainly a way to "index{} something that all games do to some extent" (which ... wow!), but it does so in a very weighted manner.

How about this- how about he does the same indexing, except he calls non-GM driven RPGs ... INAUTHENTIC. Which makes more historical sense, because the traditional (aka, authentic) RPGs tend to be GM-driven. That's how they started ... you can't get more AUTHENTIC than OD&D, right?

There, everyone is happy! Right? Because the actual word doesn't matter- he's just using any ol' random term to "index" something or other.

Win/win! Yay everyone!!!!!

 

[Fenris-77]

I feel like I'm going to sit tight and let Pem tilt at his own windmill a bit before I continue with this piquant little roshambo we've started. I think I know what he's aiming for, but that's not enough for me to want to further clutter the thread. You and I are, if nothing else, verbose.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

I feel like I'm going to sit tight and let Pem tilt at his own windmill a bit before I continue with this piquant little roshambo we've started. I think I know what he's aiming for, but that's not enough for me to want to further clutter the thread. You and I are, if nothing else, verbose.

Ro. Cham. Beau.

I demand the most difficult spellings. H. L. Mencken can simplify my posterior.

 

[Sepulchrave II]

@pemerton

Are you purposely trolling? It seems unlike you. I can't believe that you'd just sit down and use a word like authentic without being cognizant of the attendant value judgment which accompanies it, and without understanding that the label of inauthentic implicitly be extended to games which do not comport with the criteria which you have set forth.

Perhaps you might elucidate.

 

[Deset Gled]

How about "agency"? Find and replace every time the OP said "authenticity" with "agency" and it's pretty normal post for a discussion on railroading.