D&D 5E Why the claim of combat and class balance between the classes is mainly a forum issue. (In my opinion)

[pemerton]

The link to that thread doesn't seem to be working for me now, but IIRC Edwards went to considerable trouble to explain that the "damage" could be reversed by playing other games.

OK - I didn't re-read all the "awful thread of awfulness", I just linked to it. For "permanent", then, read "enduring and not trivially reversed".

I think that Edwards's point, including his reference to games from the 70s peaking in the 90s, is this: that although not originally designed as such, people adopted the RPG form for story-oriented purposes, but it was not well-designed for this in its original form (in particular, its distribution of responsibilities across players and GM) and developments to compensate for this (especially, stronger and stronger GM force to ensure the creation of "story") just compounded the problem rather than solving it. And he likens the design of "indie"-style games (Sorcerer, DitV, etc) to compensating prostheses - whereas he refers to his own recent designs (with which I'm not familiar) as dealing with the issue from the ground up - implying that in a certain respect that they are not really RPGs at all because they have in a certain sense transcended or at least radically moved beyond the player/GM dichotomy.

Iif you find GNS useful, by all means employ it. I just find it really doesn't work for me (and I don't buy into it) so I tend to react negatively when it feels like folks are pushing its concepts on me

I think some people, such as [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION], [MENTION=463]S'mon[/MENTION] and [MENTION=87792]Neonchameleon[/MENTION] are missing the fact that while they may not enjoy playing in railroads with meta-plots and little to no "protagonism" apparently some/many people do.

In what way am I missing that fact? All I've said is that I don't like that sort of play, and that I've welcomed refugees from it into my games. If others love it that's no skin of my nose, as long as they don't try and tell me that I'm not really roleplaying.

As for this implication that I'm some sort of terminology-pushing elitist - [MENTION=85870]innerdude[/MENTION] was the one who (i) introduced GNS terminology into this thread, (ii) for the purpose of arguing that gamists have no place in RPGing. It is only the three posters you mentioned, plus [MENTION=49017]Bluenose[/MENTION] and [MENTION=386]LostSoul[/MENTION], who have made the point that gamism is where the RPG hobby began, and is - from the Forge point of view, among others - a completely viable, vibrant and unobjectionable form of RPGing.

Here's an interesting post excerpt from the Evil Hat website by Rob Donoghue (co-creator of FATE) concerning indie rpg's being equated with the Forge and his feelings on the Forge.... Since he clearly draws a distinction between himself and "members of the Forge" I'm starting to believe that Fate isn't a Forge game.

I don't see himself distingusihing himself from "members of the Forge" - which furthermore would be dishonest, wouldn't it, if the forum for his game was based at The Forge. (Unless you are working with some other definition of "message board member" that I'm not familiar with.)

Frankly it seems to me that he is trying to avoid being tarred with the Forge's brush, despite selling a game which strikes me as pretty "indie" by any typical measure (eg player protagonism via metagame mechanics that hook onto fictional positioning of PCs), because there is a degree of Forge hostility in many RPGers that I personally don't really understand.

The gap between the RPG camp and the Storygame camp - indeed the idea that there is an actual gap - seems in my experience to be a claim of the RPGSite and its most influential member the RPGPundit (who makes Edwards seem polite and reasonable).

<snip>

As far as I know the only place that claims that Edwards currently has any power in the industry is the RPGSite. He said some interesting things from 1999 to 2004 and was full of enough energy to develop the Forge (IIRC he didn't even found it) - for the publication of role playing games.

I don't know who founded the Forge, but I have always assumed (from the wording of the administration descriptions, perhaps?) that it was Clinton R Nixon.

I don't know all the ways that "storygame" is used, but I mostly see it used - on these boards, at least - as a way to imply that the sort of RPGing I tend to enjoy and be interested in is not really RPGing. I don't really understand the desire of some RPGers to exclude playstyles they personally don't enjoy from the category of RPGing.

I don't visit the RPGsite very much - it doesn't appeal to me much, in part because the general tone seems very full of hate towards RPGers for reasons that I don't really get. The link you posted, for instance, took me (via google) to a thread attacking RPGnet for the way it moderated a thread about sexism in RPGs. It strikes me that there are obviously huge issues around sexism (and also racism) in RPGs, and given that these things matter to me and to my participation in RPGing as a hobby, I don't find the RPGPundit's casual dismissal very plausible or appealing.

In fact, one thing I was reminded of in posting the two passages from the AD&D PHBs upthread was that Gygax - whatever his personal views, about which I know nothing - in his AD&D rulebooks took steps to use gender-inclusive language, whereas by 1989 AD&D had reverted to masculine-only pronouns. Why did TSR's RPG text become less inclusive in the language they used?

 

[Bedrockgames]

So one way of being a Forge game is using their message boards as your official company message boards. Not simply posting there. Using resources they have provided under their name as part of their core function of supporting companies like you gets you marked as one of their companies, yes.

I certainly think some current games out there that are doing well can probably point to the forge as a contribtuing factor to their existing, but I do not believe use of message baord resources oughtt o mean a game is a "forge game" a n "en world game", etc. Lots of companies use message boards and even in different ways but that doesn't automatically link their gaming philosophy to the philosophies of those sites, and it doesn't automatically link them to a movement associated with the sites. Having a cpmpany page on the forge definitely strongly suggests Evil Hat is a forge company, but in light of what people have posted Fred Hicks (and that people have pointed out the game predates the forge itself )it also makes me doubtful of drawing this connection. I am sure there games and companies that link strongly to the forge. I just do have trouble seeing forge ideas when I look at fate (which again really reminds more of the stuff laws was doing in the 90s, more than stuff like GNS).

Maybe we are disccussing to seperate things though: the forge's contribution to the industry by assisting smaler companies by giving them a page on the site, and the forge's contribution to design approaches via GNS. My sense is most people here are speaking of the latter.

i will say though, since it came up, that in this small industry, whatever point people are trying to argue, 10,000 copies sold is damn good. It isn't D&D level good, but among the other companies, most folks would do back flips for those kinds of sales numbers.

 

[Imaro]

So one way of being a Forge game is using their message boards as your official company message boards. Not simply posting there. Using resources they have provided under their name as part of their core function of supporting companies like you gets you marked as one of their companies, yes.

Well thanks for YOUR definition of what constitutes a "forge" game but when it comes to determining whether a specific game is or is not part of something... I'm going to go with the actual creators of the game as opposed to random internet guy whose speculating... Just saying.

 

[pemerton]

If the rules don't include metagame mechanics, you can still metagame aplenty.

Are yo able to explain how, in either Runequest or Classic Traveller, metagame considerations can be brought to bear upon action resolution (or PC development, for that matter)?

My own view is that it's basically impossible.

 

[Bedrockgames]

In what way am I missing that fact? All I've said is that I don't like that sort of play, and that I've welcomed refugees from it into my games. If others love it that's no skin of my nose, as long as they don't try and tell me that I'm not really roleplaying.

?

I don't think you are not roleplaying. I consider it all rp (though i sometimes casually use RP to mean speaking in character and from character pov, I don't think that useage defines the R in RPG). Howevr i do think you implied in one of your posts (though you not very comittal) you agree with edward's conclusion that these other styles cause lasting damage to one's creative abiltiies. If you reject that concluiof i appologize, but if you didn't then i think you are going beyond simply saying you dislikedhese other styles of play and patholigizing them (and i do think speaking of people who have moved from those styles into your group as "refugees" suggests the same). Again, if this isn't your meaning then I do appologize, but that is how i have been reading your posts.

 

[Imaro]

I don't see himself distingusihing himself from "members of the Forge" - which furthermore would be dishonest, wouldn't it, if the forum for his game was based at The Forge. (Unless you are working with some other definition of "message board member" that I'm not familiar with.)

Frankly it seems to me that he is trying to avoid being tarred with the Forge's brush, despite selling a game which strikes me as pretty "indie" by any typical measure (eg player protagonism via metagame mechanics that hook onto fictional positioning of PCs), because there is a degree of Forge hostility in many RPGers that I personally don't really understand.

Ok, stop... indie rpg does not auto-equate to Forge game... so a game being pretty "indie" does not in and of itself make it a Forge game.

As to the hostility... really?? Edwards compares those who like AP's or encounters or Vampire the Masquerade play in the 90's with being brain damaged or a sexually abused 12 yo child and you have no idea where the degree of hostility comes from... really??

 

[Neonchameleon]

Ok, stop... indie rpg does not auto-equate to Forge game... so a game being pretty "indie" does not in and of itself make it a Forge game.

As to the hostility... really?? Edwards compares those who like AP's or encounters or Vampire the Masquerade play in the 90's with being brain damaged or a sexually abused 12 yo child and you have no idea where the degree of hostility comes from... really??

A game being indie doesn't make it a Forge game. A game that set up its online presence making heavy use of The Forge makes it a Forge Game (or rather a Forge company). How is this complicated?

And Edwards made one bad statement. Why is there the hostility to the entire Forge simply because one of the contributors behaved like a jackass once and then doubled down against the obvious thoughts of the community?

 

[Bedrockgames]

And Edwards made one bad statement. Why is there the hostility to the entire Forge simply because one of the contributors behaved like a jackass once and then doubled down against the obvious thoughts of the community?

He isn't just one of the contributors though,he is arguably the architect of forge theory and that essay seems pretty foundational. I don't think anyone tied to the forge needs to be the focus of hostility (i dont even think edwards ought to even though i disagree strongly with his opinion expressed in that essay-like i said b dont want to blame him now for something he said years ago online, probably intended for a small audience of people who shared his views). But i understand why it lead to so much hosil y. Once you say that people who play a certain way are lastingly damaged it sets the stage for enoromous divisions.

my sense is, these divisions are beginning to heal. There is no where near the same level of animosity there once was between the differennt groups. But it is still having a bit of an echoe and the folks who were active online at the height of the forge (on both sides i think) seem to bear the grudges most.

For me, my only real objection when i encounter forge stuff is it sometimes feels like i am having a framework forced upon me, and i also feel the terminlogy interferes with communication a bit but I don't hold it against folks if they play games inspired by ideas from the forge.

 

[Ratskinner]

An Indie publisher setting themselves up through The Forge was the whole purpose of the Forge. Possibly "Deep within the Forge" was overstating the case - but it was certainly through the Forge using it for its intended purpose.

This, I have no objection to. It is, quite clearly, IMO basically what happened. Starting up, Evil Hat didn't have the resources/time to run their own forums, etc. Eventually, they "outgrew" the need for the Forge's help and went independent. Now they challenge the definition of "Indie", even though they are certainly a very small company.

Forge Theory was designed to help with new games - and point out why the games at the end of the 90s were not fit for purpose and we needed better games. If you look at The Forge Website, the top three forums are "Actual Play", "Game Development", and "Independent Publishing". Not "Forge Theory", "GNS", or anything of the sort. The sole purpose of the theory was to help with game development.

No objection. I was reacting specifically to the phrase "deep within the Forge" applying to Fate, which would indicate to me a game whose design is heavily influenced by the GNS theory discussions on the Forge (or possibly even an "experimental" game within that framework.) There are a few other games on my harddrive that I would feel similarly about...but they do not appear to have gained the traction that Fate has, and are mostly forgotten. (even by me...sometimes I'm stunned by what I find in my "Other RPGs folder" )

 

[Imaro]

No objection. I was reacting specifically to the phrase "deep within the Forge" applying to Fate, which would indicate to me a game whose design is heavily influenced by the GNS theory discussions on the Forge (or possibly even an "experimental" game within that framework.) There are a few other games on my harddrive that I would feel similarly about...but they do not appear to have gained the traction that Fate has, and are mostly forgotten. (even by me...sometimes I'm stunned by what I find in my "Other RPGs folder" )

This is along the lines of what I think when someone says something is a "Forge game"... that the game was designed around and with their principles in mind not that you used their message boards but have chosen to draw a distinction between their group and your company.