Do you prefer your character to be connected or unconnected to the adventure hook?

[Ovinomancer]

Given that the creator of AW has used the term storygame for it on occasion,a nd uses RPG for it on his website, I reject out of hand your objection; the term isn't narrow. Essentially, it's any game designed to encourage a story-first mode of play, and lacking significant simulationism (story-games.com via Archive.org). And AW very definitely is exactly that. Now, there are storygames that aren't RPGs... the leading example being Once Upon A Time... a knee-jerk "I don't play storygames" tirade does not change the fact that AW is a very narrativist agenda with just enough gameism to keep things moving if the story stalls.

Okay. I'm not sure that definition means much outside of the Forge, but you can have it. It doesn't do much for me.

As for the surveys: the surveys which show the percentages of D&D exclusivity weren't asking for a specific period. In the several surveys by Wizards, some 80% of D&D players reported never having played any game that wasn't D&D, and many have only played one edition of D&D ever. Even on RPGG, there are a significant subset who only play D&D family games, most of those only 1 edition at any given time. The most recent by wizards that I recall was during the dev period for 5E, and it was pretty impressively "We'll play only D&D branded games." What's surprising was the response set included some who'd never played D&D, SWd20, SWSE...

Well, a survey of D&D players by the D&D company on the D&D websites might, you know, skew toward D&D pretty heavily. Or, selection bias.

 

[pemerton]

I'm prepared to accept that most RPGers play only some version of D&D. But I don't think that is very relevant to @Ovinomancer's posts on this thread.

Ovinomancer's point (as I understand it) is not that he is statistically unexceptional. It's that he is not particularly exception in his capabilities. In other words, anyone else who is posting on ENworld and who wants to understand how to play a RPG in a way that is closer to player-driven PbtA than to GM-driven AP-oriented play, probably can do so.

Furthermore, they probably can do so without needing videos or other foresnic-level proof that such other approaches to play exist.

I'm also sympathetic to Ovinomancer's rejection of the label "story game" in this particular context. Because in this particular context what is significant about BitD, AW etc is that they are RPGs, with pretty traditional allocations of responsibilities to players and GMs, but they allow for story to emerge in play without the need for anyone to have pre-authored it.

What is significant in the context of this thread is how techniques other than pre-authorship but also other than round-robin/pass-the-baton shared storytelling can be incorporated into RPGing so as to ensure that play will result in emergence of a story.

 

[hawkeyefan]

I would like to second the notion that @Ovinomancer is unexceptional.



In seriousness, though, although the vast bulk of my RPGing has been some form of D&D, it still surprises me how many people here on a RPG based site never seem to branch out beyond that category. It seems that there are a few common exceptions such as Call of Cthulhu and Star Wars, and then not much else.

One would tend to think of gamers as generally open-minded...so it does seem odd that trait doesn’t seem to carry over to the idea of trying new games. I get that D&D is foundational in many ways, but still I can’t help but wish that more folks would be willing to try more games.

 

[Maxperson]

I would like to second the notion that @Ovinomancer is unexceptional.



In seriousness, though, although the vast bulk of my RPGing has been some form of D&D, it still surprises me how many people here on a RPG based site never seem to branch out beyond that category. It seems that there are a few common exceptions such as Call of Cthulhu and Star Wars, and then not much else.

One would tend to think of gamers as generally open-minded...so it does seem odd that trait doesn’t seem to carry over to the idea of trying new games. I get that D&D is foundational in many ways, but still I can’t help but wish that more folks would be willing to try more games.

Speaking for myself. When I was in high school and the years right after, I had tons of time. We would sometimes play for days or even weeks straight. We played lots of D&D, but we also played Gamma World, Star Frontiers, Marver Super Heroes, Boot Hill, and some others. The time was there. What we didn't have were families, full time jobs and other responsibilities.

Now, I have all of those things. I get to game once a week for about 4 hours. I don't have the time to really invest in learning and playing a new game for long enough to really decide if it's good or not. Myself and my group love D&D and don't want to take months of time away from D&D to give a new game a fair shake, and it would be a waste of time to give it an unfair shake. So we only play D&D.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I would like to second the notion that @Ovinomancer is unexceptional.



In seriousness, though, although the vast bulk of my RPGing has been some form of D&D, it still surprises me how many people here on a RPG based site never seem to branch out beyond that category. It seems that there are a few common exceptions such as Call of Cthulhu and Star Wars, and then not much else.

One would tend to think of gamers as generally open-minded...so it does seem odd that trait doesn’t seem to carry over to the idea of trying new games. I get that D&D is foundational in many ways, but still I can’t help but wish that more folks would be willing to try more games.

It's a mistake to think gamers are any more open to new things than any other group. It's like sports fans -- most follow a singke sport, a few more follow 2, but it's the rare fan that follows more than that.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

In seriousness, though, although the vast bulk of my RPGing has been some form of D&D, it still surprises me how many people here on a RPG based site never seem to branch out beyond that category. It seems that there are a few common exceptions such as Call of Cthulhu and Star Wars, and then not much else.

One would tend to think of gamers as generally open-minded...so it does seem odd that trait doesn’t seem to carry over to the idea of trying new games. I get that D&D is foundational in many ways, but still I can’t help but wish that more folks would be willing to try more games.

1. Path dependency.

2. Network effects.

It's pretty simple. Most people play D&D* because most people play D&D, and have played D&D. Most new players who are introduced into RPGs learn to play D&D from other people playing D&D. They then invest in D&D material to play D&D. If they move to a new place, they are likely to find other D&D players.

D&D is easy, and it is ubiquitous. It is both a lingua franca and a fallback. It is easier for most people to customize D&D to what they want (with other people who know D&D) than to play a new game.

It is what it is; simply put, any other game will merely be an alternative.


*I am broadly including all versions of D&D and D&D clones, here, including PF.

 

[Ovinomancer]

1. Path dependency.

2. Network effects.

It's pretty simple. Most people play D&D* because most people play D&D, and have played D&D. Most new players who are introduced into RPGs learn to play D&D from other people playing D&D. They then invest in D&D material to play D&D. If they move to a new place, they are likely to find other D&D players.

D&D is easy, and it is ubiquitous. It is both a lingua franca and a fallback. It is easier for most people to customize D&D to what they want (with other people who know D&D) than to play a new game.

It is what it is; simply put, any other game will merely be an alternative.


*I am broadly including all versions of D&D and D&D clones, here, including PF.

It's not actually easier to customize D&D to do what you want, unless you're staying in a pretty narrow band of play. People spend huge amounts of effort to customize it because that's what they know and there's a weird identity thing in saying you play D&D, even if a heavily house-ruled version. Most of the effort I see people doing in trying to modify D&D would be clearly better served by picking up a game that already does that. What's even more odd about D&D fixation is the edition thing -- people stick to an edition. You'd think, given the huge range of OSR games that have already made modification to do specific things they'd be more used, but people really seem to want to put a designer hat on with D&D. Further to that, having only had experience with D&D, they rarely actually realize what the game is doing because that's all they know, so their mods don't really address the problems they have. There's a reason that a personalized version of D&D is usually called a Fantasy Heartbreaker.

I wish every D&D player would, at some point, give an earnest try of a different system. They can hate it, that's fine, but the experience is still very rewarding when you come back to D&D-- open eyes make for better choices. My D&D games got lots better after I branched out because, when I play D&D, I'm not trying to make the game anything other than what it is; I embrace it and play it that way. It's when you use D&D to do something that D&D isn't that you get into trouble, and most with only D&D experience think D&D can do way more than it actually does.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

It's not actually easier to customize D&D to do what you want, unless you're staying in a pretty narrow band of play. People spend huge amounts of effort to customize it because that's what they know and there's a weird identity thing in saying you play D&D, even if a heavily house-ruled version. Most of the effort I see people doing in trying to modify D&D would be clearly better served by picking up a game that already does that. What's even more odd about D&D fixation is the edition thing -- people stick to an edition. You'd think, given the huge range of OSR games that have already made modification to do specific things they'd be more used, but people really seem to want to put a designer hat on with D&D. Further to that, having only had experience with D&D, they rarely actually realize what the game is doing because that's all they know, so their mods don't really address the problems they have. There's a reason that a personalized version of D&D is usually called a Fantasy Heartbreaker.

I wish every D&D player would, at some point, give an earnest try of a different system. They can hate it, that's fine, but the experience is still very rewarding when you come back to D&D-- open eyes make for better choices. My D&D games got lots better after I branched out because, when I play D&D, I'm not trying to make the game anything other than what it is; I embrace it and play it that way. It's when you use D&D to do something that D&D isn't that you get into trouble, and most with only D&D experience think D&D can do way more than it actually does.

I wish more people in America would walk to work instead of drive cars. And?
I wish more people in America would eat at local restaurants instead of corporate fast food and fast causal establishments. And?

People play D&D. I explained why. It seems unlikely to change, but who knows.

EDIT: I find it is often more helpful to understand why something is and work with that than assume people shouldn't do something that they choose to do and argue against it.

 

[Ovinomancer]

I wish more people in America would walk to work instead of drive cars. And?
I wish more people in America would eat at local restaurants instead of corporate fast food and fast causal establishments. And?

People play D&D. I explained why. It seems unlikely to change, but who knows.

EDIT: I find it is often more helpful to understand why something is and work with that than assume people shouldn't do something that they choose to do and argue against it.

Well, I'm certainly enlightened. I mean, I put out a clear wishful thought that more people would look for different experiences so that they can make better choices on what's fun for them, but, yeah, totally shouldn't have done that. What was I thinking?

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

Well, I'm certainly enlightened. I mean, I put out a clear wishful thought that more people would look for different experiences so that they can make better choices on what's fun for them, but, yeah, totally shouldn't have done that. What was I thinking?

Don't know. You probably didn't use enough paragraphs to explain it.