System matters and free kriegsspiel

[S'mon]

I'm confused why I've received pushback, then. If the GM's call is the only one that matters, this definitely changes the nature of the invisible rulebook and why it's invisible. Now, the only invisible rulebook that matters is the GM's, and since it's invisible this is hidden from the players. Yet you say that the GM must be able to explain their reasoning, which cuts against the invisible rulebook because it makes it visible. We're back to the competing ideas of transparent play vs hidden play and why you'd even use an invisible rulebook at all.

I don't think 'invisible rulebook' is a helpful concept for you in understanding FK. The person who came up with it, as a metaphor, did not mean anything like rulebook as you understand the term. From reading her essay, she meant a sort of headcanon guide book to genre/setting norms. I think it would be best if you forgot about 'invisible rulebooks' completely.

Re arbitrariness, if I as GM am operating within the internal aspect of an NPC, their actions do not feel arbitrary at all. Their actions result from their motivations, hopes, fears, grudges, loyalties etc etc. I know some people don't/can't get their head around this, cannot take on the internal aspect of another character (possibly not even their own PC), and don't think other people can, either. In which case they should not GM a character based FK/free-roleplay game IMO, and if they don't trust the process they should not play in one, either.

Edit: Another way of putting it: when GMing FK style, I as GM am normally in 'actor* stance' playing NPCs, and in 'neutral referee' or 'world stance' when adjudicating. I am never in 'author** stance', except in a very residual sense that when GMing in a particular setting/genre my refereeing necessarily takes account of the original setting authors' - the rules they made for the world.

*In the Ron Edwards sense of internal-aspect method acting.
**In the Ron Edwards sense of story-creation, what would make a good story.

 

[Aldarc]

To have fun.

By having fun.

To have fun.

IMHO, there are non-answers. When I sit down to play boardgames like Pandemic, Settlers of Catan, or Ticket to Ride or card games like Poker or Skat, I of course hope that I have fun, but these games still have objectives, player rewards, and the like built into the game, the feedback loop of play, and often their premises. The same is true for TTRPGs, whether we are playing D&D, Cortex Prime, Blades in the Dark, Fate, or Call of Cthulhu. Saying that your game is about "fun" is like saying that you're "nice" on your online dating profile or that you're "good at Microsoft Office" on your CV: it probably means, to put it mildly, that you don't have a lot else going for you to brag about. It's the lowest bar standard.

Also, what are the massively over-complicated games that you claim that FKR is reacting against?

 

[Ovinomancer]

I think this is true of several posters here. It feels like extolling the virtues of steak BBQ to a vegan.

Well, yeah, I guess it is. The vegans* are asking what nutrients and vitamins you get, where you get the cut, how you cook it, what spices and preparation are involved, when what they're just missing is that it's tasty (fun)! Vegans* just don't get tasty!

*not actual vegans

 

[overgeeked]

I think this is true of several posters here. It feels like extolling the virtues of steak BBQ to a vegan.

I was more thinking the Monty Python sketch where Terry Jones is trying to explain charity to John Cleese’s banker.

 

[S'mon]

Well, yeah, I guess it is. The vegans* are asking what nutrients and vitamins you get, where you get the cut, how you cook it, what spices and preparation are involved, when what they're just missing is that it's tasty (fun)! Vegans* just don't get tasty!

*not actual vegans

Why are vegans wasting their time asking about something they don't like and won't like? Do they think the steak eaters are having badwrongfun?

 

[overgeeked]

Why are vegans wasting their time asking about something they don't like and won't like? Do they think the steak eaters are having badwrongfun?

In a weird way I think it works better if you flip it. It’s steak eaters asking vegans where’s the beef? And the vegans are saying there’s no beef. That’s the point. To which the steak eaters just keep saying, “yeah, but explain to me where is my beef?” It’s like they don’t understand the concept of a meal without meat. So they’re hung up on meat and can’t quit asking about it. The vegans keep trying to explain the benefits of veg, the moral and ethical concerns of meat, etc. And the meat eaters just keep asking about the meat. No, that’s literally the point. No meat. But...but...

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

This is not plausible even by reference to the FKR resources that have been pointed to and quoted in this thread.

Tactical infinity already gives us a focus for play: tactics. The notion of problem solving has also turned up. These are well-known ideas in game play in general, and in RPGing in particular. They tell me to expect a game much closer to Tomb of Horrors or White Plume Mountain than (say) Wuthering Heights.

Just as one example: when I'm playing a member of the crew of the USS For Example, what do I need to know: my job as a crew member and the technology that I have access to? Or who I'm fighting with and who I'm sleeping with? Which will be more important for dealing with situations that play throws up?

Every FKR thing I've read suggests that it will be the former and not the latter; ie that relationships, emotional connections, etc will not be factored into either how situations are framed or how situations are resolved.

Argh. No. I can't agree with this. You can't pull on one bit and expect to define something you aren't doing, and appear to not want to do.

Take the instant example- you are keying in on the term "tactical infinity" and then equating to problem solving, and then stating that this must be the same as "skilled play" as in White Plume Mountain. But that is the opposite of what the FKR games in existence will show you!

Tactical infinity is about solving problems- but the "problems" can be anything. Here-

Any tactic. Not the tactic on your character sheet. Not the tactic from your equipment package. Not the tactic associated with being a fighter or a magic-user. Any tactic. You're French fur trappers in the 1700s. How would you solve a problem? You're post-apocalypse water scavengers. How would you solve a problem? You're underpaid interns working in an anthopological lab. How would you solve a problem? The answer to all of these questions is "however it makes sense, given who you are, what the environment suggests, and however the fictional context allows." Now, in any of these situations, the stuff on your meager character sheet, be they keywords or items, certainly inform your choices, but they do not constrain them.

A "problem" doesn't have to be a trap; it can be any conflict, which includes relationships and emotional connections. Sure, it does have the connotation of something to overcome- but that's usually the point of a game (or even a story). Which is why:

Have you read Brideshead Revisited? The Wizard of Earthsea? Foundation and Empire? Any captivating novel, regardless of timeframe, setting, or genre? Well now you can run a full FKR game based on that book.

Yes, you can use FKR to play Wuthering Heights. And it doesn't mean that there are no rules- for example, maybe you want some sort of hate mechanic! But you start with the fewest possible, and work from there.

But in addition to the concept of taking any work or genre and "gamifying" it, you can look at the specific examples (114 of them) on itch- we have:
Sci-fi games
Post-apocalyptic rock music
FKR BiTD
FKR Troika with BITD mechanics
A game based on Messerspiel that states, "If you love Messerspeil, Trophy Gold, Blades in the Dark, or Cthulhu Dark ..."
A game where you are a home appliance
FKR Star Wars
FKR Suicide Squad
A game of sailing and discovery of heritage
Pokemon
Fast & Furious
Play as an insect
etc.

There are OSR variants (including a pacifist version) but it's not accurate to typify this as just "White Plume Mountain" redux. IMO.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Why are vegans wasting their time asking about something they don't like and won't like? Do they think the steak eaters are having badwrongfun?

Why are you making this personal? You're attacking people now, not discussing games.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Why are vegans wasting their time asking about something they don't like and won't like? Do they think the steak eaters are having badwrongfun?

And I'm honestly curious about what makes FKR FKR. I find knowing more, even about things I may not personally like, helps me do better games. And, I've already run into a game I didn't get that I finally did get and it's one of my favorites. That understanding didn't come from being told its about fun, but about clear descriptions of the methods and principles of play. That, in turn, made my D&D games better, not by copying over but because it helped me identify what's great in 5e and lean hard into that rather than trying to make 5e do things it's not great at.

I don't understand why, if FKR is something you love, it cannot be discussed and the why's and how's of that love extolled. "Fun" is, as noted, a non- answer.

 

[Campbell]

This is my bookshelf. There are many like it, but this one is mine. There are many sorts of games here. OSR games, Forge games, traditional games. Games with dense setting material. Games with low resolution setting. Games with dense mechanics. Games with a lighter touch. Each provides a unique value and is the result of incredible design effort (which should be respected). Each justifies its existence, not by replacing the experience provided by another, but by providing a different one with its own unique value proposition.

I could have lengthy conversations about each of these games, when I would use them, when I would not. What sort of players are uniquely suited to each. What each brings to the table. The discipline involved in the process of playing or running each.

What I am looking for is a distillation of FKR that shows the unique value it brings. When you would use it instead of something else. When you would not. Something that shows its value as its own thing and not as a superior form of something else. Something that respects the discipline and craft of different forms of play. How do I integrate into my overall understanding of roleplaying games? Where does it fit? Provide me with an integrative understanding that respects the value other games bring to the table. Show me how to do it in a way that is not just 'Do whatever man'.

To me what I'm seeing of the FKR reminds of the "intuitive" training types you see in the strength sports space. People that look at the various disciplines (body building, Olympic lifting, power lifting, strong man) and opt to almost randomly take what they want from each thinking they'll get similar results. Basically they argue that all the thought, experimentation, and practice that athletes in each discipline have put in has no real merit or value. I just lift bro. It's easy.

I hope I am wrong about that. I hope that FKR has something new to offer. That it's experience is different in the same way D&D 5e is different from Blades in the Dark. That it does not put itself up as a replacement for the rest of the hobby.