Not a Conspiracy Theory: Moving Toward Better Criticism in RPGs

[Aldarc]

Designers often have a surprisingly clearer-eyed view of the strengths and weaknesses of their games than the fans do, if they aren't mired in a bubble.

I remember asking the Cypher System Discord channel what they thought the Cypher System didn't do well or the system's weaknesses. Needless to say that question went over as well as a lead ballon.

 

[chaochou]

I must say, I've been struggling to follow what is really being discussed here in the last few pages. I mean is it just our personal bias for certain jargon? I'm also lacking much sleep these last 3 days due to a work deadline, so do ignore me.

Well, one or two posters attempt to shut down thread after thread by claiming to be terribly, terribly offended by jargon and they’re at it again here. They also, hypocritically, rep posts which are full of the jargon they agree with.

So basically it's the usual dull pearl-clutching by the standard people who weaponise their offense-taking.

 

[Lanefan]

@Pedantic @Lanefan If you want to explain how you think your version of the action declaration, in which the player has their PC skulking in the shadows, would be resolved in Apocalypse World, I'm happy to hear it.

Nope, I'm not falling for this. Nice try.

The point isn't the resolution method or how any given system does it, it's the legitimacy of a GM arbitrarily putting a PC into a scene in the first place where a) said scene directly one of the PC's goals and b) the player/PC had no opportunity to avoid this violation.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I'm wrong about what I meant? Well, I'm glad I took the time to explain!

I think you understood my point.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I remember asking the Cypher System Discord channel what they thought the Cypher System didn't do well or the system's weaknesses. Needless to say that question went over as well as a lead ballon.

Well, that's the kind of question that generally goes over that well in any dedicated venue to a general-purpose system, honestly.

 

[niklinna]

Well, one or two posters attempt to shut down thread after thread by claiming to be terribly, terribly offended by jargon and they’re at it again here. They also, hypocritically, rep posts which are full of the jargon they agree with.

So basically it's the usual dull pearl-clutching by the standard people who weaponise their offense-taking.

At least they aren't stomping in with the old standard boots.

 

[Lanefan]

It seems to me that what you call "GM play" at T0 (assuming this is "prep time") is...not really "play" in any sense I would recognize. Indeed, it would seem most TTRPG players feel that way, since GM prep is considered a form of work, a duty the GM must fulfill--hence why so many take the position that the players owe something to the GM for their hard work. It may be joyful work, undertaken out of love or enthusiasm, but it is still work, rather than play proper.

I'm also confused because you seem to be presenting T0 and T2 as, essentially, identical things (since you use identical phrasing other than the word "Some" and changing "view" to "light"), but at least to my mind there are actually three different actions occurring here.

T0: GM does preparation work, which often involves both (if you like) "master map/key" construction and theatrical notes for the performance (NPC details, monster alignments, faction membership, etc.)
T1: GM and player actually interact, which is something we all unequivocally consider play on both sides.
T2: GM does wrap-up/tallying/etc. of the preceding events, ensuring sufficient notes are kept to support the next round of the cycle.

Both T0 and T2 don't strike me as "play" in a meaningful sense. They are a lot more like...well, a sort of "creative bookkeeping" (and not in the "cooking the books" sense, but in the sense of keeping-the-books regarding one's creative work.) If we're extending the concept of "play" to include these things, I'd really want to know why you consider it "play."

So it could be beaten down to:

T0: Prep (almost entirely GM)
T1: Play (everybody)
T2: Bookkeeping (mostly GM, some player)

There's player-side prep involved in an RPG, the most obvious example of which is character generation. Depending on system there's also ongoing player-side bookkeeping in terms of advancing levels or abilities, updating equipment, and so forth; usually done during in-fiction downtime or between sessions.

Also worth noting perhaps is that while T0 usually happens on its own, T1 and T2 often overlap; when bookkeeping and note-taking are done during play rather than afterwards.

 

[FrogReaver]

It matters because it gives other people the wrong impression about how this stuff actually works and hinders the ability to effectively communicate what is going on in our actual games. You do not have to care about that at all, but to expect others to view your input as valuable after you have just attempted to make a mockery of their play is not exactly going to work out very well for you.

Just curious - is this happening in this thread or is this a reference to past threads?

That much of this thread has basically boiled down to requiring us to justify our place within this hobby as something worthy of respect while even mild statements of preference (I don't like to play in games where there is fudging or I find collaborative world building improves my play experience) get treated as invectives towards other peoples play even when we explicitly personalize it to us only.

I don't understand where you feel this is happening in this thread?

@Thomas Shey I find this exchange enormously frustrating because I have spent the last several pages trying to show as much empathy as possible for you and others, but when given the chance you do not seem to have the willingness to show even an iota of empathy for people like me that feel like you are misrepresenting their play experience. If you do not actually care about where we are coming from let me know and I can cease to interact with you.

This isn't to me, but I genuinely am trying to have empathy as i relate to similar feelings about others misrepresenting my playstyles, but I really don't understand what's prompting your feelings of your play experience being misrepresented in the context of this thread. Maybe you can elaborate? I would love to better understand - and not just to dismiss.

 

[FrogReaver]

Duplicate. Deleted

 

[Lanefan]

At least they aren't stomping in with the old standard boots.

That's the third or fourth time I've seen this phrase recently, but I've no idea what its origin or reference is. Please explain...