Why do RPGs have rules?

[hawkeyefan]

I don't believe that the dominance or lack thereof of any playstyle has anything to do with making clear that your opinions, positive or negative, are just that. Being the "underdog" doesn't grant you special rhetorical privileges.

Sure, I didn't mean to imply that it should. It's more that anyone should be able to say whatever they want.

Like, why can't I say that once I learned more about narrative games and actually ran/played a few, my GMing overall improved? That my games, even more trad leaning games, became better? Why can't I say that?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Sure, I didn't mean to imply that it should. It's more that anyone should be able to say whatever they want.

Like, why can't I say that once I learned more about narrative games and actually ran/played a few, my GMing overall improved? That my games, even more trad leaning games, became better? Why can't I say that?

You can, but if you present that argument with an implied, "and your GMing will also improve if you do what I did", you are essentially suggesting objective superiority of your preferences, which will get some push-back.

 

[Maxperson]

My own interpretation of "Immersion" is generally one of "so into the game that the time seems too soon when the end of session hits." Personally, I can get this from story or mechanics - I find Advanced Civ (not an RPG, but a 6 to 18 hour boardgame) quite immersive. And I seldom find AD&D even halfway there. It's never been immersive for me as a player.

For me immersion is when I inhabit the character to such a point that I start thinking and being that character. I am so immersed in the character and the world that the real world seems less. You can never leave the real world behind completely, but you can get pretty close if you don't have to constantly stop to roll things.

 

[Aldarc]

But this is objectively wrong. Not all games are designed for one person. There are plenty of games I know aren’t for me. I don’t describe them as poorly designed for that reason.

Yeah, there are many games out there with great design that aren't for me (for a myriad of reasons). I will still recommend them if I think that others would like them. IMHO, good game design should be lauded - especially by independent designers - regardless of my preferences.

This all started in the "Fighting Law and Order" thread because people seemed to pushing narrative/storygame solutions to a trad problem, in a D&D thread. And continued to extoll the virtues of said games in that thread long after it was clear the OP was uninterested in those solutions (or indeed any solutions as far as I could tell). Had the discussion explicitly been about those kinds of games I likely wouldn't have engaged. Now I've got my back up and am unfortunately finding it difficult not to chime in when the subject comes up, which it seems to be doing a lot lately.

I was dragged into the conversation by someone who mentioned me in a post where they clearly misunderstood and misrepresented Dungeon World. I had to backtrack to see what the conversation was even about, which included seeing how DW got mentioned in the first place. Mention of story games and any advice thereof were actually mostly absent from the initial wave of discussion.

Dungeon World and story games doesn't come up until Post #107 by EzekielRaiden in a single offhand comment buried in his post, i.e., being a fan of the characters. No one cared. No one pushed back. No one mentioned it all.

But before that? Hawkeyefan didn't intially mention story games with their advice. Mort didn't initially mention story games with their advice. EzekielRaiden didn't initially mention story games with their advice. AbdulAlhazred didn't initially mention any story games with their advice. FrozenNorth didn't initially mention any story games with their advice.

It's really only at this point with AbdulAlhazred's post that the conversation starts to pivot as he starts (somewhat abrasively) explaining the what he perceives as the difference between his and your preferred play styles, game preferences, and perspectives. But by this point, basically everyone in the thread had written off the OP. But no one was initially peddling story game advice to the OP.

I think that your narrative that you are trying to construct about people just wanting to push story games is pretty bogus. Debate and disagreement was happening prior. It turns out that people can disagree on a topic without pushing their preferred games.

If you don't care about advice from story games, the simple solution is not to engage it and let it die of natural causes. Putting the more egregious offenders for your complaints on ignore is also an option. It's that easy.

Regarding your second point, enthusiasm is one thing. Talking about how gaming is so much better now that you've left behind stuff a lot of people really like is quite another, especially if, as some have done, you proceed with your enthusiastic claims using non-subjective vocabulary.

I suspect that your bias may be clouding your judgment given that a fair number of people are also running 5e D&D or other traditional games and not just story ones, and I would also say that you are painting others with too broad of a brush.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yeah, there are many games out there with great design that aren't for me (for a myriad of reasons). I will still recommend them if I think that others would like them. IMHO, good game design should be lauded - especially by independent designers - regardless of my preferences.


I was dragged into the conversation by someone who mentioned me in a post where they clearly misunderstood and misrepresented Dungeon World. I had to backtrack to see what the conversation was even about, which included seeing how DW got mentioned in the first place. Mention of story games and any advice thereof were actually mostly absent from the initial wave of discussion.

Dungeon World and story games doesn't come up until Post #107 by EzekielRaiden in a single offhand comment buried in his post, i.e., being a fan of the characters. No one cared. No one pushed back. No one mentioned it all.

But before that? Hawkeyefan didn't intially mention story games with their advice. Mort didn't initially mention story games with their advice. EzekielRaiden didn't initially mention story games with their advice. AbdulAlhazred didn't initially mention any story games with their advice. FrozenNorth didn't initially mention any story games with their advice.

It's really only at this point with AbdulAlhazred's post that the conversation starts to pivot as he starts (somewhat abrasively) explaining the what he perceives as the difference between his and your preferred play styles, game preferences, and perspectives. But by this point, basically everyone in the thread had written off the OP. But no one was initially peddling story game advice to the OP.

I think that your narrative that you are trying to construct about people just wanting to push story games is pretty bogus. Debate and disagreement was happening prior. It turns out that people can disagree on a topic without pushing their preferred games.

If you don't care about advice from story games, the simple solution is not to engage it and let it die of natural causes. Putting the more egregious offenders for your complaints on ignore is also an option. It's that easy.


I suspect that your bias may be clouding your judgment given that a fair number of people are also running 5e D&D or other traditional games and not just story ones, and I would also say that you are painting others with too broad of a brush.

I don't put people on ignore. I don't see the value of it, in either direction, actually, but I can only control my own actions.

And while you're correct that the thread took some to get to pushing storygames, it get in fact get there. Add to that my admittedly visceral reaction to @AbdulAlhazred 's comments (which I still contend were intentionally inflammatory), and that's where we ended up.

I agree that people can have disagreements without pushing their favorite games, but they still do, and its tough to do that without pushing the other games down in comparison.

 

[pemerton]

The notion that I could predict political happenings and such from the World of Greyhawk Gazetteer is equally ridiculous in a similar way

This, one thousand times.

I mean, anyone who has even a passing familiarity with the historical and literary tropes that the WoG is built on can read the book and imagine things happening - eg in one of my games using the setting, the Great Kingdom was pulled into shape by new and dynamic leadership, and as a result conquered Rel Astra and was preparing to absorb Almor. That's not a model - it's just imaginative projection from the material provided.

 

[pemerton]

maintaining verisimilitude (who the hell came up with this word, it feels like playing twister on a keyboard?) often stands in the way of expression. Yeah, it makes sense that shooting someone with a gun should be more effective than throwing a plate at them, sure.

The problem is that you very quickly end up with a whole stable of characters that shoot guns. And check corners. And throw flashbangs into a room before barging in.

Because there's a very limited pool of actually effective and good options.

This is a similar point to the thread you started not too long ago, isn't it? About separating fictional content from resolution process?

 

[pemerton]

Just actively seeking and using techniques developed to seek emotional intensity and more personal narrative forms is seen as elevating your play above others even if you acknowledge the strengths of other forms of play.

This whole thing about "acknowledging the strengths of other forms of play" is a weird one to me.

I could read threads about how to GM The Curse of Strahd, and how to "Jacquay" a dungeon, and whether or not WotC's latest encounter building guidelines work, from now until next year, and barely see a hint of recognition that there are other RPG designs beyond D&D from its invention in 1974 to its reaching its current mainstream form probably around 1985.

Why does someone who wants to post abut a different sort of RPGing need to "acknowledge" the strengths of other forms of play? Just tell us what you think is interesting about what you're doing!

 

[Micah Sweet]

This whole thing about "acknowledging the strengths of other forms of play" is a weird one to me.

I could read threads about how to GM The Curse of Strahd, and how to "Jacquay" a dungeon, and whether or not WotC's latest encounter building guidelines work, from now until next year, and barely see a hint of recognition that there are other RPG designs beyond D&D from its invention in 1974 to its reaching its current mainstream form probably around 1985.

Why does someone who wants to post abut a different sort of RPGing need to "acknowledge" the strengths of other forms of play? Just tell us what you think is interesting about what you're doing!

You don't have to do that, but it is one way to help avoid the impression that you consider your style of play objectively superior to those of others.

 

[Imaro]

Why does someone who wants to post abut a different sort of RPGing need to "acknowledge" the strengths of other forms of play? Just tell us what you think is interesting about what you're doing!

Because it usually leads to someone with a different playstyle explaining to you why you're not actually doing what you think you're doing... or why there's no way you're achieving what you think you're achieving and so on...