Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Campbell" data-source="post: 6731600" data-attributes="member: 16586">I have some of my own issues, but most of it comes down to both boosters and detractors taking the Essays too seriously and not placing them in the particular context they were born out of. The Forge was born in a very particular environment. There was a community of indie game designers that were deeply deeply unsatisfied with the role playing games of the 1990's. When Vampire came out it took the tabletop role playing game culture by storm. It basically defined the new normal. Metaplot, illusionism, and GMs telling their players a story became what tabletop role playing games were about. Shadowrun, Deadlands, Lengend of the 5 Rings, Planescape, Ravenloft, You Name It - they were all basically trying to out Vampire Vampire. Role playing not roll playing was the clarion call of RPGdom. It's with that particular environment in mind that The Essays should be read. The Forge was a movement to produce games that were games, but still covered much of the same ground. The purpose of The Essays was to provide a basis of discussion for designing new games, and they had a particular audience. They were biased as hell, but they really weren't meant for general consumption. It was meant to be a given that most of the audience didn't like Vampire and its effect on the hobby. The Essays also weren't meant to cover games like AD&D played in a Gygaxian fashion. It wasn't really the purpose of the discussion that was going on. The interest was all in designing new games with a particular bent. The whole enterprise was very punk rock. Independently created, independently published, reactionary and dismissive of the then current mainstream.The Forge was also very formative. The Big Model came about in an environment where game designers were making the games that proved they could totally design a game. It was very much a moment in history where people were writing stuff to figure out what this thing could be. Sorcerer, Dogs in the Vineyard, and Life With Master were very much experimental and the result of inexperienced designers starting to find their footing. They were good games, but not like mature games. A lot of time was spent defining what things were and what things were not. Unfortunately this has a really chilling effect. The way the agendas were presented made it appear like they were mutually exclusive, rather than a matter of priority. It could have really done with agile programming style "These are the things we value more. We still value these other things - we just value them less."  rhetoric. Some of terminology used was also deeply unfortunate. Labeling "Step on Up" as gamism totally makes it seem like you're not interested in games as games. Likewise Narrativism and Story Now are too closely associated with the language of a play style that most indie RPGs were a reaction against. Antagonism towards different sorts of games also closed off a lot of discussion and possible design space. It took  a lot for me to realize that Vampire - The Requiem 2nd Edition was totally my jam.Historical context is important here. The Forge was what it was. We got a lot out of it, but it's a good thing it's not really a thing anymore. There's a time and place for movements and identity politics. A lot of what the Forge brought to our culture is still important though - focusing on actual play, being able to identify and verbalize what we want out of games, demanding functional and questioning assumptions are all very important things. Most importantly, we got some very good games out of it. That's the biggest thing.I think what gets lost in a lot of these discussions both in my crowd and outside of it is that at the end of the day we are talking about games and stuff. They games I play and the way I play them affects the people I play them with. It shouldn't directly impact you. I'm not telling people what they should do. I'm just talking about a thing I do that I sometimes take way too seriously.  [MENTION=90370]Zak S[/MENTION], I want to thank you for your perspective. I totally appreciate that you are sharing your perspective and not negating other people's experiences. This thread has been really weird for me. I personally feel a kinship with you OSR folks. I like the independence, the advocacy for an overlooked play style, and the willingness to question assumptions. At the end of the day I appreciate the opportunity to clarify and reflect on why I like the games I like, and also a chance to step outside of my own bubble a little.    It was also formative.</blockquote>

Verification