Indie Games Are Not More Focused. They Are Differently Focused.

[Campbell]

In a number of conversations on these boards the idea that indie games are these narrow curated experiences and more mainstream games are somehow more flexible keeps coming up again and again. There's usually no real justification for this.

I like a lot of mainstream games. I am player in D&D 5e and Infinity games right now. I love running Pathfinder Second Edition, Exalted Third Edition, Legend of the Five Rings Fifth Edition and Vampire. There are a lot of attendant expectations that go along with running and playing these games. They are almost on adventuring where players are expected to work together to complete the adventure of the week. There are all sorts of expectations around the sorts of scenes you are expected to frame, the sort of consequences you can inflict, and like how the player characters are oriented towards each other. In my experience there are also strong expectations around stuff like spotlight balancing, character concepts, and the like.

Sure there are constraints placed on a GM in games like Blades in the Dark, Apocalypse World, and the like. There are also things you can do as a GM that would not go over well in D&D or another mainstream game. Like in a game like Masks or Apocalypse Keys the GM has the ability to say it makes sense you would feel Angry and have that impact play. In Blades in the Dark if you can get arrested and have to serve out a sentence. Having that sort of consequence without giving players lots of opportunities to avoid it or escape would be very fraught in most games. The sort of hard moves I make when I run Apocalypse World just don't work in most mainstream games.

I guess I don't understand how someone could make the case that mainstream/traditional games are more flexible without accepting their constraints as the norm.

 

[Arilyn]

I think that it comes down to familiarity. A lot of indie games approach play in a way that feels different from mainstream games, so players become hyper focussed on that, missing the constraints in their own favoured games.

And of course, indie is a pretty fuzzy term. PbTA. Indie or now mainstream?

 

[Morrus]

In a number of conversations on these boards the idea that indie games are these narrow curated experiences and more mainstream games are somehow more flexible keeps coming up again and again. There's usually no real justification for this.

I mean, yes there's no justification for that position, but is this really something you've come up against a lot? I've never seen anybody posit such a position. I'm not saying it hasn't happened in conversations you've been in, but I don't think it's a widespread sentiment.

You get very focused indie games and very flexible indie games. Indie games encompass a massive, wide range of game types. The most flexible tabletop RPGs in the world are usually indie games.

I'm not sure what you're defining as 'mainstream' (D&D?)

 

[dragoner]

I guess I don't understand how someone could make the case that mainstream/traditional games are more flexible without accepting their constraints as the norm.

Not sure about the "more flexible" part, but in buying games, indie and trad, at various places: itch, gencon, etc.. I prefer hard copy to really sit down and read. My group does place a combination of indie and trad games, usually as we rotate GM's. All that said, I find indie games, often are more focused, and also usually have less supplemental material. It is feature, not a bug, though; at least how they seem to be presented to have the mechanics for specific things they are trying to emulate, and in a rules light fashion.

 

[Arilyn]

I have seen discussions about how indie games won't be able to generate broad appeal because of a lack of flexibility or more commonly because they are hyper focussed on a set theme, like Dogs in the Vineyard.

There is some truth to that. My Life with Master, for example, is a tightly focussed game. Game play, however, is going to really depend on the game, and there's a huge variety across the market. And just like music, indie can become mainstream.

 

[Campbell]

I have seen it all over these boards recently. Mostly in the context of touting D&D's flexibility. The idea basically seems to stem from the perception you can basically do anything with D&D you could use other games for. I think that relies on a lack of awareness of D&D's culture of play and the constraints they do not see because they are use to / embrace.

I mostly use mainstream as a stand in for 'traditional' games because that's a label I'm not super fond of. Adventure gaming is probably a better stand in.

 

[Morrus]

I mostly use mainstream as a stand in for 'traditional' games because that's a label I'm not super fond of. Adventure gaming is probably a better stand in.

OK. So what do you define as 'traditional'?

(I'm not trying to have a go, just trying to get a handle on your points of reference)

I literally don't see [indie - mainstream] and [focused - flexible] as being the same spectrum. They're too entire different axis. Is Star Wars mainstream? It's pretty focused. But it has a generic spawn, Genysis. Is Apocalypse World indie? It's pretty flexible. There are a hundred RPGs 'powered by the Apocalypse'. Generally, a light game (as many indie games are) is going to be incredibly flexible.

And of course, any game can do any genre. Sure, D&D can do sci-fi horror if you want it to. I'm sure the new Alien RPG can do cartoon slapstick, if you really want it to. But some games do some genres better than others.

I just don't understand the points of reference here, or how popularity relates to flexibility.

 

[MGibster]

In a number of conversations on these boards the idea that indie games are these narrow curated experiences and more mainstream games are somehow more flexible keeps coming up again and again. There's usually no real justification for this.

I would tend to agree. Some indie games, such as Bluebeard's Brides, are narrowly focused but I don't think FATE is.

I love running Pathfinder Second Edition, Exalted Third Edition, Legend of the Five Rings Fifth Edition and Vampire. There are a lot of attendant expectations that go along with running and playing these games.

I think you're on to something when it comes to how we define something as flexible. For example, I don't consider D&D to be all that flexible because the game experience is largely the same no matter the campaign setting. And I know some people will vehemently disagree with me, but every campaign world, even Ravenloft and Dark Sun, are just rife with D&Disms I'll find in Dragonlance, Forgotten Realms, or even Birthright. Despite being a big box game, I don't think D&D is all that flexible which I'm totally fine with. I don't expect it to be flexible.

 

[Campbell]

The games I tend to think of as traditional are like party or group based games where the GM creates and adventure with story hooks that you are expected to try to resolve. D&D, but also games like Edge of the Empire, RuneQuest, Scion, Shadowrun, etc. Exalted, Vampire, Conan 2d20, and Legend of the Five Rings kind of skirt the line. Basically crack team of specialists solve problems while sharing spotlight. Next week on sort of deal.

Basically indie to me are games that break from that action adventure mold. That are more focused on individual characters and their stories. Stuff like Sorcerer, Apocalypse World, Blades in the Dark, Dogs in the Vineyard, etc. Stuff like Dungeon World. Monster Week and to a lesser extent Apocalypse Keys kind of skirt the edge the other way.

 

[Morrus]

The games I tend to think of as traditional are like party or group based games where the GM creates and adventure with story hooks that you are expected to try to resolve. D&D, but also games like Edge of the Empire, RuneQuest, Scion, Shadowrun, etc. Exalted, Vampire, Conan 2d20, and Legend of the Five Rings kind of skirt the line. Basically crack team of specialists solve problems while sharing spotlight. Next week on sort of deal.

Basically indie to me are games that break from that action adventure mold. That are more focused on individual characters and their stories. Stuff like Sorcerer, Apocalypse World, Blades in the Dark, Dogs in the Vineyard, etc.

OK, so just to clarify what you're saying -- you're finding that people are claiming Edge of the Empire is flexible, and Apocalypse World is not? I mean, we both know the opposite is true, but you're experiencing a more than expected number of people claiming otherwise?