Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Campbell" data-source="post: 8932768" data-attributes="member: 16586">Significant effort has been put forward by many posters on these boards, chief among them [USER=42582]@pemerton[/USER] , [USER=6696971]@Manbearcat[/USER] and myself to provide alternative framings and explain the relevent concepts involved in indie play. Not to mention a whole lot of thinking put out by people like Vincent Baker, Jesse Burneko, John Harper and Brendan Conway (Magpie Games) long after The Forge closed its door. If John Harper's commentary is not plain English enough for you I don't know what to tell you.The same people who complain about "Forge terminology" and inability to have conversations that move past the Forge have not shown any willingness to engage with any of the post Forge work or the new framing many of us have tried to provide on these boards.It's fundamentally difficult for me to see the complaints as fundamentally being about terminology rather than an aversion for concepts and games born out of it. Many of the same posters who keep beating the drum on this have also refused to acknowledge the creative contributions of the indie community, have called games like Sorcerer and Apocalypse World irrelevant and have launched personal attacks on posters who take a different approach to the player/GM authority relationship.Rightfully or wrongfully a lot of this feels like an attempt to erase games and concepts people do not like from the overall hobby. Those people (including the OP) who most strongly advocate against Forge terminology have never said anything that makes me believe anything to the contrary. I welcome such clarifying statements. I would love to be proven wrong.</blockquote>

Verification