Ryan Dancey on Redefining the Hobby (Updated: time elements in a storytelling game)

My game group is much like Wulf's. We gather 'round the table because we're friends, and we like spending time with each other. D&D is no more or less than the preferred platform for spending that time. Some guys get together for poker, some for watching The Big Game. We? We get together for D&D.

As others have said, Story is a happenstance. It's a nice side-benefit. But really, we remember Events. Like when Lohi the Dragon Shaman held on when everyone else was dropped and used his healing aura to prevent a TPK. Or whatever. Point is, it's these individual signposts that stand. The larger story only provides a way to lead from one signpost to the next. And even then, the point is that it's us guys hanging around the table, throwing dice and having fun.

So: rather than waste time with a genre title switcheroo, RPG game makers should spend time figuring out how to make the "hanging around, throwing dice, having fun" more accessible. Make D&D less cumbersome. Don't require all players to read a tome that looks suspiciously like a school textbook. Make the initial time and effort investment really low, and you'll expand the hobby.

-z

One simple, easy example of this notion in action? Cut the spells from the Player's Handbook. Only playes of magic-using classes need that info. To the player of the Fighter, all those spells add zero value to an already intimidating block of dense rules.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

ShinHakkaider said:
Yeah, didn't mean for my response to come out harshly at all and I didnt take it personally. No harm no foul, its just that I meant for the whole thing to be taken in context. Youre right about the podcast quote, but even then I pulled the quote out of it's original context which was part of a mail bag Q & A thing they were doing.

No apologies needed D00d.


Cool. I think we both had parallel points to make that were not necessarily at odds with one another.
 

der_kluge said:
I'm not suggesting that. I'm suggesting that there are too many unnecessary rules. The game would be just as fun without "spell turning" or reserve feats, or the complexities of the warlock class, or any of the host of other secondary miscellaneous stuff.

And here is one of the elements that make any hobby game tough, disagreements. I see absolutely no "complexities of the warlock class." In fact, if I wanted to go rules light at all costs, I would replace the arcane casters with the warlock.

We obviously have different views of very basic things. Yet both of us are attracted to RPGs.
 

Meh.
The big % of the problems in RPG are bad DMs.
It's not the industry, marketing, MMORPGs, technology, etc.
The whole RPG Market, no matter how good or bad or dumb or smart it is, no matter what it does or doesn't to make its product better, is a hostage of all the DMs out there.
No matter how good a product is, if it falls on the hands of a bad DM, the game is gonna stink. No matter how bad a product is, if the DM is good one, the game is gonna fly! A big % of the success of a game experience is about the DM, not the game itself.

It's just like Jeet Kune Do.
If you watch Bruce Lee fighting you may think "Whoa! That jeet kune do thing is unbeatable!"
You are wrong, Bruce Lee is unbeatable.
I hope I made my analogy clear.
 

Korgoth said:
QFT.

Kill the Story. And take its stuff.

When I play in a really fun session, I sometimes tell a story about the session. Just like I can do with a board game: last night playing Memoir '44 I killed 4 of my friend's damaged units with a single Air Strike. I went from zero VP's to having won the scenario in one shot. There: I just told a story about a game of Memoir '44. But Mem44 is not a "storytelling game", and if it was I suspect we wouldn't be playing it.

Damn straight!
 

Creeping Death said:
I still don't understand the 'too many rules' point of view. What is too many?

You have reached the "too many rules" point in a game when the amount of rules in it make a DM and/or the players stumble over them every 5 or 10 minutes, making them flip through a book to get the correct (and errata-ed) wording of a rule and then try to bend either the rule to the scene at hand, or the scene to fit the rules.

Which is, of course, highly individual and very much depending on personal preferance, experience, play style, and the will to "be wrong"...and thus not really a helpful measure. Still pops up all the time, of course. :p
 

Alnag said:
Well... I think games, that hold per cent or more of the market are not marginal. So let's not limit us to D&D and World of Darkness. If I would also use the numbers from C&GRM show us that d20 Modern, GURPS, Shadowrun, Warhammer FRP, Serenity, Castles & Crusades, Hero System and BESM still create noticeable part of the market.
Combined, they're part of the 10-12% that is not D&D or WW. Individually, they're each lucky if they have 1-2%.

Alnag said:
Yes. But we are talking here about common gamer, not a game designers neither "semi-profesional gamers" who know what all this indie hype is about. The booth on GenCon is one thing. The true impact on the market is something completely different.
As far as I know, gamers go to GenCon. To see a continued, growing presence on the part of the indie folk both there, and at Origins, and at local cons... that means something.

They are also doing a ton of con organizing, i.e., local cons for the common gamer.

Alnag said:
But the problem here is, that we are talking (as far as I know) about industry success. Because, to put it more simple, if there would be no industry there would be less of those cons and less booth and less gamers which might go the indie way. So they would also not grow and flourish. They would die too!
I agree that it's maybe not a great model for the industry as it exists now. However, it could be a new model that's good for the hobby.

As for comparing anything to the D&D boom of the 70s-80s... it's an unfair comparison, IMO. You're talking about the birth of the entire hobby.
 

Geron Raveneye said:
You have reached the "too many rules" point in a game when the amount of rules in it make a DM and/or the players stumble over them every 5 or 10 minutes, making them flip through a book to get the correct (and errata-ed) wording of a rule and then try to bend either the rule to the scene at hand, or the scene to fit the rules.

Which is, of course, highly individual and very much depending on personal preferance, experience, play style, and the will to "be wrong"...and thus not really a helpful measure. Still pops up all the time, of course. :p

Thanks, that helps clarify things more. Then so far, to me anyways, core D&D does not have too many rules.

It has also removed the situation:
DM: Bad guy punches your mage for 2 points of damage
Me: I cast burning hands.
DM: Well, you can't he's now too far away.

Challenge players within the rules, not by having the enemies defy the rules. Anyways thats a different topic for a different thread.
 


Belen said:
Dude....I have not met anyone who buys or uses Mongoose products in 2 years. That may just be my area, but from conversations on ENW and CM, I believe you're smoking crack.

Man, it must be just your area, because up here in Vancouver (and it's a fairly big gaming scene) Conan alone does big business.
 

Remove ads

Top