L
lowkey13
Guest
*Deleted by user*
(do Americans have the slang "to chuck" meaning "to throw"?)
Not only not independent but follows from. It's right there in the rulebook - it follows from Edwards's "Story Now" essay. Unless you think that Baker was wrong when he wrote that.Baker obviously has a debt to Forge, and obviously thinks PbtA is a different thing. I thought I'd said that pretty clearly. Anyway, not independent, no.
I wonder how many people posting in this thread, or those who assert that The Forge is a waste of time, ever actually posted there?It helps that my time was not ever spent there.
I never posted either, but have also enjoyed the writing and posts on The Forge. Sure, Edwards can be abrasive but he contributed a lot to getting the indie movement up and running. I have the annotated edition of Sorcerer, which has great insights into the design of the game. Troll Babe is a marvel of a streamlined rpg.I wonder how many people posting in this thread, or those who assert that The Forge is a waste of time, ever actually posted there?
I never did. I read a number of essays, and some threads that looked interesting and useful.
I have the annotated edition of Sorcerer, which has great insights into the design of the game. Troll Babe is a marvel of a streamlined rpg.
Well, on this I would add a caveat. I think people do universalize preferences. Not just in RPGs, but in general. It's part of human condition.
The blog post makes it pretty clear that over here you have Forge games and then over here is PbtA, which is a different thing according to Baker. The fact that Baker might owe a debt to Narrativist design theory at some point in his development as a designer doesn't mean that Baker is always and forever forced to make 'Forge' games. He thinks it's different enough to make a point of it, but apparently you want to read something else into that? I don't get it.Not only not independent but follows from. It's right there in the rulebook - it follows from Edwards's "Story Now" essay. Unless you think that Baker was wrong when he wrote that.
In the blog you link Baker outlines what he calls the Forge approach to design: "a more-or-less specified situation of conflict, freeform character traits, and a universal conflict resolution system". AW is not that, but that approach is not the only thing that can follow from Forge theory. What's the basis for this claim? Besides the fact that it's almost self-evident, that neither AW nor BW is an instance of such an approach, yet both are clearly derived from thinking at the Forge about (what is called) "narrativist design".