What is "The Forge?"

[Lonely Tylenol]

I rather like that comparison. It both illustrates the point that I've been trying to make in fewer words and does so in a manner that makes me smile. Hooray for Doc Awk and Lewis Carroll!

Yay! Go me!

Also, go discount used editions of classic works of literature for easy reference!

 

[d20Dwarf]

I'm intrigued. Are you going to tell us or is it a big secret?

I'm sure the two sentences above come off as sarcastic but they are really not trying to mock you out in any way. But if there is something indie game designers trying their best are missing and you think commerical game designers and writers have a secret, why not share?

What's the secret, the influence? What is the journey? As I said, I'm intrigued.

Come on Paka, this ain't RPG.net. Eyebeams' assertion was no crazier than "we at the Forge have influenced every major RPG of the 21st Century and beyonnndddd-oonnnd-ooonnnd." I know you love the Forge and all, but not everybody thinks it's useful or even relevant to the day-to-day business and love/play of the RPG hobby. In fact, I showed quite clearly how, by the Forge's own standards, it is nigh-irrelevant when held up against the worst-selling Instant Adventure.

EDIT: I should also say that I share fusangite's wonder at the fact that some people consider what's coming out of the Forge to be deep insight. Mostly it's people working hard to make realizations that reasonably cogent people made after a few years of playing D&D.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

This illustrates my second big problem with GNS theory, the terms don't always match up with the meanings most people would associate with them.

Consider these three players:
1). The guy who enjoys playing in deep character.
2). The guy that wants as much realism in the game as posible.
3). The guy who just wants to sit around with his friends, roll dice and drink a few beers.

In GNS theory ALL THREE of these guys have a simulationist agenda.

You say you're a narativist at least partially. Would you disadvantage your character or even cause your character to fail to strenghten the story's theme? If not, then you're not what Edwards considers a narativist.

Sam

Ehh, whatever. It's all just beer & pretzels talk between games anyway. Edwards probably has a different idea of what I mean than I do. That doesn't make either of us more right. I have in the past disadvantaged a character to strengthen his characterization. He was an anal-retentive micromanagement freak who happened to be placed in charge of the security department of a space station above two of the worst "loose-cannon" types you could come up with. The conflict between his authority and their insubordination made for some zany mad-cap adventures, let-me-tell-you. At the end I let killer robots loose on the space station because my control-freakism was causing my sanity to fray. Much fun was had by all involved. Especially the killer robots.

This was in FUDGE, which made it simple for us to pay attention to the things we wanted to and not pay attention to the things we didn't care about. The GM was what I'd call a simulationist/narrativist and the loose-cannons were gamist/simulationists. They liked to kill bad guys a lot, at least, and they liked their characters to be kick-ass and win. I'm sure some dude somewhere thinks I've got them pegged all wrong, but as far as I'm concerned, it's close enough for jazz.

 

[Paka]

d20Dwarf,

I really wasn't flaming or trolling or anything negative but I really wonder at the nation that commercial game designers know something that others can't comprehend or have taken some journey that others can't know.

And if there is something to be passed on, I'd love to know what it is.

Seriously, I wasn't being nasty. I was asking an honest question.

Regarding the Forge's relevance, I enjoy Forge games, simple as that. I don't think everything that comes out of it as relevant to my table and don't really dig GNS theory in the slightest but when it comes down to it, the games have been fun.

I'm really not trying to start a flamewar; I might end up disagreeing with an idea here and there but I feel more than up to doing that without attacking anyone personally.

 

[d20Dwarf]

d20Dwarf,

I really wasn't flaming or trolling or anything negative but I really wonder at the nation that commercial game designers know something that others can't comprehend or have taken some journey that others can't know.

And if there is something to be passed on, I'd love to know what it is.

Seriously, I wasn't being nasty. I was asking an honest question.

Regarding the Forge's relevance, I enjoy Forge games, simple as that. I don't think everything that comes out of it as relevant to my table and don't really dig GNS theory in the slightest but when it comes down to it, the games have been fun.

I'm really not trying to start a flamewar; I might end up disagreeing with an idea here and there but I feel more than up to doing that without attacking anyone personally.

That's good, I didn't want this to become the RPG.net thread, and there's already a lot of baggage on this issue (I didn't participate in that thread, but read it).

It seems like you're taking eyebeams' statement as an attack on the Forge, and you've reworded his initial statement to sound more demeaning. In fact, it may or may not be true that the Forgeites know what it takes to make a commercial game design. I'll direct you to RPG Now and ask how many of those self-publishers know either.

A commercial game designer might try to figure out what people want out of a game and give it to them. An "indie" designer, at least as represented at the Forge, is much more interested in telling people exactly how to play and making sure they know they're wrong if they deviate.

That would be one difference I see between commercial designers and vanity publishers.

 

[Paka]

That would be one difference I see between commercial designers and vanity publishers.

Woops. Vanity publishers don't make money. Everyone I know who publishes at the Forge is in the black.

Self-publishers, Wil, self-publishers.

I didn't take what eyebeams said as a slam on the Forge. I just wanted to know what commercial designers know that other people don't. I'm curious about the influences and the journey that he speaks of.

I'M HONESTLY CURIOUS. I'm asking an honest question here.

I am not waiting with bated breath so I can slam him in public.

I'm really nice.

Really.

Now I might challenge his ideas but I think I can do so without attacking him.

 

[d20Dwarf]

Woops. Vanity publishers don't make money. Everyone I know who publishes at the Forge is in the black.

Self-publishers, Wil, self-publishers.

I didn't take what eyebeams said as a slam on the Forge. I just wanted to know what commercial designers know that other people don't. I'm curious about the influences and the journey that he speaks of.

I'M HONESTLY CURIOUS. I'm asking an honest question here.

I am not waiting with bated breath so I can slam him in public.

I'm really nice.

Really.

Now I might challenge his ideas but I think I can do so without attacking him.

Oh I know how nice you can be.

Sorry, self-publishers. That still includes most of the companies represented at RPGNow.

 

[Paka]

Oh I know how nice you can be.

C'mon, I'm all over a bunch of gaming online communities, when have I been mean?

Seriously.

 

[d20Dwarf]

C'mon, I'm all over a bunch of gaming online communities, when have I been mean?

Seriously.

I'm not saying you are. Defensive? Maybe.

I too would like to know what commercial designers know that others don't, since, as a commercial designer, I must know it but wouldn't know what it is!

 

[Samuel Leming]

Ehh, whatever. It's all just beer & pretzels talk between games anyway. Edwards probably has a different idea of what I mean than I do.

You can count on that. As I said, Edwards uses the terms differently.

That doesn't make either of us more right.

Well, I suppose you can describe your games however you want. I wouldn't use GNS to describe my gaming style at all, since I don't subscribe to that theory. I'm not a Narativist, Gamist or Simulationist.

I'm right, you're right, Edwards is wrong.

I have in the past disadvantaged a character to strengthen his characterization. He was an anal-retentive micromanagement freak who happened to be placed in charge of the security department of a space station above two of the worst "loose-cannon" types you could come up with. The conflict between his authority and their insubordination made for some zany mad-cap adventures, let-me-tell-you. At the end I let killer robots loose on the space station because my control-freakism was causing my sanity to fray. Much fun was had by all involved. Especially the killer robots.

Did you take those actions because that's what the character would do(Sim), make the game more fun(Sim) or back up the theme of the story(Nar)?

I was talking more along the lines of using an action die or something like it to cause your character to miss a shot at the fleeing bad guy for the sake of the story even though your character would want to bring him down. Doesn't make sense for most styles of play, does it? That's Narativism for you.

This was in FUDGE, which made it simple for us to pay attention to the things we wanted to and not pay attention to the things we didn't care about. The GM was what I'd call a simulationist/narrativist and the loose-cannons were gamist/simulationists. They liked to kill bad guys a lot, at least, and they liked their characters to be kick-ass and win. I'm sure some dude somewhere thinks I've got them pegged all wrong, but as far as I'm concerned, it's close enough for jazz.

As others have said in this thread, you can find plenty of those dudes over at the Forge.

Sam