What is "The Forge?"

[mythusmage]

You have startship fuel rules not because it will be more fun for everybody. You have it as an option for the bean-counting player. If no such bean-counting player exists you, as a halfway intelligent designer, ought to have an explanation for why the option need not be used higher up in the hierarchy that begins at the core mechanic and devolves into various individual manifestations.

Is this really the case, or is it what you would like things to be? Have you considered the possibilty others may not have your motivations? A survey of one is a poor predictor of group behavior.

 

[d20Dwarf]

Is this really the case, or is it what you would like things to be? Have you considered the possibilty others may not have your motivations? A survey of one is a poor predictor of group behavior.

A complete roleplaying game system will try to anticipate how it will be used by the end user. If you want to have a little specialty game that does one thing, then you don't have to do this. It's much easier, simpler, which is why self-publishers might choose to go this route. However, these are roleplaying games that bear more resemblance to How to Host a Murder Mystery than what historically we know as a roleplaying game.

 

[coyote6]

Eyebeams' assertion was no crazier than "we at the Forge have influenced every major RPG of the 21st Century and beyonnndddd-oonnnd-ooonnnd."

I kind of got the impression (solely from the RPG.net thread linked to earlier) that they were mostly joking.

<shrug>

I don't really care too much about theory in-and-of-itself; I've no game designer ambitions, so my concern is more like, "Will I and my group enjoy playing this?"

One of these days, I'll get around to reading the copy of Burning Wheel I bought at Gen Con SoCal, so I can see whether I like it or not. (A game I bought, by-the-by, largely because of comments from Ken Hite & some people here -- TB, maybe?)

 

[Paka]

A complete roleplaying game system will try to anticipate how it will be used by the end user. If you want to have a little specialty game that does one thing, then you don't have to do this. It's much easier, simpler, which is why self-publishers might choose to go this route. However, these are roleplaying games that bear more resemblance to How to Host a Murder Mystery than what historically we know as a roleplaying game.

Wil, c'mon, man. That's condescending. -little specialty game- I'm disappointed.

I think people go that route because it is a game they want to play. As you said earlier about commercial game designers making games based on what they think other people want.

Through use of POD, one can make a complete RPG for not so much money and make the game they always wanted to see.

For example, I'm seriously thinking about making up and publishing the RPG that I wish had been out in the world to welcome me when I was 12.

And I can without borrowing money or owning a printing press.

That's pretty nifty.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

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 drove him up to the edge of sanity because I thought it would work well for his character. He was neurotic to start with, but I made him obsessive. It made his life hell, and he totally lost all his credibility as a commanding officer. Then he let loose with the death robots as a last play at regaining control of a completely out-of-control situation. So I see the example as being mostly narrative. I dispute that "making the game more fun" is simulationist. All three aspects of play can make the game more fun, depending on what "fun" is.

 

[d20Dwarf]

Wil, c'mon, man. That's condescending. -little specialty game- I'm disappointed.

I think people go that route because it is a game they want to play. As you said earlier about commercial game designers making games based on what they think other people want.

Through use of POD, one can make a complete RPG for not so much money and make the game they always wanted to see.

For example, I'm seriously thinking about making up and publishing the RPG that I wish had been out in the world to welcome me when I was 12.

And I can without borrowing money or owning a printing press.

That's pretty nifty.

I agree, this subject is veering into an area I've been thinking a lot about over the past 12-18 months...and, gasp, done so without visiting the Forge a single time!

I'm not denigrating self-publishers, except ones that claim their tightly focused mega-niche game handles every aspect of true roleplaying better than any other game. Those I don't mind taking down a peg or five. The proof is in the pudding, and in the market...if it truly is a better, purer product, then why isn't it reaching a broad audience?

 

[Paka]

I agree, this subject is veering into an area I've been thinking a lot about over the past 12-18 months...and, gasp, done so without visiting the Forge a single time!

If you have any questions about it, there is a publishing forum and friendly folks who have some experience in this arena and will gladly answer questions.

I'm not denigrating self-publishers, except ones that claim their tightly focused mega-niche game handles every aspect of true roleplaying better than any other game. Those I don't mind taking down a peg or five. The proof is in the pudding, and in the market...if it truly is a better, purer product, then why isn't it reaching a broad audience?

You totally are denigrating 'em, man. C'mon. Their cute lil' games.

Down a peg or five? Ya lost me.

The proof isn't in the pudding, the proof is in their goals.

If their goal was to publish a game, own their intellectual property, break even/make a profit and see their vision in print, then they won. They don't need to play the distribution game by the same rules as you big ole publishers do (there is a GNS joke here but I can't quite spit it out ).

They can publish a game, make some cash, continue working their day-jobs and when they hear people are playing their game and having fun, feel like geek rock stars.

Where's the harm in that?

The Forge is saying, "This isn't an isolated incident."

The Forge is saying, "If you have an idea and are willing to work at it and make it solid, playtest it and bring it to life, you can see it in print without taking out a mortgage on your house."

The Forge is saying, "Come play."

What's the harm in that?

I don't understand the grief.

 

[Umbran]

There is an implicit punitive component to this. As the designer, you are now telling folks how to play instead of enabling different kinds of play.

Yes, because a single game can only enable so much. We certainly don't want designers tryign to make each individual game into all things for all people, do we?

When there's a disjoin between what the players want and what the designer wrote, then the players have to deviate from teh rules to have more fun. But it isn't like the designer knows and can match what all players want ahead of time. So, there's some burden upon the players to chose the right game for what they want to do, and then to use the tools the designer created properly.

This latter may seem odd at first, but bear with me. Let's say you tell me you want to make a bird house. I hand you directions, wood, hammer and nails. You still have to use the hammer and nails properly in order to end up with the birdhouse you told me you wanted. If you insist on trying to drive the nails with the claw-end of the hammer, you won't be happy with the birdhouse, and you shouldn't try to blame me for it.

 

[Samuel Leming]

I drove him up to the edge of sanity because I thought it would work well for his character. He was neurotic to start with, but I made him obsessive. It made his life hell, and he totally lost all his credibility as a commanding officer. Then he let loose with the death robots as a last play at regaining control of a completely out-of-control situation. So I see the example as being mostly narrative.

It's not completely clear what you mean by 'narrative'.

I dispute that "making the game more fun" is simulationist. All three aspects of play can make the game more fun, depending on what "fun" is.

If I had said "more entertaining for the group", the statement would have been less ambiguous.

Sam

 

[mythusmage]

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!

You'll understand when you're 10th.

(I've been meaning to talk to you, d20Dwarf. I think you're ready to learn real game design.)