Quote from: K BergEnglish is my second language and I've read and played both BW classic and BW revised, so it is both readable and playable.

I wouldn't have guessed English was your second language.

Quote from: K BergWIf you accept that we develop the character in this way during play, by jamming and riffing of the other players then the step from this and to the gradual discovery of the character in play by following the same procedure except we don't have much on the char-sheet to begin with isn't that long a step.

Actually, I think it's a large step. It's like the difference between planting tomatoes and lettuce and watching them come up, but influencing how high they grow and how much fruit they put out, and just leaving some land fallow and waiting to see what comes up naturally.

Quote from: K BergThis does not confirm with many of the interviews I have read with different authors. Some of them say the characters take on a life of their own.

They say that. What they mean is that the characters begin to make more sense to them in the context of the story than they did before the story was written. When they've written about the marriage of a character, it's easier for them to think about what their character's job is like, and vice versa.

In any case, even supposing characters magically created themselves, still the novelist has an advantage a roleplayer does not - time. No novelist would expect to be able to create a coherent and interesting character in just a few hours of discussing them - as we do in an rpg session. Novelists take months or years to create their characters and stories. We take hours and weeks.

So demanding a similar level of creativity in that shorter time - that's demanding too much.

Quote from: K BergAll of this demands creativity and spontaneity. It is the nature of roleplaying. What this means for us when we design games is that we should facilitate and channel this creativity. By creating systems that support it.

I agree. But as I said, there's a difference between encouraging something, and demanding it. A system where people have to create "colour", or turn colour into mechanics during play, that's demanding creativity and spontaneity. And I've found that what you demand from gamers you never get; what you encourage you usually get. This applies to all aspects of play. If you demand they show up on time, they don't; if you encourage them to with food and xp, they do. If you demand a quiet player participate more, they don't; if you encourage them with some success when they do participate, they do. And likewise with creativity and spontaneity.

Quote from: K BergHere the player invented a part of his character that no one knew off on the spot, we rolled with it (literally and figurativly) and we ended up with awesome. We turned a piece of color (character background), into mechanics (an npc to fight).

I think that's excellent, and sounds like fun. But I think most players don't go for that. Again, why are BW, HQ and similar games which expect this kind of in-game-session creativity so widely-praised but rarely-played? And games which don't require it (like D&D, GURPS, etc - where you can have player creativity, but it isn't demanded), are widely-absued but widely-played?

I can't agree with your assesment of the amount of play both HQ and BW get. But I guess this stems from me not knowing what you compare them to. Compare them to DnD and they vanish. Given.

however, I'll rephrase something.

QuoteActually, I think it's a large step. It's like the difference between planting tomatoes and lettuce and watching them come up, but influencing how high they grow and how much fruit they put out, and just leaving some land fallow and waiting to see what comes up naturally.

Metaphors always make this tricky. So I am going to restate something. This is as much to help me formulate my thoughts (14 days of 12 hour nightshifts just ended) as it is trying to explain what I mean.

1. Often before we sit down to play we have decided before hand what kind of game we are going to play. We may do this through our choice of ruleset or we may do it through a discussion when we meet up. How isn't that important here, what is important is that we establish a common frame of reference. We get past the initial blank page trauma.
2. When we play we create together. We talk, we imagine and find a way to agree on some details. We are by default spontane and creative. We have to be, it is in the nature of the hobby.
3. How we do the above depends on our playstyle.

Do we agree so far? or if we don't do you understand where I am coming from?

Now what I read you saying is that to create a coherent and interesting character in just a few hours is demaning too much.

No I am going to propose that what is on your character-sheet is not your character, just the tools you use to create him during those few hours. With these tools it becomes possible and easy to create a coherent and interesting character.

Now what if we use my step one above. We get past the blank page. We might not have more than a western town. We need something more. Lets create a situation. There is a card game going in the saloon. Not enough. One of the players kicks the table over and stands up. His hand on his gun, his eyes on you. He then loudly proclaims you a cheater, daring you to do something about it.

You can begin making choices about your character right here and now. Is he a cheat? Is he afraid this guy with a gun? And so on.
You do not need all the details filled in to begin with. Shit you don't even need his name right now. There is a guy with a frigging gun in his face. How you choose to react to this begins to define your character. I might state that my character quaff the last of his whiskey and put his back to the wall, watching your back for you. Suddenly we are both jamming.

Now you put two points in your aspect Gunfighter and state that you want to outdraw this son of a gun. No one calls Jim McCree a cheat (even though he is since you just put three points in the aspect cheater.)

It is not that hard. It might take some training, it is like all else a skill. But by taking part in this hobby you already have the creativity and spontaneity to do so. You just need the oppertunity.

That is what I have been trying to say. Color to mechanics is such an oppertunity.

*I have to pack for the heli-flight home, where my wife and kid waits, so if I don't reply immideatly doesn't mean I've lost interest in this discussion. I'll see if there is time to check in before I fly

Edited to give greater clarity in the example

I'm not really talking about how much the games get played, I'm talking about how much they get played compared to how much they're praised.

Do I want to be the guy everyone says is really handsome, but no woman will touch, or the guy no-one's that impressed with, but has a girlfriend? That's what BW vs D&D makes me think of. I'm just saying, there's lots of smoke and not much fire. Lots of people praising these games, doesn't seem to be many people playing them.

I want more stories like K Berg's, I want to hear what happens in play. I mean, you can look at things in D&D or GURPS or Hero or whatever, and say, "that looks funny, I'm not sure that'd work, but I wonder what people who play it say?" and then go off and easily find people who've played it, and see what they have to say. That's not so easy with these games like BW and HQ. And honestly, that makes me suspicious - just like women are suspicious of a handsome guy who can't keep a girlfriend, or workers are suspicious of an employer that everyone says is wonderful, but no-one will work for him for more than a week.

Now go pack - it's your wife and kid, man! Fuck this rubbish

It doesn't take long to pack when all you have is two bags, and you've spent so little time not wearing a boilersuit you haven't had time to dirty any of your civvies.

You want stories of play from BW, just ask. I've played, I've crashed and burned (pun not intended), and I have learned. And I'll try to share.

Quote from: Kyle AaronDo I want to be the guy everyone says is really handsome, but no woman will touch, or the guy no-one's that impressed with, but has a girlfriend? That's what BW vs D&D makes me think of.

Burning Wheel is the hot model that everyone admires but never gets to touch, while D&D is the down and dirty type... everyone gets a ride.

Quote from: Tyberious FunkBurning Wheel is the hot model that everyone admires but never gets to touch, while D&D is the down and dirty type... everyone gets a ride.

Luke should use that as a review for Burning Wheel 3.0.

I've played and GMed Burning Wheel.

I'm playing in a game right now with some roommates, playing a priest who was a chaplain to a group of knights and has Faith, worshiping a goddess of justice.

And I'm running a game over skype with two buddies who live far away, where they are two orcs whose horde was decimated and they were caught in Elven lands without safe passage back to their homelands and are now embroiled in a war between 7 Dwarven Kings and a dragon.

That's what is happening at the table, virtual or otherwise, at the moment, if you have any questions, Kyle or whoever, let me know.

I'd definitely love to see some play threads about BW, as with any game.

Quote from: Kyle AaronI'd definitely love to see some play threads about BW, as with any game.

I don't have the time to post up any play threads nowadays.  Life's just too hectic but you mentioned that it seemed like BW's not played a whole lot and I've played it a bunch, so I'll gladly answer questions if ya want.

Judd, you could probably also just link Kyle to some of your old APs...didn't you used to post big writeups on rpg.net?

Quote from: CalithenaJudd, you could probably also just link Kyle to some of your old APs...didn't you used to post big writeups on rpg.net?

In the Actual Play Index on the top of RPG.net's AP forum (http://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=256026) are several BW links and they are all from a campaign I ran a few years ago.  From Darth Vader Ballot Box on down to The Dungeon Crawl to Hell (and Back?).

Commentary on this thread:

http://itsmrwilson.livejournal.com/39864.html

Interesting! I had no idea this thread was really all about D20 and "insanity".

Wow... I let a thread lie fallow and I come back to find everyone and anyone plowing it!

Wait... that sounds wrong...

To answer Jimbob: Man,  I have a hard enough time getting a group together for games I love unreservedly, much less find time to play games that merely have great ideas. I know, there goes my credibility. :deflated:

One thing you mentioned that strikes me is that I don't see that the player should be pulling spaceships out of his pocket at a moment's notice.  There are two factors here; first the examples I read suggest/state? that the character's color should already exist, the second is that, certainly in the setting, you have to have the right background to even have access to certain things.  That aside, one assumes that you can take advantage of the peculiar arrangement of 'scenes' to take a 'build scene' to build yourself some color that you will want to use later when you can actually afford it.

I'm not entirely the expert on it, mind you.  Likewise, and I thought I mentioned this: For all I love the ideas behind the mechanic, they don't really jibe with how I play.  Not only does it clash with my 'clockwork world' mentality (the ship either is or is not) it also clashes with my preference for objects in the game world being entirely seperate from the character (GURPS vs. Champions).  

That said: I'm not to worried about how it works out in AP in BW/BE. Its a mechanic that stands on its own, this is the design/theory forum. I can see a half dozen ways to implement it outside of where it came from, that is what I am interested in: How well it plays out when removed from its home, in other incarnations.

For example: In my possibly never to be actually written Dynamic Combat Kung Fu RPG thingamajig, you have the possiblility of using a 'Weapon Based Fu', where in the weapon is functionally 'color'. Mechanically you gain a minor advantage in combat at the penality of possibly being disarmed, the actual shape/nature of the weapon is irrelevant aside from 'color'. You can also pick up a 'Mechanical Weapon' which exists outside the Fu, but could be used with it. The Mechanical Weapon has its own individual stats, and thus THAT WEAPON exists as a mechanical creation. It is not, by any stretch, Color.  Unlike the Color Weapon (these are technical terms, not game terms) you must have a specific weapon to benefit from them, and if lost can not be convienently replaced. Lose a Color Weapon in a fight, next fight you've got a replacement, barring the most extreme circumstances (prison, lost on a deserted island... though even there you might eventually get a replacement).


As for HeroQuest: picked it up when it first came out, found it a horrible horrible mess and put it away, never to be seen again. Its possible that something like this was in there, but I never saw it. Then again, I gave up about the time I figured out that damn fishhook looking thing.

Dying Earth: mentions that Clothes are Color... don't recall anything else in there that looks quite like this.

Wow, Paka has some real idiots as friends, who don´t even know about 99% of Sci-Fi gaming.
Pathetic bunch of D&D bashers also.

Quote from: SettembriniWow, Paka has some real idiots as friends, who don´t even know about 99% of Sci-Fi gaming.
Pathetic bunch of D&D bashers also.

Apparently they all speak native shithouse rat, too. (Well some of these guys practically invented the language.) We just need an appearance by Chris Chinn and Matt Snyder to make this bobblehead convention complete--- hey, there they are! Mediocre amateur game designers for the win!

I was kind of amused to see the weird D&D hatred and obsession spill over into their commentary on a thread that had absolutely nothing to do with D&D. Somehow the argument that spaceships should have stats gets re-imagined over there as "they must think the sun should actually be a 10,000 hit-dice fire elemental, ho-ho."

I mean, was the real discussion here too hard to follow? I didn't even think it was that controversial.

Even the opinions I didn't agree with weren't controversial.