James;

Exactly.

I've seen loads of people that say they're using the Forge definition or some special one, when they're actually using the music business one - differently distributed, alternative, with overtones of rebellion, coolness, edginess, and so on.

And they associate that with a specific crowd of people, who are producing differently distributed, alternative games.  Which is where identity politics creep in, as was noted already.

So we all should start calling them Thematic Games. Because they are special, but not better or more elite.
If Ron´s essays have only one thing that is a fruitfull thought:

All playstyles are equally worhtwhile.

"Thematic Games" would be any game with a strong theme.  

This would be similar to:

Ameritrash

n. A catchphrase for "American style boardgames". In general, this means games that emphasize a highly developed theme, player to player conflict, and usually feature a moderate to high level of luck. Examples of classic Ameritrash games include Axis and Allies, Dune, Cosmic Encounter, Talisman, and Twilight Imperium.

theme

n. 1. The topic or subject matter of a game. adj –atic. 2. Having rules and mechanics based on assumptions regarding the subject matter of the game. Often considered the opposite of abstract.

"Thematic Games" is not a good name for the types of games developed by Forge theorists et al.

Well with boardgames, "theme" has a totally different meaning.

But I´m all ears for other words.

BTW, the BGG Definition sucks donkey balls, because if any US game is "Euro" in it´s rules, it´s Cosmic Encounter/Dune.

CE is in no way Ameritrash, and it´s theme is very scant.

QuoteWell with boardgames, "theme" has a totally different meaning.

A totally different meaning than the one you're suggesting.

I'm just saying -- "Thematic Games" isn't a very good term to describe what's going on in games like Dogs in the Vineyard, My Life With Master, etc.

The Buffy the Vampire Slayer RPG is more "Thematic" than a lot of Forge games.

Quote from: RPGPunditOh please, the Forge itself does this, all the time. The idea of the "Indie Press Revolution", the whole image, is to try to claim that Indie is not just what they offer as the textbook definition, but also a question of being rebels, of being cool, of being an elite.

Not to mention Edwards deciding that independent games he doesn't like are just "Fantasy Heartbreakers" and not true Indie games; and deciding that games he really loves that are obviously NOT indie by the textbook definition, like Heroquest, get to be "considered Indie" for no particular reason.

Eh?  Indie Press Revolution includes many D20 products, including manager Brennan Taylor's own D20 sci-fi game Bulldogs (from Galileo Games) along with many others like "Tell It To My Axe!" and "Poisoncraft: The Dark Art" and more from Blue Devil Games, the World of Whitethorn adventures from Open World Press, the Heroes of High Favor series from Bad Axe Games, and plenty of others.  They also have plenty of other traditional RPGs, like Jonathan Ridd's Dog Town, or Mark Smylie's Artesia, and so forth.  

Also, while Ron certainly isn't doing any favors to the games he calls "Fantasy Heartbreakers", he stands by them as indie games.  The conclusion of his essay, Fantasy Heartbreakers, is as follows:

QuoteThese are indie role-playing games. Their authors are part of the Forge community, in all the ways that matter. They designed their games through enjoyment of actual play, and they published them through hopes of reaching like-minded practitioners. It is not fair to dismiss the games as "sucky" - they deserve better than that, and no one is going to give them fair play and critical attention unless we do it.

Now, it's true that there are a number of people on the Forge who don't follow this usage -- they tend to call things "indie" only if they follow a certain style or are the sorts of games they like or whatever.  But, as I said, the usage also comes from people from elsewhere.  There is at least a core of people (on the Forge and elsewhere) who disagree with this and think "indie" means independently published regardless of style or content.

Ok, fair point.

RPGPundit

D&D is the most recognized brand name of RPGs.  It's similar to how all copiers used to be called Xerox macines.  If D&D defined RPG-dom at one time, it was because it was the only one or at least the most accesible one.  If the product delivers the same experience to the user, it's most likely an RPG.  I could care less if a Xerox and a IKON copying machine have different mechanics.  Your argument is almost like saying copying machines can only be Xerox because of tradition and their market ability and all other copying machines are actually just "replication devices".

Quote from: RPGPunditOk, fair point.

RPGPundit

Wait a minute.  :confused:

Who are you and what have you done to RPGPundit, you imposter!!  

Quote from: GunslingerD&D is the most recognized brand name of RPGs.  It's similar to how all copiers used to be called Xerox macines.  If D&D defined RPG-dom at one time, it was because it was the only one or at least the most accesible one.  If the product delivers the same experience to the user, it's most likely an RPG.  I could care less if a Xerox and a IKON copying machine have different mechanics.  Your argument is almost like saying copying machines can only be Xerox because of tradition and their market ability and all other copying machines are actually just "replication devices".

No, the opposite argument is a bit like saying that just because RPGs are "innovative" it doesn't mean they aren't wargames, and not all wargames need to be like "Squad Leader".  In other words, its nonsense.

There's some very typical things that define a wargame, and RPGs are sufficiently apart from those that means they're recognizeably a different (if related) hobby.

Likewise, there's enough differences in Storygames to recognize them as a seperate hobby.

RPGpundit

Quote from: jhkimWait a minute.  :confused:

Who are you and what have you done to RPGPundit, you imposter!!  

If you're willing to recognize that there's a sizeable group of people, including on the Forge, who try to promote the term "indie RPG" as some kind of a culture statement beyond just meaning "independantly published RPGs", I'm willing to accept that there's also a stated position by key people on the Forge stating that Fantasy Heartbreakers ARE indie games (even if they're not particularly beloved games by those on the Forge), and that there's at least some push on the Forge to try to keep the definition of "Indie" as something referring to publishing and not to culture.

However, I would note that some of the selfsame people who have defended the "publishing" definition also, paradoxically, enjoy and push forward the "culture" aspect of Indie on other occasions, when it suits their agenda.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPunditIf you're willing to recognize that there's a sizeable group of people, including on the Forge, who try to promote the term "indie RPG" as some kind of a culture statement beyond just meaning "independantly published RPGs", I'm willing to accept that there's also a stated position by key people on the Forge stating that Fantasy Heartbreakers ARE indie games (even if they're not particularly beloved games by those on the Forge), and that there's at least some push on the Forge to try to keep the definition of "Indie" as something referring to publishing and not to culture.

However, I would note that some of the selfsame people who have defended the "publishing" definition also, paradoxically, enjoy and push forward the "culture" aspect of Indie on other occasions, when it suits their agenda.

No, I'm still not buying it.  This is too even-handed for you to be the Pundit.  

But if you insist on pretending... Yes, I've already said that there are people on the Forge and elsewhere who are using the term "Indie" to mean a cultural thing about the style or content of the game.  I've had a few rants against this on my LJ and elsewhere, because I think it's unclear as well as contradictory to the Forge mission statement, the Indie RPG Awards, and so forth.  (it seems particularly backwards to call only Forge-related games "indie", when the Forge site itself defines "indie" differently.)  

And I'm sure there's also a subset of people who are inconsistent in their usage as well, including Forge posters, anti-Forgers, and others.  Such is the internet.

Quote from: jhkimAnd I'm sure there's also a subset of people who are inconsistent in their usage as well, including Forge posters, anti-Forgers, and others.  Such is the internet.

*Raises hand*

I'm totally inconsistent in my usage.

Such is me.

Quote from: RPGPunditIf you're willing to recognize that there's a sizeable group of people, including on the Forge, who try to promote the term "indie RPG" as some kind of a culture statement beyond just meaning "independantly published RPGs", I'm willing to accept that there's also a stated position by key people on the Forge stating that Fantasy Heartbreakers ARE indie games (even if they're not particularly beloved games by those on the Forge), and that there's at least some push on the Forge to try to keep the definition of "Indie" as something referring to publishing and not to culture.

Heck, there's enough push that the Heroquest forum was closed because Greg Stafford has delegated publication of Heroquest to Moon Design Publications, so the game no longer fits their definition of "indie". (They had to stretch it to make it fit in the first place, of course.)

Quote from: RPGPunditThere's some very typical things that define a wargame, and RPGs are sufficiently apart from those that means they're recognizeably a different (if related) hobby.

Your argument is that since once D&D defined RPGs anything that is not like D&D is not an RPG.  Your definition of RPG doesn't reflect how most gamers or industries use the term anymore.  RPG has become an umbrella term for a number of games.  Are computer RPGs in your definition of RPGs?  Your trying to take a general term and apply it to a specific type of game because at one time that was accurate.  I think most people seem to think that D&D was a starting point for a number of different types of RPGs that have been explored over the years.  Like a scientist who discovers a new species and then proceeds to define the subspecies.

You speak that your definition is the TRUTH.  Maybe you are just playing a role to encourage discourse but you come across as the evangelist at the front door saying there is only one true relegion and everything else is false relegion without taking into consideration that your definition of the TRUTH doesn't apply to the majority you're talking to.