I think my games fail at several of these. I am so happy

Quote from: gleichman;641077If you say so. But I find that the list I posted hits all the Story Games that I'm aware of nicely without having to worry about the details.

Yes, it does, and it also hits flags for all traditional RPGs.  Therefore why bother having a list and just state that no game of either stripe does it right?  That there is always some form of red flag?

Quote from: This Guy;641087Yes, it does, and it also hits flags for all traditional RPGs.  Therefore why bother having a list and just state that no game of either stripe does it right?  That there is always some form of red flag?

Don't be silly, there are games that don't hit any of those flags or that can be adjusted to remove the flag with little effort or even (in the case of most editions of HERO) no rule changes.

Quote from: TristramEvans;641050My "red flags":

Target numbers. Hate em. Think its an incredibly lazy, inelegant solution for a task resolution mechanic. I can hande them if they're kept on a scale of 1-10, but other than that, no thanks a billion other games have already done it, and I didnt like it then.

As opposed to what, though?

1: Could I have made this game myself?

Quote from: gleichman;641073You playing in a gaming session, just not a role-playing session. Treat like any other pure game like a board game or wargame. Stock stats, simple goal, using the core rules.

You fail at understanding roleplaying games. A roleplaying game exists to facilitate the roleplaying.

It would be like saying, play a wargame but without any fighting of battles.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;641136You fail at understanding roleplaying games. A roleplaying game exists to facilitate the roleplaying.

It would be like saying, play a wargame but without any fighting of battles.

It isn't that difficult to understand. He wants a game to be enjoyable in and of itself, and if it isn't he isn't interested.

I don't agree with him on much else, but he's right about that. I'm not interested in a pure wargame, but if a game doesn't work as one it doesn't work at all.

My list is different and not as restrictive but a list I do have:

1 - The game goes on and on about how wonderful it is and indeed spends more time talking about itself than it spends on the rules.

2 - There are different rules / the rules work differently for PCs and NPCs this means there are twice as many rules as are necessary and is a clear indication that the game is just an adolescent power trip.  So I'm okay with escalating hit points or critical hits or fate points as long as both sides get them in equal quantities and they don't slow game play to a crawl.

3 - The rules subsystems are so tightly intertwined that you can't jettison or swap out the ones you don't like.  I'm afraid this is where HERO tends to fail for me.  The points system is so centeral to the game.

4 - Vital parts of the rules are not in the core book.  Personally 4e D&D is a huge offender here though things like two weapon fighting fighters might not be a huge priority for some, what I hate is when a game does significantly less in the new edition's core rules.  I would make an exception for a game like GURPS or Rolemaster or third or fourth edition D&D where the current edition is suffering from needless rules bloat.  More rules with less functionality is a cardinal sin of many games in the last decade.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;641136You fail at understanding roleplaying games. A roleplaying game exists to facilitate the roleplaying.

You fail to even try to understand what I'm saying.

I'm not saying you should play a role-playing game without role-playing, I'm saying you play a role-playing games system once or twice without role-playing in order to determine if that system is worth anything.

If it's not, find a better system.

If it is, now you can proceed to play a role-playing game with a fun system, and all the role-playing you wish to do as well. Best of all worlds instead of half.

Quote from: gleichman;641149You fail to even try to understand what I'm saying.

I'm not saying you should play a role-playing game without role-playing, I'm saying you play a role-playing games system once or twice without role-playing in order to determine if that system is worth anything.

If it's not, find a better system.

If it is, now you can proceed to play a role-playing game with a fun system, and all the role-playing you wish to do as well. Best of all worlds instead of half.

And I'm saying that's a stupid way to look at it because a game's mechanics are there to help facilitate a role-playing experience.  Since no one in their right mind picks up an RPG to play out mechanical scenario number crunching only, I imagine that's not even on the radar as a goal when the game is designed.

Quote from: Charlie Sheen;641144I don't agree with him on much else, but he's right about that. I'm not interested in a pure wargame, but if a game doesn't work as one it doesn't work at all.

If you are are talking about a wargame designed as a wargame then yes.

I don't consider a roleplaying game that doesn't function as a wargame to be a failure any more than I would a functional wargame that "fails" to be a roleplaying game.

Quote from: David Johansen;6411463 - The rules subsystems are so tightly intertwined that you can't jettison or swap out the ones you don't like.  I'm afraid this is where HERO tends to fail for me.  The points system is so centeral to the game.

While I typically don't, the point costing is easy enough to rip out of HERO, it's no big deal. I do it all the time when asked to run an on the fly game for whatever reason.

The only possible problem is getting your players to agree to it with respect to their characters, and I've never had trouble with that to be honest.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;641151And I'm saying that's a stupid way to look at it because a game's mechanics are there to help facilitate a role-playing experience.  Since no one in their right mind picks up an RPG to play out mechanical scenario number crunching only, I imagine that's not even on the radar as a goal when the game is designed.

Which is why so many games are so poorly designed.

Hell Sacrosanct, by your own descriptions you go out of your way to avoid playing the game in your campaigns as do many of the other posters on this board. Those D&D game threads were great examples of that. Maybe if people like you paid more attention to the game part, you'd know- actually play a game.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;641152If you are are talking about a wargame designed as a wargame then yes.

I don't consider a roleplaying game that doesn't function as a wargame to be a failure any more than I would a functional wargame that "fails" to be a roleplaying game.

Exactly.  No one is saying the mechanics of an RPG aren't important.  They are.  But in the context of how they help facilitate the role-playing part.  It's like wanting to see what the driving experience of a car is, but never taking it out of the parking lot.  Just sitting there and revving the engine.  Most supercars will pale in comparison to an average car because they aren't designed for luxery.  No AC, and many don't even have radios.  But when it comes to driving?  Awesome.  Evaluating the mechanics of something while intentionally ignoring what those mechanics are meant to facilitate is just dumb.

Quote from: gleichman;641154Which is why so many games are so poorly designed.

Hell Sacrosanct, by your own descriptions you go out of your way to avoid playing the game in your campaigns as do many of the other posters on this board. Those D&D game threads were great examples of that. Maybe if people like you paid more attention to the game part, you'd know- actually play a game.

What does this actually even mean?  Avoid playing the game?  That makes no sense.  When I'm playing AD&D with friends, we're playing AD&D.  RPGs are a social function you know.