Quote from: Kyle AaronI'm starting to think this is almost a political difference. There are the socialists, who want laws to make things fair and bring out the best in people, and the liberals, who think the best thing government can do is get out of the way...

The Indie-Revolution?  :raise:  Could be, could be...

The thing is they're not winning hearts and minds of Gamesmasters.  After all, "Player Empowerment" is not likely to be very appealing to GMs because it's intrinsically Anti-GM.  So, consequently, La Revolucion is not really working as Che has foreseen after all.   Kind of like poking a stick in the eye of the person you're trying to sell sticks to.   T'was a bad Marketing Strategy to begin with.   Sadly, its their Bad Rhetoric that's killing them.  The games themselves might have appealed to more GMs had they not foolishly deployed the BadWrongFun and BrainDamage attacks.   That was a huge Strategic error, and one that they may not be able to recover from.  Woopsie.   Just consider how things might have gone had they simply tried a Win-Win Strategy such as, "Traditional RPGs are FUN!  Try these New Ones, too!" ...?

Long live GM-Fiat!

Quote from: VBWyrdeThe thing is they're not winning hearts and minds of Gamesmasters.  After all, "Player Empowerment" is not likely to be very appealing to GMs because it's intrinsically Anti-GM.  So, consequently, La Revolucion is not really working as Che has foreseen after all.

Marxism experienced the same problem when the working class that was supposed to rise up actually enjoyed the fruits of capitalism enough and had enough upward mobility to not be eager to revolt and tear it all down.  That's where the whole idea of a revolutionary vanguard came from and why most of the Marxist revolutions have relied on rural peasants and upper-class college students rather than factory workers and the urban lower classes.  The inevitable transformation of society that was originally expected never happened.  Hmmm.  Maybe that's not such a bad analogy after all.

Yeah it's sad they seemed to have deployed vinegar instead of honey in selling these games.  

It does effect my buying decision, I just won't buy from these guys.  I was thinking of picking up Burning Wheel for ideas on world building and as a supplement to what I do, it sounds like an excellent product for that no matter your play style.  Not anymore.  I expected a vigorous sell of good points, new options, how the collaborative rules can support your style but have a style all there own, not ImmatureFun, BrainDamage, I'mTheGuruBowBeforeMe arguments.

What do others think?  The Guru angle has always fascinated me on the internet.  It relies on capitulating judgment to the other based on their track record.  But on the internet the Guru doesn't know his audiences' track record.  What if the person on the other end is not some know nothing / unsuccessful / inexperienced teenager that is easily impressed?  

I know it is taught as a sales tactic to find out what people fear and sell to that fear, I think that is what we have going on here, but in the crying wolf sense that just undercuts your credibility.

Quote from: VBWyrdeThe thing is they're not winning hearts and minds of Gamesmasters.  After all, "Player Empowerment" is not likely to be very appealing to GMs because it's intrinsically Anti-GM.

What about GMs who happen to be playing as players?  

I buy games I want to play.  In order to play some of them, that means GMing sometimes.  If you're purchasing RPGs, you're most likely both a GM and player of RPGs.  I wish I knew people that would run games for me that I've bought.  The best I usually can do is find someone who also has bought the game and sweet talking them into running.  

Quote from: XantherIt does effect my buying decision, I just won't buy from these guys. I was thinking of picking up Burning Wheel for ideas on world building and as a supplement to what I do, it sounds like an excellent product for that no matter your play style. Not anymore. I expected a vigorous sell of good points, new options, how the collaborative rules can support your style but have a style all there own, not ImmatureFun, BrainDamage, I'mTheGuruBowBeforeMe arguments.

That reaction surprises me.  Your problem isn't with the mechanics or how it plays, it's about the thought process that went behind the mechanics or how the game plays?  :confused: How do you envision the people you LIKE to play with playing these games?  Is the GM/player relationship really the cornerstone of your enjoyment of RPGs?  It very well could be but it sounds to me like people are just worrying about how change could affect what you really enjoy about the RPGs you're accustomed to playing.  If that's your preference cool, that method delivers what I enjoy about roleplaying games too.  Games that use different methods also satisfy what I enjoy about roleplaying games.  I enjoy playing characters and setting things up so others can enjoy playing characters.

Quote from: Gunslinger...
That reaction surprises me.  Your problem isn't with the mechanics or how it plays, it's about the thought process that went behind the mechanics or how the game plays?  :confused:

I think I might need to step back from my statement.  I originally thought Ken and Ryan had some official connection with the game.  If not then I may consider it, if they do have some official connection or are sanctioned by the company or author, then no thanks.  It's about giving my money to people whose sale tactics I find highly distasteful.  That is, the approach to selling that has turned me off not how the game was made.  

QuoteHow do you envision the people you LIKE to play with playing these games?  Is the GM/player relationship really the cornerstone of your enjoyment of RPGs?  

I think for us it is, the aspect of a player not knowing what's behind the door say and the division of labor.  Odd as it may sound I love making settings and designing adventures but when I play I want a break and a different experience, I want to be surprised.

  Nevertheless, if one of my friends want to try it I'll give it a go and try to work with it.  It's probably not much different than the play-by-chat game I'm in where in our character narration we help define the world by bits.  No rules for this we just know where we can narrate in some color that the GM may later turn into something.

QuoteIt very well could be but it sounds to me like people are just worrying about how change could affect what you really enjoy about the RPGs you're accustomed to playing.

Not worried, more amused and flabergasted by the statements made and with phrases like "adolescent power trip" a bit put off.

QuoteIf that's your preference cool, that method delivers what I enjoy about roleplaying games too.  Games that use different methods also satisfy what I enjoy about roleplaying games.  I enjoy playing characters and setting things up so others can enjoy playing characters.

I don't disagree.  I have nothing against the collaborative method, or narrative stories or any other playstyle and would be happy to hear what is good about it.  

I just have to say "you've got to be kidding me" when the argument is that these games are the one true way to game and the only hope for TRPGs.  Couple that with the implict (or explicit) argument that the traditional ways are inherently crap and if you don't agree you must be an idiot.  It makes one want to speak up and disagree.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron

"I demand my twenty minutes of fun!"



The Last Best Hope of the Roleplaying Industry

No, seriously!

Why?  Has it been 3 1/2 hours already?  
Hey - pipe down - you still have 10 minutes of torturous bordom to go!  

Well, as we were told by Stuart, old Dancey is planning on writing

   Ryan Dancey's Storyteller's Guide to The D20 System

This book is designed to take a stock D&D game (or any reasonably close to stock D20 variant) and transform it into a Storytelling Game. The intent is to replace the traditional DM vs. Player relationship with a cooperative storytelling mode. It will include my take on: Player created content, character motivation mechanics, abstract resource management, and streamlined mechanics for groups without Power Gamers. I will also be writing extensive notes on how to convert 3rd party materials for D20 for use in Storytelling Games using these concepts.
I say let's call it the Gingerbread Book, after the revolutionary innovative intuitive indie game which inspired him to these heights of genius. The GM and the players not being against each-other? Why, that's only been happening since 1973, Dancey's right on the cutting edge, here!

I don't know if the GM or the players should tell the story or not, so long as it's not Ryan Dancey telling it. Or RA Salvatore. Ahem.

One place where I'm going to give some of the Forge / GNS / Storygames theory types credit is that they don't just talk about their theories -- they actually put games together and make them available for people to play.  They may not be my cup of tea, but that's beside the point.  They're putting their ideas into practice, and a finished not-so-great project is better than a never-finished could-have-been-great project.

So I think it's good to see that Ryan is doing more than just talking about these ideas -- he's planning on making a game using them.  And in that context I can excuse some of the "last best hope" talk, as that's just good marketing.   I still think Ryan is very clever when it comes to the marketing, production, and distribution side of creating RPGs.

I'm looking forward to seeing how his game develops -- even if it's not something I'm likely to want to play myself.

Quote from: Elliot Wilen(In other threads here it's been called Shared Narrative Control; elsewhere I suppose it might be called "player assumption of Author Stance".)

I think, if I may be so bold, that this is my very own shiny term...

And to be clear, there are two kinds of Shared Narrative Control, Required and Voluntary.