Quote from: TristramEvans;667783Kindof mîssing the point there. And citations appreciated.

The point being to cite a game that sounds like it should be a traditional game in order to erroneously imply a lack of clarity where none is present, because you and I have both read the damn game and know exactly what is in it?

Yeah, sorry I'm so uncooperative.

Quote from: J Arcane;667840The point being to cite a game that sounds like it should be a traditional game in order to erroneously imply a lack of clarity where none is present, because you and I have both read the damn game and know exactly what is in it?

Yeah, sorry I'm so uncooperative.

I would guess the point is that this site puts additional baggage on the term 'storygame'. To most people, including presumably the author of that game, it means a type of RPG that has a bigger focus on story concerns. To this site, though, it means something wholly antithetical to roleplaying that people only pretend to enjoy out of pseudointellectual pretentiousness.

You can't really say that self-labelling as the first also means self-labelling as the second.

Quote from: soviet;667977To this site, though, it means something wholly antithetical to roleplaying that people only pretend to enjoy out of pseudointellectual pretentiousness.

A story game is just a different type of game with a different purpose than a traditional RPG. And people can appreciate story games on their own merits, which is what is baffling about people attempting to pretend they're the same thing as traditional role playing games. The cost of considering them as their own thing is exactly ZERO. Why is this a problem? There may actually be benefits, the same way there were benefits from role playing games considered as a type of game of their own separate from wargames, but we don't know that yet.

Quote from: Benoist;668041A story game is just a different type of game with a different purpose than a traditional RPG. And people can appreciate story games on their own merits, which is what is baffling about people attempting to pretend they're the same thing as traditional role playing games. The cost of considering them as their own thing is exactly ZERO. Why is this a problem? There may actually be benefits, the same way there were benefits from role playing games considered as a type of game of their own separate from wargames, but we don't know that yet.

I doubt you will find any reasonable person denying that there is a difference between a storygame and a traditional RPG. (Albeit it's a spectrum and the dividing lines are blurry etc etc etc).

What people including myself object to is the idea that 'traditional' RPGs are the only valid kind of RPG and that storygames are some other kind of activity altogether. For all that some posters here try to portray this as 'storygamers playing word games or being wilfully obtuse' or the like, as far as I can see this is an argument that only ever gets played out here. That should tell you something. Other than a dozen or so vocal people on this website, the rest of the online roleplaying world appears to agree that storygames are just another kind of RPG.

Quote from: J Arcane;667840The point being to cite a game that sounds like it should be a traditional game in order to erroneously imply a lack of clarity where none is present, because you and I have both read the damn game and know exactly what is in it?

Yeah, sorry I'm so uncooperative.

No, the point being an easily-accessible list of what games the Pundit has declared storygames to facilitate posting. But please, dont let your pedantic little tantrum of foregone conclusions get in the way of actuàl reading comprehension.

Quote from: Benoist;668041A story game is just a different type of game with a different purpose than a traditional RPG. And people can appreciate story games on their own merits, which is what is baffling about people attempting to pretend they're the same thing as traditional role playing games. The cost of considering them as their own thing is exactly ZERO. Why is this a problem? There may actually be benefits, the same way there were benefits from role playing games considered as a type of game of their own separate from wargames, but we don't know that yet.

I know this will fall on deaf ears on the basis I am playing some kind of semantic games with you or that I have a malicious agenda as an agent of swine, but no one is taking an issue with a separation of games per se.

The issue people are having is how and why games are being separated on this site. This is not just a disagreement as to how and why the separation happens, such as if there was a consistent criteria that was disagreed with. It is an objection as to how and why the separation happens for being on reasons other than the actual games themselves.

So, yes, separation of games may be good. But nothing good comes out of separation on reasons that are unrelated to the games themselves.

Yes, Skywalker, you do have an agenda, and your blah-blah-blah is falling on deaf ears.

You did everything you could to arrive to this state of affairs.

Quote from: Benoist;668109Yes, Skywalker, you do have an agenda, and your blah-blah-blah is falling on deaf ears.

You did everything you could to arrive to this state of affairs.

Thanks for proving both of the points I was making.

So many agendas here I feel like in Vienna, 1946. Where's Harry Lime?

Quote from: Skywalker;668104I know this will fall on deaf ears on the basis I am playing some kind of semantic games with you or that I have a malicious agenda as an agent of swine, but no one is taking an issue with a separation of games per se.

The issue people are having is how and why games are being separated on this site. This is not just a disagreement as to how and why the separation happens, such as if there was a consistent criteria that was disagreed with. It is an objection as to how and why the separation happens for being on reasons other than the actual games themselves.

So, yes, separation of games may be good. But nothing good comes out of separation on reasons that are unrelated to the games themselves.

You've made that argument clear, but unfortunately its nonsense.

The only reason games are being moved to the "other games" forum is for reasons to do with the "actual games themselves".

Mark Rein*Hagen is every bit the Swine that Vince Baker is, but the thread about his zombie game stays in the main RPG forum because his game is (unless or until I find out otherwise) an RPG, however bad I might think it is, and not a Storygame.

If Vince Baker writes an RPG tomorrow, threads about it will go in the RPG forum.

RPGPundit

I don't think claiming both "It's a sliding scale" and "Post about TBZ in storygames and FATE in RPGs, or we'll ban you" is an intellectually honest position. Grey areas in definitions* should give more leeway to posters, not justify selective rule enforcement.

* For the sake of discussion, try to imagine that a consistent definition of storygames exists.