I don't hate the Forge, but I do think its theory is bad, and pernicious by actively misleading aspiring game designers about what they can do to make their games better. The emphasis on "coherence" as a virtue is empirically untrue when we look at the kinds of RPGs that are most popular, and is theoretically dubious when analysed.

That said, I wish the Forge would have reformed rather than vanished. It needed to stop producing so many crappy high-concept micro-games with limited replayability and limited long-term potential, and instead focus on spreading useful game design advice amongst its members.

For example, the Riddle of Steel may be very interesting mechanically with its spiritual attributes, but it is nearly unplayable in practice since it relies heavily on tables which require fairly extensive cross-referencing by multiple players near-simultaneously. Without multiple copies of the book, or player-created cheat-sheets, or something like that, the game is incredibly difficult to play and the "fast" combat promised slows to a halt.

Burning Empires, which is a game I like a lot, would have been an even better game if it was more generic. As it is, you've got to work a fair bit to strip it away from the Vaylen vs. Humans angle on a mechanical level, even though the setting is never once clearly and coherently explained in the corebook.

And so on, and so forth.

Quote from: Teataine;414060I would just like to point out a few gross inaccuracies in this thread.

1. Anyone claiming Edwards, The Forge and "story games" of today have anything to do with White Wolf games or Vampire, obviously have no clue at all about The Forge. This includes you, Pundit, and mr. Kyle Aaron.

I never claimed anything of the sort, except in the sense that the Forge Swine had a serious hate-on for WW-Swine, as they were trying to be the new "elite".  A significant amount of Edwards' effort was to try to de-legitimize the hipster claims of the WW-Swine so he could promote his own hipster claims.

Quote3. Someone claimed that Ron and Vincent had "one hit each".

Well, that definitely wasn't me. Neither of them had anything remotely resembling a commercial hit. I did say that Edwards had a sole game that was even popular among Forge Swine.

QuoteYou know those new hit games, right behind D&D and Pathfinder? Dresden Files, Smallville RPG and others? "Forge games" by your standards, all of them.

Neither of those are hits, though I see how you might be confused, since they are both RPG.net darlings.  But then, you can sell zero copies of a game and still be an rpg.net darling, since most of the people who will praise and talk about a popular game on rpg.net have never actually played or even read it.

Quote4. A person insinuated that Ron and "Vinny" were homosexuals and apparently found this funny. If you don't understand how utterly immature and adolescent this makes you sound, I can't help you in any way.

I have no idea who said that, or indeed if anyone did.  But I certainly didn't. I've blogged previously about Vince Baker's degenerate sex life and how he stole another man's wife in a weird, sexually controlling foursome. Definitely creepy, but not exactly gay.
As for Ron, I have no idea what his sexuality is.  I just know the man has an extreme fondness for rodent genitals, but that's apparently "professional".

RPGPundit

Quote from: Levi Kornelsen;414078Wrestling in the muck of "Forge is bad!  Forge is good!  Ron Edwards!" is awful, it's dumb, and I wish I'd never bothered.

But, man, Teataine vs. RPGsite?   Some things, I just have to know how they end.

Quite the irony, after you censored all mention of therpgsite on the thread about the Forge's defeat over on rpg.net, and then closed that thread.

Nice to know I'm still scary to the modclique.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Pseudoephedrine;414180I don't hate the Forge, but I do think its theory is bad, and pernicious by actively misleading aspiring game designers about what they can do to make their games better. The emphasis on "coherence" as a virtue is empirically untrue when we look at the kinds of RPGs that are most popular, and is theoretically dubious when analysed.

That said, I wish the Forge would have reformed rather than vanished. It needed to stop producing so many crappy high-concept micro-games with limited replayability and limited long-term potential, and instead focus on spreading useful game design advice amongst its members.

For example, the Riddle of Steel may be very interesting mechanically with its spiritual attributes, but it is nearly unplayable in practice since it relies heavily on tables which require fairly extensive cross-referencing by multiple players near-simultaneously. Without multiple copies of the book, or player-created cheat-sheets, or something like that, the game is incredibly difficult to play and the "fast" combat promised slows to a halt.

Burning Empires, which is a game I like a lot, would have been an even better game if it was more generic. As it is, you've got to work a fair bit to strip it away from the Vaylen vs. Humans angle on a mechanical level, even though the setting is never once clearly and coherently explained in the corebook.

And so on, and so forth.

No reformation was possible. The place had to be burned down to the ground and the earth salted so nothing would ever grow there again.  Otherwise the taint would merely be passed on to the new generation.

RPGPundit

Burning Empires is to fucking complicated. There are about a dozen interlocking systems you would need to understand to play the game properly, and there can't be more than a tiny handful of people who know it well enough to play the game competitively like it suggests.

I wonder if ANYONE has actually completed a full game through all the phases.

But I like that there is a focus on games having to provide a unique play experience to be called a game.

To an extent this is just moving what used to be scenario design to the forefront - I can think of 'scenarios' for battletech that involve trying to get the players to run a concentration camp (accidentally), or the Lone Wolf scenario for 2300ad ( http://web.me.com/pentapod2300/mag/lonewolf.htm ) which has the players take on the roles of ship captains from rival navies hunting a kafer commerce raider and competing for the glory. These could easily be repackaged as full games in and of themselves and that is no bad thing.

But while I loved Transhuman Space, it just isn't a game. There is no gameplay there. They actually went out of their way to make creating a game in the setting difficult. Fuck that noise. I want a game.

Quote from: EBM;414176Yes, preferably anally (because it's edgy and kewl) to get Hx+5! :rolleyes: FFS!

So you're telling me my Gunlugger gets more Hx if I assfuck the Battlebabe then if I just get a blowjob?  What about a blowjob after I assfuck her, is that worth combo points?

This thing is FATAL: Forge style

Quote from: RPGPundit;414184Quite the irony, after you censored all mention of therpgsite on the thread about the Forge's defeat over on rpg.net, and then closed that thread.

Petty, backbiting tribalism and spite are poisonous to large and relatively diverse communities, and thus don't belong on RPGnet, where I moderate.

That don't mean I don't like that bitter-almond taste.  Is that ironic?  Yeah, probably.

But I came here to see a thing, and that thing isn't going to happen; I chatted with the fellow in question elsewhere.  So, maybe in a few months, I'll swing by again for another dose.  I'm sure you'll still have it on tap.

Quote from: CRKrueger;414192So you're telling me my Gunlugger gets more Hx if I assfuck the Battlebabe then if I just get a blowjob?  What about a blowjob after I assfuck her, is that worth combo points?

This thing is FATAL: Forge style

I would imagine ass to mouth for the win is probably right...  You would describe the scene in great detail as your fellow Forgeites ("Forgeries") around the "gaming" table would lick their dry lips, dark eyes brightly shining, clapping their pale clammy hands together with glee and nodding sagely to one another, bound together in the certainty of how significant they really are.

Quote from: RPGPundit;414183I have no idea who said that, or indeed if anyone did.  But I certainly didn't. I've blogged previously about Vince Baker's degenerate sex life and how he stole another man's wife in a weird, sexually controlling foursome. Definitely creepy, but not exactly gay.
As for Ron, I have no idea what his sexuality is.  I just know the man has an extreme fondness for rodent genitals, but that's apparently "professional".

RPGPundit

I think that it's a reference to one of my posts and an indication of critical reading comprehension fail and the blinkered brainwashed kind of reflex defence mechanism that only true cult leaders can engender.

I said something along the lines of - "I think winter phase is quite apt, given Ron and Vinny's proclivities. It's the time in Pendragon when if you're lucky, you'll cop a feel of your girlfriend's boobies."

It was, of course, a reference to their obssession with getting dodgy sex and/or rape coded into the game mechanics a la "system matters" and not a comment on their sexuality - your link pretty much validates the opinion, though.

I feel I should point out that from just those three terms we have already got a little RPG going, which I get the impression is kind of the point. :-)

And Levi seems to really ... enjoy being a moderator at RPG.net.

Now I'm not saying he has gone power mad and is already drilling the thought police to remake the place in his own image but...

Quote from: Erik Boielle;414208And Levi seems to really ... enjoy being a moderator at RPG.net.

Now I'm not saying he has gone power mad and is already drilling the thought police to remake the place in his own image but...

He's the guy they think is the reasonable, public face of the moderation - same as the first time.

He gets rolled out when there's a shit-storm, and well, it's Levi! All is cool.

Quote from: Levi Kornelsen;414200Petty, backbiting tribalism and spite are poisonous to large and relatively diverse communities, and thus don't belong on RPGnet, where I moderate.

That don't mean I don't like that bitter-almond taste.  Is that ironic?  Yeah, probably.

But I came here to see a thing, and that thing isn't going to happen; I chatted with the fellow in question elsewhere.  So, maybe in a few months, I'll swing by again for another dose.  I'm sure you'll still have it on tap.

Don't let the door hit you on the way out.

Quote from: Levi Kornelsen;414200I chatted with the fellow in question elsewhere.  

Indeed.

Weird. Storygames hasn't been mentioned once here and yet all the vitriol you decry this site for seems to be oozing from the equivalent thread over there.

Quote from: One Horse Town;414219Weird. Storygames hasn't been mentioned once here and yet all the vitriol you decry this site for seems to be oozing from the equivalent thread over there.

Don't mind Levi, he wants to ban people for "provocation" on rpg.net. This on a forum where they had to make a specific rule against making threads announcing you were going to masturbate to someone's avatar.

   You have been permabanned.
Reason: being kind of annoying in a hard-to-explain way. Basically we just don't like you.
All this goes way, way back to the "emotionally safe environment" petition on rpg.net's Trouble Tickets... I dunno, six or seven years ago, thread's been purged since then. Anyway, basically a bunch of lefty types got all upset that someone would say something racist, sexist or homophobic, and it might take as much as thirty minutes for them to be permabanned (apparently mods have lives outside being moderators, who'd've thought it), and if in those thirty minutes someone would say, "you bigoted cunt!", well that person would get banned, too - for a while. They said that rpg.net ought to be an "emotionally safe environment" - in other words, they wanted the bigots to be instantly silenced, but for them to be able to say what they wanted. Freedom of speech, but not for you cunts! You provoked us!

But who defines provocation? I mean, obviously, "all niggers must hang!" is stirring shit, okay, ban that guy. But posting that people are "shifting the goalposts" in a discussion is provocation? Meanwhile in Tangency some guy in a squirrel suit posts a how-to on anal sex, and that's alright. It gets absurd. But that's rpg.net moderation for you.

The more things change, the more they stay the same, and all that.

Being a whiny, backstabbing, hypocritical, passive-aggressive douchebag is rewarded on RPGnet.

Speaking your mind is bad. You should have ulterior motives, hide them, make Nth degree allusions to mock your opponents, and not hesitate to suck mod dick when you have to. Unless of course you're bashing a guy for something the moderation agrees with. Or you're special, like Luke Crane.