Oh hey, Sage.

One of the good things about DW is the community at least; if you have questions there's people like sage, who co-created it, that you can ask about the game directly.

It never seemed that different than D&D or other games to me. The people that end up hating it tend to take things too literally, I think, and not realize that it's meant to be a kind of launching point for the GM to do his own thing.

I only can say that some indie games are poorly designed, some others are brilliant, and most are just there.

Regarding DW, I have run several games and it's quite OK. I see how it can't be everyone's cuppa, but there is nothing terrible about it, and it's excellent (as is AW) to help new GMs. Also, all the times I've seen Sage interact with people, specially rabid critics, he've been a great professional, helpful and polite, which is a big plus in my book.

Also, as it happens a lot of late, Brendan said everything I wanted to say far better than I ever could. I don't know why I bother writing here XD

I'm not into playing any of the *World games but I've found the Fronts/Agenda idea super useful in terms of planning.

Quote from: PencilBoy99;810933I'm not into playing any of the *World games but I've found the Fronts/Agenda idea super useful in terms of planning.

Fronts really help when running sandbox, or theme park styled game. If you're good with not having a set outcome for your game world setting up a few of these and just letting them play out as the PCs do their thing can be really interesting.

Quote from: TristramEvans;810855Not among the game's target audience. If one already plays or knows how to play old school, DW seems to baffle them. Considering the overwhelming bias of this forum's population towards old school play, I cant see a reason this game need even be discussed on this forum, other than as a stepping stone for new players who up to this point had only been exposed to modern storygames.

You know, I totally get the old-school hate for the term "fiction".  I started playing in '82 or so, and really hated the trend in the 90s towards illusionism, railroading, and a strong, predetermined storyline.  To the point where any mention of the word "fiction" or "story" in terms of the game set my teeth on edge.  And usually got me into full-on rage mode.

What convinced me to try some of these games, and see what I wasn't getting, was griping about how a lot of this stuff was just "roll to see how awesome you are" since the ending was predetermined (which I still maintain is a frequent mode of play, and one which I have no use for).  Some guy then said that in his DFRPG game, at the end of the scenario, I think the bad guys won (or barely lost), and nearly every PC had suffered some terrible loss - either giving up their humanity and going full Faerie (and thus turning into NPCs), having powers stripped from them, outright dying, etc.

That sounded pretty cool to me, so I figured I'd give it a shot.  Turned out that I ended up liking some (not all, but some) of the games, once I wrapped my head around how they should actually be run.  Not necessarily *more* than old-school games, but they can be a lot of fun when run with the right mindset.

Quote from: Future Villain Band;810448I really enjoyed Dungeon World, and didn't find anything objectionable about it.  We played for about a year, and had a great time in a Thieves' World setting.  I think the integrated rules as moves on the character sheet is probably this decade's big innovation, and I can't wait for other games to pick it up.  

I'm also not sure how it's "not" an RPG.  I'd put Firefly and the other Margaret Weis games as a little further into "wild new theory" territory than I'd put Dungeon World.

One of my groups played a session or two of it while we were waiting for WotC to figure out what they were doing for Encounters a year or two ago. It was fun.

Too bad 5E got so popular we aren't playing anything else aside from Pathfinder, especially since I work retail at night.

Damn I need a new job.

I'm still chuckling over the butthurt from *World fans in this thread.

Quote from: jeff37923;810991I'm still chuckling over the butthurt from *World fans in this thread.

This post is your toothless butthurt over having your No True Scotsman bullshit shoved back up your ass.

Quote from: Enlightened;810996This post is your toothless butthurt over having your No True Scotsman bullshit shoved back up your ass.

And this comment, is the cherry on top.

Thank you for making me smile this morning.

This thread is making me regret I didn't invest in the Dungeon World BOH.

Yeah, cause if someone criticized OD&D, and then described the DM running it as something completely unlike OD&D, NO ONE on this board would suggest maybe that the DM was shit. :rolleyes:

Isn't this the board that constantly says: "Show me where the Bad DM Touched you?"

I'm not even a fan of DW. I've played it a few sessions and read the book. Not something I love but its an alright game. I just think the "lol I'm laughing at butthurt" comments to people who are being far far from inflammatory absolutely hypocritical as shit.

Also: Couching people talking politely about how that the way he describes it isn't the way it was written, or meant to be played as "butthurt" is just a bullshit way of dismissing it by position yourself in some position of superiority by pretending they are being irrational and emotional, when they really aren't. What are you, 12?

Quote from: Ladybird;810768I'd agree that narrative games and *W games probably have a higher learning curve than most games, though, due to their approaches being slightly different to other games.

I think this is a good point. To a certain extent a lot of 'traditional' RPGs contain an assumption that the GM will use the rules as guidelines more than anything else and smooth over any gaps or inconsistencies as they go. The learning curve between these kinds of games is therefore lower because the GM is doing a fair amount of the heavy lifting themselves. Storygame style RPGs tend to be built more on the basis that rules can be a positive tool rather than a necessary evil, therefore let's set everything up to try to achieve *this particular style of play*. If you don't want that particular style of play, or you want it but you don't properly apply the tools the game gives you to do so, then the game is perhaps more vulnerable to going wrong.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;810998This thread is making me regret I didn't invest in the Dungeon World BOH.

The text is available for free; I've put a link to the Github version somewhere as well. You miss the sidebar text, and the art is good, but the only thing of note in the sidebars is an example of monster creation (The rest is thematic quotes).

Quote from: CRKrueger;8107811. The natural gaming flow experienced Player's and GM's do innately is broken down into specific Moves.  This can come across as either limiting or completely pointless.

But it's purely a presentation thing. Only having so many "moves" doesn't limit a characters options, in the same way that only having so many "rules" in other games doesn't limit a character's options; if a player ever looks at their character sheet and thinks "this is the entire list of things I can do", they're probably not very good at playing, regardless of game.

Quote2. The partial success or "How as a player do you want your character to get a complication along with the success" seems like with some moves narrative authority. (and please don't fucking start with denying this again, even Sage agreed that Volley was written pretty weird).

It's more narrative than some games, yeah. It isn't as narrative as some other games. If you feel that any hints of narrativeyness is enough to call a game narrative, well, I disagree. We're not going to agree.

Quote from: jeff37923;810991I'm still chuckling over the butthurt from *World fans in this thread.

Ah yes. Because "disagreement" is a synonym for "butthurt".

Boy, I'm glad this place isn't an echo chamber like other RPG forums.

Quote from: Ladybird;811023It's more narrative than some games, yeah. It isn't as narrative as some other games. If you feel that any hints of narrativeyness is enough to call a game narrative, well, I disagree. We're not going to agree.

Ok, so what term or description would you use to describe a game with narrative mechanics (of varying degrees) as opposed to a game without them?

Narrativey? Storygamish? Kinda non-traditional? A tad new-school? Indie sensibilities? It's more narrative than some, less than others?

Something about DW always brings everybody out of the woodwork. Not FATE, just DW.