You're not facilitating good dialogue, here, Clyde.

Luke, for the record: I'm not satisfied with your answer because it's partly evasive.

JESUS, that was a pretty good example of a forgie stealther.

"hey Luke, please let me give you an opportunity to abuse their community and turn this into a big advertising opportunity for the gang!"

Here's my question just to be on topic: I acknowledge that some of my questions are obnoxious. Still, I need to ask them.

Not too many people show up at these panels, did I get this right? (I've asked this three times in other fora.) Mark was the only attendee of this particular panel, wasn't he? And that's not unique, is it? Attendance by non-cultists at your panels is generally low, isn't it?

Has the brain damage/gamer-hatred thing and the controversial forgie blogs of say.. 2005... helped or hurt the forgies as a community? I think in many ways you guys are still paying for them.

Has anyone encouraged the most obnoxious elements of the forgies from within to... just shut up?

Do you think people are watching themselves now, making sure they post the really hateful stuff behind little closed forums more than before? (Thats slightly related, I guess)

Why is Indie gaming so stuck in the 90s?

Does "System Matters" accounts for why only an extreme minority of the audience seems to enjoy forgie style games?

Could System Matters account for why certain games are loved by a wide audience and others are not?

If a new-to-gaming outsider is "tricked" or cajoled into trying a game, and plays it a total of once, and never again.. does that mean that the game has successfully reached the outside audience? Does that person then become an example of a new kind of gamer? Remember, they only play once, and never again. Is that person part of this hobby?

You don't seem to have played a version of D&D seriously (as in-- a campaign lasting longer than say.. 6 sessions) later than AD&D2. Can you confirm this?

Warthur's question about why the dedications/influences changed is interesting to me. Why did the old influences have to be removed? I can see why you added the new ones, but you removed the old ones...?

What do you think of the term "trad"? Or for that matter "forgie"?

Do you have a regular gaming group?

Do you believe in campaigns?

Do you think Ron is done after this year?

[edit: let me reword: thanks for Alnaq and the other posters, who actually had some interesting questions to ask, and thanks to Luke for taking the time to answer them.
Now, seeing that this thread is about to turn into an ugly flamewar, I think I'm out of here.]

And thanks to you, Bobo & Clyde, for nudging some more people towards thinking the paranoia about board invasions by fanboi rat packs ain't one after all.

Luke,

When you look at BE and BW, how much do you look at and think, "I could have done this this way instead" or think about changing up mechanics?  Do you forsee future revisions of either of those products?  How often do house rules pop up at your table, and are they an important part of your development process?

And guys, come on.  Luke's taking his good time to answer questions here--can we keep the attacks and crap out of it for a change?  Back on target, please.

Jeez, did Bobo just show up to excuse Luke from the thread?

Look, either he's here to answer the questions or to specifically leave certain questions unanswered or partially unanswered. Which is itself, a sort of an answer. I'm fully prepared to not get back answers for my questions, and believe it or not, although Luke himself seems to think he's a big swine, he's a minor offender in the grand scheme, and everyone knows it. The real big fish don't even design games.

Don't derail this. You got a question, post it.

Quote from: Bobo, the Carpenter[edit: let me reword: thanks for Alnaq and the other posters, who actually had some interesting questions to ask, and thanks to Luke for taking the time to answer them.
Now, seeing that this thread is about to turn into an ugly flamewar, I think I'm out of here.]

I wish I had a screen capture of the original - did anyone capture it?

Because this...ahem...individual just came in, tossed a grenade, then got freaked when people called him on it.  Then he did the bravest thing he could.  Instead of leaving the original and adding, he removed the offending text and bolted.

I too am thankful for luke actually answering questions.  But part of the problem is that he's only answering certain questions.  I blame this partially on, for example, the way in which the question is asked (see some of the commetns by Maw).  But it leaves me considering why he won't answer a perfectly legitimate question that would put quite a bit to rest.

For example:

Quote from: Abyssal MawWarthur's question about why the dedications/influences changed is interesting to me. Why did the old influences have to be removed? I can see why you added the new ones, but you removed the old ones...?

Now I know Monsieur Crane answered - to a point.  He skillfully avoided the true question - what happened to the orginal influence?  Is he saying that the second edition (or revised, or what have you) was so different that it was no longer influenced by the original list? That seems...odd...

If the healing is really desired, and I think VBWyrde and Analq and Luke could make some headway (my god, Pundit was almost human!), some of the tougher questions need to be answered along with the ones that promote the games.

Otherwise, it's a nice PR thread - which is fine and great - but nothing more. Perhaps my expectations were wrong when this split off from the other thread.

QuoteI wish I had a screen capture of the original - did anyone capture it?

You mean this?  

Quote from: Bobo, the CarpenterYou know, reading this thread I realized that I'd take forgite elitistic escapades over frothing, paranoid hate rants any time.
Thanks to the other posters, who actually posted some questions worth the time it took to type them, and thanks to Luke for taking the time to answer them.

I think maybe it'd be a good idea to put a self-imposed halt on the questions until Luke gets around to answering them again. Otherwise they'll just build up and we'll end with a typical flame-thing.

I didn't have anything to do with this Q&A session, or anything, but because I'd prefer to see healthier relations (and because I like Burning Wheel), I'd prefer to see questions asked in good faith (and continue to hope Luke returns in kind). Please don't try to bait, trap, or ask leading or barbed questions. I'm thinking more of Clyde and less of Maw, though I'm leery of some of Maw's questions, myself. (Though would love to see others answered, so.)

Quote from: J ArcaneYou mean this?  

Yeah, that's it. I shouldn't have let myself be goaded. Well, it's more of a wet cracker than a grenade, but still I felt the need to go back and reword it in a slightly politer fashion.
Now, if the actual Q&A got going again, that would be worth staying.

Quote from: Thanatos02I think maybe it'd be a good idea to put a self-imposed halt on the questions until Luke gets around to answering them again. Otherwise they'll just build up and we'll end with a typical flame-thing.

I didn't have anything to do with this Q&A session, or anything, but because I'd prefer to see healthier relations (and because I like Burning Wheel), I'd prefer to see questions asked in good faith (and continue to hope Luke returns in kind). Please don't try to bait, trap, or ask leading or barbed questions. I'm thinking more of Clyde and less of Maw, though I'm leery of some of Maw's questions, myself. (Though would love to see others answered, so.)

I admit that every one of my questions is a trap. But I also honestly want someone to answer them. Some of them. Any of them.

J Arcane,
"RPGs are not technology." There, I said it. However, this doesn't mean they can't grow and change and become more refined and better at what they do.


Clyde,
Funny, but not helpful. Come on, man.


Pierce,
I'm not being evasive. If you'd like to ask a more pointed question, go for it. I've answered every single question as directly as I could.


Abyssal,
1. Attendance varies. That particular panel was problematic since there were room change problems. It got split in half, so there were about a half dozen folks languishing in another room. For our half, there were two attendees, Don and Mark, one podcaster, and a handful of designers. It was actually kind of fun to be able to focus just on one idea for a couple of hours. I've done panels for 50 people, but the usual number is about a dozen attendees. Most of the attendees are members of the "unconverted" as you would say.

2. I really can't answer about controversy helping or hurting. I know the controversy certainly made you and a lot of other people mad. But as far as I know, sales at IPR have been steadily increasing since its inception. What's your criteria for benefit or detriment?

3. You may have noticed that we can be pretty critical about each other's work.

4. I try to actively post my hate right here on the rpgsite. Do you have a real question you're not asking?

5. Stuck in the 90s? Because we miss the teen pop of New Kids on the Block and Ren and Stimpy was the best cartoon ever. Seriously dude, do you have an actual question here or are you just foaming?

6. Forge style games are in the minority because they are small press games with runs of hundreds or low thousands, they don't advertise, and all marketing is word of mouth. The gaming community as a whole is rather small, compared to say one genre/type of music, so even small voices like that can make a big splash.  Regardless, their minority status stems from their relatively new position on the scene and small marketing presence.

7. System Matters is an essay written by Ron Edwards which proposes the idea that the individual bits and bobs of a roleplaying game effect the outcome of that game. For example, if you have mechanics for sword fights in your game, you'll probably have sword fights during play. That essay cannot be used to account for anything other than itself. Personally, I think it's a very accurate and simple observation. Would you like to rephrase that question?

8. Dude, what are you really trying to say? Don't be cagey or clever, just ask whatever it is you're trying to ask. You're not going to catch me in some rhetorical trap.

9. I played Advanced Dungeons and Dragons from 1987 to 1997. The two longest campaigns lasted 3 years and 4 years. I never played AD&D 2e. I spurned it! Fah, revised rules and game balance, fah! Nor have I played more than a handful of D&D 3.X sessions.

10. Page 303 of the Burning Wheel Revised Edition contains the Gameography. It is broken into two lists, one for the "classic" edition and one for revised. I did this because BW Classic didn't contain a gameography and I wanted to be very clear about my sources and influences.

11. I  think there are traditional gamers and non-traditional gamers, but it's probably a false dichotomy. Most "non-traditional" gamers I know still play Shadowrun or D&D or whatever. So I don't really have an accurate definition of "trad." Forgie's a term of convenience, and ultimately meaningless. It is often used as a slur by people who really don't understand that the Forge is just a forum website that hosts a booth at Gencon every year and nothing more.

12. I have four regular gaming groups. I  run one Burning Empires game, one BW Blossoms Are Falling game and play in two other regular Burning Wheel games. I also belong to an extended network of gamers and try to play in other games when I can. Unfortunately, the playtesting schedule for Burning Wheel and my other projects is so rigorous, I rarely get a chance.

13. The longest campaign I've participated in lasted 12 years, played once a week on Sundays for at least 42 weeks out of each year. It started as an AD&D campaign and we converted it to Burning Wheel in 1998. Since 2005 I've been running short and medium term campaigns -- 6-12 sessions. We're in the process of trying to set up something longer term right now.

14. Is Ron cooking or something? Should we turn him over? I don't understand the question.


Zach,
Of course I have my small regrets, but honestly, I'm often surprised by how well my games work for me in play. I come away from play very satisfied. I'll often exclaim, surprised, "Holy shit, that totally worked!" And that's all I can really ask!

I have no idea about revisions. We're very, very careful to play the games exactly as written. It's a great temptation to continue modifying the rules set as we go, but that's not really fair and the game would break down. It's much better just to play by the rules so every thing's fair. Every so often, we'll even get into an argument about an interpretation or a strict reading. Sometimes they shout me down and make me do it how they think it reads. It's crazy, but kind of cool, too.

James,
I think I answered your question in point 14 above. If you have additional questions, please ask them. Try to phrase them as directly as you can. I'm not trying to be evasive.

-L

QuoteJ Arcane,
"RPGs are not technology." There, I said it. However, this doesn't mean they can't grow and change and become more refined and better at what they do.

Congratulations.  You illustrated your ability to miss the point most adequately.  

There's no objective "refinement" or "better" in a subjective medium.  YOU may like it better, but that means fuck all for the rest of humanity.  

It really is a simple concept, but given your stated allegiances I'm not surprised that it escapes you so readily.

About that gameography - how did your style of play change over time and with different games?
This is something I have wondered about. BW revised strongly supports a very specific style of play, and Burning Empires actually codifies that into black-on-white rules. Is that the way you used to play even before BW classic was revised or back when you still played D&D?
Or did something significantly change between classic and revised, reflected in the gameography?