It's a bullshit argument to get into. Whether or not Hot War or Cold City are "storygames" is beside the point, a trick to get you to implicitly accept Pundit's whole "storygames aren't RPGs" bullshit. Malcolm Craig is 100% right--there was a good discussion going on, and I was enjoying reading it before Pundit dragged it into his imaginary war. (I couldn't really contribute because I don't know the games. They sound great, though. I may check them out.) I say ignore the troll and continue the discussion.

EDIT: will reply properly after the football

Malcolm,

A guy stopped by the booth at Origins on Sunday asking for Cold City. He said he'd heard about it from this thread, which is pretty cool. We sold out Saturday morning so he left empty-handed.

Quote from: Jason Morningstar;390562Malcolm,

A guy stopped by the booth at Origins on Sunday asking for Cold City. He said he'd heard about it from this thread, which is pretty cool. We sold out Saturday morning so he left empty-handed.

That is awesome. I'm glad this thread did something cool..

I can't speak about Hot War.  Just my experience with Cold City.

But what are these roles?

We were able to make our own characters without classes.  But like every modern espionage point buy game, people niched themselves A-Team style so we had the Gun Dude, the Faceman, the Investigation Dude and the Occult Dude.

I am a fan of classes myself because 9 times out of 10, players create a "class" and a "niche" with their point-buys.  

Can the GM say "NO" to a player, without any prevarication?

I guess so.  I don't play with bitches who need to piss off the GM.  The only issues we had initially was making sure everyone understood the world of pre-Cold War Berlin.  AKA, how Russia and the USA weren't instant-adversaries and how Britian wasn't just America's bitch.  If there were any "NO" moments, it was just imparting setting understanding.

I didn't see any more "Narrative Control" than in any other free-form RPG.  

Can a player decide something about the world and the GM has to go with it?

Nothing more than usual.   During play on the fly, my French lothario Faceman told the GM that I wanted to have a paramour in the Russian embassy.   This was not established earlier, but the GM went with it.  

As a player, I had no power to compel the GM to do anything, other than offering up a fun bit for him to manipulate.   He agreed and then (as usual) twisted my happy moment against me with great cruelty.

Saying "the GM and players have strong well-defined roles" means fuck all if those roles are being strongly defined as "The GM has no power and the player can do whatever the fuck he wants with the world".

There was ZERO of this in my experience with Cold City.

Zero. Nada. None.

BTW, I was with some CoC hardcores over the weekend at the PolyCon convention and when I brought up the idea of CoC Cold City, they were extremely enthused.    They had heard of the game, but because it was not for CoC, they didn't buy it.  We talked conversion, but only one of the three was a converting guy, the other two just like to have pre-made official stuff.

Malcolm, I have no doubt you have a secondary market for your setting.

Quote from: RPGPundit;390063Well, let's see. I don't actually know this game, so there is a chance that I was wrong.
But this is what people on this thread have told me about it:
1. Malcolm Craig wrote it.
2. Freeform traits (not in and of itself proof of anything, but it adds to the evidence).
3. The game has a "central theme- trust".
4. This "Theme" has a "mechanical weight in the game".
5. This "trust mechanic" is "inspired by The Mountain Witch" (a notable NON-RPG STORYGAME).
6. Characters have fixed "agendas".


Now, on the other hand, Malcolm says that the game has "a very strong, well defined GM role, very strong, well defined character roles, and so on". But what are these roles? Can the GM say "NO" to a player, without any prevarication? Can a player decide something about the world and the GM has to go with it?
Saying "the GM and players have strong well-defined roles" means fuck all if those roles are being strongly defined as "The GM has no power and the player can do whatever the fuck he wants with the world".

So if you guys want this thread back on the main RPG forum, go ahead, convince me. In particular convince me that a game with a central mechanical feature borrowed from one of the most infamous cases of the worst excesses of Forge Swine Storygaming is somehow regular.

RPGPundit

ffs yo uwere the first to bemoan rpg.net to split the rpg forum between d20/D&D and everything else, and you're doing the same here. how in the fuck can you think this isn't an rpg? It's not a boardgame, cardgame or computer game. This is ridiculous.

Thanks for all the support for both games here, it really, genuinely is appreciated.

I tend to be quite inclusive (as many people would be, I imagine) in my definition of 'RPG'. Others (like Pundit) prefer a more exclusive definition. Personally, I don't think that's positive for discussion of the hobby, but I'm not going to get wound up about it.

Quote from: Jason Morningstar;390562Malcolm,

A guy stopped by the booth at Origins on Sunday asking for Cold City. He said he'd heard about it from this thread, which is pretty cool. We sold out Saturday morning so he left empty-handed.

Ah, that's wonderful Jason, thanks for letting me know! I hope the interested customer does manage to get the game somehow.

Quote from: SpinachatSnipped cool Cold City stuff for brevity

That sounds like great fun. I do love it when people play up to stereotypes, such as the French lothario, and it comes back to bite them in the ass. One of my fondest moments in Cold City was in a game at Gen Con Indy 2007 (I think it was). The Player who had the French character had created the personal hidden agenda "Beg, borrow, or steal enough money to escape from Europe and live somewhere tropical." In his epilogue for his character, he described him settling down in a new, white painted French colonial house, jungle covered mountains in the distance, a cool drink in his had. As a troop of French soldiers march by on the dusty road. Vietnam, late 1950. Great to see players taking that kind of thing and running with it.

Quote from: Ghost Whistlerffs yo uwere the first to bemoan rpg.net to split the rpg forum between d20/D&D and everything else, and you're doing the same here. how in the fuck can you think this isn't an rpg? It's not a boardgame, cardgame or computer game. This is ridiculous.

It's not worth the stress man. I agree, there is a certain amount of hypocrisy in Pundit's position, but let's not get wound up about it. We should enjoy discussing games and just ignore what's going on in the background. I doubt Pundit will be argued into changing his mind any time in the near future.

Cheers
Malcolm

Quote from: Malcolm Craig;390695Ah, that's wonderful Jason, thanks for letting me know! I hope the interested customer does manage to get the game somehow.

I definitely pointed him in the right direction. There was a lot of interest in both Cold City and Hot War at the show, which was great to see.

I have just finished reading the setting parts of the book and must say Im very impressed by it.
Knowing London very well myself the thought of it as a damaged and fearsome place full of evil both human and inhuman is just perfect for a dark change of pace to my games.
The details in what to read or watch to add to the atmosphere of the setting really helps as well.
Ive not read the system parts as yet and so cant comment on them but IMHO the setting makes the game a buy anyway.
Im also reading Charles Stross's The Atrocity Archives and as noted in the Hot War book the two work hand in hand as to style.

I dont care where this thread lives its IMHO one hell of a game thats for sure, well done Malcolm

Quote from: two_fishes;390287It's a bullshit argument to get into. Whether or not Hot War or Cold City are "storygames" is beside the point, a trick to get you to implicitly accept Pundit's whole "storygames aren't RPGs" bullshit. Malcolm Craig is 100% right--there was a good discussion going on, and I was enjoying reading it before Pundit dragged it into his imaginary war. (I couldn't really contribute because I don't know the games. They sound great, though. I may check them out.) I say ignore the troll and continue the discussion.

Storygames aren't RPGs.

RPGPundit

Quote from: RPGPundit;390776Storygames aren't RPGs.

RPGPundit

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;390693ffs yo uwere the first to bemoan rpg.net to split the rpg forum between d20/D&D and everything else, and you're doing the same here. how in the fuck can you think this isn't an rpg? It's not a boardgame, cardgame or computer game. This is ridiculous.

Speaking not specifically of Hot War here, but of Storygames; there is a big difference between RPG.net's case and this.
In RPG.net's case, they took the single most popular RPG, and put it in a ghetto apart from everything else.
In my case, I'm taking a movement of games that are not in fact RPGs but are trying to subvert that term, and putting them in their proper place.

The difference would be akin to a forum about comics on the one hand excluding all DC comics into their own ghetto and forbidding talk about them in the "main" comics forum; and on the other hand if a forum about comics excluded conversation about the Twilight books into a non-comics forum.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Malcolm Craig;390695It's not worth the stress man. I agree, there is a certain amount of hypocrisy in Pundit's position, but let's not get wound up about it. We should enjoy discussing games and just ignore what's going on in the background. I doubt Pundit will be argued into changing his mind any time in the near future.

Cheers
Malcolm

Well, we'll see. You've reacted very well, to your credit. And if you do end up sending a review copy as you promised/threatened/offered, that will be the best way to judge. If I read the rules, and see for myself, there'll be no debate one way or the other. And of course, if my conclusion is that Hot War is an RPG, this thread will go back to the main forum.

RPGPundit

Malcolm, I'm curious, how do you think the more expansive setting of Hot War influences play? Cold City is tightly focused and sort of claustrophobic (in a good way), but Hot War seems like it could go in a lot of different directions in both theme and scope. Based on what you've seen people do with the two games, are you happy with the choice to open the setting up? Is there any dissonance from players moving from one to the other?

Right, just to add to the party (now that the World Cup is a past event for the England team):

- Cold City: I suspect it would be my preferred choice for an rpg setting. Perhaps it's the setting and the other media I've watched or read. Maybe it's my visit to Berlin last summer too - I'm planning on going back this year.

- Hot War: I got a convention skirmish game vibe from this. The secret agendas made think of a number of games with hidden motives. It reminded me too of a 90s British rpg mag with a Dr Who scenario where John Wayne and Ronald Reagan had swithed places and London was nuked. Perhaps it's a bit too bleak for me, although it would be up to the GM to make it less so, or at least offer some hope. That's a personal thing for me though.

Both settings were incredibly vivid though. I liked the idea of the nuclear sub powering London and the artwork really contributed. Not had too much time to look at the systems yet. For either I would see Trust as really contributing to the mood, but particularly Cold City - whatever system you choose to play I think you need to consider how you create that tension between supposed allies.

Excellent work Malcolm.

Anyway