Quote from: CRKrueger;669182The difference of course being that since OD&D has no specifically tailored OOC mechanics, you can play it any way you choose, which I said a ways back.  Games with specifically tailored OOC mechanics force the issue and do not allow you to be IC when engaging them.

I addressed this in my OP, and I don't think we disagree on this point (I think there are a number of arguable edge cases even in the earliest RPGs).

However, I certainly don't think Kanye's approach to OD&D is an unnatural or distinct way of approaching OD&D or RPGs in general.

I have to congratulate Skywalker; the OP is a really brilliant example of manipulation and control of language; subtly attempting to set implicit parameters and definitions right from the start (saying, without every explicitly stating it, that Storygames are RPGs, for example; and creating an excellent strawman in the way he expresses the correct distinction between RPGs and Storygames), so that any attempt to address the OP on its terms requires already conceding all of the major ground in the rhetorical battle.

I have to say, you're much better at this than most of the guys on your side in these recent threads; I bet you've groaned internally once or twice these past few days when one of their clumsy tactics just sets your whole side up to take a hit...

Even so, not good enough.  Controlling language only works if no one on the other side realizes that's what you're trying to do; and since its been the only real weapon in the Story-Swine arsenal for something like a decade now, that particular jig is long since up.

RPGPundit

Quote from: Bloody Stupid Johnson;669178There was a moderately interesting thread on story-games.com a few weeks back where they put up a good point re. that one: Monopoly fails to be an RPG because no matter how good your silly voice is, your pyromaniac tycoon can't burn down hotels to cost the competition rent - the fiction layer doesn't affect the mechanical layer (because that is so limited).

Well that's a good point. Honestly I didn't make it past the 'sentient sèlf-mobile shoe that owns property.

Quote from: CRKrueger;669182The difference of course being that since OD&D has no specifically tailored OOC mechanics, you can play it any way you choose, which I said a ways back.  Games with specifically tailored OOC mechanics force the issue and do not allow you to be IC when engaging them, which is fine, because that's why they were designed that way, to stress the OOC mechanics that game uses.  Now we're back to a game that is designed for certain reasons to force a non-immersive stance when engaging the mechanics being called an RPG the same as a game which can be played 100% IC.

IC, OOC, one of these things is not like the other.

You're never gonna slip the idea past that specifically designed OOC mechanics can't or shouldn't be a classification point in RPGs, which unless you're going with Bizarro definition, should at least allow IC roleplaying.

Keep trying though.  Maybe the 15th time, I'll miss it.

That's crap. So if I publish my houserules that enable me to play the way I like then it should not be called an rpg? Mechanics are tools, they don't force anything.

IC/OOC is just about perspective. What you consider a mechanic with no fictional or character rationalisation, someone else might. 4E is a great example of that. There are a number of ways powers can be interpreted.

Quote from: Rincewind1;669011I apologise for the unnecessary troll post, but the title of this thread makes it impossible for me to pass on this opportunity:

So, should we start singing "In RPGsiteland we'll take our stand"?

Pretty much.

Quote from: RPGPundit;669189I have to congratulate Skywalker; the OP is a really brilliant example of manipulation and control of language; subtly attempting to set implicit parameters and definitions right from the start (saying, without every explicitly stating it, that Storygames are RPGs, for example; and creating an excellent strawman in the way he expresses the correct distinction between RPGs and Storygames), so that any attempt to address the OP on its terms requires already conceding all of the major ground in the rhetorical battle.

I have to say, you're much better at this than most of the guys on your side in these recent threads; I bet you've groaned internally once or twice these past few days when one of their clumsy tactics just sets your whole side up to take a hit...

Even so, not good enough.  Controlling language only works if no one on the other side realizes that's what you're trying to do; and since its been the only real weapon in the Story-Swine arsenal for something like a decade now, that particular jig is long since up.

RPGPundit

Yup. IC/OOC mechanics aside, when looking at a game as a whole, what is the main focus/goal of play beyond " have fun" that can be implied for any leisure activity?

Are players primarily trying to construct a narrative or story through the medium of the game? If so then its a narrative rpg/storygame.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;669284Yup. IC/OOC mechanics aside, when looking at a game as a whole, what is the main focus/goal of play beyond " have fun" that can be implied for any leisure activity?

Are players primarily trying to construct a narrative or story through the medium of the game? If so then its a narrative rpg/storygame.

That's my standard evaluation, with the caveat that it matters if a game just says that's the stated goal (white wolf), or if the rules actually are designed around that premise. The former is so common among even trade rpgs, that its almost inconsequential. The latter is so rare I can count those games I've encountered on one hand thus far.

I feel like I just wandered into a session of the Cosmic Enlightened Gentlemen arguing with the Celestial Exaggerated Gentry over the metaphysical rules of Ancient Atlantis mixed with jelly.

In other words, "WTHF* are you guys talking about?!!"

This is the most confusing thread I've ever read.

* - What The Holy Fark (can we curse on these boards?)

Quote from: KJDavid;669473* - What The Holy Fark (can we curse on these boards?)

Curse away and welcome!

Quote from: Kanye Westeros;669224That's crap. So if I publish my houserules that enable me to play the way I like then it should not be called an rpg? Mechanics are tools, they don't force anything.

Yes. Mechanics are just tools. The decision to tailor yours towards playing a traditional rpg or a narrative/storygame one is yours alone. You can choose to make them loose enough to leave it open ended (much like published OD&D) or bring one style or the other into sharp focus. Its really just a question of what you enjoy most.

Quote from: Kanye Westeros;669224IC/OOC is just about perspective. What you consider a mechanic with no fictional or character rationalisation, someone else might. 4E is a great example of that. There are a number of ways powers can be interpreted.

Some mechanics are borderline. Others (like action points) are purely metagame constructs and send the game they are attached to right into narrative country.

WTF is a "martial power source" anyway? Is there a way that a character could understand it without it just being magic with the bar code filed off? When a fighter uses "Come and get it" how does it operate as the character understands it?  Constructs without a brain come running, as do mindless undead and slimes without enough of a brain to even be self-aware so it can hardly be a taunt.

ITS MAGIC!!!!   But fighters aren't wizards so that can't be. Oh my!

Its simply a jarring implementation of mechanics before world in action.

Quote from: Exploderwizard;669491Yes. Mechanics are just tools. The decision to tailor yours towards playing a traditional rpg or a narrative/storygame one is yours alone. You can choose to make them loose enough to leave it open ended (much like published OD&D) or bring one style or the other into sharp focus. Its really just a question of what you enjoy most.



Some mechanics are borderline. Others (like action points) are purely metagame constructs and send the game they are attached to right into narrative country.

WTF is a "martial power source" anyway? Is there a way that a character could understand it without it just being magic with the bar code filed off? When a fighter uses "Come and get it" how does it operate as the character understands it?  Constructs without a brain come running, as do mindless undead and slimes without enough of a brain to even be self-aware so it can hardly be a taunt.

ITS MAGIC!!!!   But fighters aren't wizards so that can't be. Oh my!

Its simply a jarring implementation of mechanics before world in action.

But it doesn't matter it's magic since wizards can cast fireballs, get with the program you locker - stuck nerd. Why do you hate jocks so much?

Yes, what I enjoy most not a question of rpg or 'story game'. Action points provide the same mechanical purpose that fate points or drama points do. This mechanic can be interpreted IC 'fate of the gods' or otherwise. It does not change the function of the mechanic.

All throughout these discussions, I've seen people taking a mechanic like warhammer's fate points and be accused of 'reaching', well now what is to stop me from doing the same here with come and get it? Is that all you got?

A martial source is easily justifiable in character. Anybody who has experience with physical violence can attest to that. There is a well you tap into, when you need it. In my youth I practiced muy thai and although the experience is hard to articulate, there is a definitive power-source. Some people call it heart, some people call it will, some call it qi, etc

Or a martial source is just a mechanic framework which allows the fighter-types to do cool things while on the combat grid both to promote tactical options and keep things interesting for the player moving the piece around on the grid.

Whichever way you take it, it is perspective.

Quote from: Kanye Westeros;669519Yes, what I enjoy most not a question of rpg or 'story game'. Action points provide the same mechanical purpose that fate points or drama points do. This mechanic can be interpreted IC 'fate of the gods' or otherwise. It does not change the function of the mechanic.

All throughout these discussions, I've seen people taking a mechanic like warhammer's fate points and be accused of 'reaching', well now what is to stop me from doing the same here with come and get it? Is that all you got?

A martial source is easily justifiable in character. Anybody who has experience with physical violence can attest to that. There is a well you tap into, when you need it. In my youth I practiced muy thai and although the experience is hard to articulate, there is a definitive power-source. Some people call it heart, some people call it will, some call it qi, etc

Or a martial source is just a mechanic framework which allows the fighter-types to do cool things while on the combat grid both to promote tactical options and keep things interesting for the player moving the piece around on the grid.

Whichever way you take it, it is perspective.

You may certainly call your home rules whatever you wish. When publishing a game/ rules with the intention that others will use them, proper identification of game type is more important in order to reach the intended audience.

In the same way we tag games with a given genre, such as fantasy or space opera, it is helpful to identify the feel of a game based on the role the players assume. Is the game primarily about cooperatively creating stories or not?  This helps prospective players find the games that might appeal to them easier without wasting their time.

If I am out looking for a game in the pulp genre that will give me the feel of Raiders of The Lost Ark at the table then I am looking for a particular experience and a narrative rules focused game is more likely to give me that.

Without knowing which games provide that kind of focus I may end up wasting time combing through games filled with simulationist rules that may be fine games........just not what I'm looking for.

Putting all types of rpg into the same bin would be like a bookstore putting ALL fiction in one section (fantasy, science fiction, mystery, romance) and not alphabetizing by author.

All fiction is lumped into the same category, fiction. Genre is based on a set of codes and conventions, at least in media studies, a sub-genre is only created when there is significant divergence from it's root but even so, it is not divorced from that root. Meaning, it becomes a sub-genre not a totally different genre.

Fantasy, space opera etc are all speculative fiction. These games we talk about are all roleplaying games. If you wish to split them up into "sub-genres", the that is your deal but to try a split them up into different hobbies is absurd, just as your analogy is misunderstood.

Quote from: Kanye Westeros;669527All fiction is lumped into the same category, fiction. Genre is based on a set of codes and conventions, at least in media studies, a sub-genre is only created when there is significant divergence from it's root but even so, it is not divorced from that root. Meaning, it becomes a sub-genre not a totally different genre.

Fantasy, space opera etc are all speculative fiction. These games we talk about are all roleplaying games. If you wish to split them up into "sub-genres", the that is your deal but to try a split them up into different hobbies is absurd, just as your analogy is misunderstood.

This.