Quote from: The Traveller;641805Thanks, but maybe next time.

Ah! Deliberately deceptive quotation! The last bastion of the moronic troll. Thanks for providing further confirmation of the fact that we should be ignoring your banal stupidity in this thread.

Quote from: Mistwell;642021But is it an RPG, or a Storygame?

AW has no narrative control mechanics. (Not sure about DW, but my skim-thru didn't find anything.) So, it's an RPG not an STG.

Quote from: Spike;641850Yeah, see: I find this ridiculous nonsense on the face of it.

Really? Which part, exactly? The part where actions like "I walk across the street" can be taken without rolling dice? Or the part where the GM can make a ruling for actions taken outside the existing rules?

Quote from: Spike;641817First I have a question about this combat thing. So Drohelm? hit a dude and took damage because he wasn't quite good enough. So far I'm fine with that (staged successes and all that.  I seem to recall something similar happening to me in Soveriegn Stone in the Pre-3E days), so really my question is how does that work when turned around? Do the NPC's make attack rolls (or whatever... I'm going in order here to clarify my understanding so don't go all semantic on me yet) and suffer damage too from inadequat success?

It's a couple of things.

First, the strategic-based mechanical decisions of the PCs lend themselves well to a player-faced mechanic and that is, in fact, the mechanic that's used. (You're not deciding to tactically "hit the goblin with your sword"; you're strategically deciding to fight the goblin in order to achieve some specific end. So the mechanical resolution isn't discrete, it's judgmental on your entire strategic approach. You're not resolving sword blows; you're resolving entire encounters or large chunks of encounters.)

But, it would be a mistake to characterize this as "passive NPCs" who just wait for the PCs to do stuff. Virtually everything the GM is supposed to be doing in AW is about having NPCs actively challenge the PCs. And the GM is mechanically empowered to take action in many different ways.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;642058Ah! Deliberately deceptive quotation! The last bastion of the moronic troll. Thanks for providing further confirmation of the fact that we should be ignoring your banal stupidity in this thread.

Hmm. And yet I can count on the fingers of one foot the number of forums I've been banned from. Something to think about while your house fills up with dozens of gamers, perhaps.

Quote from: The Traveller;642063Hmm. And yet I can count on the fingers of one foot the number of forums I've been banned from. Something to think about while your house fills up with dozens of gamers, perhaps.

You were being deliberately dishonest with your "out of context" post. Just because you claim popularity (dubious of course) does not mean you are not a dishonest poster.

Quote from: Justin Alexander;641802The number of people on this forum willing to regularly post, "I'm completely ignorant, so lemme tell you what I think." is amazing to me.

Quote from: hamstertamer;642083You were being deliberately dishonest with your "out of context" post. Just because you claim popularity (dubious of course) does not mean you are not a dishonest poster.

It was the only part of the post worth quoting, and by far the most honest in the correct context. Plus, I make no claims towards popularity, merely that I'm not sufficiently maladjusted to have been forced out of the company of my community.

Still, I've no doubt his walls are ringing with the laughter of happy gamers.

Wow, it seems a Second Edition is already in the make!

http://www.dungeon-world.com/dungeon-world-second-edition/

Quote from: silva;642105Wow, it seems a Second Edition is already in the make!

http://www.dungeon-world.com/dungeon-world-second-edition/

LOL that was a good one.

Yeah, that one was a bit funny,

Quote from: Mistwell;642045It seems like your opinion that those who prefer more traditional games are going to have a problem with it is not well supported by those here who have played the game.

Eh, Tim, Omnifray and the Mad Spaniard (while I love 'em) aren't exactly on the Capital-T side of Traditional.  Hell "all player rolls" by itself would throw DF and K&K into fits.

The "Succeed with Complications" result adds a level of abstraction to everything where the roll is firing the bow if you roll high enough, but if you don't, your roll really is attempting to set up the shot, and your failure means you have different ways to optionally try and get a better shot.

Simple "physics of the world", simulation, single task-based resolution, whatever you want to call it, those mid-range successes are not it.

Last weekend some guys I play with went and played DW at a meetup, were like 8 of them.  Only a couple liked it, the others said it was ok, but when they got a "half-result" their words, it "felt like rewriting what happened."  So yeah, it's mostly traditional, because it's attempting to enforce traditional tropes, but it uses a new school approach that would probably make Ben's teeth itch.

Quote from: The Traveller;642063Hmm. And yet I can count on the fingers of one foot the number of forums I've been banned from. Something to think about while your house fills up with dozens of gamers, perhaps.

Let's sum up:

(1) Claims of authority from self-proclaimed ignorance.
(2) Deliberate misquotation.
(3) Fallacious ad hominems.

An impressive quantity of intellectual dishonesty, but far too transparent. On a trolling scale of 1 to 10, I give you a score of 2.

Quote from: CRKrueger;642114Last weekend some guys I play with went and played DW at a meetup, were like 8 of them.  Only a couple liked it, the others said it was ok, but when they got a "half-result" their words, it "felt like rewriting what happened."  So yeah, it's mostly traditional, because it's attempting to enforce traditional tropes, but it uses a new school approach that would probably make Ben's teeth itch.

Based on your description, it sounds like an attempt to use the strategic-oriented rules in AW the same way you use the tactic-oriented rules in a traditional RPG resulted in people describing outcome before checking the mechanic.

You see the same thing happen with social skills a lot: People will describe the outcome of the social encounter, then roll the dice, and get jarred by the "rewriting" that happened because they assumed an outcome before checking the outcome.

You would never say, "I hit the orc with my sword, opening a huge gash across his chest and dealing 25 hp of damage! Now, lemme roll my attack roll..." Don't do the equivalent here.

Quote from: CRKrueger;642114Simple "physics of the world", simulation, single task-based resolution, whatever you want to call it, those mid-range successes are not it.

Having watched this exchange for a while I thought I'd pop in to say that I agree with you. Any time a player selects outcomes, he's stepped at least one foot on to Story Game game.

I'd extend it to say that it's made worst in my mind by never having the NPCs roll as that feature creates a mindset where the PC is a special snowflake compared to the rest of the world. That isn't Story Game so much as just a bad idea.

That it's gained as much traction as it has here just indicates to me how far the Story Game mindset has come over the years, starting small with HERO/FATE points and growing from there. Given that game design has done away with real attempts at simulation, and has done just about all the LITE rules there are to do, it's really the only direction left for it go.

Dungeonworld is basically an old school game with training wheels for the
DM in place. Its not a storygame as some claim (though there are a few mis-steps in that direction, well, no moreso than any classic TSr edition of D&D).

The reason its not considered an RPG on these forums appear to be political in large part. Shame because there's some clever things DW does that could very easily be ported to old school D&D.

I find offense that I'm not captial T traditional! (No, not really.)

The fact is I've played D&D since 1981, I've played Gurps, MSH, COC/BRP, Mythus, FGU games, TSR Games, Chaosium games, White Wolf Games, and many many many more.

That doesn't mean I don't think things can be done better/more streamlined/more obvious at times, but it doesn't make me "Indy" either.

I may lean a bit off traditional but I wouldn't say I'm jumping the tracks here. I've tried many Story Games and rejected nearly all of them, I've tried many Traditional games, and rejected many of them too.  

For the record High Valor, Hearts & Souls, and other games of mine tend to be player rolls for everything--and it wasn't even a new idea/new use for gaming even then. Buffy: The Vampire Slayer did it years before and that is off the top of my head.

Quote from: Silverlion;642157...but it doesn't make me "Indy" either.

I may lean a bit off traditional but I wouldn't say I'm jumping the tracks here. I've tried many Story Games and rejected nearly all of them, I've tried many Traditional games, and rejected many of them too.  

So you're saying you're Bi?

Quote from: Justin Alexander;642146Let's sum up:

(1) Claims of authority from self-proclaimed ignorance.
(2) Deliberate misquotation.
(3) Fallacious ad hominems.

An impressive quantity of intellectual dishonesty, but far too transparent. On a trolling scale of 1 to 10, I give you a score of 2.

Do you actually read any of the comments you're responding to or is this all just a parade of pretty lights and colours, a few trigger words and off you fly. You know what, it's not worth the effort dealing with this level of stupid, although as I'm on the subject you might consider renaming the blog to 'the pedestrian' to better reflect its content.

Quote from: CRKrueger;642114Eh, Tim, Omnifray and the Mad Spaniard (while I love 'em) aren't exactly on the Capital-T side of Traditional.  Hell "all player rolls" by itself would throw DF and K&K into fits.

Well, it is certainly not the most common but I recall some games using a "GM doesn't roll" model well before any story-game was born.

I think that "traditional" is a very wide umbrella.

QuoteSimple "physics of the world", simulation, single task-based resolution, whatever you want to call it, those mid-range successes are not it.

Yeah, but I do not think they are such a great deviation as to drag you out of immersion or stop the game from feeling like any other RPG. YMMV, of course.