The ass-bustingly, pants-shittingly hilarious part of this ALL is that "Role Playing Game" was a term somebody pulled out of their ass to label D&D and other similar games in the late 70s.  D&D called itself a "fantastic medieval wargames campaign."  They were called "skirmish games" and then "adventure games" and then somebody dreamed up "role playing games" and everybody went "yeah, sounds good."

There IS no fucking rigorous definition of RPGs, so to declare something "not an RPG" is meaningless.

It's like the "Society for Creative Anachronism."  Karen Anderson was reserving a park for her friends to have a mock tournament and the park asked her for the name of the group, and she said "Err... Society for Creative Anachronism."  She made it up on the fucking spot.

Just like "role playing game."

Just to add to the complexity, early on, the term story-games was used to include RPGs and games that had earned the ire of RPG players for the reasons above. The term was inclusive of RPGs rather than something different from RPGs. From what I understand, it was a reaction to the arguments about "what is an RPG" from people who just wanted to play games. Over time, it appears that, for many, the term has come to refer exclusively to games that feature means by which players are able to directly effect the fictional world other than through their characters.

Quote from: Old Geezer;668375The ass-bustingly, pants-shittingly hilarious part of this ALL is that "Role Playing Game" was a term somebody pulled out of their ass to label D&D and other similar games in the late 70s.

Heavy metal music was named after a random line in Born To Be Wild. The NWO was something Hulk Hogan made up on the spot during a live interview. Led Zeppelin was named due to an offhand derogatory remark. Nothing worthwhile is planned with rigor...look at internet memes. It's completely random which ones are popular, and trying to manufacture them is impossible. Welcome to real life.

Also, some people who like roleplaying games prefer to explore the world, not build it, and effect change in a setting through their character, not as an author.

Yeah, hard to believe I know, but some people aren't Crusaders, or Delusional, or Dinosaurs, they just don't like narrative control mechanics, or any type of player-faced, OOC metagame mechanics when they roleplay.

No one is 100% happy with the way Pundit classifies games and defines forums, except Pundit.

Quote from: CRKrueger;668384Also, some people who like roleplaying games prefer to explore the world, not build it, and effect change in a setting through their character, not as an author.

Also, some people who like roleplaying games sometimes prefer to effect change in a setting through their character and at other times as an author. And maybe even both at different times in the same game.

Though people will often form a preference one way or the other, that preference isn't necessarily exclusive of the other.

Quote from: CRKrueger;668384Also, some people who like roleplaying games prefer to explore the world, not build it, and effect change in a setting through their character, not as an author.

Yeah, hard to believe I know, but some people aren't Crusaders, or Delusional, or Dinosaurs, they just don't like narrative control mechanics, or any type of player-faced, OOC metagame mechanics when they roleplay.

No one is 100% happy with the way Pundit classifies games and defines forums, except Pundit.

That's how I like to play, also with a free hand regarding rules. That said, I'm an equal opportunity Stealer of any nifty game mechanic I like and works for my group, so I'll read just about any game that comes my way, and I don't particularly care what  games other people play, whether its dinosaur monopoly or fairy chess or the Rocky & Bullwinkle RPG/parlour game. Nor do I place any credence on the belief that there's a supersecret cadre of narrative roleplayers out to destroy the hobby.

I do especially get crankie when games that ten years ago no one would have batted an eye at calling an RPG are retroactively labelled a 'storygame' with the implication it bears some culpability in the story telling suidae conspiracy.

CRK's observations in another thread has me thinking about this some more.

It seems more obvious that what has happened here is that a group of new games, story-games, initially caused offense a few years ago. I think that this was a relatively well understood sentiment. However, in order to try and separate the offending group beyond any argument, it saw every RPG that led to that group or is somehow related to that group also being separated, even if its not part of that group. Much like cutting away healthy tissue around a tumour due to its proximity, rather than it being tumorous.
 
The problem is that this collateral separation is being done inconsistently as the reason for the separation doesn't readily apply to them and the sentiment is less well understood. This result will be that "RPGs" end up, for a good number of people, being a lesser subset of its previous self.

Quote from: Skywalker;668392CRK's observations in another thread has me thinking about this some more.

It seems more obvious that what has happened here is that a group of new games, story-games, initially caused offense a few years ago. I think that this was a relatively well understood sentiment. However, in order to try and separate the offending group beyond any argument, it saw every RPG that led to that group or is somehow related to that group also being separated, even if its not part of that group. Much like cutting away healthy tissue around a tumour due to its proximity, rather than it being tumorous.
 
The problem is that this collateral separation is being done inconsistently as the reason for the separation doesn't readily apply to them and the sentiment is less well understood. This result will be that "RPGs" end up, for a good number of people, being a lesser subset of its previous self.

Hole in one you've got there, I think.

Quote from: CRKrueger;668384Also, some people who like roleplaying games prefer to explore the world, not build it, and effect change in a setting through their character, not as an author.

That seems to be a straightforward separation.  A player has control over their character ONLY.  Anything outside of that places it in the Other Games forum.

Does it really matter what it is called or how people view it?

Quote from: TristramEvans;668388I do especially get crankie when games that ten years ago no one would have batted an eye at calling an RPG are retroactively labelled a 'storygame' with the implication it bears some culpability in the story telling suidae conspiracy.

Such as?

Quote from: TristramEvans;668394Hole in one you've got there, I think.

The weird thing is that nearly everyone arguing on this side of the fence actually doesn't like story-games either. They just don't agree with "RPGs" being limited to simulation RPGs, where mechanics are nearly all presented from an IC perspective.

As such, this whole thing is a bunch of RPGers fighting amongst themselves, with one half trying to legitimise the RPGing they have been doing for the last 30 years.

Quote from: Piestrio;668396Such as?

The One Ring springs to mind.

Quote from: Skywalker;668399The One Ring springs to mind.

That's not what "retroactive" means.

P.S. and there one ring isn't a story-game, its just s shitty game.

Quote from: Skywalker;668399The One Ring springs to mind.

All The One Ring threads appear to be in the main (RPG) forum (as of this writing).

Quote from: Rum Cove;668395That seems to be a straightforward separation.  A player has control over their character ONLY.  Anything outside of that places it in the Other Games forum.

That is a clear separation, but the problem is its not the separation being implemented. Any RPG with a Karma/Fate/Bennie system still goes into the main forum. There has been handwaving over the concept of "genre" mechanics as being IC mechanics too.

Hell, FATE gets a pass and its one of the few RPGs I actually dislike for giving the players too much of an authorial perspective.