As I get older, I notice that my gaming preferences are sliding towards the lightish, low-prep and fast resolution side (probably because of adulthood), but specially towards systems with a strong thematic focus. I dont like systems that get transparent in play, I like systems that actively support and promote the theme(s) present in the game.
Examples of such games that I like: Pendragon, Castle Falkenstein, Barbarians of Lemuria, Unknown Armies, Apocalypse World, Marvel Heroic Roleplaying, The One Ring and Lady Blackbird. (I think I would like Savage Worlds and Dogs in the Vineyard too, but never managed to play them or fully grasp their workings).
So, could we call a gamer like me an "emulationist", in the sense of emulating themes and tropes ? Also, can we say this emulationism is still in its infancy in the hobbie, being explored fully from the 2000 onward ? (with the exception of Pendragon maybe, I dont remeber seeing other games in this style before the 00s ). What do you think, guys and girls?
P.S: oh and before someone asks, I DONT like "playing stories", when I sit to play an rpg I assume I will be playing and immersing in a single character, and acting according to his point of view and capabilities.
1/10.
I'm sure you'll get a few bites though.
I don't know why you want to make a box to put youself into. Why bother? Why not just say what you did that you're more interested in emulating tropes and themes and leave it at that. What will the title of "emulationist" do for you exactly?
You owe me one Dan for proving you right. :D
Quote from: silva;634662So, could we call a gamer like me an "emulationist", in the sense of emulating themes and tropes ?
If you prefer games with strong Genre Emulation, sure.
Quote from: silva;634662Also, can we say this emulationism is still in its infancy in the hobbie, being explored fully from the 2000 onward ?
Nah. Pendragon, Paranoia, Toon, WEG Star Wars, James Bond 007, you name it, genre emulation has been around for decades. Amusing you think it's new though.
Quote from: silva;634662oh and before someone asks, I DONT like "playing stories", when I sit to play an rpg I assume I will be playing and immersing in a single character, and acting according to his point of view and capabilities.
If you say so. You are quite fond of metagame, however, of which Genre Emulation expressed in rules form is a type.
You love Shadowrun though, so I still like ya. ;)
Pretty much where I stand. I write such games to emulate the setting/style of play.
Quote from: One Horse Town;6346631/10.
I'm sure you'll get a few bites though.
Yup.
I'm an Emulationo-Immersionist. I like genre emulation, but only up until the point where it doesn't interfere with character immersion. Oh, and with my prediliction for Cool Ranch Doritoes as an aid to characterization, I guess I'm a Dorito-Emulationo-Immersionista.
Apparently my tastes run to picturing the other players naked.
I'm as surprised as anybody, frankly.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;634694Apparently my tastes run to picturing the other players naked.
I'm as surprised as anybody, frankly.
You too?
Glad I'm not the only one.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;634694Apparently my tastes run to picturing the other players naked.
I'm as surprised as anybody, frankly.
So when it comes to character sex are you an emulationist or a simulationist?
Quote from: CRKrueger;634732So when it comes to character sex are you an emulationist or a simulationist?
Nah... Hedonist! :)
QuoteNah. Pendragon, Paranoia, Toon, WEG Star Wars, James Bond 007, you name it, genre emulation has been around for decades. Amusing you think it's new though.
Interesting. I dont know some of the games cited (Toon, James Bond, Star Wars), but from what I remember of Paranoia, its system per se is on the same physics-simulation side like most games of that time (except by some bits like the secret back page sheet, etc) but I may be mistaken though.
Are you sure the emulation in those games were not like Shadowrun ? I mean, the system overall actually didnt emulate any genre, but they threw in some small litte bits that did (Essence in Shadowru, Humanity in Vampire, Alignments in D&D, etc). If thats the case, I would not call them emuluationist.
(and yeah, I love Shadowrun. It was my first, and the first you never forget ;))
Quote from: silva;634662So, could we call a gamer like me an "emulationist", in the sense of emulating themes and tropes ? Also, can we say this emulationism is still in its infancy in the hobby, being explored fully from the 2000 onward ? (with the exception of Pendragon maybe, I dont remember seeing other games in this style before the 00s ). What do you think, guys and girls?
Seems as fair as any other play-style definition to me.
But, I definitely wouldn't agree that the play-style is in its infancy. (As CRKreuger had already stated). 3 of the 8 RPGs
you mention are pre-2000 releases: Pendragon (1985), Castle Falkenstein (1994), and Unknown Armies (1998).
Quote from: silva;634750Interesting. I dont know some of the games cited (Toon, James Bond, Star Wars), but from what I remember of Paranoia, its system per se is on the same physics-simulation side like most games of that time (except by some bits like the secret back page sheet, etc) but I may be mistaken though.
Are you sure the emulation in those games were not like Shadowrun ? I mean, the system overall actually didnt emulate any genre, but they threw in some small litte bits that did (Essence in Shadowru, Humanity in Vampire, Alignments in D&D, etc). If thats the case, I would not call them emuluationist.
Victory Games' James Bond was indeed very much a genre game, moreso than most so-called games today. As was WEG's Ghostbusters, Toon, Teenagers From Outer Space, TSr' Marvel Superheroes, Mayfair's DC Heroes, to name just a few. In fact, that list pretty describes the entire foundation of every "modern" genre gamesystem of the last 20 years not directly influenced by D&D.
OTOH, I agree Paranoia is more of a system adapted to a setting of a specific genre, in the vein of Call of Cthulhu (except that the system was written for Paranoia, so its a little less generic).
I can't wait until the day we all have our own labels! It will be wicked awesome! I'll be a "clashist", you can be a "Youist", and Benoist can be a Benoi... well, whatever! We can put up electrified barbed wire around our isms, and beat each other over the head with our Spiked Baseball Bats of Great Justice if we get though that! It'll be grand! Have at you! Fiend! Corrupter of children! Assassin!
-clash
Quote from: flyingmice;634952I can't wait until the day we all have our own labels! It will be wicked awesome! I'll be a "clashist", you can be a "Youist", and Benoist can be a Benoi... well, whatever! We can put up electrified barbed wire around our isms, and beat each other over the head with our stone clubs if we get though that! It'll be grand! Have at you! Fiend! Corrupter of children! Assassin!
-clash
My label shall be
"
Dark Lord Constantinius the IXth, Neverwas-King of Pariedolia, and Royal Philologist of Tir Na Nog"
Quote from: TristramEvans;634957My label shall be
"Dark Lord Constantinius the IXth, Neverwas-King of Pariedolia, and Royal Philologist of Tir Na Nog"
It's the wave of the future, I tell you! :D
-clash
Quote from: flyingmice;634952I can't wait until the day we all have our own labels! It will be wicked awesome!
"I'm imagining you naked right now."
Damn, my label sucks. :(
Quote from: TristramEvans;634692I'm an Emulationo-Immersionist. I like genre emulation, but only up until the point where it doesn't interfere with character immersion. Oh, and with my prediliction for Cool Ranch Doritoes as an aid to characterization, I guess I'm a Dorito-Emulationo-Immersionista.
Reformed or Orthodox?
Quote from: J Arcane;634988Reformed or Orthodox?
Advent-Hoppist
Sometimes I truly love you guys. This is one of those times.
Huh, lemme see? "D&D hater" ah well, somethings never change :D
QuoteBut, I definitely wouldn't agree that the play-style is in its infancy. (As CRKreuger had already stated). 3 of the 8 RPGs you mention are pre-2000 releases: Pendragon (1985), Castle Falkenstein (1994), and Unknown Armies (1998).
Yeah, but I had the impression these were more the exception than the norm by then. Well, at least here in Brazil I think it was. :D
QuoteVictory Games' James Bond was indeed very much a genre game, moreso than most so-called games today. As was WEG's Ghostbusters, Toon, Teenagers From Outer Space, TSr' Marvel Superheroes, Mayfair's DC Heroes, to name just a few. In fact, that list pretty describes the entire foundation of every "modern" genre gamesystem of the last 20 years not directly influenced by D&D.
Cool. Ill take a look at those.
Quote from: TristramEvans;634990Advent-Hoppist
Crypto-Hobbitist
QuoteI don't know why you want to make a box to put youself into. Why bother? Why not just say what you did that you're more interested in emulating tropes and themes and leave it at that. What will the title of "emulationist" do for you exactly?
Sorry, but I dont see where the problem is. Could you elaborate ?
By the way, I just found out I have this same tendency for other kinds of games. From all the board/cardgames I played lately, most of them have this strong thematic focus too (Netrunner, Game of Thrones, etc).
Quote from: silva;635012Sorry, but I dont see where the problem is. Could you elaborate ?
Basically while some people consider *ist titles and categories useful for RPG related matter, the downsides have outweighed the upsides. Making the jargon term "emulationist" doesn't actually communicate anything because it requires you to first explain that what you are emulating is genre tropes and themes. It is just more jargon. And jargon about categories of people or play invariable creates boxes that people put other people and games into in a very not-useful manner.
QuoteBy the way, I just found out I have this same tendency for other kinds of games. From all the board/cardgames I played lately, most of them have this strong thematic focus too (Netrunner, Game of Thrones, etc).
Strongly themed games are awesome and preferring them is awesome too. I adore Netrunner for the same reasons. But I'm probably not going to make up a jargon term that I will have to explain every time I use it to describe liking games for that reason. It gains me nothing that just saying "I like games with strong theme" doesn't do better.
If you want an example of why it's bad, take a look at how emulationist is used in the class video gaming scene. Endless pissing matches between those who consider themselves true classic gamers because they use the original hardware and those championing the advantages of using emulators and roms to play their 80s NES games.
It's identity politics bullshit about playing games. Imagine if people would just say "I like the feel of playing on the original hardware" and "that is cool, but I like that I can have 2000 games on my one memory card and play them all on an emulator on my android phone" instead of making it about being part of an *ist group.
All down side, no up side.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;634694Apparently my tastes run to picturing the other players naked.
I'm as surprised as anybody, frankly.
For me, it really depends on how attractive the player is.
Quote from: JonTheBrowser;635016Basically while some people consider *ist titles and categories useful for RPG related matter, the downsides have outweighed the upsides. Making the jargon term "emulationist" doesn't actually communicate anything because it requires you to first explain that what you are emulating is genre tropes and themes. It is just more jargon. And jargon about categories of people or play invariable creates boxes that people put other people and games into in a very not-useful manner.
Strongly themed games are awesome and preferring them is awesome too. I adore Netrunner for the same reasons. But I'm probably not going to make up a jargon term that I will have to explain every time I use it to describe liking games for that reason. It gains me nothing that just saying "I like games with strong theme" doesn't do better.
If you want an example of why it's bad, take a look at how emulationist is used in the class video gaming scene. Endless pissing matches between those who consider themselves true classic gamers because they use the original hardware and those championing the advantages of using emulators and roms to play their 80s NES games.
It's identity politics bullshit about playing games. Imagine if people would just say "I like the feel of playing on the original hardware" and "that is cool, but I like that I can have 2000 games on my one memory card and play them all on an emulator on my android phone" instead of making it about being part of an *ist group.
All down side, no up side.
Copied for truth! :D
-clash
Quote from: JonTheBrowser;635016Strongly themed games are awesome and preferring them is awesome too. . . . But I'm probably not going to make up a jargon term that I will have to explain every time I use it to describe liking games for that reason.
*
DING!* Winnah!
Emulation isn't an "ism", its the point of the RPG play experience; it is one half (along with immersion) of what defines RPGs as RPGs.
So the term for someone who like emulation would be "Role Player".
RPGPundit
Quote from: RPGPundit;635408Emulation isn't an "ism", its the point of the RPG play experience; it is one half (along with immersion) of what defines RPGs as RPGs.
So the term for someone who like emulation would be "Role Player".
RPGPundit
Personally I would agree, genre emulation is one of my top priorites but its appeal is not universal. For some players consciously being aware and respecting genre conventions is anti-immersive; they would generally prefer rules and settings that are entire neutral in terms of tone but just provide an realistic(ish) physics engine and explore the world with no other preconceptions. Others just want to enjoy the tactical and mental challenges of roleplaying that come up in a roleplaying game; the idea that a player may deliberately make poor decisions in-character because that reflects the spirit of the genre is anathema.
Quote from: Soylent Green;635501Personally I would agree, genre emulation is one of my top priorites but its appeal is universal. For some players consciously being aware and respecting genre conventions is anti-immersive; they would generally prefer rules and settings that are entire neutral in terms of tone but just provide an realistic(ish) physics engine and explore the world with no other preconceptions. Others just want to enjoy the tactical and mental challenges of roleplaying that come up in a roleplaying game; the idea that a player may deliberately make poor decisions in-character because that reflects the spirit of the genre is anathema.
This is a big part of trouble with supers in the thread next door. I like
some genre emulation mechanics, like D&D's XP for gold.
Take Sanity in CoC. If anything, Sanity actually
punishes your PC for being an investigator. It assures that your short-lived victories over the eldricht horrors beyond our worlkd and their human flunkies will exact a lasting price on your soul.
And yet CoC works because people buy into the concept of sacrificing higher brain function to save the world.
From a "gamist" POV, CoC makes no fucking sense whatsoever. But because people are willing to immerse themselves, they pay what Daddy Warpig calls the game's "Bullshit Tax" and roll with it.
I think what I mean to say is, genre emulation mechanics can improve the experience of play, but they can never be a substitute for player buy-in. Or else you're just dragging players along a game they might not want to play in the first place.
Does this make any sense to anyone else?
Quote from: The Butcher;635508I think what I mean to say is, genre emulation mechanics can improve the experience of play, but they can never be a substitute for player buy-in. Or else you're just dragging players along a game they might not want to play in the first place.
Does this make any sense to anyone else?
Perfectly. But you can also look at it the other way round. It's is kind of sad when the system "punishes you" (in terms massively reducing you chances of success) for playing along with genre conventions - use of non-lethal force being a fairly typical example of where this often happens.
Quote from: Soylent Green;635516Perfectly. But you can also look at it the other way round. It's is kind of sad when the system "punishes you" (in terms massively reducing you chances of success) for playing along with genre conventions - use of non-lethal force being a fairly typical example of where this often happens.
But this here is the kicker, I think. CoC fucks you over all the time for messing with Things Man Was Not Meant To Know and you do it anyway because, fuck man, I don't want the creepy fish-people to summon their hungry space god to eat my hometown. The Sanity mechanic doesn't really rewards them for doing it, but by
punishing them, it makes their struggle even
more meaningful and heroic, and lends the game tension and pathos that, after a fashion, reward immersion.
It took that other thread, and your contribution especially, to make me notice that my "failing" when it comes to supers is the expectation that players will make the jump to four-color superheroic ethics just as easily.
I think there is a difference. In CoC you are taking a hit with Sanity in order to achieve a greater goal because learning about these forbidden things is a necessary step towards the victory conditions. It is a sacrifice play. And the works with the genre.
The sort of thing I was thinking of is what I experience playing HEX. I like HEX, but because the way the to hit and damage roll are combined, if you choose to punch someone it won't just do less damage than a gun (which you'd expect), the blow won't even land. And yet in pulp game, you do want to just punch your opponents instead of shooting them. And neither having the squared jawed hero either looking totally ineffective or acting like murderous psychopath supports genre.
Also, I can't remember which one, but I seem to recall a supers game in which you gained XP/Hero points whenever your character was defeated. This turns on it's head the more established, perhaps natural, notion of rewadring players for success. The idea was that (1) it encourages what is very much genre convention in which quite often lose the early encounters with their opponents and (2) ensured that by the end of the adventure the hero would enough Hero points to succeed. It's a bit like Fate's Compels.
Quote from: The Butcher;635523But this here is the kicker, I think. CoC fucks you over all the time for messing with Things Man Was Not Meant To Know and you do it anyway because, fuck man, I don't want the creepy fish-people to summon their hungry space god to eat my hometown. The Sanity mechanic doesn't really rewards them for doing it, but by punishing them, it makes their struggle even more meaningful and heroic, and lends the game tension and pathos that, after a fashion, reward immersion.
It's probably safe to say that genre emulation mechanics don't neccessarily have to reward the characters for following expectations, merely that they have an effect on characters for doing so.
Quote from: Soylent Green;635539Also, I can't remember which one, but I seem to recall a supers game in which you gained XP/Hero points whenever your character was defeated. This turns on it's head the more established, perhaps natural, notion of rewadring players for success. The idea was that (1) it encourages what is very much genre convention in which quite often lose the early encounters with their opponents and (2) ensured that by the end of the adventure the hero would enough Hero points to succeed. It's a bit like Fate's Compels.
Thats a house rule I've used for FASERIP (after divorcing Karma points from XP, which I renamed Continuity)- Players gain XP for failing. It makes a lot of sense considering the genre....superheroes tend to improve only after they've been defeated by a villain. I'd be interested to see it codified in a system if you can recall the game.
Quote from: JonTheBrowser;634664I don't know why you want to make a box to put youself into. Why bother? Why not just say what you did that you're more interested in emulating tropes and themes and leave it at that. What will the title of "emulationist" do for you exactly?
Boxes are quite comfy. Just ask a cat.
Quote from: Soylent Green;635501Personally I would agree, genre emulation is one of my top priorites but its appeal is not universal. For some players consciously being aware and respecting genre conventions is anti-immersive; they would generally prefer rules and settings that are entire neutral in terms of tone but just provide an realistic(ish) physics engine and explore the world with no other preconceptions. Others just want to enjoy the tactical and mental challenges of roleplaying that come up in a roleplaying game; the idea that a player may deliberately make poor decisions in-character because that reflects the spirit of the genre is anathema.
This seems to me like something that exists only in theory; I've never in my decades of gaming run into a real live player who had a blanket problem with emulation of genre as being in all cases anti-immersive.
Now, what I DID run into on many occasions was where specific settings (usually ones that required high levels of emulation; usually CoC or supers play) were turn-offs to specific players. But it was pretty much always the case that said player had no trouble with genre conventions of other genres (so for example, someone who couldn't handle the conceits of a four-colour supers RPG emulation would have no trouble handling the conceits of an epic fantasy or cinematic western emulation).
So this was always more the case of a specific issue with specific genres, than anything to do with a total rejection of emulation.
RPGPundit
Love this thread.
I'm an Immersionist of the Church of the Latter-Day Fighters.
More seriously, I don't see any immersion vs emulation problems really. Immersion vs "gamism" for lack of a better term, sometimes, maybe, but...