What is your preferred approach to genre emulation?
That the players know what the genre is before starting a game.
I generally like to run dramatist-simulation where the PCs get to feel like they are characters of that genre in that world and have that character's internal aspect. So eg in a Star Wars setting the PCs should feel competent and heroic but also the player as PC needs to feel that blaster bolts can kill, that Stormtroopers are dangerous etc. So even though in genre the protagonists don't die, I'll want there to be genuine threat - which made my Star Wars games tend to end up a lot more like Rogue One than Return of the Jedi.
It's quite a tricky balance since I don't want the situation to be hopeless or to feel hopeless, if the protagonists don't feel that way - I guess in a '1984' type setting that would be ok - but if there's a feeling of against-the-odds as in eg Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Conan the Barbarian & most other pulp fiction, then that needs to have some reflection in the reality of the game. At the very least the PCs do need to be in some kind of actual danger, though there may be more or less subtle elements giving them an edge.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1054119What is your preferred approach to genre emulation?
Not a snarky reply: I don't.
I take a lot of inspiration from genres, but I don't seek to emulate them. I think it doesn't play to the strengths of RPGs.
Define genre emulation?
Boot Hill style genre emulation?
Call of Cthulhu style genre emulation?
Big Eyes Small Mouth style genre emulation?
Gurps style genre emulation?
Quote from: Omega;1054149Define genre emulation?
Boot Hill style genre emulation?
Call of Cthulhu style genre emulation?
Big Eyes Small Mouth style genre emulation?
Gurps style genre emulation?
I am just interested in what approach people prefer, not in defining the term. I didn't have any one of these in mind in specifically. My interest is seeing which approach(es) to genre emulation, among all the approaches that are out there, folks like. So if you find one of the games you mentioned captures what you are looking for in genre emulation more than the others (or if a group offer a range that fits what you like), that is the kind of answer I was looking for.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1054153I am just interested in what approach people prefer, not in defining the term. I didn't have any one of these in mind in specifically. My interest is seeing which approach(es) to genre emulation, among all the approaches that are out there, folks like. So if you find one of the games you mentioned captures what you are looking for in genre emulation more than the others (or if a group offer a range that fits what you like), that is the kind of answer I was looking for.
All of the above fit for me really. Boot hill does an excellent job of emulating a western. Call of Cthulhu does an excellent job of emulating the Lovecraftian stories and even works really well as a non-supernatural period piece. BESM is good at emulating various anime and even branched into Rescuers style small animal world territory. Gurps works much like a broader scope BESM for emulating general or specific genres. As does TSRs MSH RPG which can cover pretty much any genre due to its nature.
Another would be the original Albedo RPG which both does the comics its based on very well. And emulates the lethality of WWII/NATO level modern warfare in an overall hard fiction setting. Or Furry Outlaws which emulates a historical authentic setting using Disneys Robin Hood style animal people. Or TOONs ability to recreate a cartoon environment and so on.
Or the various pieces in Pokyhedron for d20 modern that covered various genres such as pulp heroes, cross country racing, cartoon mystery solving rock bands, planet romance, VR worlds, and even a WWII one. I rather liked the racing one and the trapped in VR one in particular. The others were interesting though some were less so than others.
Whereas oddly I felt the Buck Rogers RPG failed to capture the feel of the setting in its various iterations. But stood well as its own thing in a sort of broader scope Flash Gordon style.
Quote from: S'mon;1054123I generally like to run dramatist-simulation where the PCs get to feel like they are characters of that genre in that world and have that character's internal aspect. So eg in a Star Wars setting the PCs should feel competent and heroic but also the player as PC needs to feel that blaster bolts can kill, that Stormtroopers are dangerous etc. So even though in genre the protagonists don't die, I'll want there to be genuine threat - which made my Star Wars games tend to end up a lot more like Rogue One than Return of the Jedi.
It's quite a tricky balance since I don't want the situation to be hopeless or to feel hopeless, if the protagonists don't feel that way - I guess in a '1984' type setting that would be ok - but if there's a feeling of against-the-odds as in eg Star Wars, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Conan the Barbarian & most other pulp fiction, then that needs to have some reflection in the reality of the game. At the very least the PCs do need to be in some kind of actual danger, though there may be more or less subtle elements giving them an edge.
What do you mean more like R1 over RotJ?
I am curious what approaches people enjoy too, and why, because I really don't "get" where the satisfaction lies in it. A lot of new games seem really focused on it, for it's own sake, and people really enjoy it but I don't understand why. I understand not wanting anachronisms in a setting or game or even story, but when it gets into following tropes, "feeling" like this sort of media, etc. I just don't understand the appeal.
I discuss genre expectations as it relates to the campaign to make sure we're all on the same page.
Websites like TVtropes are very helpful too.
System rules are useful, but nothing is more important than the conversations with players who may not all be equally familiar with the genre.
For me it about presenting a setting for my players to explore as their character. The starting point is to take what been written and imagining it as a place where people live out their lives. Then among the possibilities highlight those that are of potential interest and let the players choose where they want to start at. If they are ignorant of the setting or genre I will coach them until they are comfortable with their understanding.
Genre Emulation is what happens when I play one of these super-meta games, like Fate. Not a huge fan, but I can see the appeal.
Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1054162What do you mean more like R1 over RotJ?
PCs die a lot!
I think it's extremely important to delve in with the players so they understand that for my campaigns, "genre" does not mean "roleplaying within some form of media construct" but "roleplaying in a world and setting of a certain media construct". In other words, whether we are in Middle Earth, Hyboria, Westeros, Star Wars, Star Trek, or the Expanse, we are not roleplaying within a story and your PCs are not protagonists. They have no script immunity. We won't be both roleplaying them and talking about them from the 3rd person using OOC mechanics to reinforce genre or other narrative elements. We're going to be roleplaying, not roleplaying plus storytelling.
As a roleplayer, I prefer to roleplay. I like my genre-reinforcing mechanics to be as subtle as possible. An example that to me is acceptable is personality mechanics. For example, Call of Cthulhu Sanity, Warhammer Hatred, and Pendragon Virtues. They are basically stats that chart the mental definition of your character within the setting and rolling against them, if presented properly, are no different than making a Strength check.
When they have a broader impact, like possibly being modifiers to other actions, like Mythas Passions, they become a little annoying as now we step outside the character a bit to discuss whether 77% Love of Queen and Country is going to affect this situation.
More annoying is stuff like "Ales and Whores" rules, that govern automatically how characters make use of resources. Not a big fan of structured and mechanically enforced Downtime minigames as they tend to be bland or just storytelling exercises. Downtime rules with robust random events can be pretty entertaining.
Stuff like "Naked Barbarian/Chainmail Bikini Armor" and "Stormtrooper Marksmanship Academy", or dividing NPCs into Minion/Toughened/Nemesis each having different rules, I absolutely despise.
Pick an RPG which emulates a specific genre or group of genres (since many genres are composed of multiple other genres). Every genre has its own conventions which may require specific rules. Much to my chagrin I have been unable to find an RPG that emulates the fairy tale genre (no, Changeling: The Lost does not count because it is a grimdark urban fantasy which only burrows the superficial iconography of fairy tales), unless you hack a mythology RPG like Mazes & Minotaurs to run fairy tales. (In my experience, the primary difference between myths and fairy tales is that fairy tales generally lack any kind of world building.)
I actually despise the D&D sub-genre. Although it takes cues from fairy tales, pulps and Tolkien, it has ultimately become its own thing with its own idiosyncrasies (which are carried over into most fantasy CRPGs). Most fiction in the D&D sub-genre is actually produced online as D&D fanfiction, but the largest output of published fiction (not affiliated with Wizards of the Coast) is Japanese novels which get adapted into comics and cartoons. Watching these cartoons only highlights how silly the D&D sub-genre actually is if you take its conventions seriously.
Quote from: CRKrueger;1054188More annoying is stuff like "Ales and Whores" rules, that govern automatically how characters make use of resources. Not a big fan of structured and mechanically enforced Downtime minigames as they tend to be bland or just storytelling exercises. Downtime rules with robust random events can be pretty entertaining.
The PC game Darkest Dungeon has an interesting take on downtime. During the game, the characters pick up mental quirks due to the horrors they encounter in the dungeon. The characters can heal "sanity damage" by drinking and carousing. Which can create it's own problems. It's something I'd likely rip off if I ran a horror themed game.
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1054195The PC game Darkest Dungeon has an interesting take on downtime. During the game, the characters pick up mental quirks due to the horrors they encounter in the dungeon. The characters can heal "sanity damage" by drinking and carousing. Which can create it's own problems. It's something I'd likely rip off if I ran a horror themed game.
Blades in the Dark does this. You fill Stress during operations, that you vent out by engaging your character's Vices during downtime (which can lead to complications depending on your roll, like getting high on booze and spilling the beans in the bar, thus increasing the crew Heat score).
Darkest Dungeon is awesome, by the way. ;)
It is hard to describe... and I'm not sure I have a logically coherent means of justifying what I dig and do not dig here. Let's see.
1.) Outside of the rules, I want the text & art of a game to support the genre. To get players who read the text in the mindset of the genre, excited to make characters or build campaigns for it, etc.
2.) The rules themselves should support the genre, but I am a bit picky here about what I want, because I don't want rules that are too explicitly "Take this power to do genre-cliche". So... to take some examples:
Two games I like for genre emulation are "Street Fighter: The Storytelling Game" and "DC Heroes".
Street Fighter has a tactical combat system that does a reasonable job of evoking the feeling you get of playing the video game. Additionally, it has a couple smaller rules that contribute to its martial arts pulp action vibe, such as: Guns are slow, it takes a whole round to pull one out, then on the next turn it can be fired, but guns tend to go at low speed and not allow movement. 15 minutes after you've been knocked out and lost all of your Health, it all comes back (except "Aggravated Damage"). There are technically no rules for dying, though you might reasonably assume having all Aggravated Damage might mean that (it is never explicitly said, though). These latter two rules support a light vibe where martial artist can leap in and save the day, and people get beat up all the time, but it's not the end of the world to get your ass kicked.
In DC Heroes, the XP rules have a "Standard Award" based on the danger of the core situation the PCs are going up against and are then awarded multiples of that Standard Award based on how well they hit the following categories: Participation, RP, Thwarting the Villain, Protect Innocent Bystanders, Sub-Plot, Misc. Really only Participation & Thwarting the Villain can be obtained without getting into some genre-supporting RPing. How they address sub-plots I think maybe supports that the best. Also, PCs lose a sessions reward if they initiate Killing Combat, or lose half if they initiate Killing Combat in response to a foe who does likewise. The rules for pushing with Hero Points lend a feeling of heroic struggle to proceedings. If your character is knocked out, their ability to spend a chunk of Hero Points to attempt a "Desperation Recovery" which has a decent chance of getting them out of the rubble for another go, also seems to emulate the ebb and flow of some super hero tusslin'. Even the social interaction rules have ways for PCs and NPCs to attempt to influence others and PCs can theoretically be made to spill the beans (or let something slip) or persuaded to do things the Player might not be down with. Fortunately, the rules let them defend against this with Hero Points as well, so it all comes down to spending on what you really care about, balanced against any hopes you may have for character advancement.
A game I'm less happy with that tries for genre-emulation...
Feng Shui: I'm mostly OK with Feng Shui, but it leans a little too hard into meta, or genre trope activating rules. Like... "The Killer" has a disadvantage that if he takes more than 4 Wound Points from an attack in a climactic battle, he takes an additional 3. Or, "The Driver" has an ability called "Cool Car Jacket" worded like this: "You have the skills Seduction 11 and Intimidate 11, but only when wearing the jacket, and only when it is in good shape. The jacket is like new again at the start of each new adventure."
I'm very happy to have genre appropriate, or even genre cliche things occur in my game, but... it has to feel like it came about naturally through play and not because someone activated "My Cool Jacket Gets All the Chicks" power. It kinda feels like a cheap shortcut that takes all of the fun out of it.
Now... I'm not sure I can articulate why "My Cool Jacket Gets All the Chicks" is bad and "It takes a whole turn to pull out your Gun in Street Fighter and Gun Maneuvers have a Move of 0" is OK, except maybe in how one is explicitly evoking a trope and the other kind of more implicitly leads to a genre trope being true.
Anyways, also
3.) Seek players that both get and enjoy the genre in a way that jives with what you're looking for! Probably the most important thing. A player that mocks or intentionally undermines the genre vibe for their own self-amusement, or they have to analyze the tropes explicitly or whatever is a killer to the game. Also, a player that is not down with RP and engages in a lot of OOC planning, or engages in the game as a player trying to win, leading to unrealistic character behavior, etc. is another killer to genre emulation.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1054119What is your preferred approach to genre emulation?
With games that bring on the genre, through rules that actively
push for it.
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1054195The PC game Darkest Dungeon has an interesting take on downtime. During the game, the characters pick up mental quirks due to the horrors they encounter in the dungeon. The characters can heal "sanity damage" by drinking and carousing. Which can create it's own problems. It's something I'd likely rip off if I ran a horror themed game.
Zak Smith's blog had examples of this sort of rules for Demon City.
It needs to be subtle and recognise that RPGs are not movies and play to the strengths of that.
After all the best movies in any genre will advance the genre they're in by breaking or changing it's rules.
If the PCs feel too constrained to even do that then they're not even playing in a good movie - they're in a boring second rate straight to video release.
I remember a GM in a game getting really huffy with me once because I interrupted his evil villain monologue by shooting it with a shotgun, which he felt was "out of genre".
For myself, I think it's more about the atmosphere than using canon characters. For a Star Wars game, for example, I don't think I'd ever have the PCs run into any of the movie characters, but I would work to have the same cinematic feeling, if that is along the lines of what you are asking. It's a really generic answer, but anything more specific would have to be tied to a specific genre.
Quote from: TJS;1054222I remember a GM in a game getting really huffy with me once because I interrupted his evil villain monologue by shooting it with a shotgun, which he felt was "out of genre".
[video=youtube_share;rk9WHasIZk0]https://youtu.be/rk9WHasIZk0[/youtube]
Agree with others that I prefer rules that encourage genre emulation without requiring it. Subtle enough to not browbeat the PCs into talking about how they are following genre, but overt enough that everyone understands the carrots and sticks.
I'm not so wild about reams of setting used in an attempt to accomplish the same thing. The more "canon" the material, the less likely I am to pay any attention to it.
The rules should support the genre. AKA, if the game is about martial arts, then martial arts should be better than guns. If the game is about mounted knights, then being on horseback kicks ass vs. being on foot, and being a knight is the central focus and rules / concepts about the horse, its strengths and its care should be important.
I mainly play D&D, and I regard D&D has having its own genre. I don't try to make D&D play like a high fantasy novel.
For other games, all genre means to me is inspiration. I don't expect or care if the players read up on the genre, and I frankly prefer if they don't expect the game to play out like books or movies.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1054285The rules should support the genre. AKA, if the game is about martial arts, then martial arts should be better than guns. If the game is about mounted knights, then being on horseback kicks ass vs. being on foot, and being a knight is the central focus and rules / concepts about the horse, its strengths and its care should be important.
To me the sounds like genre physics; where the world tends to emulate the laws of a genre but in a consistent way that isn't necessarily trying to emulate the stories of the genre.
The gun one is interesting because that depends on the franchise. I can think of a lot of martial arts movies where guns are less effective than martial arts, but there are also some where the point is martial arts are effective against just about anything, except guns.
Quote from: The Black Ferret;1054226For myself, I think it's more about the atmosphere than using canon characters. For a Star Wars game, for example, I don't think I'd ever have the PCs run into any of the movie characters, but I would work to have the same cinematic feeling, if that is along the lines of what you are asking. It's a really generic answer, but anything more specific would have to be tied to a specific genre.
Specific is fine. If you were in a starwars campaign, is there anything that you think contributes best (or takes away from) the cinematic feeling?
Quote from: Itachi;1054216With games that bring on the genre, through rules that actively push for it.
Examples? What mechanics "push" genre?
Quote from: CRKrueger;1054188I think it's extremely important to delve in with the players so they understand that for my campaigns, "genre" does not mean "roleplaying within some form of media construct" but "roleplaying in a world and setting of a certain media construct"...
Once again, I agree with CRKrueger here. I'm not sure there's really a good way to emulate genre with meta-game mechanics. I keep trying games with MGM and they fall flat for me. However, /rpg/ on reddit got me thinking about social mechanics... I like how Zweihander does it (there's a procedure, but it hinges on roleplaying things out through the phases... also has a simple or complex procedure). I find (for example) having disease, corruption and magic that corrupts you to feel very dark. Elements in the game supporting genre. So, if you're a high fantasy game, and I can create refrigerators, elevators and trains with magic like it was a resource, that will probably just FEEL higher magic to me without any overt mechanics.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1054119What is your preferred approach to genre emulation?
For me, I like to take the hard work out of it. I mean, I'll let the game handle it itself. So if you want a Lovecraft themed, then CoC is an obvious choice and the mechanics are already set up for you. The players are already 'primed' as they know what to expect. Jobs a good 'un...
My own approach is pretty simple.
I was recently GMing Whitebox (with the WB add on for Gothic stuff). I told the players, that it was going to be a gothic horror scenario. I made sure the adventure, that I wrote and emulated the horror and feel of the genre that I wanted. They all played appropriate characters like, Monster Hunter, Wanderer and Spiritualist, etc. So that was appropriate as well.
So we all made it work together in the end.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1054306To me the sounds like genre physics; where the world tends to emulate the laws of a genre but in a consistent way that isn't necessarily trying to emulate the stories of the genre.
This is basically all the genre emulation I need in a game. I wouldn't want Call of Cthulhu to shove a way of playing down my throat that only recreates Lovecraft's
writing, I want horror roleplaying in the
worlds of HP Lovecraft, as it states on the cover (at least up until 6th edition).
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1054119What is your preferred approach to genre emulation?
I think the question is too broad; I'm not sure what the meaning of "approach" is here.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1054783I think the question is too broad; I'm not sure what the meaning of "approach" is here.
I was looking for a broad range of answers that cover all kinds of things. So by approach I meant both what kinds of systems and tools do you like, or dislike, for genre emulation, and what kind of things do you like, or not like, GMs to do when they emulate genres.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1054166I discuss genre expectations as it relates to the campaign to make sure we're all on the same page.
Websites like TVtropes are very helpful too.
System rules are useful, but nothing is more important than the conversations with players who may not all be equally familiar with the genre.
I prefer that the rules reflect the genre assumptions, and that the players discover the genre as a result of exploring the world, not by understanding the genre conventions and roleplaying them just to be in that genre. The result is often only peripherally in the intended genre but is more interesting than players making choices to be in the genre.
Consider discussing genre expectations but then using a rule system that works against it: how long will it take the players who expect to be paladinly knights of the Round Table to turn into looting murderhobos who kill their king, because the rules don't reward anything else? If you have players you don't want, this might be an amusing way of driving them off.
Quote from: CRKrueger;1054188I think it's extremely important to delve in with the players so they understand that for my campaigns, "genre" does not mean "roleplaying within some form of media construct" but "roleplaying in a world and setting of a certain media construct". In other words, whether we are in Middle Earth, Hyboria, Westeros, Star Wars, Star Trek, or the Expanse, we are not roleplaying within a story and your PCs are not protagonists. They have no script immunity. We won't be both roleplaying them and talking about them from the 3rd person using OOC mechanics to reinforce genre or other narrative elements. We're going to be roleplaying, not roleplaying plus storytelling.
As a roleplayer, I prefer to roleplay. I like my genre-reinforcing mechanics to be as subtle as possible. An example that to me is acceptable is personality mechanics. For example, Call of Cthulhu Sanity, Warhammer Hatred, and Pendragon Virtues. They are basically stats that chart the mental definition of your character within the setting and rolling against them, if presented properly, are no different than making a Strength check.
When they have a broader impact, like possibly being modifiers to other actions, like Mythas Passions, they become a little annoying as now we step outside the character a bit to discuss whether 77% Love of Queen and Country is going to affect this situation.
More annoying is stuff like "Ales and Whores" rules, that govern automatically how characters make use of resources. Not a big fan of structured and mechanically enforced Downtime minigames as they tend to be bland or just storytelling exercises. Downtime rules with robust random events can be pretty entertaining.
Stuff like "Naked Barbarian/Chainmail Bikini Armor" and "Stormtrooper Marksmanship Academy", or dividing NPCs into Minion/Toughened/Nemesis each having different rules, I absolutely despise.
I agree on disliking rules that force characters into certain actions (what does the player do, if the character's actions are determined by the rules?) but I am OK with rules that forbid some actions (e.g., that the player characters have to be of certain alignments and act accordingly). I am also not unhappy with things like minions that establish different rules for certain kinds of NPCs.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1054797I was looking for a broad range of answers that cover all kinds of things. So by approach I meant both what kinds of systems and tools do you like, or dislike, for genre emulation, and what kind of things do you like, or not like, GMs to do when they emulate genres.
1. Give details and commentary that promotes a genre feeling without otherwise affecting the game: Barovia in Curse of Strahd felt very different from the usual Forgotten Realms setting for D&D 5e, even if the challenges could be the same.
2. Have players agree to act in ways consistent with the genre that is being emulated
3. Have NPCs act in genre-consistent ways, and react to genre-inconstent PCs as if they are insane, but have non-hostile NPCs help genre-consistent PCs.
4. Have rules that reward genre-consistent play and penalize genre-consistent play, but allow players to go against the genre when they choose (accepting the penalties).
5. Have rules that forbid genre-inconsistent play of at least some kinds.
6. Have rules that force specific genre-consistent actions.
I like 4 best; I like 5 if not too broad (i.e., where it might as well be 6). I hate 6. 1 to 3 are generally appropriate but probably not sufficient.
Quote from: rawma;1054820Consider discussing genre expectations but then using a rule system that works against it: how long will it take the players who expect to be paladinly knights of the Round Table to turn into looting murderhobos who kill their king, because the rules don't reward anything else?
Are you familiar with 2e AD&D? It always felt like that to me.
Quote from: S'mon;1054821Are you familiar with 2e AD&D? It always felt like that to me.
As it happens, that's the one edition of D&D I don't own any rule books from. I bought 3e rule books to see whether it was substantially different but continued to play 1e (or an OD&D/1e hybrid); I played some in 4e but finally embraced 5e. I don't think I would play any of the earlier editions again.
I wonder if this impression of 2e AD&D followed just from changing trends in fantasy RPGs - dungeons seemed out of favor, so it promised other genres but still inherited enough rules from earlier editions that were inconsistent with those genres.
Quote from: rawma;1054820I prefer that the rules reflect the genre assumptions, and that the players discover the genre as a result of exploring the world, not by understanding the genre conventions and roleplaying them just to be in that genre. The result is often only peripherally in the intended genre but is more interesting than players making choices to be in the genre.
That's my preference too.
Quote3. Have NPCs act in genre-consistent ways, and react to genre-inconstent PCs as if they are insane, but have non-hostile NPCs help genre-consistent PCs.
4. Have rules that reward genre-consistent play and penalize genre-consistent play, but allow players to go against the genre when they choose (accepting the penalties).
5. Have rules that forbid genre-inconsistent play of at least some kinds.
6. Have rules that force specific genre-consistent actions.
Is 5. really a thing? I don't remember a game where this happens.
2nd edition did get away from murderhobo by including rules for awarding XP for class specific activities, and "story rewards" for completeing short and long term quests. They still gave xp for monsters and loot, but IIRC awarded xp for "defeating" monsters, not just killing them.
And the proficiencies section was a much more robust non-combat skill system for D&D after 1st edition. (Maybe not Basic, I don't remember)
But it could be run murderhobo, and I think running it that way was (and really, I'd say even "is" with subsequent editions) easier than coming up with more involved adventures.
Quote from: rawma;10548205. Have rules that forbid genre-inconsistent play of at least some kinds.
Quote from: Itachi;1054831Is 5. really a thing? I don't remember a game where this happens.
I was thinking things like forbidding certain alignments and PvP - Adventurers League does both of those.
It's probably more a group contract than something that appears in game rules.
Quote from: rawma;10548202. Have players agree to act in ways consistent with the genre that is being emulated
3. Have NPCs act in genre-consistent ways, and react to genre-inconstent PCs as if they are insane, but have non-hostile NPCs help genre-consistent PCs.
I don't know - 2 and 3 seem problematic to me. How do we really agree on what is genre consistent? Especially now that a lot of media contain characters who are themselves genre savvy. What's the difference between genre consistency and clever subversion?
Or wouldn't games be poorer if they couldn't include moments like this?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]2857[/ATTACH]
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1054119What is your preferred approach to genre emulation?
I think The One Ring does a pretty good job of it. Many of the rules are directly inspired by Tolkien quotes found in the books. It's a bit fiddly, but good at the same time. Pendragon also looks very good, but I have never actually played it.
Quote from: TJS;1054861I don't know - 2 and 3 seem problematic to me. How do we really agree on what is genre consistent? Especially now that a lot of media contain characters who are themselves genre savvy. What's the difference between genre consistency and clever subversion?
How do you define the genre you're emulating? I would probably point to certain exemplars: Edgar Rice Burroughs' Barsoom for Sword and Planet, for instance. A character would act in a genre consistent way for a game if it wouldn't be jarring for a Burroughs character on Barsoom to act that way; it shouldn't be a straitjacket that only allows the exact known stories to occur. Certainly there is potential for disagreement about what would be jarring, but not over extreme examples.
Genre subversion isn't that big an issue; you just need to decide whether you're emulating the subverted or unsubverted genre, and avoid subversions that don't follow from character knowledge. Characters should not reason from the players' knowledge of the genre, but your attachment seemed potentially out of genre to me only because the character references Republic serials (but I'm not sure what the genre actually is), not because he is aware that premature gloating by villains is a bad move. I offer you true genre savviness that would be antithetical to genre emulation:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]2858[/ATTACH]
Edit: Link added for Tom the Dancing Bug (http://wpcomics.washingtonpost.com/client/wpc/td/2018/08/31/), so you can actually read it if you're inclined.
Quote from: S'mon;1054821Are you familiar with 2e AD&D? It always felt like that to me.
Except in especially 2e you get ZERO exp for just killing civilians merchants and cows. And little to no EXP for killing things helpless or way beneath your league.
Quote from: TJS;1054861I don't know - 2 and 3 seem problematic to me. How do we really agree on what is genre consistent? Especially now that a lot of media contain characters who are themselves genre savvy. What's the difference between genre consistency and clever subversion?
Or wouldn't games be poorer if they couldn't include moments like this?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]2857[/ATTACH]
Watchmen was an intentional Inversion-of-Genre, which ironically became a genre itself as other comics tried desperately to copy it.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1054797I was looking for a broad range of answers that cover all kinds of things. So by approach I meant both what kinds of systems and tools do you like, or dislike, for genre emulation, and what kind of things do you like, or not like, GMs to do when they emulate genres.
I see. Well, in that case I certainly believe rules are a very important part of Emulation of Genre. It's one of the problems I have, for example, with most supers games. So many of these just apply standard d&d-type conventions, which make for very poor emulation of the superhero genre. ICONS is my favorite supers game because it comes much closer to effective emulation.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1055102Watchmen was an intentional Inversion-of-Genre, which ironically became a genre itself as other comics tried desperately to copy it.
Well yes. But that's how genre's grow and develop. They do things which at the time would have been considered out-of-genre and in the process the genre changes.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1055102Watchmen was an intentional Inversion-of-Genre, which ironically became a genre itself as other comics tried desperately to copy it.
This is spot-on. Sadly.
Quote from: TJS;1055115Well yes. But that's how genre's grow and develop. They do things which at the time would have been considered out-of-genre and in the process the genre changes.
As someone that worked in the comic-industry during this time - I'm going to disagree. Not because I think your logic is flawed, it's not. It's TOO logical. What you, and myself as someone that was there, missed - is the propensity for sheer unadulterated stupidity among people that have zero understanding of business, and life in general, whose capacity for low-expectations is orders of magnitude deeper and dumber than you can imagine.
And thus we have the current comicbook industry today. A dying festering shitpile, being feasted upon by the flies of political ideologues in the aftermath of the extinction-event they're prosecuting on themselves.
I think with growing genres and keeping them alive, that is a tricky balance. Genres can get stale and die from just repeating themselves, but it isn't easy to innovate within a genre and the people who have done it well, usually bring in highly complimentary alternative sources of inspiration. You can end up making the genre meaningless if you just add stuff purely for the purpose of being different from what came before. I think the trope twisting thing got old fast as a method because it is just an automatic flipping of ideas usually, it doesn't require thought.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1055103I see. Well, in that case I certainly believe rules are a very important part of Emulation of Genre. It's one of the problems I have, for example, with most supers games. So many of these just apply standard d&d-type conventions, which make for very poor emulation of the superhero genre. ICONS is my favorite supers game because it comes much closer to effective emulation.
I am not that familiar with ICONS. Curious what it did that you feel brought it closer to good emulation
Quote from: tenbones;1055144As someone that worked in the comic-industry during this time - I'm going to disagree. Not because I think your logic is flawed, it's not. It's TOO logical. What you, and myself as someone that was there, missed - is the propensity for sheer unadulterated stupidity among people that have zero understanding of business, and life in general, whose capacity for low-expectations is orders of magnitude deeper and dumber than you can imagine.
And thus we have the current comicbook industry today. A dying festering shitpile, being feasted upon by the flies of political ideologues in the aftermath of the extinction-event they're prosecuting on themselves.
I can't parse this at all sorry. I don't really know much about superhero comic books. I was just making a general point.
The same point can be made about fantasy - fantasy has been dramatically changed by people like George R R Martin and Joe Abercrombie taking tropes that had become cliches and then turning them upon their heads.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1055147I think with growing genres and keeping them alive, that is a tricky balance. Genres can get stale and die from just repeating themselves, but it isn't easy to innovate within a genre and the people who have done it well, usually bring in highly complimentary alternative sources of inspiration.
Coming back to the genre after 20-30 years seems to work best. Eg swords & sorcery flourished first in the 1930s (eg REH) and was revived in the early 1960s (eg Michael Moorcock). It often seems best to allow a fallow period, then come back to the great old stuff with fresh eyes. The OSR is a good example of this in RPGs.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1055147I think with growing genres and keeping them alive, that is a tricky balance. Genres can get stale and die from just repeating themselves, but it isn't easy to innovate within a genre and the people who have done it well, usually bring in highly complimentary alternative sources of inspiration. You can end up making the genre meaningless if you just add stuff purely for the purpose of being different from what came before. I think the trope twisting thing got old fast as a method because it is just an automatic flipping of ideas usually, it doesn't require thought.
I don't think inverting tropes is necessarily the point I was trying to make - more ignoring them - or treating the situation in a more logical manner.
Which is what role-playing games are set up to do. It's a product of the medium that they tend to de-mythologise things - it takes real forcing on the part of rules to prevent pcs taking the more realistic approach to a situation based on logical extrapolation.
If you set up a role-playing game in which pcs play supervillains they will "do it 35 minutes ago" because players want to be clever and creative. If you try to do the bond hero schtick of capturing the heroes in a spy game so the villain can gloat out his plans - they will resist getting captured - then recklessly try to escape before they are taken before the villain, then interrupt and wisecrack while he tries to threaten them with his plans for world domination because that's what PCs do. If they travel to the mystical utopian city of the high elves deep in the mountains where every inhabitant is ancient and wise they will immediately ask things like who shovels the shit and does all the menial labour?
There, is I think, an inherent tension between genre emulation and the rpg medium, and that is, I think one reason why most so many games designed to emulate genres to specifically come and go in endless succession and rarely seem to stick around for very long.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;1055148I am not that familiar with ICONS. Curious what it did that you feel brought it closer to good emulation
It's sort of hard to pin it down in one single detail. But generally speaking, of all the Supers games I tried, it was the one that in actual play FELT most like traditional superhero comics.
Quote from: TJS;1055115Well yes. But that's how genre's grow and develop. They do things which at the time would have been considered out-of-genre and in the process the genre changes.
Dave Gibbons just apologized for what Watchmen did to comics.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1055682Dave Gibbons just apologized for what Watchmen did to comics.
FFS I couldn't give a shit about what Watchmen did to comics.
Quote from: TJS;1055709FFS I couldn't give a shit about what Watchmen did to comics.
If Watchmen had destroyed comics entirely, it's creation would still have been worth it. It's not Moore and Gibbons' fault that a bunch of idiots got all the wrong lessons from it.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1055921If Watchmen had destroyed comics entirely, it's creation would still have been worth it. It's not Moore and Gibbons' fault that a bunch of idiots got all the wrong lessons from it.
Yes. Agreed entirely.
Quote from: TJS;1055158I can't parse this at all sorry. I don't really know much about superhero comic books. I was just making a general point.
The same point can be made about fantasy - fantasy has been dramatically changed by people like George R R Martin and Joe Abercrombie taking tropes that had become cliches and then turning them upon their heads.
Basically what tenbones said is that everything SJWs touch turns to suck.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;1055994Basically what tenbones said is that everything SJWs touch turns to suck.
Much more concise. I ramble.
Quote from: tenbones;1055995Much more concise. I ramble.
Most SJWs prefer to call themselves progressives though.
Quote from: tenbones;1055995Much more concise. I ramble.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;1056005Most SJWs prefer to call themselves progressives though.
Let's just step back from the politicsa step. It's basically moralism that's at fault.
Puritans, of any stripe, have never produced good art.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;1056005Most SJWs [strike]prefer to call themselves[/strike] identify as progressives though.
Fixed!
Quote from: TJS;1056019Puritans, of any stripe, have never produced good art.
Correct. SJW RPGs are exactly the same kind of awful as Christian Fundamentalist RPGs. The only difference is there's way more of the former.