1. Genre
Gonzo genre shall be defined here as science fantasy; where science fantasy means a blissfully incongruous mix of scifi and fantasy elements strictly for purposes of awesomerization
Examples: nearly every major fantasy campaign world developed circa 1980 (Arduin, Detroit Gaming Center-era Rifts, early Palldium FRPG I guess, bit of Glorantha?, Tekumel, Wilderlands...I'm forgetting stuff here...)
Gonzo genre must be sharply distinguished from 1990+ genre mashfests. Feng Shui is a 1990s game. Publication dates to the contrary, Rifts is a 1980s gonzo game. Magic trains to the contrary, Eberron is not a gonzo setting.
Lords of Creation: as an ostentatiously designed gonzo game, LoC may mark an early moment of gonzo genre self-reflexivity, when fantasy RPGs increasingly dropped the sci, and sci games increasing dropped the fantasy.
2. Attitude
Gonzo gaming attitude (GGA) shall be defined here as "simultaneously taking yourself and your character seriously and not." Litmus test: You care for your character.
Therefore, GGA must be sharply distinguished from "beer & pretzel" games, in which you do not.
Hypothesis: Rifts is frequently misunderstood as a beer & pretzel game.
Follow-up hypothesis: GGA died when RPGs became (im)mature. V:tM is the mortal enemy of GGA. Eberron is its infantilization. As such, V:tM and Eberron are the two halves of a totality to which they however do not add up.
I feel that Gonzo is an additude. Any game (for the most part) can be played in a gonzo fashion. There are games that lend themselves more to a gonzo game. (LoC, Rifts, and etc) But its really a shared mindset and attitude of the group that makes it gonzo.
Where does Alternity fit in the genre scheme? It doesn't seem like it's just a genre mash-up.
What makes Eberron not gonzo? I don't necessarily disagree, I just can't put my finger precisely on what makes the setting not work. Is it that it tries to hard to integrate the essential incompatibilities?
Eberron actually takes itself very seriously as a post-war fantasy. It's kind of a strike against it, really. It's treatment of magic is very.. mundane. Magic isn't really magic in Eberron, it is technology.
If you read the Dreaming Dark books which kinda describe Eberron you can see just how serious Keith Baker kinda envisioned it to be.
Attitude, but best served by genre.
Eberron is either gonzo or noir, can't really mix those two. (Proofs to the contrary gladly accepted)
EC is definitely gonzo. Dunno 'bout Talislanta...
Eberron = gonzo simulated, plus shiny toys for kids (Warforged).
Encounter Critical = gonzo facsimilized.
Hypothesis: while gonzo attitudes may survive, actual gonzo RPGs that are neither simulations nor facsimiles nor re-editions haven't been published in forever.
Thus, if gonzo is an attitude--a gaming style--then it is a historically specific one. It had its time and has been on the wane for a long time now.
Proof: EC. Facsimilization of a (lost) original implies historical reflexivity, which implies a chasm between the present of the facsimile and the past of the original. One does not facsimilize that which is alive in the present.
Reasons for said waning: ??? (complex)
One thing's for sure--
Q: Is gonzo "incoherent"?
A: FUCK YEAH
Quote from: PierceOne does not facsimilize that which is alive in the present."
A good point, but it doesn't describe the whole phenomenon. I can (and do) run gonzo games without much in the way of reflection or irony. I can turn it up for ironic smirks, but the baseline is brainless gonzo.
Erm, I wouldn't say that EC replicates a specific "gonzo" attitude. It's just a parody of some the more immature and amateuerish productions -- not _intentionally_ gonzo. What's been lost in the dread mire of history is just science-fantasy, which has seen better days.
Minor point: not sure which aesthetic is being picked out here. Here's where I'd look for what I'd call 'gonzo':
The default gonzo campaigns: Arduin, Wilderlands of High Fantasy. To a lesser degree, Greyhawk and Blackmoor. The SenZar world, for sure. Rifts, yes; Lords of Creation, yes, but with some reservations (though I really loved playing that game).
Super-gonzo cleaned up and made nice: Forgotten Realms.
Exalted's Creation seems like a clear candidate for Gonzo even though I wouldn't touch a white wolf game with your dice.
Tekumel: has the gonzo elements in spades but except for a few bits of oddness (the restaurant at the end of the universe...er, college of undying sorcerers) has an internal cohesion not supported by any of the other settings mentioned. This makes me less inclined to call it gonzo.
Glorantha: problematic, has the gonzo, but is using it differently, and again there's a sort of internal cohesion (though of a different and more interesting kind than Tekumel offers - Tekumel wins the competition for most realized portrayal of a different place, but Glorantha wins the competition for integration of real-world mythic imagination with fantastic setting, and the gonzo is primarily a vehicle for that here IMO.
Are we talking about the same thing or not?
3e D&D supports gonzo in every way except that the crunchy mechanics place a little more distance between the gonzo idea and its realization than some of us would like. I think.
Cal, I agree that Arduin, Rifts, and SenZar are all gonzo. I'd add the world of Synnibarr and Cedri from TFT. Greyhawk and Blackmoor both have gonzo elements. Both have suffered from differing levels of whitewashing by anti-gonzo 'fans'.
What are your reservations about Lords of Creation?
Pierce, you made one generalization to fast:
If something is facsimilized, there is an audience, who engages in the museum line of thought. There might well be genuine adherents and carriers of a certain mindset.
The fact that there´s Terry pratchett, doesn´t take away the pure and utter seriousness that Peter Jackson put into the movies.
Quote3e D&D supports gonzo in every way except that the crunchy mechanics place a little more distance between the gonzo idea and its realization than some of us would like. I think.
I´d postulate the opposite. If you come to 3.5 character builds with a gonzo mindset, you spare yourself a lot of aesthetic grief.
It´s mostly the AD&D 2nd Edition Ren Fair romanticists that dislike 3.x.
I don't know...I guess in LoC, I mean, it's ultimately gonzo, but it's sort of so gonzo that the gonzo's just part of what's going on.
I guess there's an element of transgression in gonzo roleplaying for me - maybe that's the attitude part - and LoC wasn't a transgressive game for me. It was just a really fun game. But all the gonzo elements are there in the setting, so in that sense maybe I shouldn't have reservations after all.
In old D&D you make up some crazy 87 hit die flying fungus, there's one line of stats and a paragraph of crazy description, and then it's there in play. Or you make a half-demon character with your GMs permission, jack a few stats, draw an ugly picture, and you're off to the races.
3.5 takes a lot more work to get there, and in fact one of my beefs with it was that going gonzo with the powergaming can cut against gonzoness of vision. But I think 3.5 can deliver gonzo visions too, because it's such a huge toolbox, it's just work (and maybe some aesthetic grief).
Cali, total agreement re. Tekumel and Glorantha. These contain traces of gonzo but are quintessentially about something else. I mentioned them for sake of completeness.
It is my firm belief that, while WW games are the antithesis of gonzo on every level, 3E too makes it as hard as possible to gonzify play.
Thoroughly logical and pervasive powergaming-oriented mechanics = anti-gonzo. This statement is not invalidated but rather corroborated by Rifts. Reason: game balance = anti-gonzo.
Therefore, you should NOT sell your Arduin stuff, is what I'm saying.
Sett: true. EC is a meeting point of the gonzo survivor and the gonzo antiquarian. Not sure about the Pratchett/Jackson distinction?
Aha, you're realizing it yourself!
I agree completely with the original poster.
RPGPundit
The original poster? That's me!
One more thing.
As Rob Conley summarized it so well in another thread: schools of gaming are distinguishable by by plot, setting, and attitude to the rules.
Not rules. Attitude towards rules.
Gonzo attitude towards rules = cavalier. Sometimes, this is internalized in the rules themselves (cavalier rules), as a deliberate element of design: Rifts, Arduin.
Fuck the rules and your attitude to it.
It´s about aesthetics and atmosphere at the table.
Game-flow might be interrupted by rules, that might be a factor, though.
If you think barrier peaks (or Borbarads Fluch) fucks up your campaigns aesthetics, you are doing it wrong. That´s the core of the problem.
You can have pretty bad-ass-viking hat DM gonzo gaming, I´d say.
Rules attitude is not as important.
Attitude to the flow of the game way more.
@tangent: refreshing to discuss at the speed of thoughts, not be slowed down by JimBobian wordiness.
My take on Eberron: It´s pretty much totally like German Shadowrun. Gonzo elements, taken far, far too seriously by everyone involved = 90ies all the way.
Quote from: SettembriniRules attitude is not as important.
Attitude to the flow of the game way more.
Same difference, sector duke. Gonzo aesthetics overrides balance. Gonzo flow overrides stat block scrutinizing.
On a related note, gonzo wackiness overrides rules-implemented narrative. Gonzo proves ex negativo why Mearls can/could talk to R. Edwards even as both couldn't talk to David Hargrave.
QED.
Re. Eberron: yes, dear god, yes.
Hmm, is it just me or has this discussion taken a slight turn? It's not gonzo gaming as an option, but as the only way to game. At least it sounds that way...
You mention
Tekumel but not
Jorune. :grumpy:
Quote2. Attitude
Gonzo gaming attitude (GGA) shall be defined here as "simultaneously taking yourself and your character seriously and not." Litmus test: You care for your character.
This part seems a bit wonky. Going by this definiton, how does "gonzo" differ from any other gaming attitudes?
Regards,
David R
is d02 the ultimate gonzo?
http://www2.hawaii.edu/~rdeese/RPG/D02/D02.htm
(http://www2.hawaii.edu/~rdeese/RPG/D02/D02_Banner.gif)
:D
...WOW a real life game designer here on island!:eek:
Jorune and Harn are not gonzo; the setting of Chivalry & Sorcery is not gonzo; Ars Magica is not gonzo; Pendragon is not gonzo.
(Just to make the contrast class clear. Gonzo =/= teh kuhl. I played in some fuckin' lame gonzo campaigns back in the day, let me tell you.)
i'd love to try that one (d02) out with my group, for shits & giggles. i'm sure they'd have a blast with it
Harnmaster has the Airmasters. How do they fit in?
Who the heck are the Airmasters?
The ones wo fought with the Earthmasters.
I think they are in fact Aliens, but I always remained a player. So any HM DM here to enlighten us?
EDIT:
Quote- HârnPlayer, Entry 'Airmasters':
"According to legend, an alliance of monsters that came... from beyond
the stars to wage war upon the Earthmasters... and as the Ancients
stood for peace and beauty, so the invaders cared only for war and
destruction... The greatest appeal of the legend is that it explains
the disappearance of the Earthmasters."
Also, watch this thread (http://www.harnforum.com/viewtopic.php?t=42&highlight=airmaster) for "realistic gonzo mindset"
d02 is fucking awesome. I've PbPed it two or three times, and it keeps on getting deleted as spam.
Quote from: CalithenaJorune and Harn are not gonzo; the setting of Chivalry & Sorcery is not gonzo; Ars Magica is not gonzo; Pendragon is not gonzo.
(Just to make the contrast class clear. Gonzo =/= teh kuhl. I played in some fuckin' lame gonzo campaigns back in the day, let me tell you.)
I demand to know why
Jorune is not gonzo...also what the hell does "teh kuhl" mean ?
Regards,
David R
Quote from: David RI demand to know why Jorune is not gonzo...also what the hell does "teh kuhl" mean ?
Regards,
David R
Thats the oh-so-hip internet way to spell "The Cool". Why the hell people on the internet can't learn to spell
"THE" I've never quite figured out.
By-the-way, the poster formerly known as Jim Bob does a great parody rant of that style or typing and posting.
- Ed C.
Thanks Koltar, I thought it was "teh Kewl"...late again to the party :o
Regards,
David R
How the hell did this thread go 37 posts without anyone mentioning Gamma World? Or Metamorphosis Alpha?
Quote from: J ArcaneHow the hell did this thread go 37 posts without anyone mentioning Gamma World? Or Metamorphosis Alpha?
I miss my old copy so. Metamorphosis Alpha that is.
Quote from: David RI demand to know why Jorune is not gonzo...
Regards,
David R
Jorune has the genre-blending elements, but it never struck me as gonzo, unlike say Arduin or Blackmoor...it's too coherent and was never about being a badass or "kuhl" or whatever.
And I have to mention Tunnels and Trolls as teh Gonzo, in the best possible way.
TheShadow
Quote from: SettembriniI´d postulate the opposite. If you come to 3.5 character builds with a gonzo mindset, you spare yourself a lot of aesthetic grief.
It´s mostly the AD&D 2nd Edition Ren Fair romanticists that dislike 3.x.
Totally true in my experience!
Mostly attitude, though certain genres tend to support it.
I've seen Arduin played completely straight--though that takes work. But I've never seen a Feng Shui game fail to go off the chart. Over the Edge ought to be unavoidably full-bore gonzo, but it can be played nice and easy, too. Space 1889 seemed to want to be very stodgy, but sooner or later, you find bat country.
I think when the game text (as opposed to the rules) is written with a very folksy, enthusiastic style--or when it's simply written poorly--players feel more comfortable to go gonzo with it. Urban Fantasy should be one of the top five full-bore king-hell crazy-ass gonzo extravaganza genres, but the typical style of writing in the books seems to discourage it. Of course that can be overcome.
It's like how "comedy" games, like Toon, Tales of the Foating Vagabond, Gatecrasher, etc. aren't necessarily funny in play. But Unknown Armies, which is presumably dark and forbidding, frequently becomes hysterical.
Attitude. I could play the same game at two different tables and have it be gonzo or non-gonzo, accordingly.
QuoteBut Unknown Armies, which is presumably dark and forbidding, frequently becomes hysterical.
Please elaborate!
I don't know if it's gallows humor, or the players "whistling by the graveyard," or the over-the-top mindsets of the folks who want Real Ultimate Power, or just the dark humor embedded in the game universe--but my Unknown Armies scenarios always escalate (or descend) into a wild frenzy of full-gonzo insanity.
It may just be me. I see the humor in the setting and it appeals to me, so I tend, maybe, to draw it out more.
Quote from: J ArcaneHow the hell did this thread go 37 posts without anyone mentioning Gamma World? Or Metamorphosis Alpha?
An exceedingly valid question.
David R, at least AFAIAC Jorune isn't gonzo because it tried too much to be the Tekumel of science fantasy. Too encyclopedic (language), too sociological (citizenship quests). Too, well, reasonable.
Having said that, the artwork is something else again. He said, fondly ogling his boxed set on the bookshelf.
Quote from: J ArcaneHow the hell did this thread go 37 posts without anyone mentioning Gamma World? Or Metamorphosis Alpha?
Everyone knows those games are gonzo.
Well, everyone except Bruce Baugh, maybe.
Quote from: jrientsEveryone knows those games are gonzo.
Well, everyone except Bruce Baugh, maybe.
:killingme: :D
By my take, in gonzo, attitude is a cause while genre is a symptom: games with a gonzo attitude have a tendency to result in crazy mish-mash settings which go beyond even your usual kitchen sink worlds.
I propose that gonzo gaming can't be properly defined because it is characterised by a high level of irreverence for its source material and discipline in creativity. A methodical game or world cannot be gonzo; gonzo is a product of crazy enthusiasm where nothing has to remain in context. It is dangerous to analyse gonzo, because it can very easily give you something that has all its static elements but none of its dynamism. So Calithena gets it when he calls out games as not gonzo, and so does Settembrini when he mentions Everron and Shadowrun. Both of those have the gonzo trappings but not the fluidity. Both are 2e type ecologised settings. Just like how the Wilderlands are gonzo, but when people try to rationalise it overmuch, it loses this appeal. I think the d20 version, as cool as it is, kinda has this problem in places.
For the record, from everything roleplaying-related I have published, only Isle of the Water Sprites (http://www.judgesguild.com/fans/isle_of_water_sprites.pdf) is genuinely gonzo. While I respect the attitude, I am unsuited to follow it.
Quote from: jrientsEveryone knows those games are gonzo.
Well, everyone except Bruce Baugh, maybe.
Yeah - I don't want to trash talk Bruce, but he didn't get it. No, not at all. (Although the people who did the Amazing Engine Metamorphosis Alpha or later editions of Gamma World were certainly guilty of the same crime.)
I must correct myself. Although I still think what I said was correct. Pierce & Melan are right to put major emphasis on attitude, though.
I was right in 2007 and I continue to be right in 2011. :cool:
You are right about that. And I think it is good to point that out!
ADD: It is all about attitude.
I wonder where Pierce is these days.
He posts occasionally on Sett's board. I understand that he's more interested in miniatures wargames than RPGs these days.
From a Q & A with Wayne Breaux, Palladium artist and writer extraordinaire:
QuoteQuestion: I'm curious Wayne, how much wood could a woodchuck chuck, if a woodchuck could chuck wood?
Answer: 1D6+1 units for unskilled 'chucks, but taking 2 slots for a 'chucking skill would allow a 20%+5% per level chance for an increased rate of 1D6+1D4 units per level of experience. 'Chucking could be maintained for a number of melee rounds equal to the 'chuck's P.E. attribute+1 round per level of experience. (http://palladium-megaverse.com/forums/images/smilies/biggrin.gif)
The idea that someone asked him that given all of the options greatly disturbs me.... that fact that he answered it like that greatly amuses me. :)