I want to be careful to draw a distinction between "Forge-like" and Ron's initial work in questioning the lack of narrative control on the part of players.  "Forge-like" games created their own (small) subgenre.  But the larger issues Ron raised, about giving more people at the table narrative authority, have worked their way into many designs because a lot of really good game designers recognize their value.

So I'm not in any way saying Mouseguard or Numenara are "Forge-like" games.  I'm just saying they reflect a change in the way designers are thinking about the relationship between players and GMs and between players and narrative authority.

Quote from: RSDancey;743272I want to be careful to draw a distinction between "Forge-like" and Ron's initial work in questioning the lack of narrative control on the part of players.  "Forge-like" games created their own (small) subgenre.  But the larger issues Ron raised, about giving more people at the table narrative authority, have worked their way into many designs because a lot of really good game designers recognize their value.

So I'm not in any way saying Mouseguard or Numenara are "Forge-like" games.  I'm just saying they reflect a change in the way designers are thinking about the relationship between players and GMs and between players and narrative authority.

The error here is that proper RPGs have sweet fuck-all to do with narrative or story-telling at all.  They--like the wargames they're derived from--are about problem-solving; you have an objective, and limited resources at hand to deal with meeting it, so how do you meet that objective?  This is Ron's big error, compounded by those who likewise fail to grok what this medium is about, and the consistency of their failure shows it.  It's about getting the job done.  RPGs that stick to this problem-solving paradigm are the ones that succeed; the rest fail.

It's not about story-telling or narrative to operate under a first-person perspective, or through a destructable avatar; these are nothing more than the same constraints that every one of us has to deal with everyday.  Nor is it about those two things if a player chooses to cooperate with others (PC or NPC) towards common objectives; we do the same thing in real life everyday, for the same reasons, and it's not about narrative/story-telling here either- it's about getting the job done.  That's what makes Edwards and his ilk so toxic; they're trying to do something that the tool (the TRPG medium) is not designed to do, was never intended to do, and fails horribly at doing.

If Edwards and company want to deal in narrative and story-telling, then we already have an entire industry all about doing that collaboratively, and it is quite telling for many of us that they choose not to use the proper tools for the job (or work in the proper medium) but instead insist on trying to make a wrench do the work of a drill.

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;743276RPGs that stick to this problem-solving paradigm are the ones that succeed; the rest fail.

Mouseguard is a Modern Midmarket RPG.  It's more successful than most RPGs published since 2000.  It has probably outsold every "OSR" game combined.  Do you think that game is a failure?

Quote from: RSDancey;743272So I'm not in any way saying Mouseguard or Numenara are "Forge-like" games.  I'm just saying they reflect a change in the way designers are thinking about the relationship between players and GMs and between players and narrative authority.

Except, for the reasons I outlined, for the most part Numenera thinks about that relationship and says "Actually, 99% of the time I'm cool with the relationship between players and GMs and narrative being authority exactly how it is with D&D".

Quote from: Bradford C. Walker;743276RPGs that stick to this problem-solving paradigm are the ones that succeed; the rest fail.

Quote from: RSDancey;743280Mouseguard is a Modern Midmarket RPG.  It's more successful than most RPGs published since 2000.  It has probably outsold every "OSR" game combined.  Do you think that game is a failure?

One thing you might notice in these parts is a tendency to engage in all-or-nothing thinking when it comes to talking about anything connected with anyone who's ever been connected with the forge.  Being able to spot details and make distinctions flies out the window as people zealously defend the faith against the heretics.

I suspect you might be encountering some of that religious fervor now.

For some here, they'll see Luke Crane is the author and assume because of his some time association with the forge and people like Jared Sorensen that everything he does must somehow count as a failure and when the numbers put the lie to that, they'll be along shortly to tell you how the game doesn't technically count as an RPG (no true scotsman fallacy).

Quote from: RSDancey;743280Mouseguard is a Modern Midmarket RPG.  It's more successful than most RPGs published since 2000.  It has probably outsold every "OSR" game combined.  Do you think that game is a failure?

I'm sure someone will be along shortly to tell you that for some reason Mouseguard doesn't count as an RPG in a blatant display of the No True Scotsman fallacy.

The thing to remember about this forum is that our host has been carrying out a one-sided personal war against anything that even remotely connected with the forge.  So you get some like minded individuals who can't ever allow anything that can be even tenuously connected to Ron Edwards to be good or a success.

Quote from: RSDancey;743231If I were creating something like Vampire: The Masquerade today, and if it had not previously existed, I would certainly be focusing on shared narrative authority and other storytelling mechanisms that evolved on the Forge.  It's hard to imagine they wouldn't.

The latest update to the Vampire core rulebook, Blood & Smoke does exactly that.  It's probably the version of the game that focuses the most on sharing narrative authority, thematic mechanics and goes even further with the use of scenes and storytelling mechanisms than Vampire: the Requiem.

I happen to prefer something like 1980 Runequest 2nd edition, but I can totally see why that approach makes more sense for Vampire.  And from what the Onyx Path people are saying, it looks like it may end up qualifying for your Midmarket category, though I can't say for sure.

Quote from: Warthur;743282Except, for the reasons I outlined, for the most part Numenera thinks about that relationship and says "Actually, 99% of the time I'm cool with the relationship between players and GMs and narrative being authority exactly how it is with D&D".

Here's what Monte Cook wrote about the "spirit" of the game.

Since the guy knows pretty well what the relationship between GMs and narrative is in D&D, don't you think that it is interesting that he takes the time to compare and contrast several different, non-D&D-style narrative experiences, plus D&D, and describes his game as different than D&D?

Or do you think the guy who wrote a version of D&D, and wrote Numenara doesn't know what Numenara is like?

Quote from: RSDancey;743294Or do you think the guy who wrote a version of D&D, and wrote Numenara doesn't know what Numenara is like?

Given the long history of game designers declaring that their games are totally different from D&D, when actually they amount to minor variations thereof, it would be entirely unsurprising for this to be the case with Numenera.

Though to give Monte full credit, he doesn't seem to be saying with that article what you want him to be saying to support your argument - he points out that whilst the rules of Numenera don't work like any of the examples he cites (a houseruled AD&D game, a houseruled Rolemaster game, and a houseruled 3rd edition game), "the spirit of the game–the essence–owes a great deal to these experiences. Numenera is about imagination, ideas, and stories. The rules exist only to service these things, and when they're not needed they get out of the way. Which means, among other things, that there aren't rules for things that don't need rules."

If anything, this sounds as much like the approach of lighter OSR games as it does anything Ron Edwards ever did.

Quote from: RSDancey;743280Mouseguard is a Modern Midmarket RPG.  It's more successful than most RPGs published since 2000.  It has probably outsold every "OSR" game combined.  Do you think that game is a failure?

Yep.  Sales is not usage, and I can't find anyone in the Twin Cities who plays this game.  The interest is not there, and that's because those few interested in playing anthropomorphic rodents already have TMNT/After The Bomb, HERO, GURPS, or (most likely) some form of D&D to scratch that itch.

It doesn't help that the source comic is itself a niche product with low appeal; a derivative product of a niche product with low appeal to the target audience is going to produce no users worth noting.  A successful TRPG is one where I can walk into ANY game store, club, etc. and either play or run that game in five minutes flat.  D&D?  Yep.  CoC?  Yep.  RIFTS?  You got it.  Traveller?  Sure.  But Mouseguard?  "That fucking furry shit comic?" (if I get any recognition at all) followed by "What fucking bullshit rules are these?" always ends in "Fuck this.  I'll just use D&D."

Precious few RPGs are successful.  Most of them are utter wastes of time that would have been better used supporting an existing game, or spend on putting in the work towards mastering the craft of the proper medium (for the products that scream "frustrated novelist" or something similar) for that game's ambition, and they should be purged for the good of both gamers and gaming.

Quote from: RSDancey;743294Here's what Monte Cook wrote about the "spirit" of the game.

Since the guy knows pretty well what the relationship between GMs and narrative is in D&D, don't you think that it is interesting that he takes the time to compare and contrast several different, non-D&D-style narrative experiences, plus D&D, and describes his game as different than D&D?

Or do you think the guy who wrote a version of D&D, and wrote Numenara doesn't know what Numenara is like?

The guy that wrote the version of D&D that in his own words have an "exhaustive definition of, well, everything." writes a game now that doesn't.  

Ok, but Monte's missed the whole point of his fond recollections of yesteryear.  When he played AD&D "Jay had no rules for how this would work. No stats for the demon lord. But since I could only use it once, that stuff didn’t matter."

Now he claims that in Numenera "there aren’t rules for things that don’t need rules."

Well, unfortunately for Monte, if you're following the Edwards or even Laws playbook then all those intangibles that didn't require rules before absolutely require rules once the game makes narrative control and story creation a design goal.

That's the whole point of the Forge - System Matters, so you want story, you make rules for it.  You want players controlling something outside the character, you make rules for it.

By the way, Monte (and I guess Ryan also) apparently fails to realize that Malhavoc having as a character an in-game power is not a narrative control mechanic.  That's as much narrative control as saying my character kills the princess instead of saving her.  Characters always have control of their own character and can influence the setting through the character, that's the whole damn point of Roleplaying for Christ's sake, and has nothing to do with "narrative control" because the setting, despite Robin's decades long delusion to the contrary, is not a story, and roleplaying is not a literary art form.

Quote from: RSDancey;743280Mouseguard is a Modern Midmarket RPG.  It's more successful than most RPGs published since 2000.  It has probably outsold every "OSR" game combined.  Do you think that game is a failure?

Mouse Guard is an IP recognition game. I've worked on enough of these to know how they function market-wise.

Would it have done a tenth as well under its own aegis? Probably no without totally twisting the genre to get attention. Which fails as oft as it succeeds.

Ryan, you'll notice some shifting goal posts here.  If you point to Mouseguard as an example of a successful game that features a different distribution of narration, you'll get a few different responses.

1) No True Scotsman.  It can't be a successful RPG if I can claim it's not an RPG at all!

The ironic thing about this is that Bradford's defintion of what RPGs are about directly applies to Mouseguard.  Mouseguard is about taking the role of a character and overcoming problems that character faces.

2) Special pleading.  It can't be a successful RPG if I just define success as people playing it and then assert that no one does.

Mouseguard gets played.  It's been out for almost six years and for a couple years after it came out, people just weren't shutting up about their games of it.  Actual Play podcasts started having series of it.  A google search for "mouse guard actual play" put the lie to this assertion that no one plays it.  And with google hangouts rising in popularity, it seems to be getting a bit of a resurgence.

Ryan Dancey also seems to be talking about the entire industry, while these claims of "no one plays it" are often idiosyncratic to the poster's location and immediate circle of gaming friends.  If I had to guess, I'd guess that there are just as many OSR purchasers who don't play regularly as there are Mouseguard purchasers who don't play regularly.

Omega's point about licensed products is a good one.  I'm sure it contributed to the sales.  Although many people I know ended up getting introduced to the comic because of the RPG.

Mechanics that distribute narration rights to people other than the GM are all over the place right now.  And games that have them seem to be doing just fine in the market place.  I'm not sure there's a midrange game that doesn't have some form of them right now.

More on the definition of RPG as it's used on this forum and how it applies to these midrange selling games that have them:

Spoiler

This site generally functions with a very clear distinction between RPGs and Story-games and the presence of meta mechanics or narration rights mechanics is often seen as an indicator that the game might be a story game rather than an RPG.  The only problem is that people forget that it's a matter of degrees.  

You need enough of the meta mechanics or narration rights mechanics that you depart from the core behaviour of RPGs. There are many, many games that have these indicative mechancis but still fundamentally are about playing a role and solving problems that character faces, and resolving those problems using rules based on the factors involved in the described problems.

Thank goodness your 2 months experience of the site is sufficient for you to be able to speak for everyone.

Quote from: One Horse Town;743413Thank goodness your 2 months experience of the site is sufficient for you to be able to speak for everyone.

That's how pronounced it is.  That's how easy it is to pick up on.  There are examples right here in this thread.  I'm not speaking for anyone, I'm describing what I've heard them say.

I don't really play story games any more.  And I've moved away from games that have mechanics dealing with narration rights.  However, I don't consider such games to be wrong.  Many of the most prolific posters do.  And it's colouring their interaction with someone who actually knows about the industry as a whole.

If anyone spent a couple months reading what's posted on this forum and weren't able to pick up on the pro-OSR, anti-story game zeitgeist of the forum, I'd question their reading comprehension skills.

About the specific responses I pointed out were fallacious:

Spoiler

Earlier in the thread, I questioned whether or not any ideas even tangentially related to the forge have had any impact on the industry at all, but Ryan Dancey pointed to the midrange selling game category and they do seem to have some form of narration points or mechanic as a common element.  They don't depart from the definition of RPGs that many hear use completely, but there's something there in terms of story considerations impacting design.  

I took a closer look at Mouseguard and the new Vampire book.  And the proliferation of FATE and other systems and found that many do have mechanics where the players can override, change or directly control what gets narrated.  And these games are drastically outselling games I prefer like OpenQuest, BRP or LL.

So I'll change my position on that after being presented with some evidence and accept that some of the forge-ish ideas have had more of an impact than I would have liked and that some of the best selling games have these elements.  The only real options when someone gives you evidence that falsifies your position is to change your position or use a logical fallacy to nullify the evidence.

"That's not really an RPG" and special pleading to redefine success into failure with "No one actually plays these games, they just talk about them on the internet" are ones I've seen rather regularly over the last two months.  They're even in this thread.

Not that I've also seen examples like the feminist critique of Ron Edward's new Kickstarter where these ideas were not applied fallaciously.  The feminist literally said that she wasn't going to play the game but was happy her concerns were addressed anyway.  And there are games that do use enough story and narrative related mechanics that they would depart from being an RPG.  I don't think FATE, Mouseguard or Vampire go that far though.