In my example it's about the style. Constant "just make sure you're on same page", "we'll talk about it later", total lack of any emotions, lack of explanations for why something is there (like, the part of chargen process, where players might meet first, and then meet again - it's not that I don't embrace the idea, but I don't understand why it's any important, and I think it could use some "here's what we, at Evil Hat think about it" treatment).
Well, it's a matter of taste. I don't get why you would want emotion in a rules text...
Given OD&D's Thief Skills and how "hide in shadows" was misinterpreted, I'd say it's a problem of games in general:p.
Hmmmmmmm... Hm, hm, hm... :hmm:
There's some truth to that.
Still, while rough on edges, typical RPGs are pretty straightforward, I think. You usually understand how the session is supposed to look like, what's its structure, who does what and such.
In case of FATE/*.World games? IMMV, but I keep hearing that people don't get it, even if they spend some time studying the corebook.
That's a big assumption, I find.
If I give a newbie a traditional game (that's not Atomic Highway or TBZ...though I'm not sure how traditional TBZ is considered around here), I'm pretty sure the newbie wouldn't have the faintest idea how RPGs are played. Remember, we're talking a complete newbie.
If I give him (or her) the Apocalypse World book, I'm pretty sure I'd have someone who wants to play it. Well, assuming someone who wouldn't be turned off by the genre - but even those people would understand how to play an RPG from it. And their conclusions would be close enough that I could seamlessly correct them for a traditional game.
...I usually suggest throwing it out of the window and reading/playing some FATE derivative.
Derivatives are often better in the case of Fate. I usually suggest Tianxia, not the least because the lifepath generator does away with the need for the group generation (which I find tedious).
But, once again, I'm personally of the opinion that almost all games, except those where procedural exactitude is part of the goal (i.e. GURPS and the likes) have way too many rules. "These are the system's core principles. These are examples of how they're applied. That's the list of skills. If you have doubts, ask the Referee. Referee, it's not a bad thing to call for a group vote if you have doubts, as most new Referees do! Now for the setting..."
As an example, Talislanta's OMNI engine should be explained in 5 pages or less! Note, Talislanta is not not the worst offender, by far! I'm using it as an example because I've managed to explain it to a freeform player without going over 500 words...so I can count on personal experience.
Why some people find hundreds of pages to be necessary is something entirely foreign to me. Have they never heard the phrase "cutting off the excess fat"
?
Or is it that it's no longer politically correct to say so:D?
Primator Double 24, FTW. :cool:
Cool. I'll double-check with some Czech friends next time I open my Facebook (which isn't even a monthly event with me).
And due to Amazon, I can probably order it:p!
Hmmm, I think you may be over-generalizing here. I think there are straightforward games on both sides, as there are confusing/ambiguous ones on both sides too.
PbtA*, Cortex+, Shadowrun and D&D (whatever the edition) are pretty straightforward on how they are supposed to be played. On the other hand, games like Fate, Continuum, Gurps Transhuman Space, Unknown Armies, and Vampire the Masquerade (authors said “Personal Horror”, players heard “Supers by Night”), are pretty fuzzy about how they are supposed to be played.
*About PbtA, I hear people who don’t get it are those more rooted in traditional style gaming which approaches it with the “glass half-full”. I, for one, never had any problem grokking it. IN fact, I find it’s suggested play structure one of the most clear I’ve seen.
I can only state that my experience confirms this;).