More wisdom from Gary Gygax

RPGPundit · March 08, 2007, 09:55:21 AM

Quote from: Christmas ApeWait, wait. I'd like to see if Pundit is really advocating that one member of the group always be a GM, and the rest only play, before we start harping on that idea. It's possible that 'underlying truth' is something actually insightful, though I'm willing to entertain the idea it's actually that ridiculous and largely (wisely) extinct idea. Except for Paranoia.

No no, it wasn't about that at all. It was about Player/GM roles being clearly demarked. You can't really do that by telling people not to read the GM's guide (especially since many RPGs these days don't actually HAVE a "GM's Guide"). But you can do it by players letting go of the idea of knowing all of the rules, and letting the GM do his thing on that end.

RPGPundit

blakkie · March 08, 2007, 09:58:32 AM

QuoteAnd that this can be solved by having clear understanding of what each person's role is in the gaming group.

RPGPundit

I'm curious, which games don't have their GM roles and player roles spelled out?

EDIT: Oh, I get it. You want all games to have them divided a certain way. The way that keeps players fumbling in the dark and leads to rule screwups.

blakkie · March 08, 2007, 10:05:13 AM

Quote from: RPGPundit(especially since many RPGs these days don't actually HAVE a "GM's Guide").

I never played it but I've been looking into it a bit and I haven't seen a separate "GM" rule book for Classic Traveller? There are definately other games dating from the 80's that don't have such a thing.

RPGPundit · March 08, 2007, 10:11:49 AM

Quote from: blakkieI'm curious, which games don't have their GM roles and player roles spelled out?

There are many where the GM role has been mixed with the players (the cause of White Wolf's Story-based gaming disaster), and where the players role is mixed with the GM (causing most Forge-style "Lets castrate the GM" games).

In most normal RPGs, however, the roles are spelled out, but that doesn't stop people from trying to defy them. Almost always to the detriment of the good order of the gaming group.

RPGPundit

blakkie · March 08, 2007, 10:23:34 AM

Quote from: RPGPunditThere are many where the GM role has been mixed with the players (the cause of White Wolf's Story-based gaming disaster)....

Huh? WTF are you talking about?

QuoteIn most normal RPGs, however, the roles are spelled out, but that doesn't stop people from trying to defy them. Almost always to the detriment of the good order of the gaming group.

Perhaps there is a reason they are defying them? Maybe the order isn't so good?

Christmas Ape · March 08, 2007, 10:24:04 AM

Quote from: RPGPunditNo no, it wasn't about that at all. It was about Player/GM roles being clearly demarked. You can't really do that by telling people not to read the GM's guide (especially since many RPGs these days don't actually HAVE a "GM's Guide"). But you can do it by players letting go of the idea of knowing all of the rules, and letting the GM do his thing on that end.

RPGPundit

Alright, groovy. I'm willing to agree to that.

TonyLB · March 08, 2007, 10:25:13 AM

Quote from: RPGPunditThere are many where the GM role has been mixed with the players (the cause of White Wolf's Story-based gaming disaster), and where the players role is mixed with the GM (causing most Forge-style "Lets castrate the GM" games).

Hmmm ... we seem to look at this in (predictably) different ways. I figure that if a game says "You will distribute tasks in this specific way" then it's spelling out the division, even if that division is different from the one that Gygax conceived.

Are you saying that explicitly spelling out a different division is the same problem as not spelling out a division at all? Is the problem caused only by games that don't explicitly establish any division of duties, or by games that don't explicitly establish Gygax's division of duties?

blakkie · March 08, 2007, 10:30:09 AM

He's saying he wants control, damnit, to keep the good order.

Quote from: ClaudiusBesides, it drives me nuts when a GM thinks I shouldn't have rule information (for example, how many XPs I need to go up a level) or setting information (for example, who Assamites are). I just think they want to control me for the sake of it.

Maybe. Or he's just trying to create a sense of mystery and doing it in a very blunt, clumsy, awkward fashion because he can't think of another way. Or both.

Warthur · March 08, 2007, 12:18:35 PM

Quote from: RPGPunditThat there's a fundamental issue today, and most problems in gaming stem from it, of Game Masters wanting to be players, and players wanting to be GM, and everyone wanting to be rules lawyers.

And that this can be solved by having clear understanding of what each person's role is in the gaming group.

Over at my neck of the woods, when you want to be a GM, you run a game, and when you want to play you play. The idea of a "game group" is kind of alien to me, possibly because I live in an area with a reasonably dense game population.

Koltar · March 08, 2007, 12:31:03 PM

Quote from: RPGPundit....... with the GM (causing most Forge-style "Lets castrate the GM" games).

RPGPundit

WHAT!??
Goddamn it....no wonder their stuff didn't appeal to me when I read the capsule descriptions of their RPGs.

- E.W.C.

blakkie · March 08, 2007, 02:28:39 PM

Quote from: KoltarWHAT!??

No, not really. But I believe with Polaris you shoot the GM and dump his body in a river.

RPGPundit · March 08, 2007, 02:44:06 PM

Quote from: TonyLBHmmm ... we seem to look at this in (predictably) different ways. I figure that if a game says "You will distribute tasks in this specific way" then it's spelling out the division, even if that division is different from the one that Gygax conceived.

Are you saying that explicitly spelling out a different division is the same problem as not spelling out a division at all? Is the problem caused only by games that don't explicitly establish any division of duties, or by games that don't explicitly establish Gygax's division of duties?

In a broad sense, "Gygax's division of duties" is what DEFINES an RPG.

So yes, going too far beyond that in either direction (toward the GM or toward the Player) is going to create something that will be very crappy as an RPG. It might be great at being something else, though.. but a crappy RPG.

RPGPundit

Seanchai · March 08, 2007, 03:15:24 PM

Quote from: RPGPunditIn a broad sense, "Gygax's division of duties" is what DEFINES an RPG.

No, not any more than cave paintings define what's art.

Seanchai

Blackleaf · March 08, 2007, 07:36:59 PM

Quote from: RPGPunditIn a broad sense, "Gygax's division of duties" is what DEFINES an RPG.

So yes, going too far beyond that in either direction (toward the GM or toward the Player) is going to create something that will be very crappy as an RPG. It might be great at being something else, though.. but a crappy RPG.

Gygax believes dice are something that defines an RPG. Diceless games (like Amber and Nobilis) are not RPGs in his mind.

I haven't played either game, but since Amber is the only game with it's own forum on "theRPGsite", clearly you don't entirely agree with Gary's appraisal of what makes something an RPG.