I have always had some issues with understanding the real applied differences between the two. When people try and explain it, it comes down to "traditional games are old and use outmoded methods of play" or "the design theory(which I read as the designer's assumptions) behind traditional games is out dated". From what I have observed, the distinction (often expressed as Trad vs Forgey) seems artificial. I am not talking about what the designer was thinking when he wrote it but what the rules and play are like at the table.

For instance, I have karma point which, if I understand the terminology  correctly, map to Drama Points in common parlance. I think anyone who has ever read any of my games would describe them as painfully traditional. I look at the design and, honestly, I think there are traditional (derived from old school) and "indie" (new school) elements but more to the point the combination makes for some very flexible play.

So, is it that there is more focus on player empowerment? Is that the new definition of "indie" or "Forgey"? Was that always the definition and I missed it? I think that may be the issue since I do not follow much in the way of Forge theory. Even if this is the case, isn't this just a different play style. I mean, me as a GM, I run games where I encourage players to input into the game. Am I a freak(o.k, as far as play style goes)? I have been doing this for decades. I do not find it as some sort of great enlightenment except to new GMs. I find the idea of attempting to dictate play style to groups as futile. Not wrong, but telling a group to share the role of story teller, even with rules as guidelines, seems impossible if they are not interested. Alternatively, if the group is interested in sharing the story building role (players adding elements from character and GM adding elements from the concept) traditional games do not seem to limit them in any way. In fact, I have seen far more of the later than groups embracing a total separation of duties. Personally, I think this is human nature. People wish to be involved but not all people want to tell the story. They wish to say "Yeah, but Joan falls in love with the knight" and see what the knight will do. This could just be my experience though.

Summary
What are the differences between trad and indie games to you in actual play (i.e. ignore what the designer thought but what people play)? Can trad vs indie only be defined by theory involved in design? What would be the elements in the final product that would define indie or trad games?

Do you believe division of story telling duties is a defining point of indie vs trad games?

Do you believe that it is necessary (or even possible) to restrict story to the GM? Is this what occurs in a traditional game?

Thanks,
Bill

Quote from: HinterWeltWhat are the differences between trad and indie games to you in actual play (i.e. ignore what the designer thought but what people play)? Can trad vs indie only be defined by theory involved in design? What would be the elements in the final product that would define indie or trad games?

Do you believe division of story telling duties is a defining point of indie vs trad games?

Do you believe that it is necessary (or even possible) to restrict story to the GM? Is this what occurs in a traditional game?

There is no difference between indie and traditional games.  Indie games can be traditional, and traditional games can be indie.  i.e. Artesia, JAGS, Perfect20, Truth & Justice, A|State have all been lauded as indie games.  The definition both on the Forge and the Indie RPG Awards supports this.  

Now, the typical games out of the Forge are different, and I'll mention more about them below.  

Quote from: HinterWeltSo, is it that there is more focus on player empowerment? Is that the new definition of "indie" or "Forgey"? Was that always the definition and I missed it? I think that may be the issue since I do not follow much in the way of Forge theory. Even if this is the case, isn't this just a different play style. I mean, me as a GM, I run games where I encourage players to input into the game.

Well, you can certainly run your games in a way that makes them more like typical Forge games than by-the-book play.  In Forge parlance this is called "drift", but that's what other people would call "variant", "loose", or "house-ruled" play.  

I would tend to say that the common features of Forge games include: (1) mechanics for regular player input on the background outside his PC, (2) more-than-traditional metagame influences on resolution, and (3) lack of in-game modifiers for subjectively-determined circumstance.  There are more specific trends for particular branches of Forge game design, but the main thrust of design has been in non-simulation or anti-simulation mechanics.

I believe I have finally figured this out, for myself.

I think the labels Indie and Trad are huge generalizations and have all kinds of other meanings and agendas attached to them, which leaves open all kinds of point-missing tangencies on internet discussion.  However, I will use them here at the very least as placeholders to distinguish between one thing and another.

So what I describe below is purely the difference as I see it and what works and doesn't work for me.  It is something I just figured out and has been very helpful to me because when I see this thing, I know what might and might not work for me.

I recently played Inspectres and read PrimeTime Adventures.  These games were what helped me figure this out.

In both these games, the players, through simple contests of chance (dice and cards, respectively), get a chance to narrate what happens in play.  They don't just control what their character does, but actually what happens.  In effect, it is more about creating a story together, where different people get the power to say what happens at certain points.  

This can be kind of fun.  In a wacky game like Inspectres (you play ghostbusters), you can come up with all kinds of wacky stuff and with an imaginative group, there is a kind of dynamic that results in neat situations.

But at the end of the day, my roleplaying itch is not scratched.  I want to play my character and I want my character to rub up against the world.  As a GM, I want my players to interact with my world and have the dice arbite what actually ends up happening.  This to me is the imaginative space that makes a roleplaying session become another reality.

Creating a story together, no matter how clever and dynamic the rules structure, does not do that for me.  It can be kind of entertaining.  Maybe about as entertaining for me as a board game.  But it doesn't scratch that itch.

So that's what "indie vs. trad" in the theory sense means for me.

Quote from: jhkimThere is no difference between indie and traditional games.  Indie games can be traditional, and traditional games can be indie.  i.e. Artesia, JAGS, Perfect20, Truth & Justice, A|State have all been lauded as indie games.  The definition both on the Forge and the Indie RPG Awards supports this.  

Except of course that the practical definition as used in common parlance does not.

QuoteI would tend to say that the common features of Forge games include: (1) mechanics for regular player input on the background outside his PC, (2) more-than-traditional metagame influences on resolution, and (3) lack of in-game modifiers for subjectively-determined circumstance.  There are more specific trends for particular branches of Forge game design, but the main thrust of design has been in non-simulation or anti-simulation mechanics.

That's a closer definition of what most people think of as Indie, and what Ron Edwards and the forge crowd tend to use as a litmus test of a "good" Indie game than the so-called official one.
Of couse, usually one can add to this that for an Indie game to really fit the definition it needs to be pretentioius, take on pseudo-academic or pseudo-artistic airs, make all kinds of absurd claims about how "serious" or "sophisticated" it is, and covertly or openly shit all over regular games and insult the intelligence of those who play them.
For most people, THAT is "Indie".

RPGPundit

"Indie" is a brand.

Quote from: jrients"Indie" is a brand.

Perhaps story games vs Trad would be a better phrase. I have been told by the only authority that matters that HinterWelt is not Indie in the sense you are using it. I am not sure where it deviates but that is fodder for a different thread.

I was shooting for how someone would know they were playing in a story/forgie/indie game vs a trad game if no one told them.

Thanks,
Bill

Quote from: jrients"Indie" is a brand.

Agreed.

Quote from: HinterWeltI was shooting for how someone would know they were playing in a story/forgie/indie game vs a trad game if no one told them.

At its most general, I think the way they know is if they as a player can influence things in the game that their character could not.  That is the difference to me.

Quote from: HinterWeltI was shooting for how someone would know they were playing in a story/forgie/indie game vs a trad game if no one told them.

If a tree fell in the woods would we know how to label the RPG publication it was made into?

Indie means independently published.

...

Some people may want it to mean something else... and those are perhaps the same people who like the idea of taking all kinds of words and developing alternate meanings for them... but the truth is the rest of the world sees it just like they do music.  Indie = Independent.  They don't see Indie = Hippy Music.

Here's another way to say it:

In traditional games, you say "My character does this."

In indie games, you say "this happens."

It does depend on how you're using the term. Yes, the Forge definition is 'creator-controlled'. Yes, in practice it gets applied to wacky games more than eg Artesia, though that rule gets broken all the time (I saw somebody at RPG.net, for example, call Zorceror of Zo indie the other day).

In the wild, among people who don't read about internet controversy, I've found that people just see them all as 'games'. This is why I think that the internet audience has been polarised in a kind of political way.

I suppose that for me, the major differences between Forge-influenced games and others (which I'll define loosely as things the Punani would play) are a more conscious direction of play, and a willingness to reexamine assumptions about how RPGs work.

Quote from: walkerpAt its most general, I think the way they know is if they as a player can influence things in the game that their character could not.  That is the difference to me.

That just seems so strange to me. I am not trying to be snarky or obtuse but I have always let my players interject ideas into the campaign. I do not need rules for it. However, I think I begin to see the problem.

Bill

Quote from: HinterWeltCan trad vs indie only be defined by theory involved in design?

I don't believe in "indie" games. I believe it's a division created by folks who have something to gain by it and doesn't mean much to actual gamers.

Seanchai

Quote from: SeanchaiI don't believe in "indie" games. I believe it's a division created by folks who have something to gain by it and doesn't mean much to actual gamers.

Well said.