[Minor NSFW] Is there something wrong with storygamers?

[Peregrin]

I get where you are coming from, the problem is that the vocal minority of freaks in our hobby are the ones who become representative of our hobby to the general public.

I see this sort of fucked up shit happen way more often on trad forums with people who obsess over homebrew campaign-worlds.

Hell, recent events at ENWorld and their shit moderation had some assholes running threads with settings that glorified rape and fascism (in a way that made it seem like the poster in question had no problem with such things IRL) and you were getting banned if you dared call them sexist or insane, whereas the thread remained open for days while the few females members who were willing to post in that trainwreck made it quite clear this was not "Morrus' grandmother" level of content and that they were being made felt quite unwelcome by allowing that sort of shit to fester with absolutely no resource against the OP because you'd get banned for being "mean" to him.

You even had a few other members of the ENworld forum defending ability scores by sex in the same thread because "LOL Real Life."  

You don't have to go far to find people who have weird fucking ideas.  Especially among nerds.

[B.T.]

Hell, recent events at ENWorld and their shit moderation had some assholes running threads with settings that glorified rape and fascism

You even had a few other members of the ENworld forum defending ability scores by sex in the same thread because "LOL Real Life."

One of these things is not like the other.

[RPGPundit]

The whole point of the storygames hobby is to be "indie", "edgy" or "avant garde"; to imagine that by playing or designing these games you're a Great Intellectual Rebel.  The Forge-Theory out of which Storygames evolved began as a movement to basically redefine the "alternative" away from White Wolf's system and style; to say "we're more radical than you guys" (for Ron Edwards, this generally meant more radical system-wise; but this quickly also had to include "more radical" in terms of how "deep" the subject matter was that they engaged in with their little microgames).

The problem with this should be obvious, each would-be Great Indie Game Designer from the Storygames movement must strive to push the envelope further, either with more ridiculously gimmicky rules/"Theory", or with more extreme degenerate subject matter.

RPGPundit

[Imperator]

It isn't just you. I find this to be pretty representative of storygames and think that people who enjoy this kind of gaming are pretty fucked in the head. I agree with the distinction between a storygame and a role-playing game because I do not want this typically juvenile violent misery tourism to be representative of the hobby I enjoy.

I get where you are coming from, the problem is that the vocal minority of freaks in our hobby are the ones who become representative of our hobby to the general public.

Sorry Jeff, but I disagree. One doesn't need to be fucked in the head to write about horrific stuff, film horrific movies, or enjoy them. By your reasoning, every horror author or fan should be fucked in the head, and you know that is not the case.

Enjoying imaginary activities tells us exactly zero about what the person would really do or like in real life. It is like saying that shooting people in videogames makes you more prone to shoot people in real life, or at least makes you more interested in guns. Seriously. There is no correlation at all. And it's a very old argument.

Also, those games are not representative of most storygames currently produced or the way those games are played, no more than nerds raping elves are representative of D&D playing. They're just a few people playing stupid-ass juvenile games, and boasting about it in a messageboard. They're a minority even in the minority of gamers that talk about games on Internet. They're less than a speck of dust.

Now, as you happen to be interested in Internet debates about games, you're more prone to meet some of this guys and their ridiculous games. But that doesn't mean that those games are common or prevalent. It's a perceptive bias at work.

And of course, they are not going to be representative to the public because RPG discussions in godforsaken messageboards are just not perceived by the public at all. The public sees (at most) what happens at big cons, like GenCon, and most of what you will get there is D&D. So for the public, RPGs are still about nerds pretending to be elves and shit.

[Nicephorus]

Enjoying imaginary activities tells us exactly zero about what the person would really do or like in real life.  It is like saying that shooting people in videogames makes you more prone to shoot people in real life, or at least makes you more interested in guns. Seriously. There is no correlation at all. And it's a very old argument.

Actually, there is a correlation between exposure to violent media and increased violence. There have been enough longitudinal studies to demonstrate that the effect is probably causal. It's a complex link with provisos but there is definitely a link. I'm not advocating anything but it's ridiculous that people keep repeating the old lie that there is no correlation.

[two_fishes]

It's certainly not representative of the indie RPGs I've played, or the people I've played with. As others have stated, I don't think this is any more representative of the "storygame" spectrum of RPGs than Human Occupied Landfill is representative of more traditional games.

[RPGPundit]

It's certainly not representative of the indie RPGs I've played, or the people I've played with. As others have stated, I don't think this is any more representative of the "storygame" spectrum of RPGs than Human Occupied Landfill is representative of more traditional games.

That whole "non-representative isolated incident" argument sure starts to wear rather thin once you have approach a list of a dozen or so popular Storygames that are filled with morally repugnant grotesquerie and sexual degeneracy, doesn't it?

I mean sure, one priest diddling an altar boy is an "isolated incident" that isn't representative of the church... but once you have thousands and thousands of cases all across the world? That whole line of argument just stops being really viable.

RPGPundit

[jhkim]

That whole "non-representative isolated incident" argument sure starts to wear rather thin once you have approach a list of a dozen or so popular Storygames that are filled with morally repugnant grotesquerie and sexual degeneracy, doesn't it?

I mean sure, one priest diddling an altar boy is an "isolated incident" that isn't representative of the church... but once you have thousands and thousands of cases all across the world? That whole line of argument just stops being really viable.

I think there is some sort of middle ground here.  I agree with two_fishes that the OP for this thread is not representative of the story game scene as a whole.  I take my 11-year-old son to story gaming gatherings like "Nerdly Beach Party" without any concerns, for example.  

However, I do think that there is a sizable minority in story games who prefer to be "edgy" by engaging in stuff like this - moreso than in traditional RPGs.  On the other hand, I think some commentary has blown the meaning of this out of proportion.  Some criticism seems identical to the moral outrage against 1st edition AD&D and Vampire: The Masquerade for their edgy content.  If you're comparing the games, remember to compare game text to game text - and play examples to play examples.  Sure, the assassin class and succubus aren't comparable to the OP examples of Hell for Leather play - but what teenage boys did in their AD&D1 games might well be.  

Actually, there is a correlation between exposure to violent media and increased violence. There have been enough longitudinal studies to demonstrate that the effect is probably causal. It's a complex link with provisos but there is definitely a link. I'm not advocating anything but it's ridiculous that people keep repeating the old lie that there is no correlation.

I suspect some of this is miscommunication over statistics.  I think most people would be OK accepting that there is correlation.  That might just be that people who are already non-violent are more likely to be grossed out by violent media, while people who are already violent are more likely to be fine with it.  It is the causal connection that is more the issue.  

Even accepting a causal connection, though, there is a lot of stuff to question about how and why media promotes violence.  In particular, is playing good guys who kill orcs and dragons in the name of good better or worse than playing bad guys who commit atrocities and die horribly?  Some would argue that the former glorifies violence more, while others would argue that the latter desensitizes people to violence more.  

This is wishy-washy, because I don't have a solid opinion about the effect of media violence, because I don't know the studies well - and I realize these psychological studies can be riddled with assumptions and errors.  I know that I'm a very non-violent person who likes violent media, but I realize that is anecdotal.

[Nicephorus]

It's very complicated and I don't want to make a big deal about it.  But there have been studies lasting a decade or more showing a link between early media and later violence.  There are also lab studies that have shown modeling of the exact violent behaviors that they've witnessed under certain circumstances.  But it's not a huge effect or single cause that predetermines anything.  And, like you mentioned, the context and the details matter.  I just get tired of the the huge blocks of mainly video game players who loudly brush off all crticism by stating that there's no correlation without ever having looked at any info.

[two_fishes]

That whole "non-representative isolated incident" argument sure starts to wear rather thin once you have approach a list of a dozen or so popular Storygames that are filled with morally repugnant grotesquerie and sexual degeneracy, doesn't it?

Name a dozen popular, degenerate story-games, please. I like how you insist they must be popular--I know you like to flip out against Poison'd, for example, but it's hardly popular. I'd venture that it gets mentioned on this site more than anywhere else. Do you also want to start a list of comparitively repugnant trad style games for comparison? FATAL and RaHoWa have been mentioned, and I mentioned HoL. There's another thread on this forum talking about just how repugnant Dark Heresy really is. How about Dread (the one that uses d12s, not the Jenga Dread) or Carcossa?

[VectorSigma]

I do think it's fair to note (although anecdotal) that every review or mention of RaHoWa, FATAL et al has been "anti" - either mocking or horrified.  That's not exactly true for some of the 'storygames'.

EDIT: that should read "review or mention THAT I'VE ENCOUNTERED", sorry.  Hence the 'anecdotal' mention.

[jeff37923]

Sorry Jeff, but I disagree. One doesn't need to be fucked in the head to write about horrific stuff, film horrific movies, or enjoy them. By your reasoning, every horror author or fan should be fucked in the head, and you know that is not the case.

If you will note in the quote of mine I did not say anything regarding write about or filming. I was specifically mentioning playing a game.

I don't mind if you disagree with me, I just mind it when you disagree with something I didn't say and try to attribute it to me.

Enjoying imaginary activities tells us exactly zero about what the person would really do or like in real life. It is like saying that shooting people in videogames makes you more prone to shoot people in real life, or at least makes you more interested in guns. Seriously. There is no correlation at all. And it's a very old argument.

You are right, it is an old arguement. So is the saying, "You are what you eat."

(Hang on, I'm playing Devil's Advocate a bit here.)

Also, those games are not representative of most storygames currently produced or the way those games are played, no more than nerds raping elves are representative of D&D playing. They're just a few people playing stupid-ass juvenile games, and boasting about it in a messageboard. They're a minority even in the minority of gamers that talk about games on Internet. They're less than a speck of dust.

Now, as you happen to be interested in Internet debates about games, you're more prone to meet some of this guys and their ridiculous games. But that doesn't mean that those games are common or prevalent. It's a perceptive bias at work.

The thing is, as you quoted me saying, while we both understand that there is a distinction because we are familiar with gaming, the general public only has a image of gamers based on stereotypes that we try to disprove as authentic.

Which would you rather have people talk about or read about, things that would leave a positive impression about gaming or things that would leave a negative impression about gaming?

And of course, they are not going to be representative to the public because RPG discussions in godforsaken messageboards are just not perceived by the public at all. The public sees (at most) what happens at big cons, like GenCon, and most of what you will get there is D&D. So for the public, RPGs are still about nerds pretending to be elves and shit.

Here I disagree with you. There are powerful search engines out there which will pull results based upon keywords and not based upon whether or not the game play which is described is common or authentic.

If someone who is curious about gaming wants to learn more and searches the internet to do so, finds storygame crap like Poison'd or trad crap like FATAL - it does not serve the hobby as a whole to be that first impression.

[Kyle Aaron]

Actually, there is a correlation between exposure to violent media and increased violence.

In the Army, the most popular rpg was Recon.

[RPGPundit]

However, I do think that there is a sizable minority in story games who prefer to be "edgy" by engaging in stuff like this - moreso than in traditional RPGs.  On the other hand, I think some commentary has blown the meaning of this out of proportion.  Some criticism seems identical to the moral outrage against 1st edition AD&D and Vampire: The Masquerade for their edgy content.  If you're comparing the games, remember to compare game text to game text - and play examples to play examples.  Sure, the assassin class and succubus aren't comparable to the OP examples of Hell for Leather play - but what teenage boys did in their AD&D1 games might well be.  

I can't recall a single game session of my teenage-years of AD&D where we sodomized dead cabin boys.

RPGPundit

[RPGPundit]

Name a dozen popular, degenerate story-games, please. I like how you insist they must be popular--I know you like to flip out against Poison'd, for example, but it's hardly popular. I'd venture that it gets mentioned on this site more than anywhere else. Do you also want to start a list of comparitively repugnant trad style games for comparison? FATAL and RaHoWa have been mentioned, and I mentioned HoL. There's another thread on this forum talking about just how repugnant Dark Heresy really is. How about Dread (the one that uses d12s, not the Jenga Dread) or Carcossa?

Your premise is conveniently impossible, since there aren't any "popular" Storygames.

Also, the big difference is that the vast majority of gamers do not go of their way to try to defend or justify FATAL, much less "RaHoWa"; whereas Storygamers regularly try to defend Poison'd and its ilk.

For that matter, regular roleplayers tend to go out of their way, when the subject comes up, to unequivocally condemn games like FATAL; whereas I've never seen a Storygamer condemn games like Poison'd.

RPGPundit