Fuck narrative games. Bunch of hipster dipshits writing fanfic at each other with a bunch of guardrail rules to make sure that nobody's fanfic gets infringed by anyone else or the GM.
If you wanted to a do a collaborative storytelling exercise that's fine, but stop pretending it's a game. It isn't a game any more than those autistic quest threads are.
Everyone in the Universe
Do not try to apply logic here.
That way only lies madness.
Actually if Penn Jilette DM'd a game for me I bet he'd be pretty cool. He's got that booming, dramatic, commanding voice and presence that I think would make everyone invested in the game.
Just, you know, don't play a cleric or a paladin in his game.
>Just, you know, don't play a cleric or a paladin in his game.
>tons of drama-class trashcans replying to the truth saying it's bait
You are misusing the term "narrative game" incorrectly. All P&P are narrative games, but you want to complain about rules light games despite probably being a hypocrite.
What is the real issue? *World games? FAE?
To actually get some worth out of OP's blogpost, I think the big frustration is just the proliferation of rules-light games in general. There's some good and popular rules light games out right now, but not much for rules heavy or even crunch medium. One could feel like there's an over saturation of rules light games. I don't see it that way, but I bet there's lots of people who do.
Unfortunately, the only solution is one really good crunch heavy or even crunch medium game to come out and be popular, and even in this indie friendly world that's very difficult. I feel like if Fantasycraft had more support, we'd start to see a sea change.
/tg/, we really, REALLY need to talk about the recent surge in popularity of "Dungeon World" around here, especially the trend of recommending it as a good system for "introducing" players to our hobby.
I understand that there is an obsession with being subversive and finding the most super specialest alternative to D&D possible, but having finally taken the time to read into Dungeon World and the reasons why this game has caught on around here and other forums I feel the need to be frank: this NEEDS to stop. I try as hard as I can not to be a "badwrongfun" style curmudgeon, but this is not a role playing game. Full stop. This is not a role playing game, and this disingenuous promotion of it as such is legitimately dangerous to this hobby. This is an exercise in self-congratulatory free form group storytelling.
This is a "game" where the danger of literally any challenge is by design arbitrary, not just from encounter to encounter, but from action to action. There's no actual combat or tactics at play, everyone takes turns basically describing a "cool fantasy battle" and resolve everything through "dodge danger" and "hack and slash" rolls triggered at the GM's whim. This is a game proud of being anti-structure, where the goal is to explain to the GM how many cool things your players do instead of actively overcoming any challenges in your way.
It's chaos. Consequences of certain failures are decided collaboratively. The GM is encouraged to be more of an antagonistic player than an actual referee of any rules. At /tg/'s suggestion I watched a few videos of people playing this. At one point the *GM* asked the *PLAYERS* what rumors they had heard in town.
I get that the people involved in this game by admission shill it everywhere, but please stop pushing this as a system for beginners. It's dangerous to our hobby and the behaviors it promotes encourages entitled players with disruptive expectations for how parties are meant to work.
I think one of the only good reasons to prefer board games to video games is their ability to be rules light and adaptable. Heavy simulations with lots of number crunching are just better left to computers.
Do you smell it?
A kinda smelly smell.
A smelly smell that smells... smelly.
This feels like a copypasta.
please tell me it is?
/tg/, we really, REALLY need to talk about the recent surge in popularity of "socialism” around here, especially the trend of recommending it as a good system for "introducing" workers to the economy.
I understand that there is an obsession with being subversive and finding the most super specialest alternative to captialism possible, but having finally taken the time to read into socialism and the reasons why this idea has caught on around here and other countries I feel the need to be frank: this NEEDS to stop. I try as hard as I can not to be a "badwrongfun" style curmudgeon, but this is not an economic system. Full stop. This is not an economic system, and this disingenuous promotion of it as such is legitimately dangerous to this country. This is an exercise in self-congratulatory, centralized planning.
This is a "system" where the setting of any price is by design arbitrary, not just from five year plan to five year plan, but from month to month. There's no actual market incentives at play, everyone takes turns basically describing a "proletariat economy” and resolve everything through "production” and “consumption” plans triggered at the party’s whim. This is a system proud of being anti-freedom, where the goal is to report how many boots you made instead of actively overcoming any challenges in your way.
It's chaos. Consequences of certain failures are decided collaboratively. The party is encouraged to be more of a CEO than an actual referee of any rules. At the state department’s suggestion I watched a few videos of planning sessions. At one point the industrialists asked the *GOVERNMENT* what the market needed.
I get that the people involved in this game by admission shill it everywhere, but please stop pushing this as a system for workers. It's dangerous to our economy and the behaviors it promotes encourages entitled workers with disruptive expectations for how markets are meant to work.
Oh good, because then it makes it somewhat less sad than if the guy took time to write that.
You got your replies, what more do you want? A cookie? Not this late at night young man.
>mwf tons of drama-class trashcans are still enraged about all the truth that is getting posted in this thread
There is another aspect to it.
D&D and various other popular RPGs teach that metagaming is the devil.
Narrative mechanics are by their very nature metagaming.
So there is an influx of successful and popular narrative-driven RPGs and as a result we've got plenty of grognards getting nuclearly buttblasted about one of their dogmas being proven wrong.
Actually, if we examine game popularity statistics on Roll20 or game sales in places like ICv2, rules-heavy games still dominate the market.
Rules-light popularity is mostly an Internet discussion phenomenon.
Of the big three, narrativism is undoubtedly the worst way to run a game. Gamism is childish but it is at least a game.
Obviously the only mature way to play is with a simulationist mindset.
A simulationist game has far more rules and reasonable conditions for success and failure than a narrativist game does. It is in the nature of simulationism to do so. A narrativist game is designed to accommodate the power fantasies of its players, it will only bar them from doing something if it harms the narrative without regard to reason or sense.
Apocalypse World is a great example of that, since you can do something as long as everyone deems it "cool". Utterly infantile.
Obviously, the best way to run a game is the gamist way. It is a game after all.
And running or playing a game is inherently childish.
Narrativism and Simulationism are like the adult covers of Harry Potter at best. It may no longer look like you're reading a children's book, but the fact remains that you are.
>A simulationist game has far more rules and reasonable conditions for success and failure than a narrativist game does
No it doesn't. You just interpret them as reasonable because you've deluded yourself into thinking "this is the way the real world works" when people who ACTUALLY STUDY THE REAL WORLD DON'T KNOW HOW THE REAL WORLD WORKS.
Every so called "simulationist" game makes conceits in order to fit the kind of game it's trying to be. If computers, things that actually excel at keeping track of hundreds of niggling variables and mathematical details can't create a perfect simulation of our world then why the fuck would you think numbers written on 500 pages would?
Gamism is literally playing a game. It's not childish because of that, though, because games aren't inherently childish. It's childish because its adherents are playing roleplaying games specifically - they'd clearly be better served playing a video game.
Again, reasonable does not mean accurate. A method of FTL travel that makes use of ideas and materials that don't presently exist can hardly be understood as "being the way the real world works" but it certainly can be reasonable. Further, you're absolutely mistaken in thinking simulationism is about mimicking the "real world." For one thing, a great number of simulationist games are not set in the "real world". The goal of a simulationist designer is to make rules that makes sense within the context of the world they're presenting, not to make rules that make storytelling easier or balance the mechanics.
I am not into narrative games. I prefer stimulationist games (which I believe is by far still the majority of tabletop RPGs). Different strokes for different folks. I don't see one as a threat to the other and I am willing to play both.
>It's childish because its adherents are playing roleplaying games specifically - they'd clearly be better served playing a video game.
Lol you have no idea what you are talking about.
Really, before using big words like the various -isms, learn what they mean.
>The goal of a simulationist designer is to make rules that makes sense within the context of the world they're presenting
Dude that's a WAY to handle setting and mechanical interpretation but it's certainly not the only and it's certainly not the best.
Because while you might think "gaming the universe" ISN'T a goal of such a system let me tell you every system I've seen that tries to do that invariably has people attempting to do that. You literally may as well say "Bananas aren't intended solely to draw in monkeys". They aren't but that doesn't mean if you hold one up they won't come swarming at you.
>Dude that's a WAY to handle setting and mechanical interpretation but it's certainly not the only and it's certainly not the best.
Let me make this simple for you: it's the only good one. Failing to constrain players on the basis of what makes sense is the biggest mistake you can make as a designer or GM, followed closely by constraining players from doing what makes sense. If you think otherwise then I'd want absolutely nothing to do with you or any games you're a part of.
Narrative games are like communism. Under ideal circumstances with a good GM and players who can police themselves and roleplay appropriately, you only need a handfull of rules to mediate conflict or challenge resolution.
But, like communism, that ideal will never and can never be reached. You will always have at least one player who, whether they are an innocent-minded powergamer or a total off the wall sperg, who necessitates the player/GM policing side of the rules that comprises the vast majority of TTRPG content.
and, again like communism, sane people can pick up on this flaw subconsciously and know to hold a distaste for such games without even having to experience the horror of them.
>Virt may be dead, but he lives on in our hearts.
maybe your paranoid delusion that the evil boogeyman spreads his lies anonymously is in fact shit and you need to realise these are commonly held views
There is no argument here, only trolling.
If there was an actual argument here, it would be made by someone incapable of grasping the possibility that they might be wrong, in spite of all evidence.
Was finally permabanned for calling FATAL a worthwhile game.
Praise be Hiroyuki-sama.
Ultra-laffo, he'd argue the fuck out of every plot point being "narratively justifiable" but also be able to pull rabbits out of his ass when it came to making Conflicts.
This top quality image bamboozled me
>Still talking about GNS theory
GNS Theory, as this thread demonstrates, is just a smoke screen to cover everyone's opinions on games as if they were hard, objective fact. It's empty rhetoric tell us nothing about good game design.
Look at everyone falling over to call themselves "narrativist" or declare others childish because they play "simulationist" games, and the apparently moral fervor both of those statements come with.
Take note of how people scramble away from even thinking about their game as a game. What is a gamist? What is an example of a purely "gamist" RPG? No one knows and no one can make one, because it's inherently a judgment value, not a theory.
This is the sort of nonsense that leads otherwise intelligent people to say things like "the less of a game an RPG is, the better it is".
It's exactly the same thing as "combat as sport" vs "combat as war" or John Wick's attempt to define what RPGs are: it's not a theory made in good faith, but wrapping paper for a specific agenda.
If we want to actually have good discussions about games, we need to scrap it and start from zero.
You are 100% correct, but this thread was never trying to have a good discussion about anything.
Also, people love to categorize things no matter how unuseful their categorization system is. But I think at least half of the people talking about this are just trolling.
There are a couple of people at least who have been shitposting about specific games in every thread about those games or every time those games come up. There's at least one who always seems reasonable when you call him on it, but then does the same thing again the next time that particular game triggers him.
The Virt was contagious. At least we're still nicer than a lot of other boards though. There are quite a few good posters still around, just more shitposters around them.
>mfw that guy who calls everyone "virt" is evading his ban again so he can defend the fair maiden of shitty games
Has anyone else noticed that narrative games are always played by and promoted by transtrenders? Of course this leaked into the new D&D too, where wizards hired a bunch of trannies and they had to force their fetish into D&D while they were forcing more narrative bullshit into it.
We've had a spike of shit posters recently
Usually ranting about lewdness on /tg/ but after they forced the smut threads to leave they've just been wandering the board getting angrier and angrier and complaining about more and more types of badwrongfun
I don't care one way or the other, but the fact remains that it wasn't removed through reports or appeal to mods or anything, but by shitspamming the board until the mods caved from the sheer workload it was forcing.
It was an admission that getting loud and destructive and throwing a tantrum would get what you want, which was an extremely unhealthy precedent.
>autistic jackoff continues to pretend that he isn't rectum-ruined that his retarded cybersex thread was sent to /b/ where it /b/elongs
Please keep it up, there is nothing funnier in the entire universe than you
I noticed around the time they first started and realized just bitching would do nothing, there was a sudden change of tactics where they'd go full /pol/ or tumblr in threads they don't like. I think they were trying to drown out the badwrongfetishfun with badwrong/pol/fun because in their minds it's better.
This of course attracted actual /pol/ and tumblrs and now we're here
This, this is why I have an issue with /wst/ being gone, the mods fucking caved to shitposting
I'd have no problem if they'd have handed out range bans to the trolls while telling /wst/ to get out but what they did is just encouraging worse behavior than the smutfags ever were
It's been going on for a lot longer than a few days
>autistic jackoff posts a manifesto about how unfair it is that nobody is pandering to autistic jackoffs since the autistic jackoff mod got removed
Oh god this is amazing
>Autistic jackoff continues to receive serious replies to his bait threads
Dungeon world practically was when Virt was active, it was impossible to have a coherent thread about any world game because of him and people taking his lead.
And he only got banned after a full administration change
Did DW and DG get a full month of nonstop spam, multiple fake threads, and ban dodging?
Also, what the fuck is wrong with Delta Green? Never been interested in Dungeon World so I can't speak for it
It's people who latch onto the transgender identity and use it to get attention. It's where all these extra genders, snowflake pronouns, et cetera come from. 90%+ of the experience with "trannies" /tg/ has is with transtrenders.
Trans people hate them too. Myself included.
oh god oh god look he's got a conspiracy theory!
It's not a conspiracy at all?
Old mods were lazy and took the easy path each time, whether that meant caving to shitposters or just ignoring their damage.
Mods got a lot more public and a lot more active after MooTwo took over
Nah, most of them are shit but quests are as /tg/ related as these are
Just wish there was less of them, or at least one half decent one
Huh, didn't know that, I tend to avoid generals and only stick to threads that look amusing
Ah, you're just trying to pick a fight, carry on
I'll agree for the most part, but no stronger enforcement of the rules after the shitstorm at the end of /wst/ was not the right thing to do
I was making a poor joke.
Quests resulted in old QTG, which moves to Moe and became Spooky once it became too much of a "shitpost and get angry" thread.
Pretty much everything after that was Spooky acting like supervillains, making the stupidest plans and trying to "see how they could destroy the board"
Autist haven it was, I wish Moe hadn't died so I could link.
It was also probably where whoever did the porn spamming and general dickey that canned WST got their support
>all these narrative kickstarter 2013 "gamers" just shitting up this thread as hard as they possibly can because someone dared post the truth in it
i hardly ever bothered with moe
(except for /a/ metathreads bitching about moderation)but this has me really curious. I wish it was still there so I could look through, but do you remember any of the details of these secret plans?
It was 95% autistic SA level shot posting with no results.
And then occasionally they'd get some PRODUCTIVE autist who'd play ringleader and get them to spam/dox/whatever some QM, get pastebins, imgurs, tumblrs taken down, etc
All I really remember of the wst thing is that they were all celebrating and patting each other on the back and saying how they'd got their proof of concept and could start driving off quest now.
Which of course they never did because they have 10 second attention spans for the most part
>the transtrender who calls everyone "Virt" is evading his ban just so he can defend bad games
I had a player who was an actor as well, that is he did the equivalent to my country for what drama is. Guy metagamed, powergamed and generally thought he had rights to decided things in my story, all despite of claiming to know the ways of acting and such.
You never actually post any arguments though.
They always add up to "these games are bad because I say they are bad" and all you do is post examples of how these games are played and say "ISN'T THIS FUCKING TERRIBLE" when that exact same strategy can literally be used with any other kind of game or system.
You never actually post any defense though.
They always add up to "these games are good because I say they are good" and all you do is post examples of how these games are played and say "ISN'T THIS FUCKING AWESOME" when that exact same strategy can literally be used with any other kind of game or system.
Of course he did, anyone who is self-absorbed enough to want to get up on a stage and "entertain" people with fucking horrible plays is clearly going to be a massive narcissist when given the chance to directly influence their "audience".
This is also the reason why narrative games are fucking horrible and the people who play them are so unbearable with their shitposting about them on /tg/. They're massive narcissists who think everyone in the world should listen to their hot opinion 24/7.
I don't see why you have to be strictly in one style of play. I think it's that forge bullshit about coherence and focus that makes folks think every game has to be some extreme of GNS.
I don't really believe in gns but I like to run simulation and exploration heavy sandbox games. I also include random bullshit players say about the setting as being true and occasionally allow players to add things to the setting in the sense of "you're coming back to your hometown, tell me a bit about it."
>poor widdle twanstwender is weally mad about da twuth!
No I haven't, because I live in a city were we don't give a fuck.
This guy fucking gets it.
Although I would all games are Narative at because we are not playing fucking number monsters.
What surprises me more is that this thread is still around, it sort of like that stupid redeemed succubus shit this summer.
>implying I play Narative games in the first place.
It's called roleplaying for a reason, man. I expect players to at least try being their character while they play.