Each year, a new game is released that makes me feel bad. Not so much the game, but the game becomes the game that everyone recommends as a solution to whatever GMing challenge I have. This year, it's Dungeon World.
Today, I fight back! You can join me, or explain how I'm wrong (be kind, I'm sensitive). Go for it! I'd like one of you to at least agree as that will make me feel better.
Here are some things that get presented regularly as things that are true that I'm not sure actually are true.
1. The reason more people, mostly the populace at large or cooler people than the people that usually play RPG games, don't play RPG's is because of the topic. Games need to be less about proactive characters making a difference, and more about emulating a drama, romance, etc.
examples: Drama System RPG, Kagematsu, Nightwitches
why this might be wrong: I'm not sure that RPGs are great for emulating complex personal relationships. Real life is barely good enough for emulating a complex personal relationship. I'm not kidding. Also, it turns out that, in general, games with action-type focused premises not only far outsell these games, but are actually played by lots of people when you actually find people playing games rather than posting on the internet.
2. Most people don't enjoy exploration, encountering someone else's ideas presented as a thing they need to interact with in the game, whether it's a published setting or just the GM's preparation. What they do enjoy is design by committee.
examples: Fate Core (RAW w/ threats)
why I think this might be wrong: in every RPG I've ever played players are much more existed and interactive with the things the GM has created then the threats or NPCs from their back-story that they were excited about at the beginning of the game. Things you didn't invent seem more real and challenging than things you did invent, because you've just invented them and you know you invented them.
3. GM's are a terrible idea, an artifact left over from the early days of the hobby. If we can't get rid of them, we need to strongly restrict the scope of their effect on the game.
why I think this might be wrong: all of my best RPG experiences have included a Great GM's. I know there are abusive GM's out there, but they seem more like stories people retell in the echo chamber of the internet then people I play with.
4. Immersion and longer-term play aren't really fun. Games that take several hours to play, or have long-term campaigns, deliver the same amount of fun one or two short sessions of more story/narrative style games.
why I think this might be wrong: longer sessions (and sequences of more sessions) make everything seem more real and complex - the world, your depiction of your character, etc.
Today, I fight back! You can join me, or explain how I'm wrong (be kind, I'm sensitive). Go for it! I'd like one of you to at least agree as that will make me feel better.
Here are some things that get presented regularly as things that are true that I'm not sure actually are true.
1. The reason more people, mostly the populace at large or cooler people than the people that usually play RPG games, don't play RPG's is because of the topic. Games need to be less about proactive characters making a difference, and more about emulating a drama, romance, etc.
examples: Drama System RPG, Kagematsu, Nightwitches
why this might be wrong: I'm not sure that RPGs are great for emulating complex personal relationships. Real life is barely good enough for emulating a complex personal relationship. I'm not kidding. Also, it turns out that, in general, games with action-type focused premises not only far outsell these games, but are actually played by lots of people when you actually find people playing games rather than posting on the internet.
2. Most people don't enjoy exploration, encountering someone else's ideas presented as a thing they need to interact with in the game, whether it's a published setting or just the GM's preparation. What they do enjoy is design by committee.
examples: Fate Core (RAW w/ threats)
why I think this might be wrong: in every RPG I've ever played players are much more existed and interactive with the things the GM has created then the threats or NPCs from their back-story that they were excited about at the beginning of the game. Things you didn't invent seem more real and challenging than things you did invent, because you've just invented them and you know you invented them.
3. GM's are a terrible idea, an artifact left over from the early days of the hobby. If we can't get rid of them, we need to strongly restrict the scope of their effect on the game.
why I think this might be wrong: all of my best RPG experiences have included a Great GM's. I know there are abusive GM's out there, but they seem more like stories people retell in the echo chamber of the internet then people I play with.
4. Immersion and longer-term play aren't really fun. Games that take several hours to play, or have long-term campaigns, deliver the same amount of fun one or two short sessions of more story/narrative style games.
why I think this might be wrong: longer sessions (and sequences of more sessions) make everything seem more real and complex - the world, your depiction of your character, etc.
Some Things I'm Not Sure are True
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire