sbloyd
Supporter
WHAT! A human in a Precursor service vehicle?!
Posts: 2,762
Preferred Game Systems: Storyteller; Dresden; Mage
Favorite Species of Monkey: Goddamnit, Curious George is a CHIMP not a monkey! Stop teaching my daughter improper classification!
|
Post by sbloyd on Oct 6, 2015 15:56:58 GMT -8
Joe, I did because I believe people like that don't mean to come across as assholes.
I'm often wrong about that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 6, 2015 16:10:22 GMT -8
Then perhaps you should work on not coming across as offensive and insulting. Here's a roleplaying opportunity for you: go back and read your posts, pretending to be anyone other than yourself. I can't see any insult unless I look for it and ignore the meaning of the words which I know are there. I mean, I can see how someone might take it as an insult, but only if that person wants to take it as such (or possibly if this is not the viewer's native language). If I knew how to be more clear on my points, I would have done so the first time around. Edit: I did provide you with a definition of a roleplaying game thanks to sbloyd. You just didn't seem to like it, which, in your world, means it's wrong. Your definition agreed with mine, which is why it supported my previously stated conclusion. You need a different definition if you don't want to disprove the argument, or else you need to point out how one does not necessarily follow from the other. Nevertheless, I think we have carried this debate to the only end we can possibly reach. I shall henceforth stop responding to such obvious provocations, and limit discussion to topics of less controversy.
|
|
maxinstuff
Supporter
Posts: 1,939
Preferred Game Systems: DCC RPG, Shadowrun 5e, Savage Worlds, GURPS 4e, HERO 6e, Mongoose Traveller
Favorite Species of Monkey: Proboscis
|
Post by maxinstuff on Oct 7, 2015 19:34:19 GMT -8
If we really need definitions, here's what the Oxford Dictionary of English says:
If someone can source a better definition that what those guys have put in the fucking dictionary then please share it. Otherwise, let's all just ease off on the doublespeak?
As for any actual premise/conclusion - I am on my phone right now and can't find it easily in the thread so I'll chime in on that later.
Love me a flame thread.
|
|
maxinstuff
Supporter
Posts: 1,939
Preferred Game Systems: DCC RPG, Shadowrun 5e, Savage Worlds, GURPS 4e, HERO 6e, Mongoose Traveller
Favorite Species of Monkey: Proboscis
|
Post by maxinstuff on Oct 7, 2015 19:56:16 GMT -8
The short version is: If you made it an aspect, and then it gets compelled, it's how your character would act regardless of if it is a) beneficial or b) what they would 'want' to do. Still in character. Agree 100%. I see no difference between this and "playing your disads". GURPS is about as simulationist as it gets, and yet I can still be called out on my disads. A GURPS GM can ask me to make a willpower roll to resist the urge to steal cutlery if I took the kleptomania disadvantage, what is the difference between this and the GM compelling my "ooooh shiny" aspect? Sounds like the same damn thing to me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2015 0:48:12 GMT -8
A GURPS GM can ask me to make a willpower roll to resist the urge to steal cutlery if I took the kleptomania disadvantage, what is the difference between this and the GM compelling my "ooooh shiny" aspect? When the GURPS GM asks you to make a willpower roll because circumstances warrant, the outcome is determined solely by the dice. When the FATE GM compels a similar aspect because those same circumstances warrant, the player is asked to make a decision by taking into account meta-game factors that the character is not aware of, such as the potential need for that extra fate point at a distant future junction. That is the fundamental difference.
|
|
maxinstuff
Supporter
Posts: 1,939
Preferred Game Systems: DCC RPG, Shadowrun 5e, Savage Worlds, GURPS 4e, HERO 6e, Mongoose Traveller
Favorite Species of Monkey: Proboscis
|
Post by maxinstuff on Oct 8, 2015 1:11:55 GMT -8
A GURPS GM can ask me to make a willpower roll to resist the urge to steal cutlery if I took the kleptomania disadvantage, what is the difference between this and the GM compelling my "ooooh shiny" aspect? When the GURPS GM asks you to make a willpower roll because circumstances warrant, the outcome is determined solely by the dice. When the FATE GM compels a similar aspect because those same circumstances warrant, the player is asked to make a decision by taking into account meta-game factors that the character is not aware of, such as the potential need for that extra fate point at a distant future junction. That is the fundamental difference. So apart from maybe a consideration on whether or not to use a FATE point, is there any other fundamental difference here? Using GURPS again, a character has the option to spend a character point and re-roll. This should raise the same "issue" of meta considerations on the part of the player. You could argue that ANY rule causes metagaming, because the rules inform the reality of the game world and therefore player behaviour in the game. This is observable in ANY game, not just role playing games. Without the rules guiding player behaviour, aren't we are just playing make-believe after all?
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Oct 8, 2015 1:14:03 GMT -8
Without the rules guiding player behaviour, aren't we are just playing make-believe after all? You are only playing make believe correctly if you make decisions for your character only based on information they would have. Not on any other considerations. Ever. Period.
|
|
maxinstuff
Supporter
Posts: 1,939
Preferred Game Systems: DCC RPG, Shadowrun 5e, Savage Worlds, GURPS 4e, HERO 6e, Mongoose Traveller
Favorite Species of Monkey: Proboscis
|
Post by maxinstuff on Oct 8, 2015 1:22:03 GMT -8
Without the rules guiding player behaviour, aren't we are just playing make-believe after all? You are only playing make believe correctly if you make decisions for your character only based on information they would have. Not on any other considerations. Ever. Period.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2015 10:18:52 GMT -8
So apart from maybe a consideration on whether or not to use a FATE point, is there any other fundamental difference here? Using GURPS again, a character has the option to spend a character point and re-roll. This should raise the same "issue" of meta considerations on the part of the player. I wasn't aware of that rule, but it would certainly put them much closer together if it is the case. Are you sure that wasn't off in some side-bar, of how to make things more cinematic? Like the bulletproof nudity rule, or the luck powers? You could argue that ANY rule causes metagaming, because the rules inform the reality of the game world and therefore player behaviour in the game. This is observable in ANY game, not just role playing games. Metagaming is when you have the character make decisions based on information that it doesn't (or can't) know. The character doesn't know the rules in the book, but probably does understand much about the reality of their world, of which these rules are merely a reflection. In D&D, it's metagaming to cast a Cure spell on someone who has low HP if you're playing HP as plot armor that isn't observable to the spellcaster. If HP are a reflection of how beaten up someone is, and this is visible to anyone who looks, then it's not metagaming - it's just the character making a decision based on the reality it perceives, which is just plain old role-playing. Where the line gets blurry is when the player has agency within the game beyond what the character has within the game world. The FATE player isn't necessarily asked to have the character decide what to do based on the existence of fate points, but the player is tasked with deciding how the story resolves by taking into consideration (among other things) this resource that exists at the narrative level and doesn't necessarily even correspond to anything within the game world. That's the more fundamental difference between GURPS and FATE, is that GURPS doesn't ask the player to act outside of the agency of the character. As the very old saying goes, "You are your character." The difference between the Disad willpower check and the compelled Aspect is just an example of those two different approaches. But again, if what you say is true, then maybe GURPS does ask the player to act beyond the character's agency. Although, it's also possible that they address it in such a way that it remains in-character. I'd have to check the actual book to be sure, though I'd be surprised if it was much more than an optional side-bar, given how the rest of the system is presented.
|
|
|
Post by mook on Oct 8, 2015 17:33:01 GMT -8
I wasn't aware of that rule, but it would certainly put them much closer together if it is the case. Are you sure that wasn't off in some side-bar, of how to make things more cinematic? Like the bulletproof nudity rule, or the luck powers? I believe maxinstuff is referring to p. B121, under "Self-Control Rolls." After outlining the procedure for 'normal' self-control rolls, it goes on to say: "Optionally, the GM may permit you to use one unspent character point to “buy” an automatic success on a selfcontrol roll."
|
|
maxinstuff
Supporter
Posts: 1,939
Preferred Game Systems: DCC RPG, Shadowrun 5e, Savage Worlds, GURPS 4e, HERO 6e, Mongoose Traveller
Favorite Species of Monkey: Proboscis
|
Post by maxinstuff on Oct 8, 2015 17:53:12 GMT -8
Every rule is optional in GURPS Thanks mook - that is exactly what I meant, along with all the other mechanics involving spending character points (all optional of course), as they have the same impact on player actions (do I spend a point to succeed now, or keep it and advance more quickly?). Certainly the characters in the game have no concept of character points, bennies, fate points or XP/levels.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2015 18:54:11 GMT -8
Certainly the characters in the game have no concept of character points, bennies, fate points or XP/levels. It depends on how you look at it, but it's going to vary somewhat by player/table and game. Some systems more easily support one view over another, and some views exist between the two extremes. It seems fairly clear that D&D characters are aware that they grow by their experiences, at least in a general sense, even though they don't see it in numerical terms. I think it would be fairly difficult to argue that FATE characters are aware of the impact that fate points have on their world, given the nature of how those are earned and spent. I would make the case the character points are much closer to experience points than they are to fate points, in terms of the degree to which characters understand them, though that could change significantly depending on how many optional rules you throw in. A young swordsman in D&D should know that he can't become a master swordsman through practice alone, and eventually he needs to head out and get real-world experience, because that's how his world works. Likewise, a young swordsman in GURPS should know that he can become a master swordsman through sufficient practice, but it might take a decade or two. I don't know what a young swordsman in FATE would know. I have difficulty even understanding what difference it would make, whether he's a master swordsman or a novice, but I'm fairly certain that this reflects my lack of knowledge about the game rules rather than actually indicating that there's no distinction.
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Oct 8, 2015 20:28:48 GMT -8
I don't know what a young swordsman in FATE would know. I have difficulty even understanding what difference it would make, whether he's a master swordsman or a novice, but I'm fairly certain that this reflects my lack of knowledge about the game rules rather than actually indicating that there's no distinction. You could go and actually read Fate Core or Fate Accelerated so that you make informed statements.
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Oct 8, 2015 20:33:43 GMT -8
I don't know what a young swordsman in FATE would know. I have difficulty even understanding what difference it would make, whether he's a master swordsman or a novice, but I'm fairly certain that this reflects my lack of knowledge about the game rules rather than actually indicating that there's no distinction. You could go and actually read Fate Core or Fate Accelerated so that you make informed statements. Why would he want to confuse himself with facts? JiB
|
|
maxinstuff
Supporter
Posts: 1,939
Preferred Game Systems: DCC RPG, Shadowrun 5e, Savage Worlds, GURPS 4e, HERO 6e, Mongoose Traveller
Favorite Species of Monkey: Proboscis
|
Post by maxinstuff on Oct 8, 2015 21:23:31 GMT -8
I don't know what a young swordsman in FATE would know. I have difficulty even understanding what difference it would make, whether he's a master swordsman or a novice, but I'm fairly certain that this reflects my lack of knowledge about the game rules rather than actually indicating that there's no distinction. So you're clinging to your assumption that these aren't equivalent (or closely equivalent) mechanics, on account of not having read the book that costs $0 (or PWYW). For fucks sake - here: www.drivethrurpg.com/product/114903/Fate-Core-SystemEDIT: I can see from your next post that you do own it and just haven't read it. So uhhhh... GOOD.
|
|