Gygax:>“The referee is there to impartially adjudicate, not to tell a story. The story is what happens when the players make decisions and deal with the results.”>“This is the definitive treatment of the D&D game. It is meant to assure uniformity of play and avoid arbitrary rulings.”>“Some modern players have completely abandoned the discipline of tactical play in favor of story-worship. This is not D&D as I conceived it.”Arneson:>“I was more interested in what happened between battles. Who the characters were, what they wanted, what the world looked like when they changed it.”>“Rules are just the skeleton; the flesh and blood are what the players bring.”>“If you can talk your way past the guards, go ahead — why roll dice for that? You already did the hard part.”Who was right?
>>96923912Gygax is correct in that he didn't conceive of the system to have a story emphasis. This doesn't mean a story emphasis is bad, but D&D obviously was not made for it, it was made for dungeon crawling. Even nowadays the game basically does not have social mechanics beyond rolling a completely arbitrary pass/fail check. You can run a story-heavy game, but D&D is simply not very well-equipped for it.
>>96923912What Gygax prefered is fine for what it is, but it has largely been outmoded by computer games fulfilling much of the same appeal.What Arneson preferred remains an appeal that only ttrpgs can satisfy to any serious extent.
>>96923912>Who was right?Me.
>>96923912>“The referee is there to impartially adjudicate, not to tell a story. The story is what happens when the players make decisions and deal with the results.”This part is literally how PbtA games work. The GM presents the setting where things are happening, and they react to player interaction with it as determined by the mechanics.It does emphasize the storytelling rather than using more elaborate tactical gameplay though, which is the kind of thing that he'd hate.
>>96923912As loathe as I am to agree with Gygax, he was totally right, assuming he said what was quoted.A game is a set of challenges put against player skill and luck, and impartial adjudication is the only way to consistently facilitate the rules of engaging said challenges.The best stories in relation to games are told through drip-feeds in the character options, and through the progression of the game; anything happening in the game should boil down to "that's how the game was designed" and not "that's how I wrote it to happen".Any story happening within the game delays the activity the group was organized for. Any sitting around talking, or listening to someone else talk, is not playing a game.Describe scenery as player characters can interact with them, describe hostile forces to give an idea of what may or may not be effective against them, but do not sit for hours on end, pontificating Princess Paizuri's petulant prattling, about Mount Ejaculation turning into a volcano because Dark Lord Buttfuck broke the magical Prostate Jewel sealed within, now the party has to defeat the Thirteen Bukkake Brothers (who mechanically speaking are just normal fucking orcs with maybe one magical item to differentiate them) to collect a piece of the Mystical Anal Bead Chain from each, and make a plea to the Thousand Elemental Gods of Why to seal the Dark Lord after a fully-scripted "battle".If it turns our your group isn't interested in a game, that's perfectly fine too. You are all reasonable adults (or should be), able to agree upon an activity you can enjoy together. It doesn't have to be a game; all things considered, the point of games is to have fun, and if you don't have fun with games, do something else.Why gather together a group under the pretense of playing a game if you aren't going to actually play one? Seems silly to me, and a major waste of time for anyone hoping to play a game.
>>96923912Both were right but Arnesons philosophy won, at least in the market sense.
RPGs are just a framework to contextualise a social event during which people enjoy each other’s company.There are no hard and fast prescriptive rules for how players should interact with the game, the rules and each other. Arneson and Gygax are both right in their own way. It’s up to the individuals playing to determine what’s their own best path.
>>96924007Best post ITT.Don't listen to dead men how to run your games, listen to the people you actually play with.
>>96923967You're right, if I wanted to play a combat simulator where I'm limited to the rules allowed, then I'd rather just play Balder's Gate or any RPG video game.For me, the appeal is that I can affect the narrative in ways no video game can mimic. Its like a TV show where you can choose the character, their backstory, and their actions.I think being able to bend rules for the sake of the narrative is an extension of that freedom.
>>96924076I think you're being disingenous and attacking a strawman of a story
>>96923912>>“Some modern players have completely abandoned the discipline of tactical play in favor of story-worship.Jesus, Gary was so full of himself that I sometimes wonder why he didn't become his own black hole, collapsing under the gravity of his ego.
>>96923967>outmoded by computer games fulfilling much of the same appeal.This has never been true.Name one coop pc game where I can create my own dungeons using my own preferred ruleset and I can do simple things like digging through walls, or climbing a tree to get a height advantage or to hide.
>>96923912For every Gygax quote, you can find its opposite.OP is presenting a false dichotomy.
>>96924268Neverwinter nights.Next question?
>>96923967>>96924268Yeah people keep saying that "computer games killed that type of play" but it has never been true and I don't think these people have actually played old D&D as written before.
>>96924223That’s basically how he lost control of TSR. He was stupefied that the contracts that he had signed with the company could be considered binding.
If I didn't care about the story I'd get my miniatures and play a wargame. This is a roleplaying game
>>96923912Gygax was pretending to be a wargame ref while promoting a new hobby that was explicitly not meant to be a wargame. Arneson didn't want to play a wargame, so he ran something else instead.
>>96924488Wargames frequently have long and connected campaigns that tell an involving story. The whole "roleplaying social encounters thing" was a mechanic that David Wesley just took from the Strategos wargame that him, Arneson and friends where playing at the time where if an army enters a settlement they can ask citizens for information about nearby areas and that encounter is just roleplayed. At this point I am convinced that all the "the mechanical aspects of RPGs are outdated thanks to video games" and "I would just play wargames if I wanted no story" people are just bots.
>>96924548>Wargames frequently have long and connected campaigns that tell an involving story.Genuinely curious what you mean by this, because I have never encountered a wargamer that actually considers any string of skirmishes a story. I know some people go back and spice up their games and try to inject some fiction, but to say wargamers do it "frequently" seems like an embellishment
>>96924548This is flat out not true. When I play wargames there is no story. I have an army and my enemy has an army, we are fighting, that's all the story needs.In fact if you go by the lore of most wargames many many skirmishes become completely nonsensical- allies massacre each other for no logical reason, people who share no possible border will fight over territory, the like.
>>96924589Mordheim and Necromunda did this.
>>96924160Yeah what matters is the de facto way it is played.
>>96924677What do you mean? The games themselves still have no need or tendency to form a story. You move minis to kill other minis still, no need for a plot beyond "you are enemies" or "you are fighting over turf." In fact Necromunda, and 40k in general, explicitly built its story so literally any combination of factions can suddenly be fighting each other now with no need for deeper explanations, even different groups of the same faction.
>>96924589That’s because modern wargames like current Warhammer is just competitive miniature noodling. This isn’t the type of wargame that D&D was based on, the whole “you can do anything that’s within the realms of possibility and it gets adjudicated by a referee” was taken from Strategos, which in turn was cribbed from Prussian Kriegsspiel. In these games you don’t move miniatures around, you tell the referee what you want to do and then he adjudicates that decision with the help of the rules and uses his own judgment for rulings where the rules don’t cover something the players are attempting. As I said before, even the whole “roleplay social encounters” got cribbed from these kinda wargames. When Gygax is talking about strategic play he isn’t talking about moving miniatures around the map (he didn’t even play with minis), he’s talking about putting the players in situations where they have to use their problem solving abilities to succeed. In this context unorthodox solutions that couldn’t be attempted in a video game (because you can’t program in an action for every unorthodox thing a player wants to attempt) can be attempted succesfully by the players. Tl;dr: The type of wargames /tg/tards play aren’t the same as the games Arneson and Wesley played that later become Blackmoor and D&D. When Gygax is talking about strategic play he isn’t talking about miniature wargaming, he’s talking about problem solving situations.
>>96924715Well your argument is just semantics then, because I'm referring exactly to "competitive miniature noodling" in this case; a game, with defined rules, where I put several minis on the table and they use predefined moves or commands. A tabletop game based on miniatures warring.
>>96924715So it's not something that happens "frequently" but rather, "in some cases" or "in the past" and you are trying to talk about something else entirely.
>>96924696I mean those are the wargames where I've personally seen stringing actual narrative around the series of encounters. I guess small scale skirmish scope where every individual model matters sorta facilitates people getting more invested in "their dudes" and their misadventures.Mainline 40k seems to have ditched this attachment focusing on really just the combat.
>>96924735Yeah, but the missconception in these threads, which are born out of ignorance of D&D history at best, or deliberate malice at worst, always assume that wanting mechanics to facilitate play in RPG just means miniature combat (because combat is the only mechanic h that people can think of apparently) and that RPGs must be playacting out a story. Old D&D as played by Arneson and Gygax was born out of the type of wargames they (more so Arneson) played which where open games where you could attempt things outside of the rules which would be adjudicated by a referee. This is why you even have a DM in the first place, to adjudicate situations the players get into. The whole mechanics = combat assumption is so fucking baffling in the first place.
>>96924759>Mainline 40k seems to have ditched this attachment focusing on really just the combat.This is another problem, to most people here wargames = Warhammer and modern Warhammer equals competitive gaming. Older editions of 40k and Fantasy had a much bigger focus on long term campaign play with storytelling, something that is still continued in a few specialist games by GW but is largely forgotten.
>>96924268>Name one coop pc game where I can create my own dungeons using my own preferred ruleset and I can do simple things like digging through walls, or climbing a tree to get a height advantage or to hideWhile there isn't a game that already does this, you can make your own game which accomplishes this, which is point being made. Why settle for making your ideal version of dnd a pen and paper game when you can just make it a videogame?>but I don't know how to program a videogameSkill issue
>>96923912Arneson.>>96923956>Gygax is correct in that he didn't conceive of the systemShould have just finished the sentence there.
>>9692493532nd post best postIt's Arneson's game. Thank him.
>>96924268Minecraft
>>96923912>This is not D&D as I conceived it.Gygax didn't conceive D&D so he's automatically wrong
>>96924589I do it for almost every game I play these days. I've been wargaming for over half my life, games are just more fun and compelling when you have a reason why your little lead warguys are bashing eachothers heads in.>>96924661It sounds like you're not getting the most out of your games. Next time you play I suggest you have a short conversation with your opponent before you start rolling dice about WHY your two opposing generals want to kill eachother. It can be as little as a sentence of "flavor text", but you might be pleasantly surprised by how much more invested you are in the game when you have a reason to win beyond simply "I need to score more points than my enemy"
>>96924761>because combat is the only mechanic h that people can think of apparentlyThat is because combat and magic are basically the only mechanics D&D has.
If you ask me, when it comes to the language used why does the Referee play the enemy team?The Ref as a role should be "The Rules Lawyer" at the table, while the DM should be focused on representing the world at hand, with the Ref being there to insure that the world being shown to the players follows the rules of the game. It's a concept that's introduced in the book LISTEN UP YOU PRIMATIVE SCREWHEAD by Mike Pondsmith and Gang, that I resonate with. Ideally you have the ref and the DM be the same person but on the backside of that I go back to the question of "Why does the Ref Play the Enemy Team" If you ask me, at that point you have players who are dedicated to running the monster factions like in an actual war game. It's something that my mind couldn't get over when it came to having the ACKS II judges journal read to me and a group. It had this very language that felt antithetical to the game that I had experience with, and that's mainly because "The Game" Had changed so much over 50 years. (Also you spent the money on the fucking dice, so you should get to use them as much as possible.)Me, personally due to the way I've played for years the Arneson playstyle is what I like more. Your Characters are more than dumbasses who die in a dungeon, they are a character, that character deserves to be explored to go through arcs, to go through trials and tribulations, and most importantly to have their death MEAN SOMETHING, Whats the point of calling something a Character if they aren't going to do Character shit, whats the point of calling them heroes if they aren't going to be written about in heroic epics.Not only that but as I see it The DM is the Foremost Representative of His or Her World not just it's Villains, But it's Ancient Heroes, It's Cultures, It's Everyday People.The DM Sets forward the World, The Players interact with it. The Story Comes from that.
>>96923912Arneson, obviously
>>96924268Fortnite
>>96923912The first and last quotes are Gamer Gary, the middle one is Corporate Gary. He had reasons for all of them.Also Arneson was wrong and a big fag, he never wrote shit down so this "you don't need rules man" thing is pure cope.
>>96925238He's not saying you don't need rules though. He's saying the players take priority over strict RAW and then that rolling die for something the characters already did is retarded.
>>96925254You can't play RAW if like Arneson you never write the fucking rules down. Arneson was at best a pure RAI and at worst pure Fiat GM.
>>96924589>>96924661Read.
>>96924160>Don't listen to dead men how to run your games*chuckles**unsheathes katana*You weren't saying?
>>96925281No. I don't care if your specific kind of wargaming had story. Nowadays that is not the case, the hobby has moved closer to the tabletop space. I was referring to this kind of wargaming.
>>96925305Published in 2022, how's that for "Nowadays". The truth is a detailed Wargame campaign looks an awful lot like and RPG campaign.
>>96925333I can go and find an individual TTRPG book that says literally anything I want. Does not make that individual TTRPG book a representative of the hobby as a whole.
>>96925363Oh there is no doubt that a very casual board game play style dominates what passes for wargaming today. However even GW is flirting with campaigns in the form of Crusade and Path to Glory.
>>96925093>If you ask me, when it comes to the language used why does the Referee play the enemy team?It's an old wargame thing. The ref is expected to play the opposing side in a convincing and realistic manner. This still holds true for the modern day GM / DM / Ref
I feel a lot of people today get together to do acting improv, with the game being an excuse to not call it acting improv.
>>96924148>t. homosexfaggoid theatre kid
>>96925238>he never wrote shit downkekYour stupidity is truly intriguing, senpai. Is it deliberate, or are you truly ignorant? I am genuinely curious.>>96925363Are you ok, anon? You seem to be speaking for all of us: are you schizophrenic in any way? Please don't avoid taking your meds.>>96925396>even GW is flirting with campaignsUhhh, geedubs has been doing campaigns for their entire existence. This is not new, but a continuance, my friend.>>96925411I feel like you don't play games with real people. You should try it - it's fun!>>96925415Try being less lame, kid. People will admire and respect you more.
>>96925281"Frequently" implies that it is a common occurrence in the hobby, and not a footnote from people who are already dead.
>>96925093ACKS II is closer to a real game than you'll ever know you worthless parasite.
>>96925502You should play actual games with actual people - then you wouldn't come off like a retard.
>>96924589Historicals tend to work like that
>>96923956>he didn't conceive of the system to have a story emphasisAnon, not only don't any of the op quotes support your claim, the second one says nothing about story at all and the first one contradicts>completely abandoned the discipline of tactical play in favor of story-worshipStory-worship is not the same as having an emphasis on story.>impartially adjudicate, not to tell a story.Doesn't say anything about emphasis or lack of emphasis on story only that the DM is not there to tell a story.>The story is what happens when the players make decisions and deal with the results.Since story comes from player decisions and the game is players making those decisions this says story is emphasised.
>>96925514kekDid your feefees get hurt?Did your get your booty blasted when acks 2 got called out for being crap?Or are you just stupid?
>>96925525Well his system doesn't seem to agree, because the players aren't doing any of the describing of the locations or the scenarios (which is telling a story) or the creating of the dungeons (which is also telling a story) or the NPCs and enemies (all of which are parts of the story).There is no way for the DM to merely only impartially adjudicate. He is not equipped to do any adjucating by the system and he is in fact the engine through which the story is being produced because he is writing 90% of it.
>>96925093>It had this very language that felt antithetical to the game that I had experience withWat's wrong with different games playing differently?
>>96925521>>96925524>Does this happen!>OH YEAH ALL THE TIME... in the past. Shut up retard.Subhuman behavior.
>>96925415Well let’s see your definition of the purpose of an RPG then, anon.
>>96925539You're butthurt that you didn't kill the kickstarter, huh fishy? Ieday admay andway illkay ourselfyay ecausebay Acksway isway evernay eavinglay
>>96925548>his system>hisAnon, it's Arneson's system.>>96925582>doesn't know what 'historicals' meanskekI love you more than you can possibly imagine, senpai.
>>96925632NTA but we don't do that in historicals either. Them being "historical" often complicates the entire "making up your own story" thing.
>>96923912Arneson. Especially the last point - dice shouldn't be rolled if there's no risk of failure. If a character can present a strong, reasonable, logical argument to the guards, then why would they ever need to roll? There's no chance of failure - so there's no point in rolling.
>>96925632>guy who knows jack shit about historicals trying to dunk on other people over his made up bullshit about historicalsTouch brass, friend.
>>96923956>social mechanicslmao DESPERATE
>>96925093>The DM Sets forward the World, The Players interact with it. The Story Comes from that.My DM had maps and charts and history books we were all expected to keep up to date with so we didn't break canon.Every NPC knew more than us and hated us for being outsiders, so they wouldn't voluntarily help whatsoever because they were living under a brutal dictatorship we were supposed to overthrow.I quit after we were sent to the sewer (by the resistance) to fight mimics while they attacked the castle without us and shunned us even more for not helping in the assault
>>96924589>>96924661You've been poisoned by tourneyfag mentality.
>>96926659Even though I don't doubt there are people who do narrative-driven campaigns for similar post-hoc storytelling reasons, the claim was that it was a "frequent" occurrence in the hobby. As in, something that happens a lot, or is a common thing to do for wargames. It can be a thing that people do, but if it's not a thing that a significant portion of the hobby actually does, then it's not frequent and it's not remotely relevant when talking about TTRPGs and their Wargame connections.
>>96925514ACKS might genuinely be one of the worst games ever made. If you play it, you will end up a worse GM, and likely a worse person too.
>>96926515Clearly then the story didn't come from the players interacting with the world.
>>96926694kekYou lost. Try playing more games!>>96925646>>96925903>still doesn't know what 'historicals' meanskekIt's adorable to see you sperg out.
>>96925514It's closer to a video game, that's for sure. And I mean that in an unflattering way.
>>96924761Bruh, why are you lying? Like you can actually pull up scans of the first edition of D&D and see that you're entirely full of shit. It's combat and movement based on miniature movement.
>>96926962You clearly don't know what you're talking about.Are you off the meds, again?
>>96926962NTA but Gygax is infamous for having 'D&D the marketable game" with rules and grids and procedures maid mainly to shut down IP fuckery, and "D&D at Gygax's table" which was mostly freeform RP under a veneer of playing the written game.
I read the elusive shift and I have come to the conclusion that even at the time Gygax' style was quickly outdated and the main allure of TTRPGs always has been the story rather than the raw number crunching and "beating a game" kind of feel.Gygax never understood the appeal of his own product.He may have had a strict vision for it but loads of people didn't buy TTRPGs for his vision. The "story" side becoming the de facto way most people play these games nowadays settles it.
>>96924193Hyperbole ≠ disingenuous.You don't think it could happen, because you have such a narrow viewpoint and either likely never experienced such a thing, or enjoy such things.In either case, I envy you, but I'm legitimately curious: why gather together a group under the pretense of playing a game if you aren't going to actually play one? And if you aren't playing a game, why claim to be playing one? THAT is what seems disingenuous, as it's an outright lie.
>>96927119>le game maymayOh please, anon - come up with better arguments.
>>96927119People enjoy the context of playing a game but don't enjoy the act of going though all the procedures.The lack of understanding and inability to accept this concept shows a lack of proper socialization on your part.
>>96925415While I do like musicals, I have never starred in one.
>>96925853>then why would they ever need to roll?This is kind of gamist in its own way because it implies that all NPCs should be reasonable logical actors who can just be convinced of anything with the right words, but that's anathema to reality. There are people who will not listen out principle, stubbornness, duty, inebriation, bigotry, etc. The Orc-hating dwarf guard might not give a fuck that the greenskin is as eloquent as a bard or has some official-looking documents, he ain't letting your ugly mug inside the isolationist city and rationalizes that the documents were clearly forged.
>>96924268MineCraft
>>96927409So why should I roll die then, if he's not going to be convinced? What is random chance doing here? If he's racist, he's not suddenly going to let go of it randomly.
>>96927409so give the proper penalty to that roll. make this a reality in your game and people will adapt their play to it.If you just say you succeed or you fail then why the fuck are we even playing
More like GAYgax. Hah, gottem
>>96923912Me>Who gives a shit about two old farts that fell into obscurity 40 years ago
>>96927409In that case they wouldn't roll because you already decided it's a failure or impossible difficulty.
>>96927573>so give the proper penalty to that roll.No. You only need to roll a die if the outcome of an attempt is uncertain. When the NPC is for whatever reason unable to convinced of your proposal then you don't need to roll because a roll implies the possibility of success.The player should change their approach in such a way that success becomes a possiblity instead of hpoing the dice appease his lack of creativity.
>>96923967Except ttrpgs are fucking terrible for conventional story telling. Proof? The while genre of "rpg horror stories" where the game group falls apart because the gm is a story shitter or the players arent satisfied with the story he is shitting.
>>96923912Gygax.Most of the Arneson stuff is revisionism from after he started playing with MAR Barker (of Serpent's Walk fame lmao), most of the player's of his actual Blackmoor campaign said he was a bit miffed the dungeon was taking away focus from the tactical wargame.
>>96927935>You want proof? Well, I've been reading a lot of posts on reddit, and-I'll stop you there.
>>96923912Gygax was only obsessed with rules because he wanted to sell you more rule books>https://lichvanwinkle.blogspot.com/2020/06/gygax-said-your-d-is-fake-and-inferior.html
>>96927935Story =/= Railroad, I wonder if you will ever stop being a faggot but then I se you still try to push your new-speak terms and see you wont.
>>96927970>Most of the Arneson stuff is revisionism from after...And for everything Gary has said, he's also said the opposite and contradicted himself, repeatedly, in the rules, books, and modules he did write.
>>96927192There is no context of playing a game without its procedures. The context of an act comes from performing an act. If I sit down to watch television, and I say I'm writing a novel, there is no context in which I'm actually writing a novel during that time. That's called a lie, a deliberate falsehood.Like I said before, it's completely fine to not want to play games, I'm just confused as to why people have to lie about playing games when they clearly don't.If I say I enjoy games whenever possible, but just spend all my time listening to audio books, then that isn't me enjoying games whenever possible, that's me saying I enjoy games, while doing something else; a deliberate falsehood.Get it yet, retard?>thowth a lack of proper thothialithathion on your partMy friends don't enjoy tabletop games, and I'm mature enough to not try to force them to do things they have no interest in.Are you so underdeveloped you don't understand friends don't necessarily have to have all their interests line up, little faggot?
>>96926694>it's not remotely relevant when talking about TTRPGs and their Wargame connections.Yeah it's not like the game was marketed as rules for fantastic medieval wargames campaigns.
>>96929608>lemme prove you wrong>by using an example that hasn't been relative in 50 yearsAre you arguing just to argue, or do you think you're making an actual point that disproves the assertion that wargames do not " frequently have long and connected campaigns that tell an involving story. "
>>96923912Those statements aren't contradictory. Gygax says that the DM isn't there to tell a story. Arneson says that the players are the ones that flesh out the world. Gygax says the story is what happens when the players make decisions. Arneson says he's more interested in what the world looks like when the characters change it. They're both arguing against the GM railroading the players.
>>96929573Anon, ill repost what I said but capitalize the important part>>>96927119People enjoy the context of playing a game but don't enjoy the act of going though ALL the procedures.People don't ignore the rules completely, they engage with them just enough to allow them to achieve their intentions, which is using the game they are playing as context for having a good time with others.Its less watching TV but saying your writing a novel, and more watching TV while Ironing, you can't give the TV your full attention because its not actually the primary goal of the moment, its the thing you do to make the moment entertaining.I didn't want to just call you an autist who has a meltdown when people don't follow the rules, because even people with autism can learn to understand that everyone develop shorthands and shortcuts in their everyday lives and in their social contexts which slide past formality and regulation. But you expressed a difficulty to understand that most people game to socialize and socializing means an inherent looseness to terms of engagement.Obviously the groups you engage with are not those kinds of groups and that's fine, its your lack of understanding and presentation of confused aggression towards those outside your bubble that makes you under socialized.Call them subhuman normies who shouldn't be in the hobby, but don't deny the validity of their existence as a real understandable demographic.
>>96931175MotherfuckerI misclicked on the earlier post while reviewingIt was meant to just be>People enjoy the context of playing a game but don't enjoy the act of going though ALL the procedures.
>>96929573>I'm just confused as to why people have to lie about playing games when they clearly don't.People are playing games, you're just autistic about it.
>>96931105if Wargame campaigns were not well known and participated in D&D would have NEVER taken off. It would have never been developed in the first place.
>>96931314Wargame campaigns weren't long, connected stories, though. They were a series of battles. Stuff like Braunstein were the exceptions that proved the rule, and even then, they were novelties, not the standard, and certainly not "frequent" in any regard. And today, in the period we exist in now and are attempting to discuss, the idea of lengthy wargame campaign stories is extremely uncommon and not found in the majority of the hobby, which, yet again, hammers on the point that roleplaying and storytelling in wargames is in no way a "frequent" occurrence.
>>96931116That doesn't explain why so many anons are taking their words as a cue to argue against each other.
>>96931444Read the battle reports, the emphasis was not on creating a story but rather that the battle scenarios were defined by the players choices leading up to the battle. I also never claimed they were the standard, they weren't, anything that requires more effort is going to have less participation. I don't think anyone claimed campaigns are the norm for today, only that it isn't extinct.
>>96931577>I don't think anyone claimed campaigns are the norm for today, only that it isn't extinct.Follow the conversation, then. This entire argument hasn't been "wargames NEVER EVER have stories" but that someone insisted that wargames campaigns "frequently have long and connected campaigns that tell an involving story." ( >>96924548 ) which is simply not true, and wasn't true back in the day either. It was a thing that sometimes happened and a thing that has verifiably happened. Just never as the norm and never frequent enough to be considered some core aspect of the wargaming hobby.
Gygax is eternally right, story game freakshitters.
>>96931750And yet he never practiced what he preached.
>>96931750The characters on his games had so much story stuff the lore keeps reaching us to these days.
>>96931750>deluded osr chudtard
>>96931550>That doesn't explain why so many anons are taking their words as a cue to argue against each other.It's because OP asked "Who was right?" as a cue to imply that one of them was wrong or that the statements opposed each other. And some people enjoy arguing enough to just take OP's question at face value.
>>96931750>>The story is what happens when the players make decisions and deal with the results.”
>>96931844This, this, 1000 times this.
>>96931610What is this 'norm' you keep speaking of?It's like you know everyone who ever played ever and know exactly what they thought at all times...which is hilarious to me!
>>96929573>retardAh, you give up and apologize - I accept your apology.
>>96935243You're so dedicated to being wrong that you've chosen to make an ass of yourself instead of making a real argument.
>>96927935Good thing 'conventional story telling' is not what anyone advocated for.
>>96923967There is not a single video game to this day that properly translates D&D as an experience.
>>96935272>he doesn't get itThat's fine, just don't pretend you're playing a game. That's all there is to it.
>>96931257Listening to an audio book isn't a game.
>>96931175"Sorry Anon, your royal flush doesn't count because everyone develops shorthands and shortcuts in their everyday lives, and poker is a social game; socializing means an inherent looseness to terms of engagement."According to your response, you would need to have no problems with that quotation, assuming you keep your standards consistent, of course.
>>96940756Yeah, if your group shows up to actually just drink and shoot the shit while using poker as a fun pretext and dead space filler. Then if over the course of sessions playing everyone decides that Royal Flushes don't count for one reason or another, and as long as anyone new coming into that space is told about it, that's fine.Same shit like how every household that plays monopoly tweaks with the rules in some way sometimes passing those tweaks down down generationally.Its normal social behavior.
>>96923912Gygax was right.
>>96941140Interesting.So, how many of poker's rules need to be changed before it isn't poker any more?If you told me "hey Anon, let's play chess the next time we hang, but I'll need to borrow your board and pieces" and then I show up wearing scuba goggles, a catching mitt, a goalie's chest guard, riding chaps, hiking boots, while holding a tennis racket, with no chess board or pieces in sight, would you still think I properly prepared for the game of chess you asked for?You'd have to, according to the previously expressed logic. Chess is a social game, after all, and socializing means an inherent looseness to terms of engagement.>as long as anyone new coming into that space is told about itThat's the key problem with a lot of groups who run story-heavy sessions, though; they don't tell newbies to their table they'll be spending most of the time sitting around listening to other people talk. A lot of newbies are told that they'll be playing a game, not that they'll be listening to someone telling stories.
>>96923912>“If you can talk your way past the guards, go ahead — why roll dice for that? You already did the hard part.”But, I'm actually a social inept retard that demands to play a smooth talking face, you can't ask me to actually be smooth talking, I have to be able to roll a dice for it.^typical player
>>96941221There is a soft boundary that any reasonable person playing chess should have about the context of the broader game that inhibits them from doing that.I know that your trying to gotcha me by creating absurd situations to point out any flaws in my standards. But that's not going to work because the precept I'm discussing from assumes that the people involved are competent enough social actors with a general context of society and how social situations work, and so are able to compensate for enough issues that arise with any personal deviations, to give absurd corner cases no legitimate standing.And personally I actually agree with your second point..A good group should let new players know a bit about how the game is run beforehand, but not every group is like that so sometimes you just gotta show up and do the social thing of tanking the evening if its not enjoyable just to see how it goes. And then if your invited back just telling the person asking that its not your thing.
Stale bait.How many more fucking times do we have to have this goddamn thread?
>>96941880Until the matter is decided via a supermajority of the community overwhelming the other side so completely that they are pushed to the margins and are forced to accept that they are outsiders tot he community..
>>96941880It ends when fake wannabe OSR grog poseurs stop pretending that Gary was some enlightened saint who perfected RPGs on his first try, alone, thus making him the final authority on all matters of how games should be designed and played.
>>96924188If the game was well designed, you wouldn't need to ignore the rules to do anything interesting.
>>96925022If course, in actual fact, it's you who isn't getting the most. I recommend refraining from wasting time masturbating instead of playing the game.
>>96925093lol storyshitter
>>96925525Story worship means emphasizing story.
>>96925594To kill monsters and get loot, obviously, dumbass theaternigger.
>>96925853You roll to determine the character's competency with their action, obviously. You have presumed that there is no chance of failure, which is not a fact in evidence.
>>96927106congratulations on coming to the wrong conclusion, dunno why you think we should care.
>>96927986No you won't.
>>96928175Story equals railroad. If it isn't planned in advance it's not a story.
>>96923912Proof Gygax plays 4th I see.
>>96931175Nope, either you follow all the rules or you don't. No middle ground and no exceptions. Argue and I'll kill you.
>>96931784yeah he did fag
>>96941140No, it isn't fine, and I'll burn your house to the ground.
>>96941307Yes, this is completely reasonable, and is why the game has rules. Because we often play characters that aren't perfect duplicates of us, and as such have different capabilities.
>>96941417No, it isn't absurd at all. Games are defined by their rules, and chess has exactly one very specific set of rules, and any game that has different rules isn't chess. It's not subjective, it's not social, and it's not up for discussion.
>>96941880When you learn how to have fun correctly and stop pretending to have wrong preferences.
>>96923912Problem is, DND players never get what they like more. Or to be more precise, in a given group there is a very high probabilty that they think both are valid.Hell, often enough the same person has both opinions, to an extent.
>>96942628>A decent, well-rounded individual ought to be able to have a good range of capability and also be able to pretend to have those he doesn't.This is the result of allowing troglodytes to join your game.
>>96942861No, a game ought to be able to simulate the capability of beings in the game, since that is the purpose of the game system.
>>96942663As always, these things come down to everyone's least favorite answer, doesn't it? "It Depends."The story is told by the gameplay, yes. However, that story doesn't happen if the players don't have motivations for their characters and aren't invested in the world. If the players only choose tactical, optimized choices at all times, then it isn't really a game, as much as it is an exercise in doing the right thing when told to, and rolling high numbers as often as possible. It's got nothing to do with "discipline" because it's not a rigid tournament game where adherence to the rules is the only way to achieve true fairness.
>>96927970>revisionismGo back to whining about Marx, faggot
Consistent and impartial adherence to the rules is the only way to achieve fairness. That's what fairness means.
>>96942952Only if adherence to the rules generates a sufficiently enjoyable experience and the rules themselves are fair, of course.
No, what I said is correct with no further qualifications and no exceptions. STOP ARGUING.
>>96941221>Immediately segues into a false equivalencyKek, this is why OSRtards always lose.
lol dumb storyshitting theaternigger
>>96943836Nope, it's perfectly equivalent. You lose.
>>96942628Nah, play what you know.
No.
>>96943836>games aren't equivalent to games>socialization means an inherent looseness, but only when it's convenient for me personallySure thing.Your concession is accepted.
>>96923912Obviously Gygax. Storyfagging is a plague.
>>96923912>Who was right?The enthusiasts capable of having fun playing their game however they want.
>>96945259Nope, your fun is wrong.
>>96945261Yep, my wrong is fun.
>>96945259Based
You lose.
>>96944122Yes anon, saying "Oh we're using a houserule that slightly modifies the game" is different from playing chess without chess pieces or a chessboard.Or let me dumb this down to your own level of speech so you might understand: Durr hurr durr durr durrhurr.
>>96945416No, it is in fact exactly the same. Retard.
>>96927551>>96927814>>96927573The point is moreso that there is spectrum between "good RP should bypass social rolls" and "the NPC has in-universe reasons to disregard any good RP" and that space is where social rolls are relevant.
>>96942526Post a picture of your last game, and we can let the other anons in this thread be the judge of who's game looks like more fun. You've got my picture in the post your replied to, but I'll give another one here as a show of good faith.I know this is 4chan and all but you're responding with crude insults to a genuine suggestion for how to enrich your gaming experience, one that would require you to exert almost zero effort to reap it's benefits. I'm not even suggesting that you change the system you play, add or abolish any rules, or even change your mindset once you start playing the game. What have you possibly got to lose?You see a friendly hand offering you a small gift and you choose to spit in it. For shame anon.
>>96942932>The story is told by the gameplay, yes. However, that story doesn't happen if the players don't have motivations for their characters and aren't invested in the world. If the players only choose tactical, optimized choices at all times, then it isn't really a game, as much as it is an exercise in doing the right thing when told to, and rolling high numbers as often as possible.this is a driving force behind my general beef with D&D, especially the Old-School Gygaxian sort: the systems simply aren't arranged to encourage player input beyond that sort of "this character sheet with a max roll for strength goes in the fighter-shaped hole" problem-solving.compare D&D chargen to the likes of CoC or WoD and see how much more those other games demand you to think about your character *as a character* rather than simply matching the highest stat you rolled to a class that uses that stat.
>>96924268Dwarf Fortresshttps://www.bay12forums.com/smf/index.php?topic=176070.0
>>96924268Solasta comes pretty damn close to covering all your requirements
>>96923912Both. I don't see either of the quotes, nor philosophies they represent, as being mutually exclusive. If I am wrong please let me know why.
>>96942632>chess has exactly one very specific set of rules, and any game that has different rules isn't chess. It's not subjective, it's not social, and it's not up for discussion.You do know the rules of chess have changed over time right? And that there are many variants of chess, some of which are popular enough to see international tournaments with grandmaster attendents, such as Fischer Random. And thats not even counting things like speed chess formats or just general time and repitition rules, which do explicitly vary depending on social setting.
It's not one or the other. Both playstyles are completely compatible, and balance is achievable by a competent GM.
>>96927551>roll particularly well>the guard captain shows up and inquires about the commotion, finally allowing the party inside>the dwarf guard now holds a grudge against the players and will show up later as an antagonist
>>96946434You lose.
>>96946545Nope you lose
>>96923912Generally speaking I think Arneson is the more right of the two. There's some slight misalignment between him and myself but that's just how things are.
lol theaterslop
>>96942861Didn't reply, you lose.
>>96923912Gygax didn't conceive of the game, and Arenson is stating an opinion. So neither are "right". >>96947402Enjoy your well-earned vacation :)
>>96947897Nope you'll enjoy yours :)
>>96947974I wouldn't be at all surprised, frankly
>>96942562>t. retard who makes his characters roll to walk on solid, even ground and breathe in a normal atmosphereThere's always a chance of failure after all! You might trip even on a perfectly smooth paved road or forget to breathe!
>>96927409>This is kind of gamist in its own way because it implies that all NPCs should be reasonable logical actors who can just be convinced of anything with the right words, but that's anathema to reality.It's fantasy first off, so reality need not apply. Second, you're exaggerating my point.>There are people who will not listen out principle, stubbornness, duty, inebriation, bigotry, etc. Okay, and that's where the stabbing starts. Walk softly, carry a big stick.>The Orc-hating dwarf guardIs getting stabbed by the orc's friends for being subhumanoid filth and then we're using the Wizard to purge this city of filth off the map.
>>96948576>You might trip even on a perfectly smooth paved road or forget to breathe!Literally me when I'm anywhere near my crush
>>96923912Arneson has the more realistic depiction of DnD games.>Battles in DnD are a huge change of pace and tone, hence why you only ever get one a session because they're such a drag, leading to balance issues as casters don't need to conserve spells.>The rules are mediocre. You just as much rewrite or tweak them to run your game, and ignore or alter them depending on your needs as you're not running something according to the official material.>If a player can adequately solve a situation in a reasonable way, they don't need to roll a dice for it. Dice are for where your issues aren't so simple as to be solvable by some RP.Gygax is popular among those who like to talk about how genuine they are in the community, but lack any real capacity for creativity or of making something for themselves. There's no creativity, no spirit. Just maths and rules and enemies.Gygax's DnD is a Darkest Dungeon side scroller. And while that's fine if you like it, it's meant for oneshots, not campaigns, save for reoccurring character sheets.Arneson recognizes that people who actually play games, don't want a vidya-tier side scroller, and will change rules around to better fit their world.Overall, his are better, and more accurate, than Gygax's.
>>96948576No, you roll when there's a chance of failure, to determine the character's capability, which is different from the player's. Like I said.
>>96948884one encounter a session doesn't mean one rest per session.
>>96949151Yes, there's always a chance of failure a character could trip or forget to breathe. So, they have to roll for literally every single thing they try to do. This is your logic, not mine.
>>96950050Nope.
>>96950050>logickekAnon, you gone and sperged out.And you were doing so well....
>>96950050Really? The ruleset assigns a chance of failure to breathing? What page is that on?
>>96949192Anon, you failed your comprehension roll.
>>96942596You're wrong, salty bitch. Come at me!
>>96936150>muh argumentOh, is that what you're doing? kek>>96940682>muh gaemYou sound concerned...
>>96951471"You only ever get one a session because they're such a drag, leading to balance issues as casters don't need to conserve spells."Now let's see, how do casters get their spells back? Right, by resting. So if "one combat encounter per session" means "casters can get their spells back", then it must be the case that casters after resting after each encounter. Since there is one encounter per session, and the casters are resting after each encounter, it therefore follows that they are resting once per session. If this anon didn't think that "one encounter per session" means "one rest per session" clearly he wouldn't have any problems with casters getting their spells back, since he could be running any number of encounters between rests, with each encounter occupying a session.If you have any issue with this, state SPECIFICALLY what you think I'm wrong about, or do not reply.
>>96951530kekAnon, you just botched your comprehension roll with a 1.Great move. Wanna try again? I have faith in you, I believe you are capable of comprehension, in time.Protip: maybe if you weren't so angry, your brain would work better? Maybe you should be applying the original rules to anon's statement, instead of 5e?Maybe that might be your problem?That, and you're adorably stupid.
>>96951593Thanks for conceding.
>>96951530Also, you really fucked up your response, it's barely understandable.You esl?
Is he still trying? lol
>>96951596>concedingkekSee how adorable you are? You run away and, like a sweet little girl, claim victory.Run away more, and you will win a flawless victory!>>96951611Ohmygod, you are adorably new, too.Gotta be over 12 to post in this chan, kiddo, kek.
>>96951611kekAre you still running away?Run faster, anon.
>>96951624So you don't think casters have to rest to get spells back, or you don't think he said they were doing one encounter per session, or you don't think he said they were resting after each encounter? Which is it, sport? What are you scared of?
>>96951629Why are you running away?
>>96951630>projectionkekDon't be so scared, son - just because I laugh at your stupidity doesn't mean that you're a bad person on the inside. I'm sure your mom thinks you're very brave.And, oh yeah: anon didn't mention 'rests', you complete maroon, kek.>>96951633daw, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, thank you!
>>96951665Actually, he did mention rests. Why are you running away?
>>96951671Oh ho! you are a liar!For reference: >>96949192kekWhy lie, anon?Are you weak? Are you stupid? Can't do arguments like a big boy?I love how pwned you are right now.Moar!
>>96951707Why are you quoting my post? You didn't say I didn't mention rests, you said that anon didn't mention rests. Why are you running away?
aww it's okay lil buddy don't shit yourself! you can do it!
>>96936656That's the thing, they don't need to translate dnd.
>>96951714Oh, you must forgive me, here's the post you were lying about: >>96948884Liar!
>>96951977How do casters recover spells?
>>96951714Why must you lie, anon?Is it the only way you can win?
>>96951982Did you confuse me with someone else? Your posts are nonsensical.
>>96951980kekBack pedaling? Why are you running away?
>>96951989How do casters recover spells?
>>96951985Sorry, broseph - here are the receipts: >>96951977Why lie, anon? Can't you win with good arguments?>>96951994>back pedals harderkek
>>96952002How do casters recover spells? What do you think I'm back pedaling from?
>>96951994>>96952003Why are you running away?
>>96952005Why are you running away?
>>96952006kekAnd more flattering imitation! Thank you again!It's sad you've chosen to give up, but hey, you do you little buddy!
>>96952016Why are you running away?
>>96952018kekI love your broken brain method of argumentation, it's really got my jimmies russlin'!Protip: never ever let us see how mad you are, kid.Stay mad!
>>96952031If you don't answer how casters lose their spells, you lose. Final word on the matter.
>>96952033kekYou say 'final word', but we both know you can't help but respond, because we both know you are lying.
Thanks for conceding. You'll reply to this post and lose again.
>>96924589Have you never made adjustments or handicaps to your army list, using story to justify it?You've never mixed and matched units from different armies, making up a goofy story reason as to why they're working together before?I've had sessions where we allowed reinforcements or perks, depending on whether certain objectives were completed, or whether one player completely tabled another.Even something as simple as going first or other sorts of advantages as a reward for winning last game.RAW I believe Trench Crusade kinda does this with the results of the previous battle having impact on what type of upgrades your units can have. This kindof encourages you to see the games as a series of battles, following your units.
>>96952137None of those things are unbelievable or being denied. The whole concern was that some dipshit was making sweeping generalizations about wargames, as a whole, that don't hold up to scrutiny. Do some wargames have narrative elements? Absolutely. Is it a common and expected thing that wargamers do all the time? No.
>>96952230erm, anon: why did you run away?
>>96925440Faggot>>96925238Arneson is a retard and this whole revisionism is an attempt by Critical Role-obsessed niggers to try and maintain control over tabletop because they're freaks.
>>96952286>faggotkekNot an argument, my simple friend!Why did you run away?
>>96947974>the next fucking day and he's still at itWelp seems like janine is permanently on vacation, I guess that explains why mentally ill "people" like lastpostfag are allowed to shit the place up
>>96942585>. If it isn't planned in advance it's not a story.Not even trying anymore, I see.
>>96947142Sorry, but your opinion is totally invalid unless accompanied by a photograph of you last game.
>>96953415Don't know what "story" means? lol
>>96924268Brother literally described the most popular game in the world, Minecraft, and didn't even realize it. If anything it lends credence to your credentials as a TTRPG-only grog, to be so far under your own rock.
>>96924223>I'm amazed that gygax was so utterly rightt.homosexual assmad that a gay romance simulacrum isn't what D&D is
>>96942558Just play Borderlands, it achieves the same effect.>b-b-but that's reddit!Oh, so NOW the fluff matters? :^)
>>96957233No, I'll just play tabletop games, since that's what tabletop games are for.
>>96923956>it was made for dungeon crawlingThen why has it always had such crappy combat and poorly written rules? THAC0 will always be the dumbest idea I've seen people defend.
>>96924268Modded Minecraft unironically has more freedom than most TTRPGs.
>>96959400>doesn't understand THAC0kekYou have trouble with shoelaces, too?
>>96923912Both are right in some aspects, but I think Arneson was a bit more right.
>>96923912Neither are wrong. Are either right? They're not really contradicting each other. OP wants to make a thread about story vs gameplay but these two opinions aren't in conflict.Story-worship without rules is masturbatory. Just write fiction together, there's no reason to sit at a table every week to do that. Likewise, just sitting down to play an elaborate game with dice and paper is dull after the first few times without something to contextualize what is happening in the game, but an overfocus on the story that contextualizes dilutes the gameplay mechanics that give that story any meaning.Do the thread up again but better, OP, there's no reason to pit these two against each other.
>>96928167Why do people worship Gygax in the first place?
>>96957219I dunno anon, thinking stories are always gay sounds pretty gay to me.
>>96959652Appeal to authority combined with retards mythologizing a guy who was, by all accounts, an idiot and a jackass.
>>96956911>an account of imaginary or real people and events told for entertainment.Yes, do you?
>>96960121LOLLLL
>>96959460tell me more
>>96923912They are both right, both are different ways to enjoy the game and in order to maximize enjoyment between you and your friends you should often discuss what you expect out of the game and what you like and don't like to see. A person takes the role of the "computer" that relays the game back to you, so that means that D&D is deeply personal between your DM and you.
