(TFT) Excerpt from Essay in the Sorcerer rpg. Thoughts about RPGing style.

["rsmith" <rsmith@lightspeed.ca>]

Hi everyone,
	This is a quote from an essay at the back of the
Sorcerer rpg written by Ron Edwards.

	Start Quote:
	...Three player aims or outlooks have been 
suggested, in that a given player approaches rpg pretty
much from one of them, with some, but not much cross-
over possible.

	--> Gamist.  This player is satisfied if the 
system includes a contest which he or she has some 
chance to win.  Usually this means the PC vs. NPC
opponents, but Gamists also include System Breakers &
Dominator type role players.  RPGs well suited for
Gamists include 'Rifts' and 'Shadowrun'.

	--> Narrativist.  The player is satisfied if a
role playing session results in a good story.  RPGs
for Narrativist's include 'Over the Edge', 'Prince
Valiant', 'The Whispering Vault' and 'Everway'.

	--> Simulationist.  This player is satisfied if
a role playing session 'creates' a little pocket 
universe with out fudging.  Simulationists include 
the well-known subtype of the Realist.  Good games
for Simulationists include 'GURPS' and 'Pendragon'.

	Here I suggest that RPG system design cannot
meet all three outlooks at once.  For example, how
long does it take to resolve a game action in real 
time?  The simulationist accepts delay as long as it
enhances accuracy; the narrativist hates delay; the
gamist only accepts delay or complex methods if they
can be exploited.  Or what constitutes success? The
narrativist demands a resolution be dramatic, but 
the gamist wants to know who came out better off 
that the next guy.  Or how should PC effectiveness
be "balanced"?  The narativist does not care, the
simulationist wants it to reflect the game-world's
social system, and the gamist simply demands a fair
playing field. ..."
	End Quote by Ron Edwards.

	The rest of his essay talks about how these
beliefs affect rpg design.

	(If you are interested in his game check out:
http://www.sorcer-rpg.com )

	The author is very much a narrativist, and
his game designs are created to emphasize this 
aspect.  


	The reason I bring this up is that I suspect
that most of the people who love TFT fall into a
blend of gamist / narrativist.  We like TFT because
it is FAST.  When I tried GURPS with my group we
decided to stick it out until we were comfortable
with the rules and could play it quickly.  Even so, 
the extra defend dice roll bugged us.  (Not only 
did it require an extra decision or two every 
combat swing, and an extra die roll, but since more 
blows were parried the combats lasted longer.  
However in the end, the net result was the same, 
with the players usually having kicked NPC butt.)
	The fast combat system allows people to get
on with the story telling.

	But the gaming elements are also enjoyable.
I think that it is fun to see your player's go up
attributes and gain more skills as time goes by.
Most of you at one time or another probably felt
the satisfaction of finally learning Fencing with
one of your characters.
	My expanded talent list has 40+ pages with
some VERY hard to get talents. 

	Now 40 pages of advanced, hard to get talents
are likely antithema to a hard core narrativist.
"If you ROLE PLAY properly you don't NEED all those
talents!"  Well yes, but how well did the 'Amber'
rpg sell?

	Don't get me wrong.  I LOVED the Amber series
by Rodger Zelazny.  I WANTED to find players so I
could GM that game.  But I didn't find enough 
people at one time to make a go of it.

	Hack an slash RPGing is boring in my opinion.
But I think that hacking RPGing or gaming style
RPGing keeps newcomers busy until they learn to 
role-play. (Admittedly, many never learn.)

	Gaming style RPGing has a couple of advantages
that Mr Ron Edwards didn't mention. (His essay was
selling to some extent his views on narrative RPGing
after all.)

	Gaming style RPGing allows the GM to be a bit
more indirect when it comes to PC deaths.  In my 
experience, narrative style GM's rarely if ever kill
a PC.  Since EVERYTHING is made up by the GM, any PC
death is seen as the GM fault.  

	Why do I care?  Are PC death's a good thing?
Well I am fascinated when I see real courage by a 
player.  Rufus had a very successful character who
risked almost certain death to save a companion. I
roll my dice in full view of the players so it is 
hard for me to 'fudge' results.  Yet Rufus took a
REAL risk with a PC which represented hundreds of
hours to play to save someone.  The risk and the 
successful gamble were given added sweetness by the
fact that they occurred in a gamist environment.

	
	Summary:
	Melee and Wizard are great games.  Because
of that, I think that the majority of the hard core 
TFT fans enjoy the game aspect of TFT.

	Now in the 'spat' I had with Michael a bit
ago, I agree with almost everything he says.  The
roleplaying of talents, etc. IS harder and more
interesting than straight gaming.  If you don't 
have interesting stories, the time spent seems
sterile after a while.  I believe that RPGing is
joint storytelling.

	(I took mild offence at the strident tone
he took with a 'newcomer' and the WAY he tried to
strengthen his arguments.)

	Now for many years I've been trying to 
improve (dare I say perfect) the roleplaying and 
story telling in my campaign.  There are many 
times where we will spend an 8 hour session 
"Nattering at NPC's" (in one player's words).
But I think that the strength of TFT is that it
is a strong game that is FAST.  Thus it can 
satisfy two groups fairly well.  The narrativists
don't spend all their time in combat.  TFT 
combats tend to be short.  Yet there is enough of 
a game there, to keep the gamist's happy while
they learn better roleplaying.

	I have a couple of narrativists among my
players and a couple of people who are very much
gamists (who CLAIM that they are there for the
roleplaying but grumble if they don't get at 
least one good fight).  The fact that the two 
groups can both enjoy TFT says good things about 
the system in my opinion.

	I also call for some perspective.  It is 
not the end of the world, if some people use TFT
to hack and slash.  Life is too short.


	QUESTIONAIR TO GROUP:
	What percentage of your players fall into
each camp?  Which do you prefer?  I will post 
some public predictions just after this post,
this way my guesses won't influence you if you
don't want them to. 

	Rick
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"