RE: (TFT) Is TFT a role playing or board game?

[Ray Rangel <ray.rangel@cox.net>]

I'm certianly one of the ones looking for a sequel! Chris, see my blog. I have pix of my first attempt a running through WotR.

---- George Dew <gdew@ResponseNetworking.com> wrote: 
> Just a quick statement about programmed adventures (PA). (BTW, Chris'
> adventure, "Wolves on the Rhine," published by Dark City Games is
> excellent).
> 
> Chris is right that PAs are limiting.  
> 
> Unfortunately, there's not really much that we can do about it. 
> 
> PAs offer individuals the ability to play adventures either by just reading
> through, or by playing solitaire. This is better than nothing at all.
> 
> For groups, programmed adventures offer people the opportunity to play
> through adventures without having to do the massive amount of background
> work required to write an interesting campaign. Once you have this baseline,
> the GM can expound freely on what the adventurers can do, provided the GM
> has an understanding of the PA.
> 
> I guess it's just that there are always trade-offs in the way you do things.
> So although PAs are limiting, they are wonderful to have around.
> 
> BTW Chris, there's a lot of people asking for your sequel.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tft-admin@brainiac.com [mailto:tft-admin@brainiac.com] On Behalf Of
> Christopher Brandon
> Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 11:31
> To: tft@brainiac.com
> Subject: RE: (TFT) Is TFT a role playing or board game?
> 
> Sorry Mr. Jackson, despite my earlier protestations to avoid posting, the
> thoughtful posts by Ray and others enticed me to return.
> 
> First, I have zero issues with TFT used as an RPG system however one defines
> that personally. I was fortunate enough to have an adventure published by
> DCG so clearly I think the base system is great and I do use it in my own
> playing (although in my very tweaked homebrewed rules set).
> 
> Part of my Tactical RPG versus Story telling RPG thoughts stem from writing
> adventures in the solitaire/ programmed format for Dark City.
> (great guys & great adventures!) I find writing in this format constricting
> and to be honest limiting.  Let me take a moment from a recent non
> programmed adventure to illustrate:
> 
> You arrive in town with 6 silver pieces each, an empty stomach, and a hunger
> for adventure.  Two characters are in a port town and need money to get
> passage to an island where an ancient tomb is said to be.  They pool their
> cash, haggle, and buy a very small bag of fine tobacco.  They then go deeper
> into town trying to sell it as part of a recently arrived select cargo.
> They go through town and find a buyer.  They set up a meet with the buyer at
> their "warehouse."  Their warehouse is actually one they track down, break
> into, KO the guards, then meet the merchant, make the sale, and then try to
> sneak out of town with the cash.  The try to bribe the guards to let them
> out, then have to fight the guards to keep the coin. They end up scattering
> the cash to end the fight. Each ends up with 50 silver for all the trouble,
> two different angry merchant's after them, and the town guard looking for
> them while they are still trapped in the city.
> 
> That little interlude is about 5 hours worth of role playing with reactions,
> fast talking, hunting through tobacco shops, hunting to find a warehouse
> with tobacco in it, combat and all sorts of shenanigans.  If I were to try
> and program that one night adventure out, it would easily be 40-50 pages
> with all sorts of yes/no/maybe threads.  Would it be fun for the player?
> Mine thought so, but would it be fun for the writer...for myself I dread the
> thought.  
> 
> Why? 2 reasons: First because the programmed adventure relies on die rolls
> for success versus the player's ability to try and "sell" the GM what they
> are attempting and act it out.  Second, because I have to write out every
> possible out come from every decision or failed die roll even though maybe
> half to 1/3 will actually be experienced in play.
> There were only two combats in the entire adventure, and really only one was
> life threatening.  So maybe my issue is really one of programmed adventures.
> The format is roll-playing heavy decision tree, and not really role-playing
> where how you "act" has much more influence then a binary success/fail die
> roll format.
> 
> Example:
> You enter the dry goods shop.  The smell of spices and incense swirl in the
> stained glass colored air. A large, muscled fellow off to the left holding a
> staff watches you suspiciously as you enter.  Deep brightly colored carpets
> muffle the sound of your boots on the floor; though the occasional squeak of
> wood under the carpets tells of a shop that has stood for quite some time.
> The pinch faced, corpulent, black bearded fellow behind a tapestry covered
> counter smiles as he looks up. Then you see the corners of his smile falter
> and his eyes darken when he eyes your shabby dress.  "Yes?" He asks
> imperiously.  
> 
> In a role playing adventure the characters can now throw out a whole host of
> different responses.  Not so in a programmed adventure.  Also would this
> sort of interaction be any fun in a programmed adventure?
> Especially if written without any die rolls or interaction beyond "If you
> say...go to XX" over and over and over for 95% of the tale? I am going to
> guess...not so much.  Yet at the table it was a hell of a lot of fun.
> 
> All of that (sorry so long) to say maybe the combat centric nature of
> adventures published to support TFT may be what creates in my mind a sense
> of limits to the system as originally written.  Thoughts?
> 
> Cheers!
> Chris
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tft-admin@brainiac.com [mailto:tft-admin@brainiac.com] On Behalf Of
> Ray Rangel
> Sent: Sunday, April 27, 2008 7:09 AM
> To: tft@brainiac.com
> Subject: (TFT) Is TFT a role playing or board game?
> 
> The recent conversation has got me musing over what a role playing game
> really is. But, before I begin, please understand that these are my own
> thoughts and mental meanderings and nothing more. With that said...
> 
> I've been playing, first strategic board games, then tabletop historical
> miniatures games, and in the last few years various RPGs, since I was
> eighteen. That's about thirty-five years. The one universal element that
> I've found in all of those years of gaming is that everyone role plays.
> The
> miniatures gamer oversees the deployment and movement of his vast Napoleonic
> army and soon take on the role of Marshall Ney, Davout, or Bonaparte
> himself. Many is the miniature or paper battle that has been fought on the
> border of Natal and Zululand where the players have assumed the role of the
> stiff upper lipped Victorian officer or the proud brave Zulu prince fighting
> for their lives at Rourke's Drift.
> 
> Yet we generally don't consider these role playing games. Why not? I think
> that it is question of game design and intent rather than how is a game is
> actually used. The miniatures rules or board game focus is on the mechanics
> of play on the tabletop or board. The definitions and rules provided apply
> to movement, combat, and morale of the playing pieces (whether cardboard
> chits or miniature soldiers). Any role playing is left up to the players and
> their understanding of historical (or fictional) personalities. The
> objective in the miniatures or board game is to win.
> 
> Of course there are role playing games (or roleplaying, as it has become one
> word in the industry and gaming community and RPG for short). These games
> are specifically designed to provide the players a framework on which to
> build a character or characters of which they assume the roles and act
> accordingly. The objective of the RPG is to assume the guise of a character
> and to play.
> 
> Of course, these descriptions represent the poles. There are an infinite
> number of variation between them with many games borrowing elements from the
> other in varying degrees. In my opinion, TFT is pretty darn close to the
> equator. It, obviously, has strong elements of board gaming--it also has
> strong elements of role playing games. I suppose this is why it is so easy
> to have contention when talking about TFT. In any given situation or rules
> discussion, one must first determine whether the correspondents are viewing
> the topic from one pole, the other, pole or the same pole. This is can be
> very difficult, in my opinion, because TFT lies on the midpoint and, thus
> both points of view--while different--are valid.
> 
> Anyhow...I hope you all will excuse my ramblings on this quite Sunday
> morning. My intent is not to convince anyone of anything; rather to simply
> talk about my personal outlook and thoughts on TFT as happy medium between a
> board game and a role playing game.
> 
>  
> Ray Rangel
> ray.rangel@cox.net
> http://xraysvision.blogspot.com/
> =====
> Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
> Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
> "unsubscribe tft"
> =====
> Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
> Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
> "unsubscribe tft"
> =====
> Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
> Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
> "unsubscribe tft"

--

Diplomacy is the art of saying, "Nice doggy..." while reaching for a rock.
=====
Post to the entire list by writing to tft@brainiac.com.
Unsubscribe by mailing to majordomo@brainiac.com with the message body
"unsubscribe tft"