Min/Max Boards

Meta Board => Archive => Brilliant Gameologists Podcast => Topic started by: BG_Josh on December 16, 2011, 02:21:11 AM

Title: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: BG_Josh on December 16, 2011, 02:21:11 AM
Deep in another thread we find this:

I think my personal experience on the matter of playing non-D&D games matches up fairly well with many of Basket Burner's points. I don't play non-D&D games, except very rarely, because I don't know anyone who plays non-D&D games, but more importantly I have read non-D&D games and I dislike their mechanics.

From what I can tell, BG Josh has been implying, if not explicitly stating, that this makes me a poor Gamer. In order to become a "better Gamer" I should play games that I doubt I would enjoy, that do not offer the type of gameplay I want, because doing so will lead to some sort of gamist-version of enlightened self-interest? No, no this doesn't make any sense.

Out of a table-top RPG, I want:

  • a reasonably well-constructed setting, even if it is only an implied setting
  • adventure-focused gameplay
  • deep character-creation options combined with meaningful choices of in-game action
  • streamlined action-resolution mechanics
  • and clear, well-presented documents

I am willing to play games that do not do all of those things well, if they pull off one or more of them in intriguingly exceptional good form. Examples of games that I have learned, but not played because I didn't like their mechanics: Exalted, Anima: Beyond Fantasy, Burning Wheel, Risus, World of Darkness, FUDGE, and GURPS. Examples of non-D&D games that I have learned and have enjoyed playing: Marvel Universe Roleplaying, The One Ring: Adventures Over the Edge of the Wild.

Telling me that I'm a bad gamer, or that I'm the exception to the rule, is exceptionally ignorant and elitist. You wrote the rule, and defined the rule by the company you keep. You are basically saying that the only "good Gamers" are exactly like yourself and your friends, and that others at best woefully misguided sheep to be tended by someone of your infinite wisdom, or at worst willfully defiant mongrels to be put down. So, if that's not what you mean, I'd hope you would attempt to clarify and/or amend your statements.

I said, and stand by the fact, that a "good gamer" must be good at a range of games(by definition).  That  playing new and different games makes you better at the original game.  And that most people do not always want the same experience from a game, therefore they should play multiple games.

Also I am implying that: everyone (in the group) is interested in the game you are playing, everyone understands and agrees with the way the game is being played. and that you are playing a game that does indeed do what it claims and does not suffer from critical flaws.

So here's the list.
So, burning wheel gold.  It's the only extant game that even does some of these things.

If you are being flexible on some of these points there are other options.  Of course this list isn't very good for this purpose. 

What you need is the thing you want to do.  Rather than restrictive descriptions of mechanics.

"I want to have epic battles"
"i want to be zorro/Indiana jones/Mr T/joe peshi"
"I want to save the princess/take over the world/win iron chef"

Also, there is the issue that you don't always want to play the same game.
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: sirpercival on December 16, 2011, 07:36:14 AM
I think you should make a distinction between "actively play different game systems" and "have familiarity with and reasonable mastery of multiple game systems' mechanics."  I'm in the latter category -- over the years I've learned (and in most cases, played) a number of different RPG systems.  That sort of thing has definitely broadened my horizons and made me better at the games that I do play.

However, I almost always play D&D, for a variety of different reasons, not the least of which is that I enjoy D&D's high-fantasy, high-magic genre the most.  Granted, I've never played Burning Wheel, so I can't compare.
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: Stabbald on December 16, 2011, 08:07:39 AM
I'm confused by your post BG_Josh.

To me it reads like...

"You can only be a good gamer if you play different games. Burning Wheel is the only good game."

Seems somewhat contradictory. I would argue a game like Aberrant by White Wolf also covers all of those bullet points.
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: Agita on December 16, 2011, 10:15:48 AM
I think you should make a distinction between "actively play different game systems" and "have familiarity with and reasonable mastery of multiple game systems' mechanics."  I'm in the latter category -- over the years I've learned (and in most cases, played) a number of different RPG systems.  That sort of thing has definitely broadened my horizons and made me better at the games that I do play.

However, I almost always play D&D, for a variety of different reasons, not the least of which is that I enjoy D&D's high-fantasy, high-magic genre the most.  Granted, I've never played Burning Wheel, so I can't compare.
Agreed. I have like a dozen game systems lying around with varying degrees of mastery and have played... maybe three of those, not counting different editions or sub-systems.

As for that bullet point list, D&D also fulfills all but one of those points - a reasonably well-constructed setting, while not per se present in the core books, is provided by Eberron and others, adventure-focused gameplay is the whole premise, deep options at character creation are a given (even if only a fraction are viable or even optimal, That still leaves a staggering variety, and more are added if you take subpar mechanics and optimize them to playability), and clear, well-presented documents... are sort of subjective, I guess. I quite like the way most D&D splats are laid out, myself. The only thing that's missing from that list is streamlined action-resolution mechanics, as D&D almost literally has a different kind of roll for every situation. I can't comment on how Burning Wheel fits that list, but if InnaBinder says he tried it and it didn't fit the specifications to his liking, then I'll believe him.
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: Kajhera on December 16, 2011, 11:37:11 AM
Okay, so yeah, I play multiple games. My list of games is:
- D&D
- M:tG
- Civilization
- Minecraft
- Once Upon a Time
- Chess

Those cover most things I would want to play, and experiences I want to have with a game... would I benefit by playing GURPS, Yu-Gi-Oh, Starcraft, legos, some storyteller-guided system, and Go with my limited gaming time, or is this a perfectly sufficient range for me not to do things I don't care as much about?
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: Stabbald on December 16, 2011, 11:53:58 AM
Okay, so yeah, I play multiple games. My list of games is:
- D&D
- M:tG
- Civilization
- Minecraft
- Once Upon a Time
- Chess

Those cover most things I would want to play, and experiences I want to have with a game... would I benefit by playing GURPS, Yu-Gi-Oh, Starcraft, legos, some storyteller-guided system, and Go with my limited gaming time, or is this a perfectly sufficient range for me not to do things I don't care as much about?

I'm pretty sure that by a "range of games" he is referring to RPGs in particular. Only one of your listed games would meet that definition.
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: archangel.arcanis on December 16, 2011, 12:04:11 PM
As far as RPGs go I disagree that BW is the only one that meets all the requirements on your list. I find that D&D3.5 pretty well hits on them as Agita has already laid out. I'd also add that the Arcanis RPG does so as well, even more so than D&D.

I'll even take it to an different genre too. I like RTS games. I've also been playing the same one for 7 years because every other one I try fails to meet my requirements.
For these reasons I've stuck with the same RTS for years. I have tried others but am never satisfied with them on at least some of these points. Does that mean it is the only good RTS, not at all. It means it is the best choice for me and my friends who play it.
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: Ziegander on December 16, 2011, 12:19:48 PM
I said, and stand by the fact, that a "good gamer" must be good at a range of games(by definition).  That  playing new and different games makes you better at the original game.

Okay, so now you have restated your premise, but you have yet to defend it with any evidence. Note that personal experience or "eyewitness testimony" are, in this case, almost completely circumstantial and thus worth far less than, say, a logical argument.

I think it would be best to begin by defining your usage of the term "good gamer."
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: ImperatorK on December 16, 2011, 12:41:30 PM
It's sad when you like one particular game, don't get any enjoyment from other games, and are being mocked for not being hip and well-versed like all the cool kids. :(
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: Unbeliever on December 16, 2011, 01:06:28 PM
See, the reason I don't like Burning Wheel is its failure along many of those bullet points.  Let me preface this by saying that I have not played a lot of Burning Wheel, but I was playing it with people who were old hands at it.  I also have the 2 sort of novel looking BW books, so that's what I'm going on. 

The setting is too implied.  On the one hand, I thought we were creating this setting somewhat collectively around the gaming table, and I was given a vague idea of what that was supposed to look like from the GM and other players.  Great, perfect.  Then I sat down to create a character.  And, I found out that even though the book says we let you create your own setting, and I took the book at its word, the game itself has a VERY strong set of place.  The humans in the setting are very tied to a very particular view of medieval life.  The elves are very much Tolkien's elves.  And, so on.  Given the option between sneaking in a very strong sense of a setting or being more up front with a statement to the effect of "what I have in mind with humans is 12th century France, just saying ..." I prefer the latter.

I believe that you can hack the system to do many other settings.  But, that requires work/looking online.  And, I'm more annoyed by the sneaking one into the character creation rules than I am about the particular features of the setting. 

How does combat work again in Burning Wheel?  I found the array of options dizzying and frustrating and ill-balanced.  I've played a lot of systems, and I happen to be quite good at math (I do professional and PhD level game theory, economics, and formal modeling regularly), and I found the system very difficult.  And, I don't think this is just a newb problem:  the guys I were playing with, again old hats at BW, said that they often resorted to bloody contests b/c they found the combat system too clunky in practice.  When veterans find the combat system in a fantasy and adventure game more trouble than its worth in many instances, then that indicates it's probably not streamlined. 

Although, I want to be fair:  love the "let it ride" system, the skill system in general, and the Duel of Wits. 

I do have one other personal issue with BW/MG combat.  This is less a judgment than perhaps a personal failing.  I find the level of abstraction often pulls me out of the character a bit, so I feel more like I'm playing a board game or mingame or something, and end up doing what is best for me to "win" rather than necessarily what I think fits my character.  In something like D&D, I find it easier to conceive of what my reckless, cautious, determined, etc. character would do to display those qualities in conflicts. 

I found the BW character creation an exercise in frustration.  In the core books I own, at least, it has no sense or even real concession to game balance.  A lot of the design elements are justified by reference to the implied setting -- it's hard to change careers (or settings/categories maybe?  Like noble --> village, etc., it's been a while) in a medieval society -- but that's a feature of a particular setting. 

Mostly, though, I disliked how there were clear paths to particular lifepaths, and that you were punished (mechanically) or it was just impossible to carve out other ways.  Usually I come up with a concept and then go to the character creation system to realize it.  So, I rarely sit down thinking "I want to play a Fighter."  I usually come up with "Lord Dalorand, disenfranchised knight ..." and then figure out how I want to build him.  I found this quite difficult in BW. 

But, really, it's the game balance thing:  you are strongly incentivized and disincentivized to chart a character's history, meaning his or her lifepath chain, in a certain way.

For what it's worth, I agree with the other bullet points.  I like the size, shape, and even the writing in the books.  I do think the game is plagued by poor character creation and combat mechanics -- a view that I don't think I'm unique in.  And, I think the setting was either more clearly spelled out or cast a much smaller shadow over the game mechanics. 

I'm also a big fan of Mouseguard.  I find it too simplistic for a game to play regularly, but I like the game, its setting, and the book quite a bit.  It trades much of what I dislike in BW away, at the cost of relative simplicity
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: BG_Josh on December 16, 2011, 06:48:00 PM
It's sad when you like one particular game, don't get any enjoyment from other games, and are being mocked for not being hip and well-versed like all the cool kids. :(
It's sadder still to be that person..
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: BG_Josh on December 16, 2011, 07:54:56 PM
So, definition thing here.  Whatever a "good gamer" is it is not "good DnD player" you should expect them to pick up learn and play a variety of games (I would say all games, but earlier i implied RPG's only, it should be all games).  And their "gamer score" would be an aggregate of many games.

So if you just play DnD, as good a DnD player you are you would not be a good gamer.  You would lack one of the cornerstone skills of the "generalist" gamer.  Namely picking up and assimilating new games.

----

Why Burning wheel?

The number of RPG's worth playing is a surprisingly small number.  But the thing from the list I keyed in on is:
-deep character-creation options combined with meaningful choices of in-game action-
DnD does not have deep character creation, it has deep character evolution.  (don't bother with the start at higher levels thing, not the same thing).  DnD also does not have that much to do, basically just a number of ways to fight and kill things. 

-streamlined action-resolution mechanics-
90% of BW is fantastically streamlined.  fight and ranged are complex, but not as complex as combat in DnD.  Character generation is extremely complex, but you did not ask about that.

-a reasonably well-constructed setting, even if it is only an implied setting-
This is where BW falls down, kinda.  You have to want to play the game BW is, however that's true of any game, unless it is a build a world game.  So it is what it is.

-adventure-focused gameplay-
Choose the right beliefs and you are set

-and clear, well-presented documents-
and a unicorn.  But seriously, I want that too.  But if you went with this there would be three games: Mouseguard, misspent youth and freemarket.  So take your pick (this is otmh btw).

More to come later
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: Unbeliever on December 17, 2011, 09:39:16 AM
I'm not going to continue debating the merits of BW with you. But to the extent you see yourself as conveying information to the gaming community I think you are doing everyone a disservice by blithely glossing over the system's faults.

Finally consider the position this thread has adopted for someone like myself. Here I am a thoughtful gamer - indicated by my willingness to write out about a page of cogent and I think fair commentary on a system - who was interested in playing this "good" game but found it dissatisfying. By ignoring its defects the only conclusion left is that people like me, and I know there is a few, are somehow wrong on a deep level.
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: Ziegander on December 17, 2011, 10:29:24 AM
I can't be sure of this of course, but from what it sounds like, Josh, you believe that most gamers that play only a single game couldn't possibly pick up and play another game or even a few other games with any amount of ease or skill. If that's the case, then, yes, I agree, by your definition and your set of beliefs I would be an exception to your rules, as would many here; however, if that's the case, then I think there's definitely room for a debate there.

I would argue that most people that play any sort of game can learn to play a number of other, similar games without much difficulty. It would seem that this is your standard by which you determine whether or not someone is a "good gamer," not necessarily that a person is actually good at playing any game or any number of games, but that someone can with relative ease learn to play many games.

Someone plays Age of Empires a lot? I would argue that they would have little difficulty picking up Civilization, Command & Conquer, and Warcraft.

Someone plays Monopoly a lot? I would argue that they would have little difficulty picking up Life, Parcheesi, or even Risk.

Someone plays D&D a lot? I would argue that they would have little difficulty picking up any tabletop role-playing game.

I think this is where our opinions and personal experience diverge.
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: BG_Josh on December 17, 2011, 03:11:55 PM

Someone plays D&D a lot? I would argue that they would have little difficulty picking up any tabletop role-playing game.

I think this is where our opinions and personal experience diverge.

I have taught dozens of people dozens of different new rpg's and nothing could be further from the truth.  It is harder to teach a DnD player than someone who knows nothing or someone who only plays boardgames.

Much harder.  They expect things tor work like DnD and then they don't.
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: Ziegander on December 17, 2011, 03:22:29 PM

Someone plays D&D a lot? I would argue that they would have little difficulty picking up any tabletop role-playing game.

I think this is where our opinions and personal experience diverge.

I have taught dozens of people dozens of different new rpg's and nothing could be further from the truth.  It is harder to teach a DnD player than someone who knows nothing or someone who only plays boardgames.

Much harder.  They expect things tor work like DnD and then they don't.

Well, I can neither prove nor deny your statements. Like I said, our own personal experiences simply differ. I have not taught dozens of people dozens of different RPGs, but I have taught a handful of friends (who play nothing but D&D) a handful of different RPGs with very little trouble.
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: BG_Josh on December 17, 2011, 03:23:17 PM
I'm not going to continue debating the merits of BW with you. But to the extent you see yourself as conveying information to the gaming community I think you are doing everyone a disservice by blithely glossing over the system's faults.

Finally consider the position this thread has adopted for someone like myself. Here I am a thoughtful gamer - indicated by my willingness to write out about a page of cogent and I think fair commentary on a system - who was interested in playing this "good" game but found it dissatisfying. By ignoring its defects the only conclusion left is that people like me, and I know there is a few, are somehow wrong on a deep level.

Your commentary was fair. I may have obfuscated things slightly.  If you don't like BW that's fine. But that list, it's burning wheel or change some restrictions. That's what I was getting at.

-Premade settings, that are good, are very specific in how they work and what they do.  (Burning wheel)
-Then there are systems that do a thing and you build the setting (Misspent Youth, dread)

Taking another tact for Ziegander:
If you want an action adventure game here's the list

Dungeons and Dragons 4th
Dungeons and Dragons 3rd
Warhammer Fantasy (the latest)
Savage worlds (any after the latest deadland imprint)
Battlestations
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: BG_Josh on December 17, 2011, 03:26:34 PM

Someone plays D&D a lot? I would argue that they would have little difficulty picking up any tabletop role-playing game.

I think this is where our opinions and personal experience diverge.

I have taught dozens of people dozens of different new rpg's and nothing could be further from the truth.  It is harder to teach a DnD player than someone who knows nothing or someone who only plays boardgames.

Much harder.  They expect things tor work like DnD and then they don't.

Well, I can neither prove nor deny your statements. Like I said, our own personal experiences simply differ. I have not taught dozens of people dozens of different RPGs, but I have taught a handful of friends (who play nothing but D&D) a handful of different RPGs with very little trouble.

What RPGs from my list here (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=2236.0) have you taught.  Because if you taught them WoD or Shadowrun you have not really taught a different game and those games lack so much substance there really isnt anything different to teach (all you need to know is "ask the GM what to do").
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: Ziegander on December 17, 2011, 03:30:45 PM

Someone plays D&D a lot? I would argue that they would have little difficulty picking up any tabletop role-playing game.

I think this is where our opinions and personal experience diverge.

I have taught dozens of people dozens of different new rpg's and nothing could be further from the truth.  It is harder to teach a DnD player than someone who knows nothing or someone who only plays boardgames.

Much harder.  They expect things tor work like DnD and then they don't.

Well, I can neither prove nor deny your statements. Like I said, our own personal experiences simply differ. I have not taught dozens of people dozens of different RPGs, but I have taught a handful of friends (who play nothing but D&D) a handful of different RPGs with very little trouble.

What RPGs from my list here (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=2236.0) have you taught.  Because if you taught them WoD or Shadowrun you have not really taught a different game and those games lack so much substance there really isnt anything different to teach (all you need to know is "ask the GM what to do").

I haven't taught any of those games, nor World of Darkness or Shadowrun. Are you really going down the road of, "if you haven't taught any of my games, then you haven't taught anyone anything?" Because that will win you lots of approval, I assure you. /sarcasm
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: BG_Josh on December 17, 2011, 03:49:35 PM

Someone plays D&D a lot? I would argue that they would have little difficulty picking up any tabletop role-playing game.

I think this is where our opinions and personal experience diverge.

I have taught dozens of people dozens of different new rpg's and nothing could be further from the truth.  It is harder to teach a DnD player than someone who knows nothing or someone who only plays boardgames.

Much harder.  They expect things tor work like DnD and then they don't.

Well, I can neither prove nor deny your statements. Like I said, our own personal experiences simply differ. I have not taught dozens of people dozens of different RPGs, but I have taught a handful of friends (who play nothing but D&D) a handful of different RPGs with very little trouble.

What RPGs from my list here (http://www.minmaxboards.com/index.php?topic=2236.0) have you taught.  Because if you taught them WoD or Shadowrun you have not really taught a different game and those games lack so much substance there really isnt anything different to teach (all you need to know is "ask the GM what to do").

I haven't taught any of those games, nor World of Darkness or Shadowrun. Are you really going down the road of, "if you haven't taught any of my games, then you haven't taught anyone anything?" Because that will win you lots of approval, I assure you. /sarcasm
So what games?
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: X-Codes on December 17, 2011, 04:17:11 PM
I haven't taught any of those games, nor World of Darkness or Shadowrun. Are you really going down the road of, "if you haven't taught any of my games, then you haven't taught anyone anything?" Because that will win you lots of approval, I assure you. /sarcasm
Grow up.  While you're at it, look up the game "Danger Patrol."  Now, compare that game to 3.5e.  The two would, obviously, be dramatically different in terms of difficulty to teach to a new player.  So yeah, the games that you've taught to people matters.

Seriously.  I'm getting sick of people saying "Well, Josh, I don't have the experience that you claim to have in these matters, but I still say you're wrong because I've done something kinda similar on an order of magnitude significantly smaller than what you've done."  I reiterate, Josh is an asshole.  He shouldn't be, but he is.  The same goes for you people.  You're being assholes, and you really shouldn't be.
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: Agita on December 17, 2011, 06:15:56 PM

Someone plays D&D a lot? I would argue that they would have little difficulty picking up any tabletop role-playing game.

I think this is where our opinions and personal experience diverge.

I have taught dozens of people dozens of different new rpg's and nothing could be further from the truth.  It is harder to teach a DnD player than someone who knows nothing or someone who only plays boardgames.

Much harder.  They expect things tor work like DnD and then they don't.
This is correct, but it should start going smoother after the first or second game that is not D&D. I've picked up a lot of games over the last two years or so, including Mutants & Masterminds (2e and 3e), World of Darkness (plus a number of its sub-systems), DFRPG, Exalted (and Scion), and a whole bunch of Indie games. Picking up new ones (including catching on to how to min/max with them) got a lot smoother and faster after my group roped me into trying Changeling. My learning process tends to consist of me just reading the books and tossing questions at a knowledgeable player rather than being taught, though.
Still, generalizing from my personal experience, if you want to teach a dedicated D&D player other systems, I think it would be useful to start with one that uses a very different dice mechanic in order to break up conceits. The d10 system is probably the most radically different, but... it's the freaking d10 system. If I were to try to get a D&D player to branch out, I'd probably go with a FATE system, or something else that uses Fudge dice, or else one of the Indie games that use d6s. Analogous thoughts apply to players of other systems, of course - if you have a d10 player (the poor soul), try to get them to try a d20 game.
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: BG_Josh on December 18, 2011, 02:34:52 AM

Someone plays D&D a lot? I would argue that they would have little difficulty picking up any tabletop role-playing game.

I think this is where our opinions and personal experience diverge.

I have taught dozens of people dozens of different new rpg's and nothing could be further from the truth.  It is harder to teach a DnD player than someone who knows nothing or someone who only plays boardgames.

Much harder.  They expect things tor work like DnD and then they don't.
This is correct, but it should start going smoother after the first or second game that is not D&D. I've picked up a lot of games over the last two years or so, including Mutants & Masterminds (2e and 3e), World of Darkness (plus a number of its sub-systems), DFRPG, Exalted (and Scion), and a whole bunch of Indie games. Picking up new ones (including catching on to how to min/max with them) got a lot smoother and faster after my group roped me into trying Changeling. My learning process tends to consist of me just reading the books and tossing questions at a knowledgeable player rather than being taught, though.
Still, generalizing from my personal experience, if you want to teach a dedicated D&D player other systems, I think it would be useful to start with one that uses a very different dice mechanic in order to break up conceits. The d10 system is probably the most radically different, but... it's the freaking d10 system. If I were to try to get a D&D player to branch out, I'd probably go with a FATE system, or something else that uses Fudge dice, or else one of the Indie games that use d6s. Analogous thoughts apply to players of other systems, of course - if you have a d10 player (the poor soul), try to get them to try a d20 game.
I would point out that the games you listed are basically the same game.  They have the same GM and GMing style, and in all of them you fight stuff and make skill checks (player vs Environment). 

Games like Shock or Apocalypse World or Freemarket or Burning wheel are as different from each other as they are from DnD.
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: Agita on December 18, 2011, 07:19:57 AM

Someone plays D&D a lot? I would argue that they would have little difficulty picking up any tabletop role-playing game.

I think this is where our opinions and personal experience diverge.

I have taught dozens of people dozens of different new rpg's and nothing could be further from the truth.  It is harder to teach a DnD player than someone who knows nothing or someone who only plays boardgames.

Much harder.  They expect things tor work like DnD and then they don't.
This is correct, but it should start going smoother after the first or second game that is not D&D. I've picked up a lot of games over the last two years or so, including Mutants & Masterminds (2e and 3e), World of Darkness (plus a number of its sub-systems), DFRPG, Exalted (and Scion), and a whole bunch of Indie games. Picking up new ones (including catching on to how to min/max with them) got a lot smoother and faster after my group roped me into trying Changeling. My learning process tends to consist of me just reading the books and tossing questions at a knowledgeable player rather than being taught, though.
Still, generalizing from my personal experience, if you want to teach a dedicated D&D player other systems, I think it would be useful to start with one that uses a very different dice mechanic in order to break up conceits. The d10 system is probably the most radically different, but... it's the freaking d10 system. If I were to try to get a D&D player to branch out, I'd probably go with a FATE system, or something else that uses Fudge dice, or else one of the Indie games that use d6s. Analogous thoughts apply to players of other systems, of course - if you have a d10 player (the poor soul), try to get them to try a d20 game.
I would point out that the games you listed are basically the same game.  They have the same GM and GMing style, and in all of them you fight stuff and make skill checks (player vs Environment). 

Games like Shock or Apocalypse World or Freemarket or Burning wheel are as different from each other as they are from DnD.
Mind elaborating? Isn't what you describe the core of any game, as in, you roll against a number to achieve something?
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: BG_Josh on December 18, 2011, 01:51:30 PM

Someone plays D&D a lot? I would argue that they would have little difficulty picking up any tabletop role-playing game.

I think this is where our opinions and personal experience diverge.

I have taught dozens of people dozens of different new rpg's and nothing could be further from the truth.  It is harder to teach a DnD player than someone who knows nothing or someone who only plays boardgames.

Much harder.  They expect things tor work like DnD and then they don't.
This is correct, but it should start going smoother after the first or second game that is not D&D. I've picked up a lot of games over the last two years or so, including Mutants & Masterminds (2e and 3e), World of Darkness (plus a number of its sub-systems), DFRPG, Exalted (and Scion), and a whole bunch of Indie games. Picking up new ones (including catching on to how to min/max with them) got a lot smoother and faster after my group roped me into trying Changeling. My learning process tends to consist of me just reading the books and tossing questions at a knowledgeable player rather than being taught, though.
Still, generalizing from my personal experience, if you want to teach a dedicated D&D player other systems, I think it would be useful to start with one that uses a very different dice mechanic in order to break up conceits. The d10 system is probably the most radically different, but... it's the freaking d10 system. If I were to try to get a D&D player to branch out, I'd probably go with a FATE system, or something else that uses Fudge dice, or else one of the Indie games that use d6s. Analogous thoughts apply to players of other systems, of course - if you have a d10 player (the poor soul), try to get them to try a d20 game.
I would point out that the games you listed are basically the same game.  They have the same GM and GMing style, and in all of them you fight stuff and make skill checks (player vs Environment). 

Games like Shock or Apocalypse World or Freemarket or Burning wheel are as different from each other as they are from DnD.
Mind elaborating? Isn't what you describe the core of any game, as in, you roll against a number to achieve something?

All these games work the following way (with tiny outlying exceptions)

Game: GM presents an adventure; players try to overcome a series of challenges; at the end they succeed or fail, mark experience and re set up for the next adventure.

system: large scale GM presents a challenge that has mechanics instilled by the GM's decisions (like a combat encounter). small scale GM presents a challenge and the player succeeds or fails, in both cases the GM decides the outcome.

philosopy: These games are heavily steeped in the GM using the negative techniques illusionism, hand waving, storytelling and fudgeing.

The other games work, differently.

In Shock everyone is a GM and a Player.  You decide your own challenge based on a system the group made up, the GM decides a sort of knife twisting subchallenge.  When you roll, everyone at the table rolls.

In AW the GM never rolls and the players know the flat success rates for every move they might make.

In BW the game is built around the decisions you make about your character, namely their beliefs.  And even though the game has a GM most of the system is designed to give all the power to the players.  This enhances the power of the GM because they can go at you hard.  Also by design failure is not a stop, but a complication.

And Freemarket is the game so wacky people who have mastered these other games think it is weird.  It is a game actually about transhumanity.
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: Unbeliever on December 19, 2011, 09:50:13 AM
^ I think a lot of this is fair.  Although I stipulate my ignorance about games other than D&D and BW. 

The only thing I wanted to add (reiterate?) is that while that might be true -- and that the beliefs, etc. structure of BW, along with the way it treats "failures" is quite interesting -- it also carries with it a lot of baggage, to use a loaded term that expresses my assessment.  This is the setting, character creation, and combat rules criticisms I referred to in my earlier posts.

So, the costs of admission to that system may be high.  For some players, to whom such things are important.  Or, alternately, have not had enough positive experiences with the other aspects of the system to outweigh the bad stuff, those costs may be prohibitive.  This, I think, explains my thumbs up for Mouseguard and thumbs down for BW. 

Further, I think this makes it a bit equivocal whether Burning Wheel qualifies as a "good" games (full stop) or an "ok" or even "passable" game with some really intriguing great elements to it.  Combat, character creation, and setting are, one could reasonably argue, are things central to an RPG.

Finally, I'd say the typology implied by the above post may be pitched at such a level of abstraction to be divorced from actual experience at the table.  For example, I play D&D and M&M pretty regularly, apparently b/c I love ampersands.  According to Josh's typology, they are essentially the same game, and they do share very much in common.  But, I find my experience as player and GM of both to be radically different.  Likewise, it's hard for me to say my experience running/playing Rifts, WoD, Godlike, D&D, M&M, and Star Wars Saga Edition were all, in essence, identical.  What I'm saying is that typology may be an unhelpful one, in the way that saying that Basketball and (American) Football are essentially the same game b/c they both involve balls, scoring, referees, and fouls. 
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: BG_Josh on December 19, 2011, 11:15:24 AM
Unbeliver,

You use the term "baggage" and I think that is exactaly correct.  The problem that people have coming from sayDnD to Burning wheel is a kind of baggage.  (I argue that the baggage is on the side of the other game)  bw works in a particular way.  It does not run like a modified version of DnD. 

And yes bw character design is difficult, if you have decided your destination.  But unlike DnD you don't need to do that to start.

As for similar play experiences, play a radically different game and then talk to me again.
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: Unbeliever on December 19, 2011, 12:14:27 PM
Unbeliver,

You use the term "baggage" and I think that is exactaly correct.  The problem that people have coming from sayDnD to Burning wheel is a kind of baggage.  (I argue that the baggage is on the side of the other game)  bw works in a particular way.  It does not run like a modified version of DnD. 
You continue to try and defend a position but don't really offer evidence in its defense.  I have made the following contentions:  Burning Wheel has a clunky combat system (I'd actually go further to say that it borders on the unplayable) and a character creation system that smuggles in really strong presumptions about the game world. 

These, I think, are reasonable, well-thought out, and hardly unique criticisms.  What you could say is that either:  (a) I'm wrong in my estimation for such and such reasons, or (b) that the costs of admission are worth the awesomeness that is Burning Wheel. 

But, instead your response is, roughly, as follows:  (c) category error on Unbeliever's part, he thinks that BW should run like D&D, and it doesn't, and so his evaluations are mistaken. 

This is both untrue and uncharitable.  And, based on absolutely nothing I've written, except the shocking revelation that I play D&D. 

I expect BW to do what it says on the tin:  a fantasy game with meaningful rules for conflicts, some of which will occasionally involve stabbing.  Any game that includes 100+ rules for combat (I checked) can be expected to be judged, to some degree, on the merits of those rules.  And, stabbing people, jousting, and so on is an archetypal feature of fantasy stories. 

As for similar play experiences, play a radically different game and then talk to me again.
This is both arrogant and prickish.  I don't know if that's your intention, and I try to make allowances for written media.  But, this sort of claimed authoritative high-horsing seems to be a theme in your posts. 

This is an argument by authority, and I am willing to guess you know what that is and why it's bad.  Also, by context and by admission I've, y'know, played both BW and Mouseguard.  So, ummm ... yeah ...
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: BG_Josh on December 19, 2011, 02:31:41 PM
Burning wheel does not have a "combat system" so that alone reperesents a paridigm shift. 

One subsystem called Fight is somewhat complex to encompass but is less complex than any DnD system.  To learn fight, you play it.

How is the game without fight?

Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: Unbeliever on December 19, 2011, 04:37:33 PM
Burning wheel does not have a "combat system" so that alone reperesents a paridigm shift. 
sigh ...  This strikes me as yet another instance where you will have some idiosyncratic usage of a common term.  The Burning Wheel rulebook I have has many many pages devoted to adjudicating combats, and further pages devoted to the implements of such combats (weapons and armor) as well as how entities recover from the rigors of such encounters.  This is a set of rules adjudicating combat, or a combat system, for short.  And, it is a significant part of the game, both in pages and in terms of the genre the game is supposed to emulate. 

One subsystem called Fight is somewhat complex to encompass but is less complex than any DnD system.  To learn fight, you play it.

How is the game without fight?
The complaint wasn't complexity, but "clunkiness."  Which I think is a combination of opacity, imbalance, as well as complexity.  In particular, it was hard to parse the rhyme or reason or internal logic between the modifiers attendant to all the various maneuvers.

I think I described my general feelings on the system above.  Setting aside combat for a minute, I found its character creation system very problematic.  There were balance issues, but I also did not like how firmly it tied you to a very particular image of the setting, one that was never spelled out anywhere.  Indeed, the opposite is stated in the beginning of the Character Burner, if memory serves. 

Besides that, my only other complaint is that there's a lot going on in the Artha, et al. system.  Perhaps too much in the way that all the various things fit together.  Although that might just be a newb problem or one of presentation. 

To reiterate:  I was disappointed by BW.  I purchased it on the recommendation of people, including the Brilliant Gameologist podcast.  And, I think there's a lot of potential for a game that is truly character-driven and deeply-satisfying.  But, I feel the game is hamstrung by particular, and on my read surprising, design choices that lead to restrictive and baroque mechanics.  These, I feel, get in the way of the more interesting and innovative features presented in the game.

This doesn't mean it's not a good game.  But, it does mean that it has issues.  Especially since the elements that I find problematic are reasonably important ones to an RPG.  But, I play and really enjoy lots of games that have issues, and even great games tend to have them (to take an example from another medium, the Witcher 2 is a great action RPG, but it has serious issues). 

Part of me would love to find a group of Burning Wheel players and still try it out and experience it at its best, though I don't have the time nowadays. 
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: BG_Josh on December 20, 2011, 01:08:57 AM
So, here's the deal Unbeliever. 

BW works like a negotiation. 

Player: I want this
GM: How shall we do that? OR Here is a way to do that
Player: This Way OR I accept/reject that way
GM: what happens if you make it?
Player: This.  What happens if I fail?
GM: This. Are we agreed to terms and mechanics?
Player: Yes/No/ go back to "I want this"
Player Rolls, Play progresses

Now it is never that formal but that is the overview.  Players always are aware of all the mechanics, there are no surprises in that regard.

So to use this for combat the group decides how to apply it.  Skill test, extended test, ranged, fight etc.  So combat can be a kind of skill test or you can use a subsystem.  But in the end you negotiate what you would like to use. 

It's a very different game.

PS:  By design, there is no specific "balance" between players.  That's why you don't see it
PPS: by design character generation is tied to setting, and adventure is tied to character design. 
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: Agita on December 20, 2011, 06:22:55 AM
So the only difference is that in BW, the DM pitches in on how to solve situations and players are aware of all the consequences of their actions?
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: BG_Josh on December 20, 2011, 09:45:07 AM
So the only difference is that in BW, the DM pitches in on how to solve situations and players are aware of all the consequences of their actions?

No.  The gm does not pitch in.  There are many ways of executing a goal.  All the players know these ways.  The player and the gm agree on what the final numbers are.  The job of the gm is to set obstacles and complications as well as push the situation.

Again, it is so different from DnD you really need to experience it.
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: Unbeliever on December 20, 2011, 10:05:19 AM
I had a longer post, but I don't think I'm going to bother posting it. 

I actually have read BW and played it a bit.  Suffice to say that my feelings on the game differ greatly from Josh's.  And, I think his brief explanations of the system both fly in the face of the book and are tinged by the way he (and maybe lots of people for all I know) run and play the game.  So, are essentially large house rules laid on top of the system.  I also don't think they answer any of the criticisms of the game I've presented.  If anyone's curious on my take I guess they can PM me or something. 
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: BG_Josh on December 20, 2011, 10:36:55 AM
I had a longer post, but I don't think I'm going to bother posting it. 

I actually have read BW and played it a bit.  Suffice to say that my feelings on the game differ greatly from Josh's.  And, I think his brief explanations of the system both fly in the face of the book and are tinged by the way he (and maybe lots of people for all I know) run and play the game.  So, are essentially large house rules laid on top of the system.  I also don't think they answer any of the criticisms of the game I've presented.  If anyone's curious on my take I guess they can PM me or something.

That's what I expected.  The way I indicate is the way to play the game. So you like many people have been playing your own way.  That may be why you don't like it.  But just as likely, you don't like it.
Title: Re: New question pulled out of thread
Post by: veekie on December 20, 2011, 10:50:29 AM
If anyone's curious on my take I guess they can PM me or something. 
Why not start a thread in Kitchen Sink for BW specific discussions and issues? Hopefully with an introduction(basic resolution mechanics, basic chargen, etc) to the system in the OP to spark discussion.
I'd like to see the basis for gap between the people who see it as the Second Coming(exaggerated), the people who don't see anything special over other RPGs and the people who can't make it through the rulebook to begin with.