Why no "revised" Sorcerer?

[Ron Edwards]

I enjoyed the discussion, James. I appreciate that you began it and am OK with that.

Here's something that might be missed too. None of this thread concerns corrections of spot-text errors or poorly-written phrases in the book. Those should be fixed as an ongoing effort through printing after printing. A lot of what you've pointed out, Jesse, qualifies as such. I'm not opposed at all to making minor corrections like that as time goes by. I've done so already, especially for the second printing a few years ago. However, I don't see it happening on a schedule or guaranteed to happen with every single new printing. What I'm writing about here is why I do not devote myself to a full rewrite and revision of presentation and vision - that's what won't happen.

Also, full disclosure. I lied. I went and read the Story Games thread after saying I wouldn't. My toes are curling with the effort not to import here some responses I have to various posts there. I won't do it. You may imagine me spanking myself like John Cleese in Fawlty Towers for putting myself in this position.

Best, Ron

[Nev the Deranged]

For what it's worth, and only because my name was specifically mentioned, I should point out that although I put a tremendous amount of work into gleaning and compiling my own and others' contributions into my "Sorcerer Quick(er) Reference" document, and while I can claim that it helped me understand how the mechanics of the game work; based on further readings on the Adept Press forum, the Actual Play forum, conversations both engaged in and overheard, etc, I can say with certainty:

I still have no idea how to play Sorcerer.

I still don't have the Narrativist skillset to make it sing the way it's meant to, no matter how well I comprehend why these dice translate into that bonus. As Ron has suggested, I may need to spend more time with Sorcerer's various stepchildren before I have those baseline skills down.

Anyway, just my 2c, not meant to rekindle or extend anything that has tailored off.

D.

[angelfromanotherpin]

I'm right there with you, Nev.

I keep trying, though.

[Brand_Robins]

But I don't need - and quite possibly am incapable of - writing a text for it again.

Best, Ron

And from this post on, I shall never bug you about this issue again. Thanks for that Ron, it really let me feel why you've made the choices you have, and understand how very valid they are.

I mean, I never seriously thought I could or should harass you into doing a new edition, but I hadn't fully understood why you didn't. Now I do, and now I know why your decision is the right one.

(edited by me to fix quote formatting - RE)

[The Dragon Master]

I just want to say thank you for all the discussion here. My plan was to introduce some... "narativist" techniques*, into a system that we don't play often**, over the course of the next few months and then spring Sorcerer on them. After reading through this though, I'll probably throw a few of Sorcerers cousins (i.e, DiTV, Burning Wheel, and Dust Devils) before I scare them off with Sorcerer.

*Yes, I realize that techniques can be used for any play-style and that it is the combination of them that leads to one style over another. So perhaps "Combination of techniques" would have been a better term.

**The specific system is the Marvel Universe RolePlaying Game. I figure that since we don't often play it, there won't be many preconceived notions of how it is to be run, and I can slip things in there (it's a very open system) without too much hassle, and without confusing everyone.

[Matt Machell]

My take on their experiences is that most readers of RPGs are not actually reading at all. Instead, they are arriving with a well-established model of "what is an RPG" in their minds already, and seeking to match what they are seeing in the text to that model as they go. They call this "learning the rules," but in reality, their own rules for play are already locked into place. What they encounter in Sorcerer, however, is that the pegs they find in its pages not only do not fit, but are in fact totally unrelated to the slots they have in their mental model. They say, "This text is unclear!

I can certainly confirm that from this consumers point of view. It's what, six years since I bought the book? When I first read it I was very much of the mind, "yeah a few interesting ideas, but not that different". But the thing about Sorcerer is that it doesn't pander to your ingrained RPG expectations, on first read it's incredibly easy to fill in gaps that aren't there based on your own RPG-playing history.

Realising that some of those gaps aren't there is a hard process, from experience lots of folks end up writing their own game to handle that re-learning process (hell, I did, Covenant is that game). After reading and playing lots of those games, I go back and read Sorcerer and passages suddenly click in ways they didn't before, but it was all there six years ago...

-Matt

[Clinton R. Nixon]

I certainly don't know how to tell people to play Sorcerer. While I get the game now, I don't know how to impart that knowledge well. I do have one piece of advice that made it work for me, though: let go of your expectations.

I played several "serious" games of Sorcerer with varying levels of success, none of them that good. In 2002 (I think), I played a kick-ass Sorcerer game set in "the 35th Century" in a desert wasteland with one guy who was an ex-bandit and had a demon named Kunagi that followed him around and tried to kill him (seriously: guy, Stamina 9; demon: Stamina 11. Insane.) and another guy whose demon was a scientist from "the 23rd Century" who accidentally entered "the Crumple Zone" and then could possess this guy and transform his appearance, as well as transport him and his pals through said "Crumple Zone." It was over-the-top post-apocalyptic craziness. Another character was added later which was just as crazy.

We told the most human, interesting stories I've had in role-playing, I think. It was a game that I will never forget being in. It was easy to run, too. It was that essential act of stopping and saying, "Sorcerer, I'm sorry I expected you to make a story for me. Here, let's just relax and use your rules to kick mutant ass, and then we'll see what happens." Before that, I approached it as, you know, High Art or something, and expected magic to happen. When I quit waiting for the magic and just moved on, magic happened. I can't really explain it well, but I hope this helps someone.

[Alan]

Ron, Thanks.

Until now, I did not understand your motive and was bothered by the rumor that your sole reason was a desire for a filter effect on your audience -- it sounded elitist and I couldn't reconcile that with what I know from the Forge.

I can understand the desire to leave a work as done -- especially one that has been published and sold successfully. It's key to moving on in one's creative career. The discussion has made me aware of the dual nature of RPG texts -- on the one hand they are a description of a procedure and on the other a performance of authorship -- but that's a subject for another thread.

There's been an assertion on this thread that implies that "how to play sorcerer" is somehow an ephemeral thing that cannot be fully communicated in text. I think this is a mystique, and I take it as a challenge to my comminication-fu -- however, I must resist the temptation to join James in writing a suppliment, as I have my own writing to do. In fact, I should go do some now.

[Andy Kitkowski]

Until now, I did not understand your motive and was bothered by the rumor that your sole reason was a desire for a filter effect on your audience -- it sounded elitist and I couldn't reconcile that with what I know from the Forge.

I was in the same boat, all because I took what I heard for granted and just simply didn't ask Ron directly (duh!).

Anyway, I for one agree with Brand's sentiments above.  This is the first time I have seen (because as I mentioned, I didn't just Ron directly) his reasons for not wanting to revisit the game, and after hearing them (especially the parts about being in a different place, a different headspace) I totally understand, empathize with and respect those reasons.

Sorcerer still remains one of the games that has inspired me most in gaming in general. I really hope that if someone out there feels the need to do a Sorcerer Unbound style text, that they go for it with rigor and Ron's support. While Ron's no longer in that headspace, it sounds like a lot of other people are, so it would be cool if someone (in the vein of the Sorcerer Unbound idea) stepped up to basically demolish the game, reassemble it into a tighter text, and be the torchbearer/frontman for the next ten years.

-Andy