Dammit! I Reinvented the Wheel!

[Bill Cook]

I went into Lonestar Comics today to kill some empty holiday hours.  Inspired by the variety of indie plugs I've been exposed to at the Forge, I thought I'd check the racks for copy.  I found Chaosium's Basic Role-Playing.  Damn!  Someone already thought of treating armor as a reducer of damage.

Later that night, I read through some top 10 Forge threads and noticed a relevant bit.  A poster described a hypothetical response to incoherence: I take a little Rolemaster, I add a little some such other best element of something well known, etc.

Then I took a look at what I've been doing in developing my own assumed system.  Ok, the resolution mechanics are a straight import from Hubris.  What can I say: I hate ratings and hitting targets.  Variable opponent rolls just strike a chord with me.  No, I didn't create it.  Hell, yes, I'm going to use it.  It "does it" for me.

(And, to give myself a little credit (if that matters,) I have made 3 significant modifications: elegant resolution of tie prevalence, excess of goal as damage variability and dual mode of scene- and round-based play, to scratch that gamist itch.)

Should I feel guilty?

Second point: I've been thinking about the purpose of groups lately.  Actually, in years prior, I've spent a lot of time and effort divining the meta-group.  (I highly recommend The Evolving Self by Mihaly Csikzentmihalyi.  Very relevant to the advancement of our hobby.)  Anyway, the recent tickle was that social software post (I tried like Hell to find the link) and its outline of baser member motives.

Brother, I'm there.  And I'm hoping it ain't all ugly.  For my position, I interpret the sex motive to be familial in nature.  Let me just confess my motives:

[*]To have friends to share common interests.
[*]To share experience.  To tell them about the latest thing that excites me.
[*]To give some context to my life; to spend time with people that know me.
[*]To take comfort in their availability and interest.
[/list:u]

I joined a writer's group in '99.  Stories kept popping into my head while I was jogging, and the only way I could keep them from bothering me was to write them down.  One night, 2 members got into a fight about whether the other should share a poem he had no intention of trying to publish.  It made me think: why am I here?  I had to admit, I mostly just liked sharing stories.  And I wanted to date that hot chick:)

Maybe I should get a dog and buy a plant.  After all, you guys have copy to sell.

Let's stop having a hobby where you have to re-invent the wheel based on Drift, over and over, because someone failed to do their homework, and in most cases, you paid cash for it.

Though his comment is particular to Drift, you've heard the more general point before: know thy hobby; play the market's breadth.  It's a pickle, though.  Imagine that you're not well read, and it's late in the game.  Walk with me . . .

In jr. high, you can spend the entire Summer playing D&D.  In high school, once a week.  College: gaming groups afford you monthly or more frequent opportunities.  Ok, now we're hitting the street with degree in hand and an exciting variety of bills to pay.  Family life ensues, and you try to convince your wife to corral your brood while you go to a friend's and stay up all night, pretending to kill a dragon.

Ideal credo, but behind the curve, you're an unlikely candidate.

Third observation: opacity is the limit of precision.  Not that I'm not glad that there are people who are right about things, but I'm mostly appreciative of those who explain what those correct men mean.  Thanks to those of you who get the rest of us on the dart board.  Nevermind the bullseye.

[Mike Holmes]

Then I took a look at what I've been doing in developing my own assumed system.  Ok, the resolution mechanics are a straight import from Hubris.  What can I say: I hate ratings and hitting targets.  Variable opponent rolls just strike a chord with me.  No, I didn't create it.  Hell, yes, I'm going to use it.  It "does it" for me.

(And, to give myself a little credit (if that matters,) I have made 3 significant modifications: elegant resolution of tie prevalence, excess of goal as damage variability and dual mode of scene- and round-based play, to scratch that gamist itch.)

Should I feel guilty?

Not one whit. One could argue that all RPGs are just ripping off D&D, as one sort of game. But that would make it seem as if there was no way to improve on D&D. As long as your final game is good, and does something somewhere in it's design that no other game does, even if it's just in the combination, it passes the originality requirements.

You're modifications would, in this person's estimation at least, put you way past the minimum requirement. Originality isn't coming up with things out of the blue, it's taking what exists and changing it so that it does what you need it to do.

Ideal credo, but behind the curve, you're an unlikely candidate.

I don't know what to say. I take it you've read my #1 rant? There are plenty of people out there who do know their hobby. So if someone can't make a game as well as these people, you're saying they should be given a pass because they haven't put in as much effort to learn their field? I guess I disagree.

Mike

[Bill Cook]

So if someone can't make a game as well as these people, you're saying they should be given a pass because they haven't put in as much effort to learn their field? I guess I disagree.

I was more trying to rationalize amateurism.  Criticism without rigor holds no value.  I'm hoping that context will help me appreciate the limit of what I can offer.  I love to work, though.  Especially on things I'm passionate about.  I simply lament the narrowing of opportunity.  No mercy, please.

That curve is explicitly not "excuse factor."  I was just pointing at it.

[Mike Holmes]

That curve is explicitly not "excuse factor."  I was just pointing at it.

I've found that the curve can be overcome without being like a course in astrophysics. That is, you don't have to read every game. There are certain ones that can sorta "stand in" for whole categories as representative. That was the idea in the latter part of my #1 rant. To get the idea across that if you knew most of 20 or so representational games, that you'd have a good idea of what exists in RPGs. At least enought to have a framework to know where to look when thinking about something in particular.

Many of these games can be had for free, and some are short. So it's not even a hard list to acquire or read through. In any case, one can get a sort of snapshot of all of it in very short order.

Mike

[Samael]

Then I took a look at what I've been doing in developing my own assumed system.  Ok, the resolution mechanics are a straight import from Hubris.  What can I say: I hate ratings and hitting targets.  Variable opponent rolls just strike a chord with me.  No, I didn't create it.  Hell, yes, I'm going to use it.  It "does it" for me.

(And, to give myself a little credit (if that matters,) I have made 3 significant modifications: elegant resolution of tie prevalence, excess of goal as damage variability and dual mode of scene- and round-based play, to scratch that gamist itch.)

Should I feel guilty?

Not one whit. One could argue that all RPGs are just ripping off D&D, as one sort of game. But that would make it seem as if there was no way to improve on D&D. As long as your final game is good, and does something somewhere in it's design that no other game does, even if it's just in the combination, it passes the originality requirements.

You're modifications would, in this person's estimation at least, put you way past the minimum requirement. Originality isn't coming up with things out of the blue, it's taking what exists and changing it so that it does what you need it to do.

Mike

Are you sure about this?  And how do other people feel?  I've been slowly working on a game for the last 5 years.  The last few weeks has seen a fury of activity (I finally have both the time and the interest to pursue it).  At last count, there are 9 (reasonably important) ideas that I've seen used in other systems (interestingly, a few of them I wrote down before finding them in other systems, but I'm sure that'll be lost on anyone who sees a playable version of this).

[Ron Edwards]

Hello,

This topic has been discussed pretty thoroughly a few times. Check out the links in my post in this thread: Ownership of Forge-derived works.

Best,
Ron

[Samael]

Thanks Ron.  I read through all the posts and all the links, and that was pretty much what I thought, but wanted to see how others felt.