The Forge Forums

Thank you Ron, Clinton, and Vincent. The Forge's impact speaks for itself. And on a personal level, I've met some great, passionate people through the Forge and had some great gaming thanks to it as well. So thank you.

*salutes*

Learn what it is you actually want, concentrate effort on getting it, accept no substitutes.  Then invite others to join in.

Thanks Ron, Vincent, Clinton.

I wrote this four years ago. Adieu, Forge!

I am the very model of a modern roleplay theorist,
I've read of play that ranges from gamist to simulationist,
Between Karma and Fortune I can simply differentiate,
On theoretic forums I am practically a potentate,
When larrakins abuse me I just keep in mind that sane adage,
"They're probably still suffering 'cause White Wolf gave 'em brain damage"
Regarding Forgeite dogma there's no topping my adherency,
My subtle observations will always spot incoherency!

His subtle observations will always spot incoherency,
His subtle observations will always spot incoherency,
His subtle observations will always spot incohere-herency!

Whenever there's confusion about those three letters GNS,
I have the explanation that will put the argument to rest,
It doesn't matter whether you're gamist or simulationist
I am the very model of a modern roleplay theorist

It doesn't matter whether you're gamist or simulationist
He is the very model of a modern roleplay theorist

My arguments supporting Story Now are quite invincible,
I'm very well acquainted with old Vincent Baker's principle
I've clearly sorted in my mind the whole immersion farrago,
I'm convinced that I can navigate my way into El Dorado.
The Big Model is intricate, don't think I'm not aware of it,
And many are the roleplayers who find themselves quite scared of it,
But you will find me friendly and my board responses punctual,
Or else I'll put your play inside a box I've marked "dysfunctional"

Or else he'll put your play inside a box he's marked "dysfunctional"
Or else he'll put your play inside a box he's marked "dysfunctional"
Or else he'll put your play inside a box he's marked "dysfunction-functional"!

My players will be awed with my precision when I'm scene framing,
Ron Edwards will come visiting the places where I'm seen gaming,
Indeed for play that ranges from gamist to simulationist,
I am the very model of a modern roleplay theorist.

In fact for play that ranges from gamist to simulationist,
He is the very model of a modern roleplay theorist

In fact, when I've rolled dice upon a table while in company,
And when I've played a role of some sort, even just on IRC
When I've bested my enemies with magic spells and strategy
And when I've eaten Cheetos and then wielded a sword +3
And when I play they'll gape in awe at my moving oratory,
If only all my play thus far weren't wholly masturbatory.
In short, when I've experience that's more than just imaginary,
You'll say a better roleplayer has never sat and played with thee

You'll say a better roleplayer has never sat and played with thee
You'll say a better roleplayer has never sat and played with thee
You'll say a better roleplayer has never sat and played and played with thee!

For my attempts to game thus far, though my desires are exact,
Have never gotten further than our fights over social contract,
But still in matters roleplaying, gamist to simulationist
I am the very model of a modern roleplay theorist.

But still in matters roleplaying, gamist to simulationist
He is the very model of a modern roleplay theorist.

Eh, it's worth it ^___^

I think Callan was being more literal than this - and I agree with him, so I'll give my interpretation.
The 'neutrality myth' is simply the assertion that running an RPG requires some amount of judgement calls - as opposed to being able to simply follow procedures.
The Parsely game series (http://memento-mori.com/online-store/parsely-games/) has the GM act like they're a computer, just plugging in the players' queries to see what the game says should happen.
But most games do require a lot of judgement calls.

To put it in the terms you've used here, where you say "the rules give you a modicum of freedom", I say, "that freedom is the non-neutrality I'm talking about." That's all. It doesn't actually sound like we disagree. But it's worth pointing out that if you have multiple players in a game, the GM will at some point have to exercise judgement about where to shine the spotlight, for how long, etc.

If you want something to exist, create it!

Thanks, Ron. Thanks, Clinton.

-Vincent

I really like this site,
for the discussions I've had that I feel have fastforwarded my knowledge, where people's honesty and self analysis has allowed me a leg up on vast quantities of personal skill and insight,
for random designers coming in on the first thoughts forum with enthusiasm and strangely familiar ideas, like representatives of the collective unconscious,
for people having wonderful ideas for mechanics that spark you going in completely different directions,
for people with really strange preferences in games but who are willing to bridge the gap, by contrast illuminating more of what interests you,
for a dedication to real examples and minor cross-examination, both adding weight to people's theories and putting appropriate limits on their scope,
for asking people "what their game is about" and encouraging conscious editing and saying something new,
for people who ask for feedback on their games (which I love to give) and honestly consider your suggestions,
for people who are experienced enough at giving advice that they know when they are starting to redesign someone's game for them,
for a depreciation of ego games compared to "getting to the bottom of it" discussion,
for the fusion of theory-making with the production of games to exemplify those traits,
and for coming across designers who's work I have a real affinity for, but would never have recognised without seeing them discuss their design process or other people's games.

It hasn't been all of those things all the time, and I've spent a lot more time lurking and archive-searching than I have being a part of discussions, but what I've been involved with has been pretty lovely.

Josh

There are a lot of people who promote Blender because it is free and open source. Blender is not easy to use if you have no experience in 3D art - you get what you pay for, and you have an exceptional learning curve ahead of you.

Creating 3d characters that arn't Legoland type characters is one of the hardest things you can do in 3d.

DAZ Studio is free, and you can work with several 3d base characters - however it only gets better if you buy third party content for it. Poser is an older, more mature, easier to use product which uses (for the most part) the same file format. But you have to pay money for it.

You might also want to consider where your characters are going to be placed. A lot of DAZ art is digital beauty art without much context. That's when another package for doing natural scenery, and a modeller (like the free Blender and other more capable (but not free) 3d products) come in handy.

Thank you Ron, Clinton and Vincent, thanks a million. Without the Forge I'd most probably have stopped playing RPGs. Now I'm moderating a small French-speaking forum very much inspired by the Forge, with some games having been started thanks to that forum now seeing the light of day as finished and utterly playable and satisfying games, some independently published, another in the end being taken up by a small press publisher. I hope I'll finish my first game soon too, as an independent endeavour. Thanks for bringing the ideas of independence and of thoughtful game design to such a wide audience, role-playing is a better hobby now than it used to be. I'm looking forward to supporting the spirit of the Forge into the future, in whatever appropriate forms we'll find.

Thanks Moreno for the time and effort you have taken to write up this historical summary - and the others - of the very valuable and insightful discussions that happened here over the last several years.