Hi everyone,

this is my first post ever in any forum! This is going to be long. So be patient with me. Thank you.

I am 29 years old and come from germany, that means the former eastern part. We did not have any RPG-experiences in the GDR and our hobbygames where not that good, because we had nothing like that at all. But we had TV, cinema and our imagination. I created about 5 games, mainly themated in the warsim-genre. In 1988 the movie E.T. was shown in our cinemas and - I do not know if you can remember - there was a little scene in the beginning of it and the kids played a rpg. (I think it was DnD) At that time I had no idea what they were doing there but I had some clues...
So a few friends and me tagged our heads together and forged a very simple system, with a quiet gritty fightmechanism. (we had no HP, but actually wounds like in TROS and free to choose maneuvers and D6! ) We played it mostly in our own tabletops-scenarios - that we created too, by the way - and the fun was unimaginable.

The first experience with "real" rpg's came to us in the chaotic times of the reunion of Germany. With his first travel to West-Berlin a friend brought a rpg-book (or gamebook) to our trembling hands. We played it until it fell apart. (Ian Livingstons Das Höllenhaus, maybe "the house of hell" ???) Up then it went very fast: the german DSA, in 1992 ADnD with Dragonlance and FR, Shadowrun, Battletech, Earthdawn, Vampire, Werewolf and other stuff. But our love has always been our -so called- "Old Group" in the FR.

The roll of the GM was mostly mine, sometimes playing with about 15 gamers! (it was a good shool I think ... *shiver*)

But we got pretty frustrated with the time, because we discovered something pure in rpg's that we could not grasp.
What was this kind of pureness? This unreachable? What heightend our expactations? For me it was the problem of not getting a whole, twisting, realistic, movie- or booklike story, with ground-to-earth SC's, that were imbetted in their environment and had real feelings, a family, something to live or to die for! The others mused with this too or with the shrinking times of fights in a session or with the growing unatmosphere. We came to the conclusion that we need our own system.

And so we forged again. And again and again... But we failed utterly. Only few believed in the pureness, thought to have reached and mocked years later about not achieving the goal.

Around that time we founded -maybe the first in the eastern part of Germany (with Berlin as exception)- our store for fantasy, gaming and hobby and the new input did not help us either.

So we laid our sessions down, most of us never asking what to expect from a rpg.

At the time of the 3rd Ed. of DnD I had a final idea: to take the old adventures of the Old Group and start again at lvl 1, going through every adventure we had made rustly 8 years ago. It was a fun idea and they all came. Of course the adventures were rewritten, actualy with more sense now -some of them I am very proud of- and with a real campaign, that will last about 30 gameyears and in which the PC's will decide if there will be magic, gods and other species than humans will anylonger roam the FR. I decided to make the theme of the campaign the theme of our rpg-pureness-search: can we have fun in our roleplay - magic in the FR, can we have realism in our roleplay - other races then mankind in FR? And so on. As they made their old char's 20 questions - like the ones in L5R - had to be answered and one of the questions was to name the three most important goals of the PC. If one of the goals would be reached a reward would be given: exp, attribut etc. The sessions lasted from not so good to very exciting, but some of our older habbits began to plague us anew.

We will play this along, to the bitter end, though my longings are for a more pureness! ( or atmosphere, magic and pleasure )

Last summer I discovered this wonderfull site and craved through it. Many questions could be answered and I played with the idea to start a new system that would contain the fresh material and our own strenghts.We made two sessions in which I approached them with a lot theorie and the beginning of some experimentations. Each player on the table had 20 points (a D20) and whenever he wished to see something what he longs for in a rpg, he had to gave points: 1 for small things, maybe of less importance, 2 for things that are important and a great theme in the system/ world and 3 points for things if they would not be in he would not play. A special knack was the possibility to trade away points fom the other, for instance if one player disliked the idea of another he could barter for or against it. I had 20 points too, but could not spend them, they were only for tradement: if needed I could give them away and ask for a thing I would like to ad.
I made about ten tasks: GNS, Task/Resolution, Genre, Magic, Races, Religion, Worlddetails, Sociographic Details, Atmosphere/Style, Mainconflicts and Charakters.

A lot of things cleared up! And the new world looks very promising. But I am not satisfied either. Perhaps I should make a step backwards and confront them with a few sessions of MLwM, TSOY and TROS? And then beginn the process with the D20 again?

I really do not know!

This is why I posted this: help me, give me hints, ask me and push me! I like to play RPG's but I am ... (maybe tired?)

A few other things:

Do somebody know something about RPG's in the former Soviet-controlled countries, til the 1990's?

Did some of you had similar experiences?

Thats all. Excuse me for my bad writing.

Dirk

Welcome!

I'm very glad to see you here, and your story demonstrates some things all of us should learn and consider carefully.

The original role-playing group, historically, was run by Dave Arneson, called "the Blackmoor campaign." Or rather, it was apparently a freewheeling, fantastic wargame in which single-character protagonists sort of emerged.

The current d20 version of Blackmoor is mildly interesting, but what really matters is the summary that was published many, many years ago, which shows how they played ... and believe me, it was nothing like Dungeons & Dragons, not even the 1974 GenCon release.

It was almost exactly as you describe, up to and including the reward system based on general character goals.

Isn't that amazing? In perhaps the only social and geographic circumstance in which it was possible - before and after 1989, in Germany - we have a "natural experiment" in the origins of role-playing!

If possible, can you describe how "important stuff" was brought into the game, during the original experience when you were younger? By "important stuff," I mean things like:
- the wizard lives in a tall, blue tower over to the east
- the dragon is lonely and likes poetry
- this innkeeper's wife is an ex-Amazon warrior

And similar things. Did anyone propose this sort of thing during play itself? Or between sessions? Or was such input limited to just one person? Also, if such proposals occurred, did the group accept them as routine, or were they considered special and exceptional events?

On a more personal note, I am currently working on a project called SPIONE: STORY NOW IN COLD WAR BERLIN. I am very, very interested in former-DDR issues, and I think the greatest possible espionage stories - of great emotional and political weight - have not yet been created.

I plan to visit Berlin later this year as part of this project. I'd like to ask your permission to begin some email conversations with you about my ideas. So again, welcome, and please keep posting!

Best,
Ron

Thank you for your warm welcome!

Ron, I will answer your questions but have to think about them for a while, because they need time to be well answered.

Of course you can mail me. I am curious about what you know and what your view of the DDR is!

Thanks,
Dirk

Dirk,

This is wonderful stuff.

I'm always interesting in hearing how things are going in the former DDR. I may be visiting the Fatherland sooner rather than later due to the political situation in America.

More details from your play sessions, please!

( o Y o ) wrote: This is why I posted this: help me, give me hints, ask me and push me! I like to play RPG's but I am ... (maybe tired?)

A few other things:

Do somebody know something about RPG's in the former Soviet-controlled countries, til the 1990's?

Did some of you had similar experiences?

Hi everyone -

just to let you know, I've been lurking on the Forge for quite some time now, learned a lot, had lots of fun - and couldn't think of a better opportunity to come out with my first post.

This is fascinating stuff. About a year ago I posted a request to grofafo.de, whether anybody knew anything about roleplaying in the GDR, after I had learned via a TV feature that the GDR had had its own video and arcade game industry and a vivid scene of crackers, who opened a black market for western games and home computers. And I had known long before that despite the state`s attempt at controlling youth culture, western rock music in all its shades had crept into the GDR, being reappropriated by the youth over there. So why not role-playing?

I'd love to hear more and I wonder, whether there are others out there, who made up their own games. From an anthropological point of view, that's pure gold, of course ;).

Oh, and Ron (or any of you guys): If you need a place to crash in Berlin, let me know.

Hi everyone,

Let's keep this thread focused on Dirk's play-experiences, and take up the excellent issue of easten bloc role-playing in RPG Theory!

Best,
Ron

Ron Edwards wrote: The current d20 version of Blackmoor is mildly interesting, but what really matters is the summary that was published many, many years ago, which shows how they played ... and believe me, it was nothing like Dungeons & Dragons, not even the 1974 GenCon release.

( o Y o ) wrote:
Thats all. Excuse me for my bad writing.

My guess is that the kind of system that would best facilitate what Dirk is looking for under the name of 'pureness' is a low points-of-contact system which is capable of being used fairly well to facilitate Sim or Nar play and which has a relatively low barrier to getting imaginary elements into play. Apologies if that's wrong, and I don't mean to beat anyone up with the jargon here.

What I'm going on in Dirk's post here is:

- "story", used generally in a sort of Narrativist way, but without any particular kind of story, and with the understanding that this is 'standard fantasy' group play with different kinds of character

- the sense of characters being 'real people' - ones who you can take time savoring your imagination of them and their friends, motives, goals, etc.

- the "atmosphere, magic, and pleasure" bit - wanting what you imagine to be able to soak into the game fairly straightforwardly, without getting bogged down in lots of extraneous stuff


But that's probably all premature speculation at this point. Dirk, if you have the time and energy, could you post about two or three play experiences that really capture what you're looking for? Or were there any? Was this instead a kind of 'holy grail' that you felt like your games were straining towards but never got to? If so, what broke you down on your way to getting there?

Brand_Robins wrote:

Ron Edwards wrote: The current d20 version of Blackmoor is mildly interesting, but what really matters is the summary that was published many, many years ago, which shows how they played ... and believe me, it was nothing like Dungeons & Dragons, not even the 1974 GenCon release.

Ron, where could interested parties find this summary?

Yup, that's it.

People, please get this thread back on-topic.

Thanks,
Ron

To Ron: the important stuff! I had difficulties to understand what you were trying to ask. Finally I understand it as the thing that heaved the table-top-sessions out of it. Is this right?
In this case I recall some long and hard fought sieges. To beat the sieged one we often decided - to keep the gameflow - that a traitor would sabotage something. But the often it came to this the more we asked us why he would do such a thing! And out of this the first stories and relationships emerged.
You have to understand that our genre was more a medieval rebattling - no fantasy or dragons. We simply had no clues about this stuff.
By the way, we had a friend, his mother came from Peru - thats why the exception of the right to travel - and he lived from 1985 to 1987 in the USA! There he discovered "The Hobbit", which became very fast his book number one. Unfortunatly he never witnessed our beloved hobby. But he told us the storie and he had to tell it often!
So, no tolkienesque fantasy. But very often would some strange PC, with grotesque features appear -we did not call this magic, we did not even had a name for such unbelievable feats.
The "between sessions" were often more important than the origianl ones!
Because we discussed and played it out, acting in our sparetime or in school.
We had no limitations, no GM, just a common sense: if it is no fun we would not allow it.
Routines? Very hard to remember. We accepted former rules and integrated them in our play, sometimes such a rule would beshadow the whole sessions because of its nature; and so, yeah, they were routine.

Details from my sessions and playgroup will follow later as I have to gather all the specfications.

Thanks,
Dirk

I found this thread so interesting, I just had to register to ask you some stuff about those first games you played.

First off, did your group have a concept of "my guy"? You mentioned you kinda integrated the RPG in your scenario gaming/war sieges, so was it like a squad of warriors with players as the generals or what?

I'd love to hear about that gritty fight mechanic. Were different units/guys/whatever given differing numbers or stats that affected that?

You said the between sessions were more important than the actual sessions, because that's when you acted stuff out. Was that stuff like "Hey, it would be neat if we discovered the general of the other army was this guy/my guy's father?" Or were you playing out the dialogue between the various characters? Was everything just generally accepted into the the sort of shared idea of "what was happening" or did people sometimes go "You know, maybe that shouldn't happen like that"?

Thanks for giving us your unique viewpoint!
-Dave

( o Y o ) wrote: In this case I recall some long and hard fought sieges. To beat the sieged one we often decided - to keep the gameflow - that a traitor would sabotage something. But the often it came to this the more we asked us why he would do such a thing! And out of this the first stories and relationships emerged.

To Miskatonic: you understand it fully right. Yes it was more a player vs player thing! Which eventually get out of hand with stories and more "in-play discussions", that means roleplay.

To David Bapst: I remember that there were mostly cliche-like chars, that we had witnessed in movies. I do not know what you are trying to ask with this "my guy"?
The fight mechanic was from my WWI "Tanks" game. We had only D6 and with it you had to roll within a range. The better the fighter, the higher the range. We had some martial-arts backround - mostly boxing, wrestling and judo - and we did understand that you had to aim for the target. If somebody was hit a roll was made to check how severe the wound was; every point of this roll was subtracted from your range and if it was a vital area bonus points were given. As you can imagine one bad hit and you did not had any range left over! But one thing that never occured was the death of one PC! We had a gentleman agreement that he would survive somehow. But it played sometimes to a better storie result. We had only this fighting stat, later armor counted against the second roll and if we were not sure who had the first hit we rolled, with the higher one was the faster one. We had no idea of boni or mali and no, we had no social stats, attributes or the like. That was played.
You described it really good with your imagination of our between sessions, it happened just like that and we discussed in different stances -out and in time.

To Sean: What do you mean exactly with "low points-of-contact system"? How can we establish a low barrier to get imaginary elements into play?
I will post experiences and our playgroup, but it will take a while. Thanks Sean

To Paganini: Thank you. Never thought of beauty in my first post ... !
Pureness. Do you imagine how it felt, back in your childhood, to see, feel, hear or experience a thing that captured your whole senses and did not let you go for a while and you were astonished all the time? This is what I mean with "pure". I know that this is a rare thing, maybe too idealistic. But RPG's are games. As such they should have these moments. And every system and every group should go for this.
Unbelievable? The ramifications of GNS are going straight in this way, if I understand them correctly. Thats why my experiments try to sort out any given hinderances.
Maybe it is just a thing of time: the more you play the more accustomed you get and the less excitement you will have. But why play then over and over and over? Because it "only" makes fun? Yes. But remember your first roleplaying sessions and you will see how much of your initial fever is left. Maybe it is just as it is and perhaps I am only too pathetic. Our group have had various signs of this tiredness, not only me. So we are doing something wrong. Thats why I ask for your help.
Again, thank you Paganini.

To John Kim: FR are the Forgotten Realms. We are not that satisfied with this world but it was our first real campaign and thats why our love to it.

To Miskatonic: Where exactly are you from and why did you left?

Thank you all,
Dirk

Thanks for the response, Dirk...

( o Y o ) wrote: To David Bapst: I remember that there were mostly cliche-like chars, that we had witnessed in movies. I do not know what you are trying to ask with this "my guy"?

The fight mechanic was from my WWI "Tanks" game. We had only D6 and with it you had to roll within a range. The better the fighter, the higher the range. We had some martial-arts backround - mostly boxing, wrestling and judo - and we did understand that you had to aim for the target. If somebody was hit a roll was made to check how severe the wound was; every point of this roll was subtracted from your range and if it was a vital area bonus points were given. As you can imagine one bad hit and you did not had any range left over! But one thing that never occured was the death of one PC! We had a gentleman agreement that he would survive somehow. But it played sometimes to a better storie result. We had only this fighting stat, later armor counted against the second roll and if we were not sure who had the first hit we rolled, with the higher one was the faster one. We had no idea of boni or mali and no, we had no social stats, attributes or the like. That was played.
You described it really good with your imagination of our between sessions, it happened just like that and we discussed in different stances -out and in time.

Hi Dirk,

on this "pureness" issue: I think what you mean is fascination, mainly. It might be what some people call "immersion", though I'm not sure any more if that's something different than simply fascination. I have often wondered: if I'm so much more aware of so many things today than I was then, if I'm a "better" roleplayer in so many ways, then why the hell doesn't the game captivate me as much as it used to?

I think the solution is not to go back there. You cannot go back there, because you know the things you know and they won't be new and fascinating any more. My solution is to go ever forward. To seek out new games, new styles, new players, new inspiration. So I would guess your D&D attempt is doomed, because it will serve only to demonstrate how everything has changed.

- Frank

P.S.: If you feel a need to phrase some of your thoughts in German because it's too hard in English, you are very welcome do so at GroFaFo. Or send me a PM in German and I will help you translate.

( o Y o ) wrote: Pureness. Do you imagine how it felt, back in your childhood, to see, feel, hear or experience a thing that captured your whole senses and did not let you go for a while and you were astonished all the time? This is what I mean with "pure". I know that this is a rare thing, maybe too idealistic.

To Frank T and Rob Carriere: Two people at the same time tell me one ting. And it seems very logical and appealing to me. I will give your solutions a try.

To David Bapst: Of course we did play the NSC's all together, but the one or the other realised that some kind of characters suited them better than others!
The "sessions" were packed with battles but not so the "in betweens". There were no differences in the fighting abilities, although sometimes we argued and ruled that, lets say a quicker one would more often have the first strike and a stronger one would ignore armor etc. There was no compensating, it was alright: we knew the better one will more often win. Maybe we compensated that with the number of fights.
I remember special occurences; for instance the "quest" of a PC to get a dinosaur like mount ( we had figurines and a lot of animals and prehistoric ones, which fitted to the size of the knights ), but nothing more.

I will discuss it with the only one of the original playgroup that I am able to speak to. He will add something more, I presume. ( we were 4 )

Thanks

Dirk

( o Y o ) wrote: Do somebody know something about RPG's in the former Soviet-controlled countries, til the 1990's?

( o Y o ) wrote:
To David Bapst: Of course we did play the NSC's all together, but the one or the other realised that some kind of characters suited them better than others!
The "sessions" were packed with battles but not so the "in betweens". There were no differences in the fighting abilities, although sometimes we argued and ruled that, lets say a quicker one would more often have the first strike and a stronger one would ignore armor etc. There was no compensating, it was alright: we knew the better one will more often win. Maybe we compensated that with the number of fights.
I remember special occurences; for instance the "quest" of a PC to get a dinosaur like mount ( we had figurines and a lot of animals and prehistoric ones, which fitted to the size of the knights ), but nothing more.

I will discuss it with the only one of the original playgroup that I am able to speak to. He will add something more, I presume. ( we were 4 )

OYO;

I agree about the beauty of that first post. The emotion behind it came through very, very clearly.

Your quest for "purity" strongly affected me. I went through something of the same with my original gaming group, however in our case we just stopped playing eventually. For years I didn't actually get to play, but just recently I've been involved in some play by email (actually, play by Yahoo group) games of HeroQuest.

To my incredible joy, I discovered that the games can be just as engaging now as they were when I was 11 years old, in fact better in some ways, because the people I'm playing with are more skilled. I don't think that the perfect, totally pure, role playing experience is possible, just like any other ideal, perfect, condition is not possible. But it is possible to get pretty close.

Some modern role playing games have rules that are very good for dealing with relationships and personality, and there are quite a few newer rule sets where the rules are much less restrictive than with D&D. That is, you are much more free to do what you want, to tell dramatic stories like in a book or film, without the rules getting in the way so much.

I'd really suggest you trying playing one of these games. It may not give you what you want, but it might get you closer. After having tried it, and finding out what you liked and didn't like, and compared it to your other systems, you might have a much better idea of what to do next. It is a bit like triangulating, looking at a distant mountain from two different points and noting the direction to it, and by figuring out where those lines cross knowing its location and distance. When dealing with emotions and ideas this is not as accurate as lines on a map, but the general idea works--when you can look at something from two very different points of view, you can tell a lot more about it.

Regards;

--Bryan

Thank you all for your positive comments!

I really did not expect this kind of helping.

Thank you again.

It will take a while to answer the questions left ...

Dirk

There are Russian websites on role-playing. You just need to know Russian to read them.

I work a bit with the PHP-based blog/CMS Drupal, and it turns out that Alex, one of its community pillars in Russia, runs two Russian role-playing websites:

• Roleplay.ru, a community/blogspace
• tarrasque.net, a forum


Both in Russian, though. Anyone fluent?

I'm in the process of talking Alex into an interview. Failing that, I hope to goad him into showing me the right people for an interview, to shed light on the early Russian RPG history. We want to know about the local, DIY games, the conventions... the works, really.