Kester Pelagious was nice enough to send this to me earlier this week. Play at will.

----

Forum Trolls: The Happening!

C. Demetrius Morgan


This is your chance to be a irregular Forum Troll!  Yes, that's right, this
is the birthday game to end all birthday games, the bestest of the bestest,
the most fun you can have without spending a lot of those hard fought and
won gold coins that grow like mushrooms out of floors in dungeons
everywhere.

To begin have the players sit in front of their computers.  They will need
to log into the Internet, however they choose to, and then proceed to The
Forge @ http://www.indie-rpgs.com/.  The game lasts a limited time and takes
places in the Birthday forum only!

So, how does one play?

Simple.  Like good Trolls everywhere know the games starts with a non
sequiter, which the next Troll playing the games picks up.  Every non
sequiter must contain the phrase 'The Forge' and in some way be related to
the previous phrase.

For instance:

Troll A:  "The Forge is a great source of information"

Troll B:  "An information abyss, that's what The Forge is."

Troll C:  "Speaking of an Abyss, did you know that The Forge was the first
place to yadayadayada"

So simple!  So easy!  So much fun!

Just remember the rulesP: Be civil to one another and no wonton bashing.  Unless it involves evildoers. ;)

Hi there,

I'll be Troll A!

This conversation at the Forge offended me!

Best,
Ron

P.S. This game is restricted to this thread only.

This conversation at the Forge offended me!

Matt Wilson wrote:

This conversation at the Forge offended me!

There are no conversations at the Forge. It's moderated.

Matt Snyder wrote: There's nothing moderate at the Forge. Damn radical thinking.

Matt Snyder wrote:

Matt Wilson wrote:

This conversation at the Forge offended me!

There are no conversations at the Forge. It's moderated.

There's nothing moderate at the Forge. Damn radical thinking.

Ron wrote: This conversation at the Forge offended me!

There's nothing moderate at the Forge. Damn radical thinking.

I thought the Forge was above all this sort of childish drivel. I am so disappointed...

wfreitag wrote:
Speaking of radicals, I'm thinking of a really really cool and realistic mechanism for determining attack damage. The thing is, it requires players to calculate fractional roots of percentile die rolls. Would this be a problem?

Paganini wrote:

Ron wrote: This conversation at the Forge offended me!

The Forge moderators are all cheaters!

(That was two in one post, Ron! Sheesh!)

Kester Pelagius wrote:
Are The Forge moderators turning a blind eye toward rules and regulations of society in a effort to promote a libertine ideal? After all it is well known that everyone at The Forge are radical free thinkers who think of life as a two in one pit stop full of cryptic remarks! Of course they may claim to be free thinkers at The Forge but are they, really, or is it just another brand of rightwing marxist propoganda designed to get us all to play indie role-playing games?

This isn't an appropriate topic for the Forge! All the members are a bunch of bleeding-heart Narrativists!

wfreitag wrote:
Y'know, I don't really get the whole Narrativism thing. What's it all about?

Paganini wrote:

Kester Pelagius wrote:
Are The Forge moderators turning a blind eye toward rules and regulations of society in a effort to promote a libertine ideal? After all it is well known that everyone at The Forge are radical free thinkers who think of life as a two in one pit stop full of cryptic remarks! Of course they may claim to be free thinkers at The Forge but are they, really, or is it just another brand of rightwing marxist propoganda designed to get us all to play indie role-playing games?

That's a dirty lie! There's no jargon at the Forge!

Paganini wrote:

That's a dirty lie! There's no jargon at the Forge!

wfreitag wrote:
Y'know, I don't really get the whole Narrativism thing. What's it all about?

Kester Pelagius wrote:
Jargon is the bread of fools and lies the butter of day old toast! Of course like Hephaestus wielding his hammer upon The Forge there are those who will believe in The Forge and those who will not. The Forge is a hot bed of seductive reasoning for those who choose to think about whether they want to believe or disbelieve and therefore The Forge fosters radical designs in narrativism. Would you not agree?

C. Edwards wrote: Paganini wrote:

That's a dirty lie! There's no jargon at the Forge!

Are you blind?!

jargon: Speech or writing having unusual or pretentious vocabulary, convoluted phrasing, and vague meaning.

The Forge is nothing but big fat piles of jargon.

C. Edwards wrote:
The Forge is nothing but big fat piles of jargon.

Lazy Smurf wrote: By the way those are some curtains you have here at The Forge!

ethan_greer wrote:
You have a lot of gall to bring up curtains. I think you should know that this behavior is not encouraged at the Forge.

Matt Wilson wrote:

ethan_greer wrote:
You have a lot of gall to bring up curtains. I think you should know that this behavior is not encouraged at the Forge.

Didn't someone on the Forge design a game where gall is a trait?

Paganini wrote:

Kester Pelagius wrote:
Jargon is the bread of fools and lies the butter of day old toast! Of course like Hephaestus wielding his hammer upon The Forge there are those who will believe in The Forge and those who will not. The Forge is a hot bed of seductive reasoning for those who choose to think about whether they want to believe or disbelieve and therefore The Forge fosters radical designs in narrativism. Would you not agree?

Of course not! No one at the Forge believes in the greek myths!

(Sorry if I made my post as a guest... but that's the true spirit of trolling)

Anonymous wrote: So when's the next story teller heartbreaker (this weeks new word) coming out of the forge?

Lugaru wrote: (Sorry if I made my post as a guest... but that's the true spirit of trolling)

Humbled unTroll wrote:
Actually logging into The Forge to post an off-topic remark that doesn't even mention The Forge, now THAT is true trolling!

Jonathan Walton wrote:

Anonymous wrote: So when's the next story teller heartbreaker (this weeks new word) coming out of the forge?

Ah, so the Forge is finally coming out, as the beacon of hope for the future of roleplaying! No more keeping our light under a buschel!

szilard wrote:
If you are interested in True Trolling, you should check out my game TrollWorld. It is innovative and great! Like nothing else, ever. You see, you get to play a Troll. He can be a Fighter, Wizard, Assassin, or Shaman. Shamans and Wizards can use giant two-handed troll swords! It rocks!

Paganini wrote:
"Any game where you have separate HP for your spleen is pretty complicated." - Mike Holmes

Paganini wrote: Right! We'll show those [censored] at RPG.NET what the Forge is really all about!

szilard wrote:
In my game, I have hit points for the gall bladder, but not the spleen. Is that okay?

Paganini wrote:
Not unless you also have hit points for the Forge.

...somewhere along the line the rules of this game seem to have been forgotten...

Oh well, its still amusing.

Valamir wrote: ...somewhere along the line the rules of this game seem to have been forgotten...

Oh well, its still amusing.

szilard wrote:

Valamir wrote: ...somewhere along the line the rules of this game seem to have been forgotten...

Oh well, its still amusing.

The rules didn't support my Narrativist goals for play, so I ignored them.

I thought everyone at the Forge plays freeform, anyway.

Stuart

szilard wrote: I thought everyone at the Forge plays freeform, anyway.

Anonymous wrote: Freeform?

Is that why the tentacle beast kept having its way with me even if I rolled perfect 20's? Your a bastard story teller... you know that?

xiombarg wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Freeform?

Is that why the tentacle beast kept having its way with me even if I rolled perfect 20's? Your a bastard story teller... you know that?

Hey! Criss-cross posting isn't allowed at the Forge! I demand this thread be split!

Speaking of tentacles, did anyone here on the Forge see that article on CNN about the collosal squid they discovered? This thing gets bigger than the giant squid, and it has hook-like teeth on its tentacles!

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/science/04/03/colossal.squid.reut/index.html

xiombarg wrote:

Anonymous wrote: Freeform?

Is that why the tentacle beast kept having its way with me even if I rolled perfect 20's? Your a bastard story teller... you know that?

Hey! Criss-cross posting isn't allowed at the Forge! I demand this thread be split!

Lazy Smurf wrote:
Are writhing tentacle beasts criss-crossing the hallowed halls of The Forge in search of true love, or is it just another blatant pro narrativist ploy to generate posts?

Paganini wrote: Are you some kind of communist...

...No one at the Forge believes in the greek myths

SunsaTHINKINbitchiz! Why can't joo just GAME like normal peeple?

Worship the AntiCHri5t,

bLAK3

Blake Hutchins wrote: SunsaTHINKINbitchiz! Why can't joo just GAME like normal peeple?

Worship the AntiCHri5t,

bLAK3

szilard wrote: You are clearly incoherent. You should read some of the articles at the Forge.

wfreitag wrote:

szilard wrote: You are clearly incoherent. You should read some of the articles at the Forge.

And if he's really incoherent, he should write articles at the Forge!

Mystery User #1 wrote: "Forge forge forge forge, forge forge forge forge. . . ."

Gordon C. Landis wrote:

Mystery User #1 wrote: "Forge forge forge forge, forge forge forge forge. . . ."

I thought the Forge was above such typical-gamer juvenallia as a Monty Python reference? Elitist - you keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means!

Which reminds me. Nobody, Forge credentials or not is a complet gamer without one of these (mostly the fez):
http://www.villagehatshop.com/hats_pvp_online_gear.html

Mike

Mike Holmes wrote: Which reminds me. Nobody, Forge credentials or not is a complet gamer without one of these (mostly the fez):
http://www.villagehatshop.com/hats_pvp_online_gear.html

Mike

ACK! MEIN GOT! Ist terribubble!

Dude, as a father of a two-year old, I can tell you that it's not Laa-laa, it's just Lala.

And as to Lala's GNS predilections, we all know that he stance issue completely dissociates GNS from issues of player to character relationships in the non-metagame sense. To discuss this in terms of metagame agenda would be to assume that there were some transparency issues with Immersion in terms of creating story in a given genre.

Mike

Dude! I love PVP Online!



p.s. my hat of The Forge know no limit!

Mike, as we often point out at the Forge, it's not really possible to address these issues without reference to a substantial instance of Actual Play. So, I ask you to consider the following example:

NARRATOR: It was time for Tubby Custard.

PLAYERS: Tubby custaaad! Tubby custaaad!

NARRATOR: Po, roll your agility pool.

PLAYER 1 (PO): Okay, I'm using all three of my dice. [rolls] 2 1 4... no successes.

NARRATOR: Po's Tubby Custard spilled all over the place.

PLAYER 1 (PO): Eh oh!

PLAYERS: Eh oh!

NARRATOR: Lala, roll your agility pool.

PLAYER 2 (LALA): I'm only rolling one die, so I can trade the others two for a point to my nuu-nuu pool. [rolls] 4, a failure.

NARRATOR: Lala's Tubby Custard spilled all over the place.

PLAYER 2 (LALA): Eh oh!

PLAYERS: Eh oh!

NARRATOR: Dipsy, roll your agility pool.

PLAYER 3 (DIPSY): I can roll up to five dice, or choose to roll fewer. Hmm...

Now, Dipsy's player faces a difficult choice. On the one hand, the metagame agenda of fidelity within this particular high-concept sim game demands that Dipsy continue the trend established by Po and Lala, and also spill her custard. The mechanics give her that option (or at least, a recourse that results in a high probability of that occurrence, by rolling fewer dice). But Dipsy's player also knows that Dipsy does not want to spill her custard, and doing so will make Dipsy sad. This is not a stance issue, it's a conflict that exists entirely within the player, between serving the metagame agenda by spilling the custard, or creating an outcome more favorable to Dipsy by avoiding spilling the custard. It's also not an issue of drift. Player 3's desire to avoid spilling the custard does not, in this instance, arise from the challenge of adept custard-handling. (Such a player agenda clearly could be Gamist, but it equally clearly is not necessarily so, any more than a movie audience's desire to see the good guys win must be motivated by competition or challenge.) Instead, it arises from the player's emotional identification with the character's well-being. Simulationism is the mode most often associated with close player identification with the character... and yet the idea of prioritizing fidelity (whether to causality or to genre expectations of coutcome) above all else appears to demand clinical detachment on the player's part, which is rarely if ever observed in actual play. This is a hidden arrhythmia at the heart of Simulationism. It's not an effect of drift but rather one of its strongest causes. And it's often mistaken for (or for want of alternatives end up expressed as) Gamism.

- Walt

You know I've been hanging out on the Forge too damn long when that actually almost makes sense...

[evil laugh reverberates through the chambers and corridors of the Forge]

- Walt

wfreitag wrote: Now, Dipsy's player faces a difficult choice. On the one hand, the metagame agenda of fidelity within this particular high-concept sim game demands that Dipsy continue the trend established by Po and Lala, and also spill her custard. The mechanics give her that option (or at least, a recourse that results in a high probability of that occurrence, by rolling fewer dice). But Dipsy's player also knows that Dipsy does not want to spill her custard, and doing so will make Dipsy sad. This is not a stance issue, it's a conflict that exists entirely within the player, between serving the metagame agenda by spilling the custard, or creating an outcome more favorable to Dipsy by avoiding spilling the custard. It's also not an issue of drift. Player 3's desire to avoid spilling the custard does not, in this instance, arise from the challenge of adept custard-handling. (Such a player agenda clearly could be Gamist, but it equally clearly is not necessarily so, any more than a movie audience's desire to see the good guys win must be motivated by competition or challenge.) Instead, it arises from the player's emotional identification with the character's well-being. Simulationism is the mode most often associated with close player identification with the character... and yet the idea of prioritizing fidelity (whether to causality or to genre expectations of coutcome) above all else appears to demand clinical detachment on the player's part, which is rarely if ever observed in actual play. This is a hidden arrhythmia at the heart of Simulationism. It's not an effect of drift but rather one of its strongest causes. And it's often mistaken for (or for want of alternatives end up expressed as) Gamism.

Fabrice G. wrote:

wfreitag wrote: Now, Dipsy's player faces a difficult choice. On the one hand, the metagame agenda of fidelity within this particular high-concept sim game demands that Dipsy continue the trend established by Po and Lala, and also spill her custard. The mechanics give her that option (or at least, a recourse that results in a high probability of that occurrence, by rolling fewer dice). But Dipsy's player also knows that Dipsy does not want to spill her custard, and doing so will make Dipsy sad. This is not a stance issue, it's a conflict that exists entirely within the player, between serving the metagame agenda by spilling the custard, or creating an outcome more favorable to Dipsy by avoiding spilling the custard. It's also not an issue of drift. Player 3's desire to avoid spilling the custard does not, in this instance, arise from the challenge of adept custard-handling. (Such a player agenda clearly could be Gamist, but it equally clearly is not necessarily so, any more than a movie audience's desire to see the good guys win must be motivated by competition or challenge.) Instead, it arises from the player's emotional identification with the character's well-being. Simulationism is the mode most often associated with close player identification with the character... and yet the idea of prioritizing fidelity (whether to causality or to genre expectations of coutcome) above all else appears to demand clinical detachment on the player's part, which is rarely if ever observed in actual play. This is a hidden arrhythmia at the heart of Simulationism. It's not an effect of drift but rather one of its strongest causes. And it's often mistaken for (or for want of alternatives end up expressed as) Gamism.

See, when I told ya dat de forge is chritsal clar..... I was LYING !!!!! AHHHHHHHHH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Fabrice.

ps: rule n°1 ov da Forge--allawys make a constructive post.

ok, I think I've seen enough. people at The Forge obviously don't know what real trolling is all about. or cooking, for that matter.

Guess Who* wrote:
The quantum entanglements of the GNS debates here at The Forge are a lot like stove top stuffing: dry when you first open the package, then essentially a lot of breadcrumbs spilled into flavored water, until you stir. That’s when it gets really interesting!

Take the above example, for instance, it is liberally dipped in The Forge's special chocolate sauce

of metaphorical determinism of absolutist ideologues as rooted in The Forge's preconceptions about the status quo of metagame construct cost ananylsis.

The average Forgeite might as well assume that Dipsy, knowing that its player is going soon to set out on a journey to Farther India, would thus negate the die rolls by acting to make its player think.

Something which wfreitag was obviously waving a nieve at with the above observation in a effort to shake the very foundations of The Forge's most basic preconceptions about the social interaction amongst trolls. Er... Telewubbies.

Hmm. Our Guest, Guess Who left a clue in one point font. Here it is for the HTML challenged.

*does NOT rhyme with coypu!

You people are always changing the subject; that's the thing I hate the most about the Forge.

ethan_greer wrote: You people are always changing the subject; that's the thing I hate the most about the Forge.

talysman wrote: ok, I think I've seen enough. people at The Forge obviously don't know what real trolling is all about. or cooking, for that matter.

this is ridiculous. first of all, you did not put a TM after Stove-Top Stuffing (TM), which means that you have violated Chef Boyardee's trademark. do you want a horde of copyright lawyers descending upon The Forge to shut it down under the DMCA?

second, this is not the way you make Stove-Top Stuffing (TM). please check your facts before posting nonsense to The Forge. I always do.

I had this weird image of a tiny $2.97 Metagaming pocketgame about giant walking political trees at war with accounting golems.