Manofmanychars

Because minor rules dispute=debate on the basic philosophies of RPG design and roleplaying culture in general.

Now that is reductio ad absurdum.

Hiding behind the word "opinion" isn't a defense against being wrong.

Every game system incentivizes certain patterns of behavior through its language and content. While playtesting 7th Sea, John Wick saw that combat just devolved into the usual Punch and Judy show of "I stand there and hit him," despite the characters being able to swing on chandeliers, jump over tables, and do the usual swashbuckly things. John Wick rewrote the combat rules to specifically mention all the crazy maneuvers you can do, rather than leave them implied (by their presence as skills). Suddenly, the players were having their characters jump and swing all over the place in combat, because they had never thought to try it until they were told that they could.

Similarly, many RPG systems have roleplaying aids in their rules in order to incentivize more and better roleplaying.

Take a group of average tabletop gamers. Have them play D&D. Then have them play Houses of the Blooded. 12 times out of 10, they'll roleplay more during Houses of the Blooded, because Houses of the Blooded encourages roleplaying.

Also, I don't see how you can get so worked up at 7th Sea's Backgrounds. News flash: Backgrounds are the worst thing you can spend points on at character creation if you want more plusses, a twinker would just take more Advantages. Backgrounds are a lot of risk for not much reward (maybe an extra point of experience every other session), their sole appeal is for roleplayers, the extra experience is there so that the player doesn't feel like he wasted his character points (which are spent to make sure the player is committed to his subplot, because the GM then has to work it into the campaign).

So if an entire group of non-roleplayers wanted to try their hand at roleplaying, your view is that they can go suck eggs?

Well, that explains the lack of new players these days.

Not everyone is a naturally good roleplayer.

Check and mate.

Yes, because any form of disagreement is automatically a flamewar, and arguments on the internet mean that real-life interaction is bad.

Hey, he cited sales numbers and convention turnouts for us, it's not like he's just making wild assumptions out of thin air. We may not like it, but we need to rethink the way we try to attract new gamers if we want to avoid what happened to comic books all those years ago (no kids infusing the hobby with new blood caused the industry to implode like a bad soufflé). Hell, this issue comes up often enough with video games, I don't see how it's so hard to believe that it's threatening tabletop gaming, as well.

As opposed to what?

I'd say it's a whole lot better than some sourcebook. Not everyone owns the core rules for Exalted.

*cough*

For peer review, just look at any given thread there.

As for whether or not results are repeatable, that's up for debate.

Not at all. You questioning the RPG cred of the largest, most experienced, and most respected group of RPG gamers on the internet is, in fact, tantamount to questioning the credentials of the researchers at CERN, or the Nobel Committee, or any other group that holds similar standing in its field. RPG.net is well-known in internet circles as the first and last word on tabletop gaming. If you refuse to acknowledge their expertise, then there can clearly be no convincing you that you're wrong, as no source will ever be credible enough for you.

Okay, allow me to point out that, so far, my evidence happens to be the only evidence. So, I'm calling it in my favor if you can't support your side of the argument. By the way, this is exactly the sort of topic in which anecdotal evidence is credible. Also, the linked article. Respond to it.

Here's that link again for you.

So, now I have linked public opinion, expert opinion, and a researched article. It's time to produce or concede the point, I've fulfilled my burden of proof.

Way to totally ignore the linked article, which further demolishes your position.

Also, the only self-selection on RPG.net is tabletop RPG players. Hence the name, RPG.net. Kinda thought it was self-explanatory, there. But yeah, what does the largest online tabletop gaming community on Earth, many of whom spend much of their time reviewing RPGs (not to mention the people in the community who make RPGs, including pros like John Wick), know about RPGs?

Next you're going to question CERN's collective knowledge of quantum physics.

You could always unitalicize it when quoting me. It's Harnmaster. It promises an authentic Harnic experience.

Also, for those interested in Don't Rest Your Head, I highly recommend the supplement, Don't Lose Your Mind. It's the game's only supplement, so you may as well get it.

Well, unfortunately for your arguments, most personal accounts on RPG.net (y'know, the place where they do nothing but talk about their tabletop gaming experiences) seem to indicate that the more integrated story and gameplay become, the more the players roleplay.

But then again, the idea that keeping plot and mechanics separate detracts from immersion isn't anything new.

EDIT: And here's some more evidence for you.

The experts weigh in.

Advantage: me.

That's a failure at interparty communication. Maybe next time you could talk with the GM and the other players before coming up with your concept.

Any GM who can't work in the group's backgrounds isn't worthy of the title. If you knew the full rules behind Backgrounds, you'd know exactly what I mean. Especially since Backgrounds are only visited once every few game sessions, on average, typically in-between major adventures.

As to your other point, if your past doesn't have any effect on you in the present, it may as well not be there. Plus, you have to keep in mind that the more the rules talk about a character's history, the more it encourages the player to do the same. Backgrounds are just general ideas, the player needs to come up with specifics. And then he needs to think about what all of that implies. The more the player is encouraged by the rules to roleplay and come up with a fully-realized character, the more likely he is to do so.

I can tell you've never played 7th Sea.

Backgrounds in 7th Sea are just that. They are purely story elements for your character to have. They set up events that happened to your character prior to the beginning of the game, which come back as a recurring subplot until such a time as they're resolved. You earn additional experience for taking part in scenes related to your background (a return on the investment of character points you used to buy the background). When the background is resolved, you get some more bonus experience. Backgrounds can also be earned through gameplay under certain circumstances.

A character's backstory should be decided on creation. Having Schrodinger's Past is unrealistic and is one of the main contributing factors in the overall lack of attachment many players feel for their characters. You didn't get to choose your own past, why should your character?

Okay, yes, Shadowrun does have a lot of books, you got me there, but the basic premise stands that most well-designed systems allow for fairly quick character creation as long as you know what you're doing. Tri-Stat might be a little time-intensive if you're keeping track of your points in your head.

As for the second part, no, you're wrong. To quote the most grating phrase a good friend of mine uses, "You're provably wrong (seriously, what does that even mean)." Other RPGs have mechanics specifically for fleshing out your character. Going back to 7th Sea, there are Backgrounds, the Fate Deck, and some Advantages imply certain character traits. Games like that are catering to roleplayers, rather than, as John called them, "hackers". This makes it much easier to roleplay in a game like 7th Sea than D&D.

Here's a challenge for you: go to the D&D players you know, and ask them who their characters' parents are. Ask them about their characters' lives prior to adventuring. What sort of emotional issues do their characters carry from past experiences? I doubt you'll get many detailed answers that aren't on-the-spot.

Then do the same for the World of Darkness players you know.

Or you could take the middle path, one I like to refer to as "the path of the dude who isn't lazy or an insufferable munchkin", which is when you come up with a basic idea of your character's concept, then choose things that support that concept, optimization be damned. Once you're familiar with the system, nothing short of Palladium or the bookstorm that is D&D will take over an hour.

By the by, John Wick condemns D&D's title of the "beginner's game" primarily because it only caters to the optimizer crowd. It's great if you love to build the greatest possible character, but if you want a character that you're emotionally invested in, you're out of luck.

Personally, I'd say the game that does the most for everyone is 7th Sea. There's more than enough material to make character optimization a real factor, while there's also a ton of stuff to get you "into" your character's story, and the rules are fairly simple, for a medium-crunch game. Plus if the new player just wants to go at it without running numbers or coming up with backstory, 7th Sea has easy chargen and a very simple premise with wide appeal you can always turn to for a story-light game: PIRATES! You can deal with mainland political intrigue some other time.