Thread: Questioning chirine ba kal

Originally Posted by AsenRG

Well, the problem is with store owners who refuse to bring something useful even when you order it, IME.

The problem there is that gaming companies have minimum orders ranging from $300 (Battle Front) to $7000 (Games Workshop's Store Starter Bundle after that it was $500 / week last time I checked) if you want a retail discount. Personally I mostly order direct because the distributor I have is awful when it comes to rpgs and miniatures. But with a low volume, low overhead hole in the wall store (you know that dark and dingy store people bitch about, that's my store) I can't afford to order $500 of stuff so you can get $50 and leave me stuck with $450. The distributors are in the same boat. They don't want to support rpgs because they still have warehouses full of d20 boom supplements for which they can't get core books anymore. I do try. I eventually managed to sell off all the Alls Quiet On The Martian Front stuff I got stuck with when the company went under and the fans set up an online trading post. But stores often lack the capital to chase special orders that they can't get from their distributors. And if their distributor is anything like mine, you have to pre-order most rpg stuff months in advance if you ever want to see it because if it doesn't say D&D they aren't ordering it without you committing to buy it.

http://www.neutralgroundgames.com

Gah! DISTRIBUTORS! Don't talk to me about distributors! Hate them or despise them, you can't ignore them!

In the mid 80s you didn't get direct orders enough to matter, everything was from distributors, and the bastards kept raising not only their minimum order from retailers but the percentage from manufacturers. When the retailer gets 40% and the distributor wants 15% plus 2% if paid in 30 days an an EXTRA 2% for immediate payment, you're scraping for damn pennies.

Years ago I came up with a scheme to go around the traditional distribution system. Demo teams would sell stock to the stores and make the distributor's cut thus allowing them to actually make some money promoting games.

It got dubbed the Amway of gaming somewhere. Recently Prodos Games started experimenting with a similar scheme. I'll be very interested to see how it goes.

Personally it's a two way street. Distributors need to be able to sell the products in their warehouses and I'm afraid that's going to require a very different business model. I'm seriously considering getting a 3D printer and a good laser printer that can make booklets for the store.

Originally Posted by Gronan of Simmerya

That's because you actually listen to people in order to process information, not just wait for them to stop talking so you can start.

That, plus making sure you have no preconceptions of what players "should" do, is all you need.

Oh. Yeah, I guess you're right. No idea how I learned to do it; maybe just experience and good teachers...

From AsenRG:
Can I learn the Secret Handshakes over Internet, and start a section of the club here, Uncle?
I've had the temerity to include Chirine in my games* already. That should count for something!

*Pretty safe, since my players don't try to kill NPCs as a goal in itself - unless the NPC makes it personal, which isn't Chirine ba Kal's style at all...

We'll work on it. I'll think of something; I always do.

Nope, it was really never personal - at least for the major stuff - as I always tried to keep it professional.

That doesn't sound entirely implausible...how concentrated are the OSR guys geographically?
Me, I think it's because people that weren't fanatics of some particular mechanics are more likely to switch to a new edition when it comes out. There have been like 3 new editions of D&D since then...

No idea; they seem to mostly be an Internet thing.

Well, they weren't exactly "orders". I chose to play a spy, not a general.
Somehow, I ended up with the most points, too!

'Instructions', then...

I'm always amazed with the number of your models - two more aren't that much for you, it seems...
No, not really. I just like making stuff, and I guess I'm reasonably good at it.

Well, the problem is with store owners who refuse to bring something useful even when you order it, IME.

Yep. I gave up on trying to do special orders a long time ago. Now, it's all via the Internet with direct orders.

Well, sometimes OSR is used for games where the mechanics aren't similar, but emulate the playstyle of a particular edition.

For example, Epees et Sorcellerie, despite the name, emulates the earliest days of the hobby, focusing on the swords-and-sorcerie roots of it (and on mechanics with d6, like Chainmail - although it's different in application, I gather).
DCC does the same, but mixes S&S inspiration with weird fantasy, and that's even reflected in the mechanics (which use weirdly-shaped dice and actually manage to do something worthwhile with them. Most of the time).
Lamentations of the Flame Princess, on the other hand, emulates the sandbox style of the early hobby, and mixes in weird fantasy. The mechanics of LotFP are more or less standard D&D-style stuff, though.

Of course, good sandbox actually needs a background, which can limit your options at times. Some people think that's too limiting; I think they're running games in boring settings. The two fractions shall not see eye to eye any time soon, I predict...

Oh, OK; this explains a lot for me - thank you!

I think those people just need a bigger "library" of props they can adapt to different locations.

I think so too - more 'generic' ones, maybe...

I think the guys who assume a "railroady/illusionist" style of play were basing it on the adventures that got published...and the first railroads appeared relatively early, anyway (Dragonlance, anyone). So a lot of people who started before I was born began with rather railroady campaigns...
(Other sources of railroading is from people trying to emulate some gamebooks, where you could have only one correct way to solve the adventure, and/or early computer games...)

True; there's a lot of emphasis on texts, from what i've seen, and not much on direct experience.

Those that thought Phil's games were "railroady", well, probably just based that on accounts of game play. When game has happened in a certain way, it only has one direction. What is not readily available is how many other directions it might have gone in...

I think it's based off the accounts of the game play out at Phil's in the 1990s; very few people know, based on the mythology out on the Internet, about the games in the late 1970s and 1980s. Our time with Phil was very free-form, very 'open sandbox'. If that changed later, I have no really good data on the subject.

I just think about the structure of the setting and the structure of the NPCs' personalities. Once players actually do something, they crash into one and/or the other structure. The structures react by pushing back, or bending, or breaking and calling up for emergencies...and it all moves the Refereeing mill.

Exactly. The meta-game keep providing new possibilities for adventures.

...hint, Uncle - next time try with John Carter's Mars. Even a lot of people who have read a couple books don't remember the name Barsoom, and many more have just watched the abomination of a movie. I think the name Barsoom was mentioned once in it, so of course, most people don't remember it.

A few might even be familiar with Mars games in the vein of John Carter...but those games avoid the name of Barsoom for IP reasons, just like the early hobbits and balrogs in D&D became halflings and balors.

I tried that. Got a little bit better response, but it's still much more about the 'name' games then anything else around these parts.

Some people still need more explanation than that.
Which is why I wrote a whole damn column! From then on, I was able to just paste them a link...beats explaining it again and again, I'll tell ya!
https://www.rpg.net/columns/tricksfo...sforgms2.phtml

(I'd add a few things today, but the core explanation I gave several years ago still holds, which pleases me).

I'll look at this; thank you for the link, and the column!

Originally Posted by Xanther

Wow, I would have thought someone who directly played with Gary and Dave would have been listened to.
I had the same experience, being told by OSR or protectors of the true way who were still in diapers when started playing D&D and Traveler that the way we played was wrong, would lead to ruin, etc. Certain folks would get down right demeaning and nasty about it. Didn't matter that you could say knew of three campaigns that played that way for a decade with no ill effect, nor if you could give specific examples of how it all worked in play and how it did not work. Found these were not really discussions but people just looking for facts to support their preconceptions and personal views.

'Free Kriegspiel' says it well if I understand the term, although everyone strove mightily to be consistent on their home rulings, which then became "house rules" to maintain consistency.

We particularly laughed at the "railroad" parts of modules that said something would happen no matter what the players did. Really? Ignored that BS right off. Growing up in the late 70's and surviving the vilification of D&D as Satanic in the early 80's we were going to do what made sense to us. And these "railroad" instructions we thought were just poor writing.

Now a "meta-game" background, without it your world is just lifeless and 2D IMHO. The world should always have something it's doing and going to do barring PCs mucking it all up. And right with you, all the campaigns I've ever ran or played in it was open, you didn't need to engage with any of the world's plots or even go to a particular dungeon etc.

From the reaction I got, the data that I was providing didn't fit the theory, and so had to be excluded. Quite a few of the self-described OSR people I've interacted with in the past have been very unhappy that my game play experiences don't fit in with their idea of how we're supposed to have played. And yes, some of then would get pretty cranky about it. So, I try to stay away from those discussions these days.

Originally Posted by Xanther

Love your explanation. I live for those moments as a player and GM when the dice go wonky. It's that aspect of unpredictability that forces you to rise to the occasion and come up with a "story" to fit in the improbable that makes it fun.

Thank you. I'd just gotten bored of explaining the same things over and over.

Originally Posted by Gronan of Simmerya

Gah! DISTRIBUTORS! Don't talk to me about distributors! Hate them or despise them, you can't ignore them!

In the mid 80s you didn't get direct orders enough to matter, everything was from distributors, and the bastards kept raising not only their minimum order from retailers but the percentage from manufacturers. When the retailer gets 40% and the distributor wants 15% plus 2% if paid in 30 days an an EXTRA 2% for immediate payment, you're scraping for damn pennies.

And thus Amazon was born?

Originally Posted by David Johansen

The problem there is that gaming companies have minimum orders ranging from $300 (Battle Front) to $7000 (Games Workshop's Store Starter Bundle after that it was $500 / week last time I checked) if you want a retail discount. Personally I mostly order direct because the distributor I have is awful when it comes to rpgs and miniatures. But with a low volume, low overhead hole in the wall store (you know that dark and dingy store people bitch about, that's my store) I can't afford to order $500 of stuff so you can get $50 and leave me stuck with $450. The distributors are in the same boat. They don't want to support rpgs because they still have warehouses full of d20 boom supplements for which they can't get core books anymore. I do try. I eventually managed to sell off all the Alls Quiet On The Martian Front stuff I got stuck with when the company went under and the fans set up an online trading post. But stores often lack the capital to chase special orders that they can't get from their distributors. And if their distributor is anything like mine, you have to pre-order most rpg stuff months in advance if you ever want to see it because if it doesn't say D&D they aren't ordering it without you committing to buy it.

http://www.neutralgroundgames.com

Yeah, but I wasn't even talking about gaming stores; my purchases of gaming stuff are PDF-only. When the local bookstore can't get me a book, and I manage to get it myself with half an hour of work, and reduce the shipping to nearly zero in the process, you could guess why I'm kinda miffed about their services...

Originally Posted by chirine ba kal

From AsenRG:
We'll work on it. I'll think of something; I always do.

Nope, it was really never personal - at least for the major stuff - as I always tried to keep it professional.

Yeah, it seems I was playing Chirine right...though they've never interacted with him personally.

'Instructions', then...

Yes; I think the thing that netted me most points was using the fact that another faction has announced full mobilisation, and organizing a manufacture in one of their own cities, for supplies we needed.
It was faster to get them from there to the front lines, and if we were defeated, I'd have had a business in the winning country...

No, not really. I just like making stuff, and I guess I'm reasonably good at it.

"Reasonably good for someone with decades of experience" is "really, really good" in layman terms.

Yep. I gave up on trying to do special orders a long time ago. Now, it's all via the Internet with direct orders.

I'm tending towards the same solution, alas. It's more time-consuming.

Oh, OK; this explains a lot for me - thank you!

And here I thought I'm just being nitpicky.

True; there's a lot of emphasis on texts, from what i've seen, and not much on direct experience.

That confirms my suspicions - although it doesn't make much sense, really.

I think it's based off the accounts of the game play out at Phil's in the 1990s; very few people know, based on the mythology out on the Internet, about the games in the late 1970s and 1980s. Our time with Phil was very free-form, very 'open sandbox'. If that changed later, I have no really good data on the subject.

Maybe. Or maybe people just misinterpreted what accounts there were. Both seem equally plausible to me; though from your description of the other group, that you split from? I'd have been tempted to railroad those guys, too. Though I'd probably just let them in the sandbox, and steer them towards the most self-destructive courses of action.
To paraphrase Gronan, "some PCs are only good when you watch them burn".

Exactly. The meta-game keep providing new possibilities for adventures.

Glad I've got that right.

I tried that. Got a little bit better response, but it's still much more about the 'name' games then anything else around these parts.

Well, seems like you're in the same spot where my local community was 10 years ago or so. It has changed for the better now, but it took quite a bit of effort and side-stepping the community and building my own thing outside of it.
(Then people that have started with me in turn integrated with the local gamers and brought the outlook I'd taught them).

I'll look at this; thank you for the link, and the column!

No need to thank me, really; as I said, a few years ago I just got bored posting essentially the same stuff in threads, and wrote the thing so I can refer them to it...

Originally Posted by chirine ba kal

From the reaction I got, the data that I was providing didn't fit the theory, and so had to be excluded. Quite a few of the self-described OSR people I've interacted with in the past have been very unhappy that my game play experiences don't fit in with their idea of how we're supposed to have played. And yes, some of then would get pretty cranky about it. So, I try to stay away from those discussions these days.

"How dares your experience to deviate from my theory" is sad when you encounter it in scientists, and merely funny when you encounter it in gamers, in my experience.
(It only gets scare when you encounter it in cops and judges. I'm fortunate to never had experienced that).

Originally Posted by chirine ba kal

From the reaction I got, the data that I was providing didn't fit the theory, and so had to be excluded. Quite a few of the self-described OSR people I've interacted with in the past have been very unhappy that my game play experiences don't fit in with their idea of how we're supposed to have played. And yes, some of then would get pretty cranky about it. So, I try to stay away from those discussions these days.

Yep. Same with playing with Gary and Dave pre-1980. One thing that REALLY gives people fits is when I describe how both of them just "made up some shit they thought would be fun." RPGZ IZ SERIOUS BIDNEZZ, I guess.