Why I don't like PbtA

[Hairless Bear]

I think my main issue, which was hinted at in Dungeon World, but really evident in Monster of the Week, was the singular "Do something dangerous" move (usually "Defy Danger").

Note: this if from actual play, not theoretical.

In most RPGs, there are a few skills that get "spammed" more often than others. Often a PC will just happen to be crafted, intentionally or not, to excell at that skill (or move, in this instance), right from the start.

In more than one Monster of the Week game I ran, someone had a +3 to their Cool stat, which was used for that "Defy Danger" move. Essentially, they became unstoppable Daredevils from character creation. The Superman problem, wherein to keep things interesting I had to constantly come up with super intense dangers that tied up these Supermen PCs so that I could have some semblance of tension.

I've never really gotten a good explanation about how to deal with this beyond "oh those games are heavily procedural, you should only do a "Defy Danger" once or twice during the actual fight with the titular Monster boss fight". That... never sat well with me.

As much as I had fun with some PbtA games, I stopped playing or running them because of this apparent expecation that you HAVE to run them in a specific procedural way.

I may have misunderstood that though. Either way, I prefer to run games as "player says that they want to do X, GM says 'roll Y' stat/skill do try it", without being hampered with additional contexts, meta-currencies or pre-determined "procedures".

I hope that I'm wrong about this, but so far I haven't been convinced otherwise. And it might only be a problem with those 2 games I played (MotW and Dungeon World).

In Dungeon World, "Defy Danger" move does not specify which attribute to use. Or to be more precise, the rules tell you to use the attribute that fits the action. So if a player tells you:

• "I am doing a zig zag run to dodge the arrows.", it's DEX.
• "I am holding the doors so the undead can't get through.", it's STR.
• "I am trying to resist the seduction of the priestess.", it's WIS.

I might be wrong, but that is what I understand as "player says that they want to do X, GM says 'roll Y' stat/skill do try it", to quote you.

I have never played Monster of the Week, but you are probably talking about its "Act Under Pressure" move, which uses the Cool attribute exactly as you said. I don't think it's the problem of the move as such, I think it is a problem of the attributes the game uses - Cool, Tough, Charm, Sharp, Weird. I don't understand why, but the game designers intended characters with high Cool to excel in all dangerous situations. Just a note though - I didn't see any character type in the basic rule book, that would start with +3 Cool.

 

[Necrozius]

In Dungeon World, "Defy Danger" move does not specify which attribute to use. Or to be more precise, the rules tell you to use the attribute that fits the action. So if a player tells you:

• "I am doing a zig zag run to dodge the arrows.", it's DEX.
• "I am holding the doors so the undead can't get through.", it's STR.
• "I am trying to resist the seduction of the priestess.", it's WIS.

I might be wrong, but that is what I understand as "player says that they want to do X, GM says 'roll Y' stat/skill do try it", to quote you.

You're right! I forgot about that. Now I remember why I preferred the way it worked in Dungeon World.

I have never played Monster of the Week, but you are probably talking about its "Act Under Pressure" move, which uses the Cool attribute exactly as you said. I don't think it's the problem of the move as such, I think it is a problem of the attributes the game uses - Cool, Tough, Charm, Sharp, Weird. I don't understand why, but the game designers intended characters with high Cool to excel in all dangerous situations. Just a note though - I didn't see any character type in the basic rule book, that would start with +3 Cool.

I had to look it up. My friend picked The Professional playbook, and all of the Ratings start with +2 Cool. Then out of the list of starting moves, he picked "Unfazeable", which adds +1 Cool.

So he started off with a character that already had +3 to Act under pressure tests.

Note that this is from 2nd edition (not the brand newest one). So maybe they fixed that? Because it was balls.

 

[Torque2100]

2) "Moves" - this artificial construct creating an extra layer between role-playing and the rules. For players, it's simply annoying, but for GMs they are like handcuffs to try and force the GM to run the game the way the author wants. The authors of PBTA games seem to see the GM as ideally a programmable robot.

This right here is why I cannot play PbtA games. Not for lack of trying. I have tried playing Apocalypse World and running Dungeon World. I felt the exact same. Just the whole concept of Moves is an instant deal breaker. I don't like how this method of handcuffing the DM to force him to run the game in a specific way the author wants is leaking out into other games.

 

[Sharrow]

You don’t. Your move (reaction might be a better term) “follows the fiction.” You determine the logical consequence, the extremity of which depends on whether we’re talking hard or soft moves. Contrast this with a typical failure in, say, a combat roll in straight D&D. You just miss. Same thing in DW could result in something like you lopping off the head of the goblin you charged at, but your momentum carried you right into the gaggle behind it. Now you’re cut off from the party, and the spellcaster has lost his tank. You’ve killed a goblin, taken no damage, but your tactical situation is much worse. DW GM adjudications are about that - ramping up the tension by introducing dire situations (which can include straight damage, if the situation (or the move, in some cases) calls for it. Long story short: make the ruling that fits. Of it applies to the actual GM hard move list, fine. If not, so what? You’re just as “free” as the GM in many other, trad systems. I don’t feel like that’s the issue people actually have. I think it’s the fact that there’s no “you’re the GM, and the GM is God” statement (even though you damn well are in DW, as much as anywhere else).

And that is a fine example of why I don't much like PBtA-style 'yes, but' successes. To my mind, were I playing that character, who seems to have been functioning as a meat-shield as much as a cusinart, this is worse than just whiffing. 1) It means I've just completely failed in what seems to have been my main tactical role - blocker and tank for the squishy. 2) It makes me look like an incompetent, and probably also a glory-hound, going for kills rather than standing my ground and guarding the squishy. And the GM gets to decide that after I've rolled, and it's a common dice outcome, not some 1-in-100 or even 1-in-20 fumble.

I'm also simply not a fan of the whole player-facing dice rolls. Also the GM moves being in reaction to player actions, and I'm fairly sure it simply wouldn't work with one of my current groups of players. They'd simply clam up and refuse to do anything once it because apparent that doing something was the primary trigger of complications. Sure, that's how games generally flow anyway, but with it completely explicit they'd just freeze up. They over-plan and over-analyse to a stupid degree already, this mechanism would just make it worse.

 

[Necrozius]

Despite everything, I found it handy how the PbtA games codified typical GM approaches into a set of tools. This sort of thing happens in the corporate world all of the time (in both good and bad ways).

It found it helpful to have a handy list on my GM binder or screen of these GM "Moves" to remind me of all of the different approaches. I don't NEEEEED them, but they're handy.

Checklists are good for even experts. I read a book on how checklists improved surgery outcomes worldwide (in an official way; even nurses and orderlies could push back on Doctors when things weren't done by the book, saving a lot of trouble, pain and infection because of it).

Not saying GMing is as important as anything else, just saying that it isn't always bad to have a handy list to remind us of the various ways we do our jobs.

 

[Hairless Bear]

You're right! I forgot about that. Now I remember why I preferred the way it worked in Dungeon World.

I had to look it up. My friend picked The Professional playbook, and all of the Ratings start with +2 Cool. Then out of the list of starting moves, he picked "Unfazeable", which adds +1 Cool.

So he started off with a character that already had +3 to Act under pressure tests.

Note that this is from 2nd edition (not the brand newest one). So maybe they fixed that? Because it was balls.

Oh yeah, you are right. As I haven't played MotW, I didn't realize, you can take "Unfazeable" right at the beginning. That is weird to me too (at least +2 Weird). It means almost 92% chance for (partial) success.

 

[Necrozius]

Oh yeah, you are right. As I haven't played MotW, I didn't realize, you can take "Unfazeable" right at the beginning. That is weird to me too (at least +2 Weird). It means almost 92% chance for (partial) success.

It’s a character build that has a significant impact upon the campaign. MotW DMs need to take note…

 

[Voros]

I have very little experience with pbta, so take this with a heavy dose of salt, but there are two aspects i find strange

1. Most fans of the system state the best iterations of the game are those which are "laser focused" to emulate a specific feel. This focus is achieved via the Moves and playbooks. To me that sounds like it's limiting player agency. If players were permitted to play their characters whichever way they wanted I don't see how you can get that same "laser focus".

2. As others have said, the game feels meta. As in a player is not directly playing their character trying to overcome obstacles, but playing a game where they decide which obstacles their character's will overcome. It's hard to describe because it's more subtle than what I wrote. Another poster compared it to playing a martial artist vs playing an actor playing a martial artist in a movie.

Not that either of those 2 things are inherently wrong, but definitely is different than traditional rpgs.

A common misconception with PbtA seems to be this idea that the players determine their own obstacles or if they will overcome them or not.

A few PbtA games, generally those with a lighter, collaborative freeform approach, do allow a high level of player input into actions and outcomes but they are far from the majority of PbtA games.

Most PbtA games I've played and even more of those I've read are more 'conventional' than that. Some too conventional by half, with more and more subsystems piled on top for little gain.

One need to only look at the PbtA games played here via PbP to see how 'traditionally' a game of Scum & Villainy runs for instance.

Claims that these are the exceptions or that we're not playing the game correctly aren't convincing to me, a case of begging the question.

A lot of the claims about PbtA seem to also confuse it with more freeform and collaborative storygames just because some versions of the system encourage some player input.

A related matter is that there even seems to be confusion about storygames requiring some kind of restricted play, when most storygames actually tend towards freeform play.

To me, the weakest storygames are those that don't give enough structure to play, as opposed to too much structure.

As Peterson's extensive review of early rpg play as reported in the APAs in The Elusive Shift shows, neither player input nor freeform play are remotely new nor 'foreign' to rpgs.

Strange that to this day some insist on treating them as either new or foreign ideas somehow being forced onto rpgs.

The fact that few today have an issue when the exact same ideas were promoted by Erick Wujcik or Greg Stafford is telling.

Certainly one can dislike any game and its mechanics but the absolutionism of some people's responses seem more tied to tribalism than reason to me.

 

[DornKratz]

The one problem that seems to creep even into the best PbtA implementations is unevenness. Moves are uneven. Some have more mechanical support, some are Do Dangerous Stuff grab bags, some barely see any play. And because Moves are so often tied to Stats, the latter become uneven too. Then you have playbooks, and you can often see which are the designer's darlings and which are there to fill out the roster.

 

[JAMUMU]

The one problem that seems to creep even into the best PbtA implementations is unevenness. Moves are uneven. Some have more mechanical support, some are Do Dangerous Stuff grab bags, some barely see any play. And because Moves are so often tied to Stats, the latter become uneven too. Then you have playbooks, and you can often see which are the designer's darlings and which are there to fill out the roster.

Nice, succinct summary of some of the structural problems inherent in the PbtA system. FitD fixes a lot of these, which is why I prefer it. Also, 2d6+Stat did not pass the "dice feel" test at our table, and it's all about the dice feel.

 

[EmperorNorton]

The one problem that seems to creep even into the best PbtA implementations is unevenness. Moves are uneven. Some have more mechanical support, some are Do Dangerous Stuff grab bags, some barely see any play. And because Moves are so often tied to Stats, the latter become uneven too. Then you have playbooks, and you can often see which are the designer's darlings and which are there to fill out the roster.

I mean, I feel like this is true of most games. In that a lot of games have really uneven attention spread to various parts of the mechanics.

 

[ffilz]

...how so? I'm pretty sure "the fiction" is being usually used to denote "stuff that happens to the characters in the shared imaginary space" or some such.
Which, to me, is IC.

My point is that IC is sometimes used for how you speak:

"I ask the bartender if what he knows of the route to the adventure."

vs.

"I'll have a whiskey. babble babble babble... So what have you heard about the Old South Road? Are the bandits acting up again?"

In the first, the player is stating the information the player wants. In the second, the character is speaking and working up to asking a question. Many would call the first out of character and the second in character. But neither is mechanics. Sure, the first is treating things a bit more a "moves" in a game, but it still is different than a third option:

"Rolled a modified 25 for my Information Gathering skill. What do I find out?"

 

[Simlasa]

Certainly one can dislike any game and its mechanics but the absolutionism of some people's responses seem more tied to tribalism than reason to me.

That butter is spread all over both sides of the bread dude... as well as on your shirt cuffs.

 

[Fenris-77]

That butter is spread all over both sides of the bread dude... as well as on your shirt cuffs.

Is the bread dude something like the gingerbread man? Catching him when he's all smeared in butter must be a stone cold bitch. Buttery shirt cuffs seem very reasonable in the circumstances.

 

[JAMUMU]

That butter is spread all over both sides of the bread dude... as well as on your shirt cuffs.

I'm ambivalent towards PbtA. Tried it, thought some of it was neat, ultimately dumped it for other stuff. Won't be using it again because of its flaws vis a vis how we roll at out table.

But the sheer ire it draws out in some folks is unlike most other game systems. It brings out the irrational internet-hater in a cohort of the RPG game community all out of whack with the system itself. Attempting to deny that is body-swerving the fact there's three multi-page threads on PbtA on this forum alone and two of em? Spoiler: they hates it, precious. They hates it the way I hate Nazis.

 

[Voros]

That butter is spread all over both sides of the bread dude... as well as on your shirt cuffs.

I have no idea what this means but I assume its an insult for some reason?

Ah, thinking on it I now guess this is a claim that I too suffer from tribalism and rabid absolutionism, because I'm on 'their side.'

I'm certainly no angel but pretty confident in saying that i have pretty broad and tolerant tastes in rpgs. I know that high crunch isn't to my taste but appreciate, own and have played in some high crunch games. I love a number of 'trad' games, from D&D, WFRP to Traveller. I admire aspects of Gurps, really like TFT, and Mythras.

But the fact that I also dare like storygames and PbtA instantly make some see me as being on the 'other side.' Which neatly helps prove my point I think.

 

[JAMUMU]

I have no idea what this means but I assume its an insult for some reason?

There's butter on both sides of the bread. Fuck all use putting that in the toaster now. So those other guys are fucked for toast. I mean, the toast is fucked, all around fucked.

So here's the insult, brovoros: There's butter on your shirt-cuffs, and, I assume, your cuff-links. Cuff-links are enough of a footery fuck-around without spreading them with churned bovine secretion, or excretion, or dairy product, as it's called in real RPGs. So you've got slippery cuff-links and buttered up holes my friend. Spread all over. And I'm just standing here, oiled, twitching. Buttered.

Your move, punk.

 

[EmperorNorton]

I'm certainly no angel but pretty confident in saying that i have pretty broad and tolerant tastes in rpgs. I know that high crunch isn't to my taste but appreciate, own and have played in some high crunch games. I love a number of 'trad' games, from D&D, WFRP to Traveller. I admire aspects of Gurps, really like TFT, and Mythras.

But the fact that I also dare like storygames and PbtA instantly puts me on the 'other side' according to some. Which neatly helps prove my point I think.

I have similar tastes, in that I like a bit of everything. But I imagine that if some people here were asked, I would be a "storygamer".

 

[EmperorNorton]

Also I got to say the more I think about it the more I think that my only real problem with PbtA is that it is goddamn everywhere now. I like reading and learning new systems. Not just new settings and new little twists on existing systems. I like reading whole new systems. And it feels like PbtA is squeezing out some of the little indie unique systems that would exist if everyone and their mother didn't seem to be making PbtA games (I know this isn't what is really happening, there are tons of other games, it is just that so many times recently I'll hear about a game that SOUNDS cool to me from a setting/thematic standpoint and then boom, open the kickstarter/drivethru/whatever page and boom, another PbtA game.)

Like even Evil Hat that basically has two in house systems (Fate, Forged in the Dark (yes, I know that technically one.seven owns the Forged in the Dark stuff, but Evil Hat is THE big Forged in the Dark publisher for the most part)) feels like they are mostly making PbtA games instead.

 

[chuckdee]

1. Player proposes an action
2. Conversation between GM and player about things such as this means, what to roll, potentially intended effect or consequences.
3. Dice Roll
4. Conversation between GM and player about actual effect or actual consequences.
5. Outcome

That's not my sequence of events.

1. The player narrates something
2. I see that what the player is narrating that they're doing is covered by a move and that move activates.
3. Dice roll.
4. I tell the player the outcome and cost/options
5. The player chooses and then I narrate what happens.

There's no additional conversation step, especially if there are no options to choose in the outcome.

 

[Voros]

Also I got to say the more I think about it the more I think that my only real problem with PbtA is that it is goddamn everywhere now. I like reading and learning new systems. Not just new settings and new little twists on existing systems. I like reading whole new systems. And it feels like PbtA is squeezing out some of the little indie unique systems that would exist if everyone and their mother didn't seem to be making PbtA games (I know this isn't what is really happening, there are tons of other games, it is just that so many times recently I'll hear about a game that SOUNDS cool to me from a setting/thematic standpoint and then boom, open the kickstarter/drivethru/whatever page and boom, another PbtA game.)

Like even Evil Hat that basically has two in house systems (Fate, Forged in the Dark (yes, I know that technically one.seven owns the Forged in the Dark stuff, but Evil Hat is THE big Forged in the Dark publisher for the most part)) feels like they are mostly making PbtA games instead.

Yeah, I can definitely see the argument that it's getting played out and overused. I'm not really into playing the same ruleset year in and year out.

And when it comes to designers, I tend to like Meg Baker's games to Vincent's by a pretty wide margin.

The most exciting modern games for me right now would include Heart, TOR, Trophy and Alien. Trophy has some PbtA DNA but is a pretty distinct game imo.

 

[Skywalker]

And it feels like PbtA is squeezing out some of the little indie unique systems that would exist if everyone and their mother didn't seem to be making PbtA games (I know this isn't what is really happening, there are tons of other games, it is just that so many times recently I'll hear about a game that SOUNDS cool to me from a setting/thematic standpoint and then boom, open the kickstarter/drivethru/whatever page and boom, another PbtA game.)

I think there is an interesting discussion to be had here as well. One of the reasons why PbtA spread so prolifically is that it appeals to designers as well as to gamers. It may be cliched at this point but PbtA isn't so much a rule system as a rules approach, and it provides an appealing framework that designers can use for their own games that is not like what open rule systems did in the past.

 

[JAMUMU]

I think there is an interesting discussion to be had here as well. One of the reasons why PbtA spread so prolifically is that it appeals to designers as well as to gamers. It may be cliched at this point but PbtA isn't so much a rule system as a rules approach, and it provides an appealing framework that designers can use for their own games that is not like what open rule systems did in the past.

And if they weren't all made using PbtA, they'd all be 5e games. Amirite?

 

[chuckdee]

Also I got to say the more I think about it the more I think that my only real problem with PbtA is that it is goddamn everywhere now. I like reading and learning new systems. Not just new settings and new little twists on existing systems. I like reading whole new systems. And it feels like PbtA is squeezing out some of the little indie unique systems that would exist if everyone and their mother didn't seem to be making PbtA games (I know this isn't what is really happening, there are tons of other games, it is just that so many times recently I'll hear about a game that SOUNDS cool to me from a setting/thematic standpoint and then boom, open the kickstarter/drivethru/whatever page and boom, another PbtA game.)

Like even Evil Hat that basically has two in house systems (Fate, Forged in the Dark (yes, I know that technically one.seven owns the Forged in the Dark stuff, but Evil Hat is THE big Forged in the Dark publisher for the most part)) feels like they are mostly making PbtA games instead.

I'm sort of the opposite. I tend to use a single system at a time and apply everything to that system- using only settings from other games. And FitD is basically PbtA but with a different bent.

 

[Skywalker]

That's not my sequence of events.

For what its worth, PolarBlues has subsequently clarified that by discussion he was trying to convey the idea of applying discretion. So, a GM determining that an action meeting a narrative trigger would qualify as "discussion," as would the player determining the outcome.

 

[EmperorNorton]

Yeah, I can definitely see the argument that it's getting played out and overused. I'm not really into playing the same ruleset year in and year out.

And when it comes to designers, I tend to like Meg Baker's games to Vincent's by a pretty wide margin.

The most exciting modern games for me right now would include Heart, TOR, Trophy and Alien. Trophy has some PbtA DNA but is a pretty distinct game imo.

Alien is such a good design. The stress system alone is amazing. I keep thinking about doing Resident Evil using the Alien system as a base.

I've actually gotten to where the games that most excite me are translation of Japanese games. They have a sort of "Galápagos Islands evolution" feel to them. Like yes there are inspirations from western designs, but it really feels like they developed inside their own bubble more and without some of the tribalism we have in English speaking communities (I'm sure they have some form of tribalism inside theirs, everywhere does, it just doesn't feel like it is the same stuff we have). Just so many odd and innovative ideas. Things like Ryuutama, Convicter Drive, Double Cross, Tenra Bansho Zero, Shinobigami, Picaresque Roman

... I still want an official translation of Meikyuu Kingdom.

 

[chuckdee]

For what its worth, PolarBlues has subsequently clarified that by discussion he was trying to convey the idea of applying discretion. So, a GM determining that an action meeting a narrative trigger would qualify as "discussion," as would the player determining the outcome.

I wouldn't think the first would.

Player: X the anonymous is going to sneak up on the guard to cut his throat.
GM: Sounds like Defy Danger - make your roll.
Player: rolls the bones
GM:
You fail and he gets the upper hand - take X damage OR
It doesn't go as smoothly as you'd like either (a) he's taken out noisily or (b) you silence him, but he's still fighting you OR
A red line appears across his throat as his body goes limp.

Where are the conversations there?

 

[Voros]

Alien is such a good design. The stress system alone is amazing. I keep thinking about doing Resident Evil using the Alien system as a base.

I've actually gotten to where the games that most excite me are translation of Japanese games. They have a sort of "Galápagos Islands evolution" feel to them. Like yes there are inspirations from western designs, but it really feels like they developed inside their own bubble more and without some of the tribalism we have in English speaking communities (I'm sure they have some form of tribalism inside theirs, everywhere does, it just doesn't feel like it is the same stuff we have). Just so many odd and innovative ideas. Things like Ryuutama, Convicter Drive, Double Cross, Tenra Bansho Zero, Shinobigami, Picaresque Roman

... I still want an official translation of Meikyuu Kingdom.

I'm a big fan of Golden Sky Stories and need to check out more Japanese rpgs. The difficulties of translating makes me leery of Kickstarting them as projects though.

I'm also lukewarm on a lot of popular anime and that seems to be a lot of what does get translated.

Double Cross I've been long interested in, how's the translation?

Picaresque Roman also looks very up my alley though, thanks for bringing it to my attention.

 

[Skywalker]

Alien is such a good design. The stress system alone is amazing. I keep thinking about doing Resident Evil using the Alien system as a base.

So is there where I point out that Free League RPGs are a good example of the positive influence that PbtA has had on the wider RPG industry? IMO its pretty clear that Free League have taken what they love about PbtA and applied it to a more traditional RPG system presentation for great effect. When I do, it tends to enrage fans of FL who hate PbtA the passion of a fiery sun

 

[Skywalker]

I'm a big fan of Golden Sky Stories and need to check out more Japanese rpgs. The difficulties of translating makes me leery of Kickstarting them as projects though.

I highly recommend Sword World 2.5. There is an excellent ongoing fan translation out there and its a fascinating system for D&D style fantasy.

 

[EmperorNorton]

I'm a big fan of Golden Sky Stories and need to check out more Japanese rpgs. The difficulties of translating makes me leery of Kickstarting them as projects though.

Anything that Lionwing translates feels pretty safe to back (Picaresque Roman was 100% on time and the quality was ace, Convictor Drive is a few months late, but it is due to printer problems (I have the finished PDF already and it is also fantastic), and they've also been communicative about it). Every other one... don't fucking kickstart them. Kotodama Heavy Industries makes quality translations, but they are not reliable at all. I'm still waiting on my Shinobigami Deluxe Edition book. It was supposed to be released in December of 2017...

 

[JAMUMU]

Now I'm just left hanging here wanting games called Picaresque Convictor and Roman Drive.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Oh yeah, you are right. As I haven't played MotW, I didn't realize, you can take "Unfazeable" right at the beginning. That is weird to me too (at least +2 Weird). It means almost 92% chance for (partial) success.

That seems like a really poor design to potentially make one character that much more effective at something that’s going to come up quite a bit. I know a lot of folks rave about MotW, but I haven’t been impressed when I checked it out. Have never played, though, so I could certainly be wrong.

Also I got to say the more I think about it the more I think that my only real problem with PbtA is that it is goddamn everywhere now. I like reading and learning new systems. Not just new settings and new little twists on existing systems. I like reading whole new systems. And it feels like PbtA is squeezing out some of the little indie unique systems that would exist if everyone and their mother didn't seem to be making PbtA games (I know this isn't what is really happening, there are tons of other games, it is just that so many times recently I'll hear about a game that SOUNDS cool to me from a setting/thematic standpoint and then boom, open the kickstarter/drivethru/whatever page and boom, another PbtA game.)

Like even Evil Hat that basically has two in house systems (Fate, Forged in the Dark (yes, I know that technically one.seven owns the Forged in the Dark stuff, but Evil Hat is THE big Forged in the Dark publisher for the most part)) feels like they are mostly making PbtA games instead.

I think its overall influence is a good thing, even if specific instances of PbtA are lacking. Apocalypse World is one of the most influential games of the past couple decades… but that doesn’t mean that everything that uses the PbtA system is equally good. Some of it is far from good.

The most exciting modern games for me right now would include Heart, TOR, Trophy and Alien. Trophy has some PbtA DNA but is a pretty distinct game imo.

I look at the games I’ve enjoyed recently that aren’t PbtA games, and they all acknowledge Apocalypse World as an influence. This includes Blades in the Dark and its FitD derivatives, to both Heart and Spire, and on to the DIE rpg.

 

[robiswrong]

I wouldn't think the first would.

Player: X the anonymous is going to sneak up on the guard to cut his throat.
GM: Sounds like Defy Danger - make your roll.
Player: rolls the bones
GM:
You fail and he gets the upper hand - take X damage OR
It doesn't go as smoothly as you'd like either (a) he's taken out noisily or (b) you silence him, but he's still fighting you OR
A red line appears across his throat as his body goes limp.

Where are the conversations there?

Bolded section.

It's a decision point where one doesn't exist in most games. In most traditional games, once you roll the dice, the decisions are over and it's onto applying the results.

These kinds of procedural changes/additions seem to mess with people a lot.

 

[TristramEvans]

Certainly one can dislike any game and its mechanics but the absolutionism of some people's responses seem more tied to tribalism than reason to me.

funny, I get that feeling much stronger from the folks who leap to the defense of PBTA

 

[robb]

funny, I get that feeling much stronger from the folks who leap to the defense of PBTA

Perhaps that is tribalism in action?

For the record, I love games from all wells of the hobby.

 

[Voros]

Anything that Lionwing translates feels pretty safe to back (Picaresque Roman was 100% on time and the quality was ace, Convictor Drive is a few months late, but it is due to printer problems (I have the finished PDF already and it is also fantastic), and they've also been communicative about it). Every other one... don't fucking kickstart them. Kotodama Heavy Industries makes quality translations, but they are not reliable at all. I'm still waiting on my Shinobigami Deluxe Edition book. It was supposed to be released in December of 2017...

Thanks, got into the Pledge Manager and have order a hardcopy of Picaresque Roman.

 

[Voros]

funny, I get that feeling much stronger from the folks who leap to the defense of PBTA

 

[JAMUMU]

funny, I get that feeling much stronger from the folks who leap to the defense of PBTA

"Leaping to the defense" of a system that has threads like "WHY I THINK PBTA IS THE SUXXORZ" and "WHAT PBTA ARE THE ANAL BLOWOUTS?" posted on this here Pub? Or just challenging what other posters are saying, often in an uninformed or needlessly belligerent manner?

Lissen up, I have zero problems with someone trying and disliking a system. Games are like that. Food is like that. Complicated sex positions are like that. Sometimes they just don't work and rub you up the wrong way. But PbtA games get used as some sort of psychosexual punching-bag, where folks crawl out the woodwork to make uninformed comments and deride those who might enjoy them as anti-RPG perverts who don't even know what side their dice are buttered on.

I don't like Mythras. But my qualms are minor and not worth explicating. If I was to magnify it up to PbtA levels of vitriol I'd be creating posts like "MYTHRAS MAKES YOU JOIN A CULT AND THEN YOU GET AIDS AND NOT JUST AIDS BUT SPACE-AIDS AND YOU POOP" and "DO YOU LIKE MYTHRAS? WELL IT KIDNAPPED MY SISTER AND CHOPPED HER UP HOW DO YOU FEEL NOW CUNT?".

Jog on if you think that those who like - or even appreciate without enjoying - PbtA games are some sort of cabal getting in the way of you thoroughbred motherfuckers having your woe-is-me minority hate-on.

 

[Ladybird]

I'm ambivalent towards PbtA. Tried it, thought some of it was neat, ultimately dumped it for other stuff. Won't be using it again because of its flaws vis a vis how we roll at out table.

But the sheer ire it draws out in some folks is unlike most other game systems. It brings out the irrational internet-hater in a cohort of the RPG game community all out of whack with the system itself. Attempting to deny that is body-swerving the fact there's three multi-page threads on PbtA on this forum alone and two of em? Spoiler: they hates it, precious. They hates it the way I hate Nazis.

Multiple ones.