The Podge Cast

Movies, Music, Books, Games, Whatever’s On Our Minds

The Podge Cast header image 2

TPC 188: Announcing Announcements

April 22nd, 2012 · David · 6 Comments

TPC 188: Announcing Announcements

* What indie games really are, and you can hear that Luke was in the house in the background, just chose not to come upstairs while we were recording stuff.

* An Analysis of Feedback Fridays, which launches to a larger discussion of podcast listening habits

* The RPG Podcast Listener Survey is coming! Tell your friends! Gird your loins!

* Dinocolypse ended, so you can’t Kickstart it anymore

* We’re heading up to Forge Midwest again! If you’re in the area or thinking about going, meet up with us!

* A brief bit of Marvel talk

* Batman vs Watto

* Wu-Tang Clan name discussion

* Die-Con needs GMs!

* A bit of Hunger Games

* Player Agency and Games

Share

Tags: Episodes · Podcast

6 responses so far ↓

  • 1 Asylos // Apr 23, 2012 at 3:34 pm

    Id probably stop listening if you ever did go scripted.

    Where are the pics of the mini?

  • 2 Karmancer // Apr 24, 2012 at 12:36 am

    I really enjoyed this episode, lot’s of theories and opinions and waxing philosophical on role playing topics. Usually I wait to listen until the slow days at work at the end of the week.

    I am looking forward to the listener survey they are interesting to me, and if anyone knows about girding your loins it’s the Podgecast.

  • 3 Justin // Apr 24, 2012 at 9:56 am

    I just had a guy this weekend go on about how he hated social mechanics in RPGs. His idea was that it should all be role-played out. Now that I’ve seen social mechanics in a few games I think that “role-playing it all out” all the time is not good; at least, it’s not what I’m looking for.

    It just gives power to people who are persuasive or can argue until they get their way. What about people at the table who aren’t good at arguing, but their character might be? Wouldn’t it be fun for them if their character could win an argument instead of losing because they couldn’t think of something to say on the spot?

    I also think social mechanics are good because for so long combat has been the most focused-on aspect in mose RPGs, and designers coming up with new and interesting ways to play out social encounters gives those encounters new weight and excitement. Presumably, a party isn’t just looking for the next big battle, they might also be looking for the next big situation that could help them become friends with someone powerful, or whatever.

    Even great debaters and arguers don’t win, and if role-playing ability was the only way to determine outcomes of social conflict then the good actors or arguers (or even the less-shy folks) would win an inordinate amount of times. Besides, your character should be separate from you as a player, even though everybody knows that it’s common for players to have characters that are some sort of avatar of themselves. Your character should have their social skills, just like any other skill, and then determine the conflict the way the system allows. THEN the player should come up with how to role-play the outcome and say whatever they want, because that character’s role in the conflict has been decided.

    The Burning Wheel social mechanics are great. I think the social mechanics in The One Ring are interesting too, but maybe not as intense as BW.

  • 4 David // Apr 24, 2012 at 11:59 am

    I do not understand people’s problems with social mechanics in the slightest.

    If you want a forced outcome, look at combat.
    Intent: “I want to kill him.”
    Roll. Miss.
    Result: “You don’t kill him.”
    Reaction: “Yeah! Whoo! Love this game.”

    Explicit, with no way of mitigating (usually).

    The perception that these are two, unrelated fields is completely alien to me and only smacks of a logical inconsistency.

    In the case of Burning Wheel, I think the strongest, most logical argument I can accept for why Duel of Wits just doesn’t work is never the one you hear.

    “It’s possible in an argument that two people both walk away feeling like they won.”

    Sure, life is complicated. Arguments are messy. Two people can look at the same situation, same data and come to two different conclusions. It’s arrogant to think otherwise.

    But, here’s the kicker: even with that argument, the structure, intent and result of Duel of Wits still holds true. All social mechanics still hold true.

    This happened. Here was the risk. You lost. Deal with it.

  • 5 Paul // Apr 24, 2012 at 1:26 pm

    Actually, it’s not that uncommon for both sides to win in a DoW. They both set more extreme terms and end up compromising in a way that benefits both of them – sometimes even in exactly the way they wanted.

    However, that ignores the point that if a fair negotiation is going on in the first place, and the two sides don’t actually want something that opposes the other side’s terms, you roleplay it out and there doesn’t need to be a DoW or even a single roll.

  • 6 Marco // Apr 28, 2012 at 12:53 am

    This was a great episode, I laughed through my whole commute. Best line in the episode hands down “What has it gots in it’s pocketses? Fat hairy Hobbit cockeses.” Love the show, thanks. Hey look, I didn’t leave the longest comment on the board today. :)

Leave a Comment