I. Dear Reader,
Over on Bluesky, there was some conversation about one of the long-running cyclical conversation that happens in RPG spaces. This time, it was about the category of statement that goes something like “I hacked D&D to run Cyberpunk 2077, just as god intended” to quote the original poster. To put it another way, it’s about this idea that design doesn’t really matter.
In the case of when this is used to defend specific games like D&D 5e, this is just fandom. People want to like what they like and will say anything. It’s best not to take it too seriously. But beyond that, I think there’s a specific structural reason that this conversation keeps happening.
Let’s talk about the two ways that people judge something. The first is by outcome (or effect or output) and the second is by input (time, effort, ingredients, values).
Have you ever gone “this is really tasty”? That’s outcome. It’s good because the effect was pleasurable.
Have you ever gone “someone put a lot of thought or skill into this”? That’s input. It’s good because of craft and care.
You’re probably doing both a lot in your life. Everyone uses both methods probably every day.
“But isn’t it more rational to judge everything by outcome?”, you might be thinking. It’s an interesting thought. In science and policy, measuring outcomes is essential to ensure you’re not just making stuff up. But in many situations you can’t measure outcome in any real way. Like for example, art. (There’s lots of other examples including almost everything you do because “it’s the right thing to do”. But getting into this is literally a philosophy class so we must hurry along.)
Coming back to RPGs, the truth is that you can have a great experience roleplaying with good design, bad design, no design, whatever. At the same time, the craft and values going into a design are also a real thing that can be observed and discussed.
People talking about the former (outcomes, experience, their fun) and people talking about the latter (inputs, design, values) are going to talk in circles if they don’t acknowledge the difference in approach. This conversation will never resolve because it’s not about the same thing.
When I talk about games in terms of outcomes, I’m really talking about myself. I had fun. I laughed. I grew closer to my friends. Those are real things — important things. When I talk about the games in terms of inputs, I’m talking about rules, setting, illustrations, etc. Those are also real things — but obviously different things.
Saying “this game is good because I had fun” and saying “this game is good because it is designed well” feels like they’re doing the same thing because of the way language works. But go deeper and they’re simply not.
Don’t get me wrong. It’s not some impassable bridge. These two starting points can be connected. Two people can begin at different places and still have a conversation… if they’re willing to talk about interaction, i.e., the space between inputs and outputs and what happens there.
But here’s the things: talking about interaction is annoying and hard. Very often, whether you’re talking about inputs or outputs, it’s easier to just ignore it. When we’re talking about design, it’s easy to say that, oh, this rule does this or this adventure does that. But for who? In whose hands? What inputs do they need to bring that isn’t in the text? A can-do attitude? How common is that input really?
When we talk about outcomes, it’s the same thing but in reverse. Oh, you had fun? Amazing. How did you get there? What led to the fun? Was it the text? Was it something outside the text? What percentage would you allocate to both categories?
Stop booing me! I’m just asking questions! I’m normal! I’M NORMAL.
Yours, hiding behind the couch as their friends fling vegetables at them for ruining the vibe once more,
Thomas
II. Media of the Week
- Matt Colvile and Quinns got together on a stream and had a fun conversation about reviewing, playing, and more.
- Aaron Voigt has a lovely video about Going Rogue, a Star Wars inspired game about troubled rebels in messy conflicts.
- You too can support the newsletter on patreon!
- If you’ve released a new game on itch.io this month, let me know through this form so I can potentially include it in the end of the month round-up.
III. Links of the Week
- A nice review of Dethroners which is “a game that involves the players tearing pages out of its rulebook to signify narrative control being wrested from the GM”.
- On Old Men Running The World, there’s a play report on playing Feral Indie Studios’ megadungeon Vast in the Dark using Mork Borg: “If Mörk Borg is like classic black and white makeup death metal, then The Vast In The Dark is the same but with a progressive streak, and maybe a melodic vocalist. They probably read M John Harrison novels”.
- Grognardia looks back on the original edition of Ars Magica, saying it “represents one of the more intellectually ambitious RPGs of the pre-1990s era. Its design anticipated many later developments like freeform magic systems, troupe-style “storytelling,” and campaigns centered on a fixed locale (the covenant).”
- Via Geek Native, Dice Monkey has a short but lovely review of Stewpot: Tales from a Fantasy Tavern, saying it “leans into what I’ve been craving more and more in my games lately: roleplay that lingers on the small moments. Not every story needs to be about saving the world. Sometimes the stakes are no higher than keeping a fire going in the hearth, or wondering whether you still feel like yourself without a sword at your side.”
- Chris Bisette writes up a fantasticly noodly post that will probably be very interesting for adventure writers. It’s about rewriting and laying out an encounter across three different games — OSE, Mork Borg, and Pathfinder/D&D — to see how they prioritize information differently.
- In a similar vein, Matthew Andre has a post analysing specific spreads from different books and what to learn from them when you’re laying out books. Very much for fans of Explorers Design.
From the archive:
- On the Age of Ravens blog, Lowell Francis writes about the five faces of the GM: traffic manager, meeting manager, interviewer, showrunner, counselor. (Issue 95, June 2022)
IV. Small Ads
All links in the newsletter are completely based on my own interest. But to help support my work, this section contains sponsored links and advertisements. If you’d like your products to appear here, read the submission form.
- Grimwild, the cinematic heroic fantasy RPG, is now available in hardcover! Get your copy of this beautiful book.
- Doctors & Demons is a rules-light TTRPG that blends magic with medicine. Uncover hidden creatures, defend against nefarious forces, and invoke ancient oaths to protect the world.
- Critical Kit is now the publishers of Cezar Capacle’s stunning and expansive indie TTRPGs! The initial physical books include Against the Wind, Wraithound, Midnight Melodies and Insurgent.
This newsletter is sponsored by the the wonderful Bundle of Holding. Check out the latest bundles below:
- Do you like Traveller? Well, it’s your lucky day because there’s a swimming pool of stuff on offer.
- You can get a discounted copy of Free Trader Beowulf, an excellent history of the game by Shannon Applecline, at deep discount.
- There’s three bundles of historical stuff — GDW era, Gamelords era, FASA era. The last two have some a lot of work from the Keith brothers whom I talked about here.
- There’s also a bundle for Pirates of Drinax and Mongoose Traveller 2e.
Hello, dear readers. This newsletter is written by me, Thomas Manuel. If you’d like to support this newsletter, share it with a friend or buy one of my games from my itch store. If you’d like to say something to me, you can reply to this email or click below!
Indie RPG Newsletter 
Leave a comment