So yeah, I found this conversation very illuminating and sad and honest.

Mutualism is certainly not dead. I think it just doesn't include everyone in a single unit. It's happening in smaller groups now.

Amazing podcast. You can just hear how painful it is to talk honestly about this.

Per, I can only speak for myself, I have no idea whether anyone else responded to Burning Empires the way I did, and if so, why.

For myself, pretty much as soon as Luke pointed it out to me, I saw how strange it was. An unconsidered emotional reaction, probably more jealousy than anything else. I spent the next day thinking about it hard, and know what? I'm an ass, and I should go fuck myself. I'm PROUD to have my games on the same shelf as Burning Empires. If I'm scared that I can't live up to that, good. I should be scared. He's setting a high bar and I better rise to it, or get lost.

It could be there was one, in fact. I just don't want to be held to answer for, y'know, everybody, and I don't want my personal reaction to be painted onto anybody else than me.

P.S. If you see the way the Game Chef "old timers" talk about Game Chef since 2005 -- too many people, no sense of community, less mutualism -- it pretty much directly imitates the way people talk about the decline of the Forge community.

P.P.S. I didn't mean that explanation to be a defense of what happened. I think the decline of collective identity sucks. I'm just trying to explain where the "they just left" impulse came for me. I was nodding at everything Luke and Vincent said and love this community with all my heart, warts and all.

With the internet, rapid accrual of "generations" just sorta happens. As a lurker in those early times whose first real design harkens back to 2003 or so, I held those early fellows to a higher standard of conduct, pocket celebreties in our mini-community. There was a palpable disappointment felt when the humanity (naturally occuring differences in personality) were revealed, and it was especially easy for some of us in the community to make villians of the old guard, with Dogs and BW being the new AD&D. I haven't listened to the podcast yet, but I'm anxious to listen, and genuinely relieved that "it's not just me," as it were, and now that I'm a little older and a lot wiser I'm looking forward to making real friends of fictional enemies at some conventions very soon. :)

Posted By: Rob Donoghuethis was incredibly useful to hear.

Hey Rob, can you parse that out a bit? What did you learn, and how does it inform your understanding of ... stuff?

I actually had a much longer response, but I decided against posting it because I didn't want to kick over old rocks, but you asked, so I'll try to strike a balance in my answer.

I'm not a forge guy. I'm just not. What history I have with it is spotty at best, and the way things have worked there has had virtually no direct bearing on me. It's had plenty of indirect bearing, since I use the Forge booth and it impacted a lot of people who are important to me, but one way or another, I am a step removed from that.

So, purely on that point alone, this was very useful to me to improve my understanding of how that idea of community existed from its own perspective. This is kind of a big deal to me, since Fred and I have been pretty successful, and we view ourselves as part of the community, and we try to bust our humps to give back and be supportive, but we do not do it in the same way it was done on the Forge, or view it through the same lens that the forge seems to. In an of itself that's not a bad thing. It's a good kind of diversity, and it should be awesome, but sometimes it's not. I worry sometimes about the timing of our success, how it coincided with events surrounding the booths and I sometimes feel like Charlton Heston by the statue of liberty - "We did it! We killed Mutualism!"

And I know that's crap. Mutualism is alive and well. Different, but alive and well. I know that our success came in the footsteps of the success of Dogs and BE and other games, and I know that we're not pushing them out as we come up. Intellectually, I totally get that.

But in my gut? Man, sometimes I wonder. Not whether it's true, but if those feeling are out there. And I sometimes really think they are, and it bugs the hell out of me.

All of which is to say, it's always useful to me to be able to boil back down to the sources on things I don't have direct visibility into, and which can generate mirages at a distance, and that era of the forge? Definitely one of them.

-Rob D.

Rob, remember that Luke and Vincent did the same thing, originally: come out of virtually nowhere to become central to the indie community because they sold more games (often, better games) and generated more buzz / talk than anyone else. Luke produced and sold Burning Wheel by himself before he ever rocked it at the Forge booth and Vincent did Kill Puppies, sure, but I don't think anyone expected him to drop that bomb called Dogs in the Vineyard. Spirit of the Century follows in this tradition pretty strongly, in my mind. If you guys are "The Luke Crane of 2007," that's about the best praise one could hope for.

Speaking as someone just dipping her toes into the big scary ocean of game design, I have to say that the huge success of games like Dogs/Burning Wheel has been very encouraging to me rather than the opposite. And the fact that people who I think of as part of the 'Old Guard' of the Forge have been very supportive of my game has been really great too.

~Anna

I can sympathize with the people who were disheartened, rather than encouraged, by Burning Empires. I could even feel a tinge of sympathy for a total ass such as Vincent Baker, but apparently game designing gave him more money than God, so, you know, go fuck yourself, no sympathy here.

But yeah, it's intimidating. A fat high production value book based on a real license, written by this one guy who then goes on to win an Origin's Award. How could anyone hope to just pop up and compete with that?

Or for that matter, Rob and Fred, Spirit of the Century.

But these works do, when you think about it, serve well to define a target for independently published games to aspire to. As long as 600-page full colour monstrosities are not the norm, there's still a considerable space for less accomplished designers with good ideas to play in.

So there are a few things I would urge "the community" to do, to keep the spirit of mutualism alive and well in face of these great achievements in indie publishing.

• Don't design in a vacuum. Embrace open design. Take care to read and reply to comments about your design.


• If you have a tendency to release fully formed platonic ideal beauties that go on to become hugely popular, consider releasing smaller works now and then. Concept games, mini-games, ashcan editions of ideas you're considering developing further. Just to show that you are, in fact, human.


• Include plenty of poorly-concealed theory and design notes in your games, or if that irks you, on a web resource your game links to. Even if you can't actively help others on design matters, you do us all a great service by allowing us an occasional glimpse of the genius behind your work.


• Start (or continue) using transparent, conversational language in your texts. It makes it easier for us to understand your game and the design decisions that went into it, and it also allows us to identify with you. This increases our courage when it comes to actually publishing something.


• Spend as much time and effort on community communication as you are willing and able - public forums and podcasts are what keeps us together, not solitary blogs (which are great in other ways).

As many others in this thread, I don't think there really is a problem right now, but cliques tend to get tighter as they grow older. The more public communication we can get the better.

It's eerily like those old sci-fi fandom woes of the 50s, 60s and 70s I've sometimes read. I think most of this is merely human community processes. The thing that fascinates me and has fascinated me for decades is the way we need to build narratives around the ebb and flow of social exchanges. We don't think that a forum has reached critical mass, and naturally splits off, so much as we have a Diaspora. We have characters, key events, tragedy, heroes, bitter lessons.

Posted By: Callan S.Do all forums have this mutualism idea?

Yep!

Posted By: Callan S.Does the forge?

Yep!

Posted By: Callan S.That might explain some stuff.

I could imagine so. :)

Helping other people with their design and (specifically because it's the hard part) publication is mutualism.

There's nothing else there. Don't draw a distinction without a difference.

yrs--
--Ben

If mutualism is dead, then I don't know where I keep getting all this help from.

I try to hurt mutualism by yelling at people but they keep thanking me for it and encouraging me to yell more and louder. :(

FAIL

I'm living proof that mutualism is dead in this community.

These fuckers have tricked me into reading their games, which are like a special poison where I find out other people are really good at things that I hoped no one was good at. These same people also repeatedly tricked me into writing a game, and tell me how to make it "better" even when I argue till I'm blue in the face with you, Mike. Then, if they do happen to be right about something in my design that I didn't see, they lord it over me by telling me to "keep it up" and that my game is going to "be awesome." A guy can only take that kind of thing for so long.

In fact, some of the people here have gotten it into their heads that it's OK to expose me to blogs and podcasts that I'd never have otherwise concerned myself with, thank you very much. And then you go to the blogs and podcasts and they're like "hey, here's fifteen brilliant ideas in one interview." As if I needed brilliant ideas. Of course, now this means I've been suckered into listening to podcasts at work and you know what that means - so much for trying to be the first office worker killed by self-inflicted stapler wounds. Jerks.

Goddamn. I almost forgot the ones that played games with me. Some of these "people" have actually gotten me to momentarily break a perfectly stable hermitude - in fact, a few have even had the nerve to play with me in person, which everybody knows disrupts my catatonic grit-eating schedule.

So if there's any mutualism in this community, I sure as hell can't find it for all the rabid selfishness. So I'm going to try responding in kind, and if that means you end up the same way, well, you started it.

If I wanted to write a game now, I'd be scared too when looking at BE. It's a bit like riding a bicycle on the street and seeing a big-ass truck or maybe those Hummer mini-tanks driving right next to you. Sure, the fear of being crushed by tons of steel and rubber is kinda irrational, but sometimes it's there.

In my head, anyway. And I don't even ride a bicycle. ^_^

I was so happy for Burning Empires. For Luke and the guys. I held it in my hands at Gencon that year and I thought "This is what Luke wanted to make, and he totally made it." It wasn't about production values, page count, color, size or anything else. It was about Luke making the game he wanted to make. I was very, very happy for him. when I did eventually get a copy of the book later that year, I spent a lot of time pouring over it and appreciating it as a physical artifact. Because it deserves to be appreciated as one, and because that's something I go for. It is, as far as I can tell, a great game (still haven't played it, or I'll be totally honest, read the entirety of it). It's also an excellent artifact. A game doesn't NEED to be both, and certainly isn't required to be both. But Luke obviously wanted BE to be both. And I think he succeeded. And I'm glad he did. And I don't feel like that effects my games negatively at all.

Vincent's writing in Dogs in the Vineyard is brilliant and makes the game a breeze to read and inspires you to play right away.

Fred and Rob have excellent marketing skills.

Luke is a trained graphic artist.

Luke didn't pay someone to layout and design Burning Empires. He spent months putting the visual package together all by himself! Pick up Burning Empires, flip through it, imagine all the art except the icons, symbols, and spot illustrations (weapon examples) were removed. That's a lot of art gone. Burning Empires, license or no license, money or no money, would still be a gorgeous book. All crafted by Luke's own hand. And it's not visual masturbation. It's not frivolous. It's as functional as Vincent's writing in Dogs. The colors, tabs, icons, and layout guide you through the book, and inform you how to use it. The textures are evocative of the content and feelings the source materials seeks to inspire. The spot illustrations provide wonderful contextual examples. The charts are beautifully and efficiently organized for quick reference. The play sheets, relationship maps, conflict charts, world maps, visual scene session breakdowns, visual campaign arc breakdowns are all brilliant. And have very little to do with the art and licensed material. It's mostly Luke's skill and hard work.

I'd love to add that Luke is also an incredibly giving and unselfish person. Many popular indie games credit Luke going out of his way to help them with their layout or giving advice or production tips. Luke is constantly giving back. Not only is he highly talented but he also shares those talents with others!

Isn't part of indie doing as much as you can yourself? Well Luke is bringing it! Other indie designers are wonderful illustrators. Shouldn't they bring bare their talents? What about Vincent's writing? Many people would love to have Vincent's skills. Don't hate on Luke because he's an artist outside of the gaming world. And please don't insult art in general by downplaying it as useless (absolutely necessary to play, no, can be incredibly useful to use, yes).

Putting that all aside, I probably go to a con at least once every 1-2 months. In person, I was pretty dismayed by the negative comments levied towards Burning Empires by other designers. People who are part of a community Luke has given freely much of his time and money to help out with no direct benefit to himself. Want to criticize the content and mechanics? Please do! It will only make the community stronger to know what works, what doesn't, and in what context. But most people who spoke to me about it didn't even read the book!

Now Burning Empires is not a game for everyone. It may not even be a game for most people here. It's a big book (not as big as it seems, it's less than 300 pages converted to a standard sized RPG book and a huge amount of those pages are taken up by charts and lists that you don't have to read). It's a tactical and competitive game. It's crunchy. It's not a "sit down, ignore the rules and just read for the setting" book. It's difficult to hack. And it's a long game meant to be played over many sessions. Nothing is wrong with liking or not liking any of these aspects. It's all personal taste. But none of that speaks to the quality of the game mechanics and procedures.

The game mechanics and procedures are brilliant. Not for everyone. But still brilliant. It's frustrating that the game is often written off as pretty or heavy and not much else. You could take the system, break it into 5 different parts and each of those parts would be amazing games on their own. There are a lot of amazing ideas in there. In the last year, I've been a part of many online and offline conversations discussing game design techniques and experimental ideas to try out. And often, ideas are brought up that are currently implemented in Burning Empires which surprises many people. There is a lot in there. Setting and situation created together by all the players at the table. Player flags. Dispersed and shared GM responsibilities. Playsheets of all sorts. Beyond character creation, procedures for running the game with no to little prep. Combat rules that scale from one on one, skirmishes, mass combat, to wars between worlds! Systems for political and psychological warfare. Rules for generating technology and powers on the fly. It breaks away from the conflict, conflict, conflict style play and actually does a good job emulating the story arcs and pacing of a comic book. There are free form scenes, flashbacks, flashforwards, scenes where players generate story content, and full blown conflicts. You can even play Burning Empires as a romance soap opera or political intrigue game, with rules and procedures to back you up. It's versatile. Not for everyone. But damn, this game is way more than just a pretty exterior.

In terms of, "how can I compete with Burning Empires?" Why would you? It's not a measuring stick. And customers have wildly different preferences and nuanced reasons for buying or not buying any given game. Dogs sells incredibly well and it's a small book with almost no art in it. Personally, I don't care about page count. In fact, I prefer smaller books that bring more fun. Because if a book can deliver me as much fun as any other game, with a smaller page count... that means I can read it quicker and get playing faster. That's a pretty damn good reason for me to buy! Now a days, instead of flipping through a book to look at the art, chapter list or play examples before I buy, I go straight to the credits page and look to see if playtesters are listed and how many. If the list is small or non existent, I usually put the book down.

Rock,
John

I don't think it's "dead," per se. I think it's gone exclusive.

If you are in (let's call them) Group Alpha, every post is perused, every game idea is read and critiqued, even full book drafts are given undivided attention. This effort is given by everyone in Group Alpha and many in...

Group Beta, those who've come lately but hit the ground running and garnered attention quickly. Many in Group Alpha and Group Beta provide attention and even some hard reading and effort to Group Beta. But not for those in...

Group Omega, who are ever-so-recent comers and who (often) are stumbling along, hoping to find some guidance or a key solution to a nagging problem. Group Omega has heard of some of the folks in Groups Alpha and Beta; but GO either knows (or suspects) that little help is needed from GO, for GA and GB. Unfortunately, this is reciprocated but for opposite reasons: Group Omega typically only gets attention from Group Omega--somewhat of a blind-leading-blind situation--and GA (and many in GB) have seen the ebb and flood, and sometimes the deluge, of newcomers and wait to get involved (or are overwhelmed).

Is there mutualism in the above? Sure, a hell of a lot of it. Is there PANmutualism? Well, obviously not--there is no RPG design, theory, or discussion site which is egalitarian (not a one). No one can ever again be in Group Alpha: it's closed, too late, where were you in the late 90s? Membership in Group Beta is fast filling up--better publish at least two games ASAP, if you want in. And Group Omega is all-but-slutty in its membership standards--EVERYone's invited, just so long as you stand near the back and stay relatively quiet and ask VERY precise, easy-to-answer questions which take little background reading.

And maybe THAT's what the "BE intimidation" really comes from:
Group Alpha sees a Group beta person blowing away (aesthetically) their best, earliest efforts.
Group Beta--remember that they're rushing to get or maintain membership--suddenly see the bar raised on their two- or three-project Entry Fee.
Group Omega... well, hell, those bastards probably won't ever finish much more than a hack of another game, so they can take or leave such a massive endeavor. Except for those who covet Group Beta status... now, these poor sods have to not only hit the ground running faster than Group Beta, but they have to somehow catch up to the theory and trends--remember that they are barely waking up to the new horizons of design. So we got blind lead by blind, bringing stone axes and plant dyes to try to make starships.

Mutualism is not dead... it's just schismatic and stratified.

Hehe... I JUST edited to finish the dangling though at the end of GO paragraph:

Posted By: David Artman...and GA (and many in GB) have seen the ebb and flood, and sometimes the deluge, of newcomers and wait to get involved (or are overwhelmed).

"If you want a picture of the future of gaming, imagine my boot stamping on a the Group Omega face . . . for ever"

-Rob D.

Posted By: lukzuIt wasn't a fuck YOU, it was a fuck THEM.

Luke, I don't think anybody thinks BE is a Fuck You. (At least I hope not.) If anything, that intimidation is the highest praise you could get, at least IME. People look at your game, or maybe even read it, and are in awe. You produced a game that is really awesome, be proud.

At least, that's where I'm coming from here, when I say I'd be scared shitless of BE. I'm not saying "What a bad game or what a bad designer", quite to the contrary. Can't speak for anybody else.

Minx: argh.

Marco: Cool. Good luck!

Posted By: Levi Kornelsen

Posted By: lukzuMinx: argh.

Luke: You're gonna have to live with just a little of that.

See, when I look at your stuff, one of my first thoughts is "See? people working on my scale can totally make shit that isjust this cool.Luke did!"

And then a couple other thoughts do drive by with... "Yeah, but I'm not Luke."

And then, depending solely on my mood, I might react in any number of ways, including having a giggle at myself and moving on, or wanting to throw my hands in the air and write some emo poetry for an hour or two.

Exactly. Only that in my brain, the second thoughts don't just drive by, it's a drive-by shooting. But the rest is spot on.

And just because I feel like the point needs to be made: For me, BE is about what we can do, not about what I can't do.

And I'll go a step further. As noted, BE would have been a gorgeous book without the art, but access to the art assets of the comic allowed him to be absolutely _luxurious_ with the art, and that's awesome. And if Luke were the only person who was ever going going to be in a position to have that kind of resource then sure, I might see shaking a tiny fist. But the reality is that the net is allowing more artists to thrive and more projects to grow. If the idea of making an RPG about a webcomic or comic or program that you love is something that appeals to you, it is getting more and more likely that you can _do_ that if you really want to throw yourself into it.

And when that day comes, and you've got a pile of art stacked high and you are staring at it wondering how you are going to make a book that does _justice_ to all this awesome stuff you have been entrusted with, Luke is the guy who's going to be there and be able to say "This is what I learned form this, this is what worked for me, let's make yours even _more_ awesome."

So, I dig it that people don't have their heads all the way around BE at this point. No one else among us has done anything like it. Yet. But we will. Not all of us. Some of us don't want to do that, and that's entirely fine, but those of us who look at it and think that they couldn't are selling themselves short, or they somehow imagine that they, personally, must make this whole thing happen. And heck, i can see why they might think that. There's a lot of DIY in game design, and if you have an idea you can often learn enough to put out a pretty good looking book. That's admirable and fun, and no, it's not how you end up with Burning Empires. That is Luke's baby, no question, but his are not the only hands that touched it.

And here's where we get to the mutualism that excites me. As a community, we're beginning to recognize that we have different strengths and capabilities, and that while one person might have a really strong game, they're not necessarily going to be able to bring the same strength to editing, layout, playtesting or marketing, and that there are people in the community that they can lean on for those strengths without making their game into something which is somehow less theirs.

Now, again, we have different priorities. Some of us don't want sales to impact our game design process at all. Some of us feel that owning the process from beginning to end gives them what they need. Some of us could have a free pass to have their game come out looking like BE and would take a pass. And that is totally fine. Even more, if those are your priorities, then the very existence of BE shouldn't even move the needle.

And even saying all that, I have some fear of BE, and a product that looks that good, but I think it's a different fear. I fear that if I ever made a product that looked that good that it would be shining a god-damned spotlight on my game, on every nook and cranny and asking "Is my game good enough to look this good?" and it would probably turn me into a nervous wreck. When you make that big a promise with the wrapper, the candy inside better be delicious. BE pulls this off, and I commend the game for that, but even more I commend Luke for explicitly taking this work of love and putting it out there in the position of highest risk, where it will suffer attacks from all sides.

I have no way to look at that and _not_ be inspired to make my own game better. Simple as that.

-Rob D.

What does it say about me that I read this thread and all I can think is: Why the fuck doesn't anyone look at Helios Rising and get intimidated? Sure, you won an Origins, Luke, but how many ENnies were you nominated for?

On a more serious note, I looked at BE and said: Wow, that's really well done. I will aspire to do x, y, and z the next time I do a book. For Passages, I flat out stole the little-head-as-rule-disseminator technique. So, no initimidation -- a challenge, example, and resource.

Geez, it's a good thing there's not a big budget glossy game called Dungeons & Dragons that people compare your games to.

ASSES.

- J, btw April 1st is coming up fast!

I appreciate your charitable reading, Lachek. But I like the not-so-veiled insult even more!

I've got a quick few questions:
Have you played a full phase of Burning Empires?
Have you played a session of Burning Empires?
Have you made a character for Burning Empires?
Have you read Burning Empires?
Have you flipped through Burning Empires?
Have you held Burning Empires in your hand?
Have you seen Burning Empires on a shelf?
Have you read about or seen the game online?

There is only one arena.

And I am its master.

"Warriors of the world, hear me."

Posted By: Thunder_GodYour anger, and attitude, are misplaced.

You talking to me?

Luke:
Your attitude, and your anger, are well placed.

This whole thread makes me passionately want an eyerolling smiley.

yrs--
--Ben

I am not sure that in my post the position I represented was my own, but we'll put that aside for a moment.

On one end we have games created by companies, and on the other we have DIY game books, the so-called Indie. Though I wonder how people like Fred and Luke push the line, as they made it their day-job.

They shouldn't, but historically, that was what was produced.

Edit: Perhaps they should, if the creator shells all the money out of his pocket, maybe he doesn't think the project is worth shelling out more than a certain amount for. And from what I know from a couple of friends who do layout for Indie RPG projects, they charge a lot less than they would if it were another client, which is in a way also a form of mutualism.

I really must buy Burning Empires...

And I'm saying that you're all underestimating yourselves. But more than that, comparing your work visually to BE is missing the point. Compare the guts, the game. That is one of the ideals that this whole community was founded on, right? Looking past the veneer into what's under the hood, what drives the game, right? Don't abandon that now as we evolve. Good things come in all forms. There are many purdy trad games that are awesome. There are many ugly ones that are just as good if not better. See them all for the good.

And when one of your friends does something cool, whether it's pretty or ugly, fucking congratulate him.

Hehe... what makes me weep is any judgment of an aesthetic reference product which prioritizes (or disregards) any of these elements: (re)playability, presentation, clarity, diction, innovation, tone, manufacturer/author, or elements of inspiration. BE has them all, of course, in equal measure.