Invitation to Soul's Calling - free PDF

FAQ | Search | Register | Login
View unanswered posts | View active topics | View your posts
Omnifray:- fantasy roleplay in the mysterious Enshrouded Lands, "a thousand worlds in one", where magic bubbles away beneath the surface, beyond the ken of the common folk, with a unique, detailed, highly flexible rules system

Re: Invitation to Soul's Calling - free PDF

Postby Omnifray » 8:57pm on 30 Jun 11

Kaiserjez wrote:
dpmcalister wrote:
Kaiserjez wrote:
Really???!!! :lol:

This is a moderator post. Play nicely...



Really???!!! :mrgreen:


Please do not give the admin lip for moderating your posts. They are kind enough to host this forum. Don't take the mick.

This is a moderator post.
Looking for playtesters for the Implodarc Tabletop RPG. If you'd like to playtest it and post public feedback or an AP thread, ask me for the private link to download it, or I can e-mail it to you. At least compared to my usual stuff, it's meant to be simple and quick to play with quick CharGen.
Omnifray
Omnifray
User avatar
Thanks: 182 given/235 received

Re: Invitation to Soul's Calling - free PDF

Postby Kaiserjez » 9:03pm on 30 Jun 11

Omnifray wrote:
Please do not give the admin lip for moderating your posts. They are kind enough to host this forum. Don't take the mick.

This is a moderator post.


Er, I wasn't really giving Dave lip Matt. Much like I wasn't giving Pete lip a few threads up.

And yeah, a few of us might have been taking the mick a bit in this thread but have you honestly come away with nothing from it?

But I'll leave you to get immersed in it dude.
Last edited by Kaiserjez on 9:37pm on 30 Jun 11, edited 2 times in total.
"And, when the doctor said I didn't have worms any more, that was the happiest day of my life."
Pompey Crew Achievements; Arse Like A Japanese Flag, Harry Redknapp'd, Pompey Social, Crash At Mick's, Spend a Penny, Safety in Numbers, Pass The Arse Gravy, The Jonny Gray's Brother Maneuver, Make Mine A Guinness, The Third Troll, Broken!, Gash Tats, Hello Sailor, Informed judgement, Dedication's what you need, The Fly, It's not trolling if..., Thundercats! Ho!
"Jez has champagne pockets and lemonade eyes." -Indie Pete
Kaiserjez
Jonny Gray's Brother
User avatar
Location: Plymouth
Thanks: 1085 given/1305 received
Playing: Nothing
Running: Nothing
Planning: Loads of stuff that I will never finish

Re: Invitation to Soul's Calling - free PDF

Postby Omnifray » 9:32pm on 30 Jun 11

What I've come away with from this thread so far is:-

1. I want to make it clearer in my PDF and core rules that impressionistic combat is perfectly capable of leading to PC death, although it will borrow a dice-check from the detailed combat system before that happens (thanks Pete);

2. I want to make it clearer in my core rules that impressionistic combat is the norm and detailed combat the exception, but also the framework;

3. Richard Stokes really thinks that immersion is a topic of interest to a very small minority of gamers;

4. a clearer analysis of anchoring/reification (thanks mainly to Pete).

The whole "theory of immersive roleplay" I've done to death on theRPGSite.com and in my essay which I'm still editing on the Art of Roleplay. (I'm going to rename it I think.) But sure, this thread has helped me to refine my analysis a little further, mainly thanks to Indie Pete.

Has anyone else come away with something useful from this thread or is it all bafflement and incomprehension?

If/when I post my long essay on immersive roleplay maybe that will help some of you come to a better understanding of it.
Looking for playtesters for the Implodarc Tabletop RPG. If you'd like to playtest it and post public feedback or an AP thread, ask me for the private link to download it, or I can e-mail it to you. At least compared to my usual stuff, it's meant to be simple and quick to play with quick CharGen.
Omnifray
Omnifray
User avatar
Thanks: 182 given/235 received

Re: Invitation to Soul's Calling - free PDF

Postby dr_mitch » 11:48pm on 30 Jun 11

Omnifray wrote:Introducing people to Soul's Calling is impossible to extricate from a discussion of immersive play because Soul's Calling is focused on promoting immersive play. I'm not saying it's the definitive, perfect tool for the job, but it's at least been consciously designed that that aim in mind. There's no point discussing what immersion means unless that discussion has a purpose - here, it's to promote a particular playstyle (which I term immersive play), to explain what is enjoyable about that playstyle, what makes it work, what stops it from working and so forth. So I think the multifaceted nature of this thread and of any in-depth discussion of Soul's Calling is kind of inevitable.


I understand that Soul's Calling is explicitly designed to foster immersive play, and that assertion and some of the techniques within is what led to the more general discussion on immersion. I'm not sure that a discussion what immersion means is pointless unless it has a purpose- but I'll accept that it's true for the purposes of *this* thread, which after all is to discuss Soul's Calling.

The actual meaning of immersion for the purposes of this discussion is tolerably clear:- it's a short-hand for in-character immersion, immersion in character, immersion in your character or what Stokesy is pleased to call Character Stance Immersion.


It's tolerably clear now. It wasn't upthread, and there was a fair amount of discussion which amounted to people having different definitions.

And what that's all about is to a greater or lesser extent identifying with your character, feeling as he feels, feeling as if you were your character and empathising with your character. There may be subtle shades of meaning around that, but the core meaning is pretty bloody clear. It certainly isn't right to avoid giving it any real meaning at all by suggesting that it means different things to different people.


That's what I'd personally take as the definition of immersion. As I said, others took it to mean being "immersed" in the fiction of the game, in the same way one could be immersed in a book or a film. I'm not saying it's right to avoid giving the term meaning. I'm saying that it's a slightly technical term from RPG theory, which not everyone discussing things on RPG boards is familiar with, and therefore needs defining before it can be discussed even within the context of whether or not a particular ruleset fosters that style of play.
dr_mitch
dr_mitch
User avatar
Location: Sheffield
Thanks: 6260 given/3552 received
Playing: Esoterrorists, Unknown Armies, Cthulhu Invictus
Running: D&D 5e, The One Ring
Planning: Lots. Always.

Re: Invitation to Soul's Calling - free PDF

Postby Omnifray » 11:58pm on 30 Jun 11

Once you refer to it as "in-character immersion", "immersion in character", "immersion in your character" or even Stokesy's term "Character Stance Immersion", it should be patently obvious what it is you're talking about.

But as I said upthread, the idea of being "immersed in the story" or "immersed in the game" is not going to bring anything useful to a discussion about RPG theory because it's just a synonym for "engrossed" and you almost might as well say "having fun", which obviously isn't going to add anything to any discussion beyond the fairly obvious.
Looking for playtesters for the Implodarc Tabletop RPG. If you'd like to playtest it and post public feedback or an AP thread, ask me for the private link to download it, or I can e-mail it to you. At least compared to my usual stuff, it's meant to be simple and quick to play with quick CharGen.
Omnifray
Omnifray
User avatar
Thanks: 182 given/235 received

Re: Invitation to Soul's Calling - free PDF

Postby Rich Stokes » 10:40am on 01 Jul 11

Omnifray wrote:And immersion is one of the critical foundations of a major playstyle, namely of course immersive roleplay - in fact if you discount merely casual gaming and two-dimensional tactical/strategic gaming (wargaming / hack-n-slash, and other forms of gamism), you are left with, essentially, immersive roleplay, one form or another of storygaming and as far as I can fathom at this present juncture (though I may revise this view in future) the odd abortion of a playstyle where the players are almost totally railroaded by the ref or just appreciate his in-depth storytelling style.


Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the crux of the problem here.

Matt clearly believes that all play of traditional RPG's which does not conform to his ideal of "immersive roleplay" is inferior and invalid. It's either all either "merely casual gaming", "two dimensional, hack-n-slash wargaming" or "odd abortion of a playstyle where the players are almost totally railroaded by the ref". In short, play his way, or you're doing it wrong.

Not only is this kind of "One True Way-ism" dismissive and downright rude, but it shows a staggering lack of understanding of how the roleplaying hobby works.

And this brings my discourse with this particular individual to a close. I will not be engaging in any more discussions with you Matt, since it's clear that it's pointless. I wish you the best of luck in your endeavours, but I clearly need to steer well clear of them. I do not use my Ignore List lightly, but you now join Morgoth in that particular limbo.
I also write a regular column here about roleplaying games and what we're really doing when we play them. It's kinda dry, but hopefully interesting to at least someone.
Rich Stokes
14th-level
User avatar
Location: Southampton
Thanks: 20 given/115 received
Playing: D&D (Eladrin Swordmage/Bralani Wintersoul/Queen of the Winter Court)
Running: Swords & Wizardry, tons of other crap.
Planning: Stuff.

Re: Invitation to Soul's Calling - free PDF

Postby Omnifray » 11:20am on 01 Jul 11

Rich Stokes wrote:
Omnifray wrote:And immersion is one of the critical foundations of a major playstyle, namely of course immersive roleplay - in fact if you discount merely casual gaming and two-dimensional tactical/strategic gaming (wargaming / hack-n-slash, and other forms of gamism), you are left with, essentially, immersive roleplay, one form or another of storygaming and as far as I can fathom at this present juncture (though I may revise this view in future) the odd abortion of a playstyle where the players are almost totally railroaded by the ref or just appreciate his in-depth storytelling style.


Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the crux of the problem here.

Matt clearly believes that all play of traditional RPG's which does not conform to his ideal of "immersive roleplay" is inferior and invalid. It's either all either "merely casual gaming", "two dimensional, hack-n-slash wargaming" or "odd abortion of a playstyle where the players are almost totally railroaded by the ref". In short, play his way, or you're doing it wrong.

Not only is this kind of "One True Way-ism" dismissive and downright rude, but it shows a staggering lack of understanding of how the roleplaying hobby works.

And this brings my discourse with this particular individual to a close. I will not be engaging in any more discussions with you Matt, since it's clear that it's pointless. I wish you the best of luck in your endeavours, but I clearly need to steer well clear of them. I do not use my Ignore List lightly, but you now join Morgoth in that particular limbo.


I have to say that I think Richard's reading of my post is very unfair.

Firstly, I think it is patently obvious that I see immersive roleplay in many corners of the roleplaying world where he sees it not. Many instances of play of traditional RPGs which Richard thinks I am dismissing as "inferior and invalid" because they do not include immersive roleplay may well in fact be instances of play of traditional RPGs which I think DO include immersive roleplay. I may even suspect that Richard is playing in a manner that I would call immersive at times when he would not agree with that description.

Secondly, at no time did I say that "merely casual gaming and two-dimensional tactical/strategic gaming (wargaming / hack-n-slash, and other forms of gamism)" were actually inferior. I can see where he's coming from, reading that into my post. But I am very conscious of the fact that the point of gaming is fun, and if you're having fun, that's great.

Why do I refer to "merely casual gaming" as "merely" casual? Because casual gaming is gaming with less psychological commitment or effort. That's not to say that it's less worthwhile. The social experience takes primacy. That may be a socially more desirable way to play.

Why do I refer to "gamist" play as "two-dimensional"? It's not an entirely satisfactory term, but what I'm trying to do is draw a distinction between games which bring the "story" or characters to life and those which do not. If you are focusing on tactics and strategy and giving minimal attention to the "story" or to the personalities and so forth of the characters, you are not in that sense bringing the "story" or characters to life. That's not to say that your style of gaming is wrong. For instance, I enjoy playing Go. A more two-dimensional game you could not get. But I enjoy it far more than some roleplaying games. There is nothing wrong with that sort of game just because it does not have the three-dimensionality of depth of character or depth of story. It's all a question of what's subjectively fun. I know that. I'm not stupid. How could I not know it?

And this brings me to the nub of my point. The roleplaying games which for me personally are most interesting are the games which bring the "story" or characters to life. If you are more focused on bringing the "story" to life, that is storygaming (unless the only person crafting the story is the ref, in which case you are in dodgy railroady territory which to be honest most people despise and I don't think that that view makes me a One-True-Wayist). If you are more focused on bringing the characters to life, in the sense that you are not focusing on the story but on the characters, you are almost certainly engaging in what I would call immersive roleplay.

It's not that I see it as "my way or the wrong way" even for traditional RPGs. It's perfectly possible to play traditional RPGs in a storygamey way (or indeed as a purely tactical/strategic exercise, which I maintain it is fair to refer to as "two-dimensional" for the reasons I have given, though a more neutral term would be ideal) and I'm not criticising people who do that, nor even implying a criticism of that playstyle by any standards. What makes it impossible for Richard to understand my position is that he does not realise that in my conceptual framework nearly any style of psychologically committed roleplay (as opposed to casual roleplay or social gaming) is going to end up being viewed as one of tactical/strategic, storygaming or immersive. The irony is that it's not ALL that different from Richard's own view that when you are roleplaying you are probably "pretending to be a character", "telling a story" or "playing a game". The difference is that it's my belief and assumption that pretty much any time someone's focus is on "pretending to be a character" they are likely to experience some level of immersion, deep or light.

That's not to say that they are consciously aware of immersion, let alone that they are consciously focusing on it. But I am certainly not criticising anyone's playstyle because (1) it happens to be about "pretending to be a character" and in my view to involve some degree of immersion but (2) they are not consciously focusing on immersion. Why on earth would I demand that someone deliberately focus on immersion if doing so makes the game less fun for them?

I would not have felt that it was necessary to go out of my way to state something so obvious and trite as that gaming should be fun and if a game is fun for you then it's great that you play that way.

Lastly and maybe most importantly, I really do think that when I have gone to the trouble of posting such in-depth replies to Richard's views, he could have done me the courtesy of putting to me his view that I was speaking like a One-True-Wayist and listening to my reply, rather than simply immediately putting me on his Ignore list. He is, after all, not a telepath and would be on safer ground asking me what's going on in my mind rather than making assumptions about it. But I will leave you, the forum-reading public, to be the judge of that.
Looking for playtesters for the Implodarc Tabletop RPG. If you'd like to playtest it and post public feedback or an AP thread, ask me for the private link to download it, or I can e-mail it to you. At least compared to my usual stuff, it's meant to be simple and quick to play with quick CharGen.
Omnifray
Omnifray
User avatar
Thanks: 182 given/235 received

Re: Invitation to Soul's Calling - free PDF

Postby Omnifray » 11:29am on 01 Jul 11

Though I should have said, to be fair, "the odd abortion of a playstyle where the players are totally railroaded by the ref, and the occasional instance of players who simply appreciate the ref's indepth storytelling style". Plainly if the players "simply appreciate the ref's indepth storytelling style" it is not right to call that an "abortion of a playstyle". To that minor extent I mis-spoke - it's hardly a hanging offence.
Looking for playtesters for the Implodarc Tabletop RPG. If you'd like to playtest it and post public feedback or an AP thread, ask me for the private link to download it, or I can e-mail it to you. At least compared to my usual stuff, it's meant to be simple and quick to play with quick CharGen.
Omnifray
Omnifray
User avatar
Thanks: 182 given/235 received

Invitation to Soul's Calling - free PDF

Postby Baz King » 1:12pm on 01 Jul 11

Using the term "abortion" to describe anyone's favoured way of playing a game, I find that deeply offensive on a personal level Just so you know.

I appreciate you flagging it up as a poorly worded statement, but its still appalling.
"Baz, I believe, is absolutely 100% right." Neil Gow

My RPG stuff for you to own http://www.drivethrurpg.com/browse/pub/5880/Grand-Scheme-Publishing

What Would the Smart Party Do? https://smartparty.wordpress.com/
Baz King
D&D&D
User avatar
Location: Essex
Thanks: 2437 given/3268 received
Playing: Star Wars
Running: 5e
Planning: The next Smart Party podcast

Re: Invitation to Soul's Calling - free PDF

Postby Omnifray » 2:05pm on 01 Jul 11

Baz King wrote:Using the term "abortion" to describe anyone's favoured way of playing a game, I find that deeply offensive on a personal level Just so you know.

I appreciate you flagging it up as a poorly worded statement, but its still appalling.


Now that's fair enough (I might even agree in the cold light of day), but I was really only talking about the almost hypothetical case of a game which is psychologically committed, but not immersive, not casual, not storygamey, not gamist in any fashion and instead heavily, heavily railroaded. I don't know anyone who would claim that that is their preferred gaming style; I only mentioned it for the sake of completeness. Any non-casual gamer I know would object to heavy railroading because it defeats the point of pretty much everything that anyone (with all their different gaming preferences) enjoys about psychologically committed gaming - it damages immersion; it defeats storygaming; it limits tactical/strategic gaming; it does exactly what people upthread (in my view unjustifiably) criticise the ultimate authority of the GM for, namely disempower players, but to a vastly greater extent. No-one as far as I am aware seriously encourages heavily railroaded games, except in the context of casual gaming, and I didn't suggest that there was anything wrong with any style of casual gaming at all, whether railroaded or not.
Looking for playtesters for the Implodarc Tabletop RPG. If you'd like to playtest it and post public feedback or an AP thread, ask me for the private link to download it, or I can e-mail it to you. At least compared to my usual stuff, it's meant to be simple and quick to play with quick CharGen.
Omnifray
Omnifray
User avatar
Thanks: 182 given/235 received

Re: Invitation to Soul's Calling - free PDF

Postby Omnifray » 2:58pm on 01 Jul 11

To add to my last few posts:-

Clearly, my agenda is to promote a particular style of play:- deeply, puristically immersive roleplay.

My position on immersive roleplay is quite complex and subtle. It would take a forty-page essay to set it out in full; I know, because I'm in the process of editing that document. I do not believe that only immersive roleplay is worthwhile. I do not believe that only immersive roleplay is enjoyable, even for me, let alone for anyone else. On the contrary, I have somewhat catholic tastes in roleplaying games (not in the religious sense of Catholic with a capital C, before anyone gets the wrong end of the stick):- I enjoy combat in roleplaying games; I enjoy playing around with detailed combat systems and magic systems; I enjoy tactics and strategy; I enjoy making the game more fun for others by shaping the events of the game to highlight the dramatic, the mysterious, intrigue, suspense, poignant dilemmas and challenges; I'm perfectly happy to game on a social basis too without deep immersion or full engagement with the "story" or characters. I'm open to all these things. I do also happen to enjoy immersive roleplay above all these things. I happen to believe that many, many gamers roleplay immersively to a greater or lesser extent - that it is a natural, inherent part of human psychology which makes almost anyone likely to roleplay to some extent immersively when they play immersive roleplaying games or any traditional RPG or even a storygame such as Montsegur 1244, even if the people who are doing so have no conscious concept of immersion. I believe that many gamers would enjoy immersive roleplay more if it were packaged in the way which is right for them. I believe that some gamers may get a far more enjoyable experience out of roleplaying if they understand the nature and processes of deliberately immersive roleplay better. I do not believe that this is true of all gamers. I do not even believe that it is true of all (or even nearly all) psychologically committed gamers who enjoy gaming using systems which would commonly be categorised as traditional, such as Dungeons & Dragons or (IMHO, YMMV) Vampire: the Requiem. I believe it is true of many gamers, possibly even most psychologically committed gamers, but certainly not all gamers.

None of this makes me a religious zealot, an extremist or any particular kind of moron who thinks that there is only one way to have fun with roleplaying games or only one right way to have fun. I am very conscious of the fact that a deliberately immersive approach is not going to suit all gamers. But I do believe that there are many gamers out there who are suited to a deliberately immersive approach and who may find more enjoyment in a game if immersion is specifically highlighted and focused on. I do not believe that Soul's Calling is the only way to achieve that kind of gaming; I do not even believe that it will work for all gamers. I specifically posted to Kaiserjez that from the sounds of things, Soul's Calling would not help him to game more immersively because of the way his own psychology works. But I do see value in promoting this playstyle and this game because I believe many gamers will get unexpected enjoyment out of this kind of game and playstyle.

No one game or playstyle is going to be the "One True Way" and I have not suggested otherwise. But I do suggest that there may be gaming styles out there (probably very rarely used, but from time to time) which are dysfunctional - specifically, psychologically committed but heavily railroaded gaming does not seem adapted to provide any obvious kind of enjoyment. I think it comes about on rare occasions through overly enthusiastic reffing, egged on by traditional descriptions of the "ultimate authority" of the ref, perhaps combined with the encouragement of metaplot. (There may well have been a brief time in my life, long ago, when i reffed this way - not out of any notion of metaplot I hasten to add, and not in the last ten years.) But I think in most cases refs learn very quickly that the players object almost violently to heavy railroading. That's why most LARP groups in the UK are obsessed with "player-led plot". And even then, my position is subtler than it probably appears:- a game can still involve immersive roleplay even if it is railroaded; the degree of railroading which it takes to eclipse immersive roleplay is pretty intense, and basically consists in denying the players any real impact on the game. Short of that, there's nothing fundamentally disastrous in a moderate amount of railroading.

And in suggesting that there may be dysfunctional playstyles out there, oh boy am I in good company, and in fact I would stop a very long way short of this thread:-

http://indie-rpgs.com/archive/index.php?topic=18707.0

... which is where Ron Edwards talks (I would suggest, far more offensively than I could ever manage) about how some gamers are "brain damaged" and says among many, many things:-

If someone wants to take issue with my use of the term "brain" when I'm talking about the "mind," I just shrug. As I see it, the mind is the physiological outcome of a working brain. Mess around with the input as the brain/mind forms, and you short-circuit it, messing up steps which themselves would have been the foundation of further steps. You could be talking about an experience such as I mention above, or you could be talking about sticking a needle into someone's head and wiggling it around. Brain, mind, damage. I don't distinguish.


... and ...

I call it "damage," and I mean it. People are story-creatures. The characteristic loss of the capacity I see across almost all story-ish role-players, especially those of a certain age range, is like seeing a bunch of people with physical objects sticking out of their punctured skulls. Some of them, presented with alternative (or more accurately, functionally-prosthetic) procedures, say "oh!", extract the damaging material, and move on (that's you, [censored]). Others see that something functional is available, but suffer and grapple with it because they mistake some of the damaging material for required parameters (that's you, [censored], or was for a while). Still others clutch the end of the object penetrating their brains and shriek protectively (that's you, [censored]), which I can do nothing about.


This is the very guy who devised GNS and the Big Model. This is the guy whose theory Richard Stokes in his columns says got it basically right. This guy talks about "almost all story-ish role-players" as being literally brain-damaged. And yet Richard Stokes is willing not merely to listen to this guy's crazy theories (which were formulated long before the brain-damage thread and before R.E. eventually regretted how he had presented his views, while closing the thread), but even to promote them in his regular columns. And yet I am criticised for being a One-True-Wayist!! Jesus, man. Talk about double standards.

I, for one, do not think that the roleplaying games hobby has caused any kind of brain-damage to roleplayers, even if I would have to accept that it has caused some gamers (perhaps even myself) to obsess unreasonably over stats, crunch, fluff and even game-theory at one time or another. I certainly do not think that any particular playstyle causes brain-damage. I do think that psychologically committed but heavily railroady games are dysfunctional. I reach that view because I find it very difficult to see how those sorts of games could really be enjoyed by anyone as psychologically committed rather than casual play, except via some kind of mixture of narcissism and co-dependency, because the very definition of that playstyle is that it deprives the players of any real impact on the game, which begs the question why they are playing at all.

The interesting thing is, though, that I remain open to persuasion to the contrary. Quite to the contrary of what Stokesy's post suggests, I am not psychologically closed-minded. I score very highly for "open-mindedness" on Big Five-style personality tests. This is not a good thing, nor is it a bad thing; it's just a trait I have of being open to ideas. It's probably why I give serious answers to troll questions, because to me, they are interesting questions. It's why I actively seek out storygames at Conventions. I'm happy to accept that casual gaming is not dysfunctional for including heavy railroading. If someone would care to explain to me how psychologically committed but heavily railroaded games are fun, I will happily listen. By the way, it underlies a few of the posts others have made on this very thread that the people who have posted on this thread do NOT think that such games would be fun, precisely because they complain about player disempowerment where they perceive it to occur (indeed, Stokesy himself forum-"thanked" someone for one of those posts). But if anyone seriously holds a contrary view, sure, speak up.

Lastly, I provided a full set of quotes and links to back up my views on the way GNS / The Big Model exclude immersion from serious consideration. I invited Richard (and the invitation is open to others too) to prove me wrong by linking to actual documents and citing actual passages which prove me wrong. No-one has done so, and in particular, Richard has not.

So, enough of the tiresome ad hominem arguments, please. (I'm saying this as Matt, not as moderator of the forum.) They are really very wearing. I don't care if the person who said something insightful was Pundit, or Stokesey, or R.E., or me myself and I. And neither should you. Maybe we can deal with the actual points of substance, rather than with the no-doubt all-too-numerous personality flaws of those who may be making them (by which I mean me). I mean, let's suppose for the sake of argument Stokesy were even right, and I were, contrary to all my protestations of innocence, some kind of rabid religious zealot. Would that make it less interesting for you to understand more about immersive roleplay? Would it make me less qualified to talk about immersive roleplay - just because I were overzealous in my passion for it? I am not that guy, but even that guy might be worth listening to, IMHO, YMMV.
Looking for playtesters for the Implodarc Tabletop RPG. If you'd like to playtest it and post public feedback or an AP thread, ask me for the private link to download it, or I can e-mail it to you. At least compared to my usual stuff, it's meant to be simple and quick to play with quick CharGen.
Omnifray
Omnifray
User avatar
Thanks: 182 given/235 received

Previous

Return to Omnifray



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

The team | Delete all board cookies | All times are UTC [ DST ]