From: batemanc@p4.cs.man.ac.uk (Mad Chris)
Newsgroups: rec.games.frp.advocacy
Subject: Diceless or Senseless? Confession!
Date: 13 Aug 92 14:51:14 GMT

FATHER FORGIVE ME FOR I HAVE NOT SINNED ( or MY NON-CONFESSION )
----------------------------------------------------------------

1. LITTLE FRAMING ANECDOTE
--------------------------

Once upon a time, there was a little boy called Mad Chris. One day he was
walking along the beach when he came across this little tiny stream, flowing
to the sea, across the sand.
"How nice", he thought, and played in the stream.
The next day, he came back - but the stream had gone.
"This is odd", he thought.
So he traced the streams route and discovered someone has built a dam at
one end.
"Ooohh!", he thought. "I'm not sure if this dam is good for the river."
So he made a little tiny hole in the dam, hoping that the stream would
carry on flowing, but still have some water behind the dam.
But when he made the hole, the water just kept gushing and gushing forth,
until Mad Chris was swept away by the flow of water and he drowned.

THE END.

2. ACTUAL POST - POINT THE FIRST
--------------------------------

For those of you who have forgotten, I am the person guilty of posting the 
orifinal 'Diceless or Senseless?' post, and I can't believe the sheer volume
of replies it's generated. I was going to sit out of it from here on in, but
I have been unjustly wronged, and since this is Advocacy, I demand my right
to respond. The Prosecution consists of one Loren Miller, and there case is
presented below:

>So why the flame/counterflame/countercounterflame cascade? My whole
>argument was meant to say that diceless roleplaying can be a fun version
>of the game. The position you and the original chimp who posted the
                                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>first "diceless or senseless" post have been taking is the opposite,
>that *diceless RPGs are not RPGs*. 

Well, Loren, I am the 'Original Chimp' to whom you refer, and you are the
chimp who doesn't listen/read/remember. Apparently, you seem to think that
I think that diceless RPG's are not RPG's.

Well, the original post said, essentially, that I had just read another 
review of Amber that said it was representative of the future of RPG's,
to which I said: I disagree. Amber is the wave of the past. I pointed out
that diceless systems existed right back at the dawn of RPG's, I pointed out
they have continued to exist, in the shape of Freeform, for many years, and
I suggested that the claim that diceless games were going to replace diced
was Ludicrous, because diced games had so much that could not be done in
a diceless game.

I went on to clarify my position by saying that Amber was a good sourcebook,
and I agreed with someone that Amber was a good genre to use a diceless
system in, and I held my view that diceless RPG's ( which I continue to refer
to as Freeforming, because that is what they were called up till Amber's 
release ) were merely a subset of the hobby, and will continue to be there,
but will never replace them.

Does that sound like diceless systems are not RPG's?????

You may believe that diceless WILL supercede diced entirely ( and if you
still believe this after over 100 posts of controversy, then welcome to
the Asylum, friend ) but you have no right accusing me of something I
did not do or believe in, and making slurs as to my species.

3. THE RAT WHO SINKS THE LEAVING SHIP - POINT THE SECOND
--------------------------------------------------------

Dear Rat,
	 I like dice, I will never give up dice COMPLETELY and I have played
diceless games ( well, Freeform, but a game by any other name would play
as sweet ). So why don't I know what I am talking about? I suggest you are
assuming everyone who has played a diceless game will automatically be won
over by it's soul-smashing superiority or, and hopefully more likely, that
your inflamatory rhetoric was badly worded or misleading.

Yours irked, but forgiving

Mad Chris.

4. TO PLOT OR NOT TO PLOT, THAT IS THE QUESTION - POINT THE THIRD
-----------------------------------------------------------------

Most gamers would agree that the more loose the plot construction,
the more fun the game is. I never prepare for a game more than one
session at a time because I CAN'T - the players have as much influence
on how the plot unfolds that I do: more, really, because without them
there is no plot.

And GM's playing an NPC generally don't know how the NPC will react,
because the Players can be so unpredictable at times, that they can
convince you as an NPC. To not be convinced is at times sheer
obstinance, and I want no part of it.

You want a programmed adventure: you play a programmed adventure.
You want fun? I recommend you revel in Anarchy. Whether that anarchy
is diced or diceless  ( although I find more fun in the moderated dice
anarchy, personally ).

5. IT'S NOT REALISTIC - IT'S FUN! ( POINT THE FOURTH )
------------------------------------------------------

Yes! Whoever said Criticals and Fumbles are unrealistic, and happen too
often, is right. Damn right. But I don't walk down the street and find
a Dragon too often, either. 

Step outside of reality and ANYTHING can happen.

I've just finished the second draft of a new RPG, an RPG which I took out
Criticals and Fumbles precicely because they were unrealistic, and modeled
the skills on more realistic random envelopes, so that failure COULD always
occur, but in a 1000 cavalry charge, 10 would not automatically fall off.

But to my surprise, three of the four play testing groups wrote back in their
first report saying: "This is all very well, and all very realistic. But we
like Fumbles! We like to screw up! Please put back in Fumbles, even if they
only apply to Player characters!".

This is FACT. This really happened. So I've included optional rules for 
Heroic Fumbles. It's not realistic, but is fun.

PS: To whoever posted the runequest anecdote with the self-mutilating
    crossbow: I think you know exactly what I mean!

6. HELP ME OBI WAN KENOBI... - POINT THE LAST
---------------------------------------------

To: Ben
From: Mad Chris
RE: Initiative

>Oh, one problem I've had with dicey games is initiative.  Namely, if you've
>got a character with low initiative (in some games) then you spend alot
>of the combat time sitting around waiting for things to get to you.
>Now that's boring.

Whilst this can be a problem, there are some very good initiative systems
in which this is NOT the case. In particular, check out systems like
'Albedo' or 'Avatar' where the 'slowest' declare actions first, but act
last. Also, some games are just so manic ( 'Paranoia', 'Star Wars' ) that
having a low initiative ( where applicable ) doesn't make a scrap of
difference. Keep things moving, and no-one gets bored.

7. GOODBYE
----------

That's it. You don't have to listen to me any more ( assuming you have
just read this far ). One final request: nobody but me has mentioned
Freeform. Am I the only one who's heard of it? If you know what I am
talking about, please email me, so I can relax and prove that I may be Mad, but
at least I'm not Confused.

All Hail Discordia!

Mad Chris.