Baduy Pride is our new vlog channel!

 My partner, Rocky, and I have decided to start doing a vlog called, "Baduy Pride" matching the name of our blog. To quote what we have on the blog:

So Baduy Pride is our way of celebrating love here on the internet. There are more than enough sites out there that bemoan the woes and pains of daily life. So we're sure there's definitely room out here for a little page dedicated to celebrating happiness and spreading a positive message of love and commitment between two men who are passionate about the things they love.

We have over twenty episodes so far, and we hope to continue making these 30-minute celebrations of geekiness and love. I'm posting here in TAG Sessions because we will also feature tabletop role-playing games in the show.  Our viewers and friends have been sending in topics and one of the topics to talk about and this episode was all about: 

Baduy Pride: Getting Into Tabletop RPGs (Ep. 17)

We got more episodes in mind, where we get to talk about games we love, systems we find interesting, and more!  Feel free to join the fun and catch us online. 

Watch our show!
BaduyPrideVlogs

Have a suggestion for future videos? 

Share your ideas here: https://bit.ly/BaduyPrideIdeas
You can also check out the blog at https://www.BaduyPride.com
#BaduyPrideVlogs
#Retrogaming
#Retrogames

GM Techniques Video

So Justin, a good friend of mine, opted to have a Hangout On Air about GMing Techniques and I had originally hoped to get there in time to join the fun.  But real life does have its responsibilities, so I sadly wasn't able to.

To my surprise, however, Justin seems to have made me part of the talk nonetheless.
It feels a bit.. overwhelming to know how much my approach to gaming has been appreciated by others.  And I only hope I can help others explore more options in gaming as well.

Thanks Justin!

Demon The Descent brings back my Sidereal love

Had a one-shot game with some friends last night and we played Demon the Descent using the Quick Start characters and the Do Over room from the God Machine Chronicles book as the jumping point of the story.  Some reflections I felt I wanted to share from running the game.

The Classic Is Now Part of the New
When Exalted first teased its coming, there was a lot of talk about it being "Before the World of Darkness."

Before the Impergium before the Mythic Ages before the Sundering before there was a World of Darkness there was something else. And now it is revealed, at last. Come adventure in the Second Age of the World, the fantastic world of the Exalted.

The forums were afire with all these opposing views on whether or not it was a good thing to have a game supposedly set before the world became the World of Darkness.    Later books seemed to support things further when players saw parallels between Solars and Hunters, Lunars and the Garou, Abyssals and the vampires and so on and so forth.  Characters like the archer Yi from Demon Hunter X resonated greatly with the concept of the epic archers of the Exalted game.  A huge key to the concept of its connecting was the Sidereals book which spoke of them seeing the fate of the world falling into one of Darkness if the Solars were allowed to maintain their rule.

Now, the game seems to come full circle, as Demon the Descent seems to resonate a lot of how the Sidereals were written to work as.

Sidereals were the super spies of fate in the Exalted game, using Resplendent Destinies to conceal their identities and being forced to remain consistent with these identities at the risk of garnering paradox for breaking out of the roles they were playing.  They had abilities to Duck Fate and rewrite events to show the were "never really there" and the like.  They were agents of change and destiny that served the Maidens and the Loom of Fate which governed the destinies of every thing on Creation.

Fast forward to today, the Unchained as they are called are fallen angels of the Machine God.  They embrace Cover, human identities which become more "real" as they are more developed, but are compromised when they fail to live up to who the cover personalities should be.  They have embeds and exploits to ensure they were "Never Here" in scenarios that head south of their plans, and while they no longer serve the Machine God, there's no denying they relate to a massive entity or force that can be argued to have grand designs and "programming" set upon every thing in the world.

The old is new again.

If Exalted lead to the World of Darkness, and the World of Darkness ended for a new World of Darkness to be born, this new World of Darkness is now coming to a nice book-end point where the Unchained of Demon the Descent resonate the Sidereals of the old.

I know, I know, it isn't anything concrete.  It probably wasn't even intentional.
But the World of Darkness Storyteller in me is enjoying a lot the parallels and relishing the idea that everything in the game line is one connected complex timeline.

And it is bringing back a lot of the love I have for all those games.

Now if it is intentional...
Man, I'm even more excited!

Why Are We Marginalizing Our Own Role-Playing Games?

Why Are We Marginalizing Our Own Role-Playing Games?

by Tobie Abad

Back in the 80s, I used to have to hide my passion for gaming.    The 700 Club was still at the heights of its campaign against role-playing games and I still (and no, not fondly) recall how many people really looked at me as if I were practicing some kind of demon worship every weekend.  There were even a few books of mine that felt the "cleansing flames" as well-meaning members of my family opted to burn some of my books in a misguided attempt to save my soul.

Today, gaming is less the target of religious groups but sadly more the target of misunderstand, misinformation and internal discrimination.  You have video games which have role-playing game-like elements being touted as role-playing games.  You have purists who believe that there is only one "true" way to play a certain role-playing game. And worst of all, you have gamers who insist that certain role-playing games which challenge long accepted notions of gaming are NOT role-playing games and are given instead all these other labels as if such discrimination was necessary.   I sometimes wonder if things were better when Christian Groups were all at arms to attack gamers, because at least back then, we were all united in trying to show our love for our hobby, that attacking each other was the last thing we would do.

What's wrong with us nowadays?  Why should computer games with role-playing game elements like Diablo and many MMOs be called role-playing games when you're not even portraying a "role" but you're just playing a character and repetitively doing certain tasks to get powers and equipment, only to face more things and repeat the cycle?   Where's the freedom of exploring the role you've been given?  Where's the development of a narrative which is clearly influenced by the player's actions?   I've learned to accept that such computer games can be referred to as crpgs (Computer Role-playing Games) or even jrpgs (Japanese Role-playing games) since they've earned recognition as a genre of gaming.  But I don't see how they are a role-playing game at all when the closest thing to them being one is the fact you don't play yourself.

But then neither is acting, or cosplaying, but neither are a role-playing game.

Earning experience points, having a leveling up skill tree, or choosing character types and classes do not make a game a role-playing game.  They are just games with elements of popular role-playing game systems.  It seems to be insulting to the hobby to say that just adding some system to another game or having a few similarities already makes it a role-playing game.   Role-playing games are not the dice and math and points that exist in its systems.  Those are just ingredients that make many simulationist and dramatic games function better.  I don't even want to get into that time one friend mentioned, "It has a character sheet, so it HAS to be a role-playing game."  That's like saying golf is a baseball game since it has a ball which you hit with a stick.

On a similar note, other table top role-playing games which throw away the need for an incremental leveling system, or throw away the need for crunchy skill trees and the like, but still allow a person to embrace the role of a character and explore that character's personality and see the repercussions of their actions and decisions should still be recognized as a role-playing game.  I don't get why fantastic games like Fiasco and Our Last Best Hope have to be segregated as "Story Games" rather than role-playing games when they are simply role-playing games that pay more attention to characters and shared story creation than they do to levels, experience gathering and multiple systems to determine hits, misses, and health bars.  I heard some people insist the distinction is merely for purposes of labels and setting expectations ("so that does seeking to play games, earn experience points and get cool shit don't get disappointed to learn Fiasco ain't about any of that") but hey guess what, role-playing games as a hobby can have many facets and genres already.  

It is a stupid as saying Speculative Fiction should be distinct from Fiction.  Fiction is about non-real settings or stories.  It has many subgenres such as Fantasy, Science Fiction and the like.  There's no need to call fictional what if stories something different, when that's already what Fiction is.

Many supposed Story Games out there are still role-playing games minus the crunch and tables (and in some cases the need for a Game Master and even dice) but are role-playing games nonetheless because they are social games where players portray a role other than themselves and build a story with fellow players.   You can simply distinguish them as narrative or tactical role-playing games.  Or maybe even as dramatic and action role-playing games.  But to insist they aren't role-playing games per se?  That's just idiotic and unnecessary.

Given the rich landscape of gaming that exists, whether or computers, on table-top, or even as physical activities, role-playing games have truly evolved from their Chainmail roots that were deeply still engrained with their War gaming elements.   The big twist back when it all started was less about "what stats should this unit have" and was more about "What if I wanted to explore more the specific character?"  And now, we have so many ways to explore the story and lives of "the specific character".  We have games for every genre, games in so many languages, games where we become the greatest of heroes, the darkest of villains, the gods and the creations, the experiments and the failures, we have games that allows us to be everything from sentient animals, to aliens, to disembodied spirits, and even victims of a telepathic cockroach.  We have games where polyhedral dice are used, where six-sided dice determine results merely by their color, where playing cards and tarot cards and personalized cards become randomizing agents or story guides, or where the use of specific key words and verbal tags become systems which determine who wins in the battle, the debate, the seduction, or the choice.  We have games where the players challenge the game master, or work with him to forge a story, or where everyone plays the game master at some point, or everyone shapes the world around a single player, or where no game master was ever needed in the first place.  We have games where players even embrace the roles of multiple characters, or portray stories in multiple time lines, and everything else in between.

We have such a vibrant and bountiful selection of role-playing games to indulge in - each with systems that favor tactical or narrative, drama or style, realism or fantasy, that challenge or encourage or even at times do both in the same instance.  

We live in such a wonderful point in gaming life.
Why do we have to marginalize our hobby and label other games in so many less unifying ways?

I wish more people just learned to embrace the joys of role-playing games and focus on exploring and sharing them with their friends.

Exalted 3rd edition and Rape.

MAJOR EDIT (May 28,2013):   Faith in Holden restored.

Here's a screen cap with the statement, as well as my comments.

I apologize for the bad formatting, but my response starts at the "Thank you.  That clears things up for me more" line.  I also included below other comments from him.

And the response to John really makes me see things clarified better.
Thank you Holden.  

(Previous post not deleted below for archival purposes)

This really bothers me.

I have no problems with exploring mature themes and dark issues in a game.

In fact, I've done that many times.  Very many times.

But this comment really bothers me.

So when rape happens, it was the victim's fault?  The victim gets seduced by a supernatural predator who can use sex to enslave him/her, and it is their fault for "allowing" themselves to think it was a good idea to sleep with that person?

Something is very wrong here.

Very wrong.

I really hope Holden clarifies this.  Because to be honest, I respect him and his ideas for the game.  But if this is the true personal view he has towards rape, then I am truly reconsidering if I want to financially help support someone who believes the victim is at fault in a rape scenario.

Trust In You Material

Trust In You Material
by Tobie Abad

This article was born out of two events.  The first was my having recently viewed and read up on the very public meltdown of a certain Bakery and Restaurant after its appearance on a certain Reality Show, and the second was after reading the response of a fellow gamer online on why for that  person it is acceptable that there is a huge holding back on releasing any game system information for the upcoming Exalted 3rd edition game which I have supported on Kickstarter.  In both situations, there was concern about how people out there may have negative feedback and comments to say about one's product, and how the urge to control if not limit is has become the goal for some people.

I admit, there are a lot of crazies and bastards out there who seem to find satisfaction in simply finding more things to complain about or make fun of from other's hard work.  I will agree that not everyone who has posted such things have a truly helpful intention in mind.  But I do question the idea that some have that the best way to control the volatile flame wars that erupt on the forums is to limit access to the said system to the readers.  This, sadly, is the mindset I cannot wrap myself around to agree with.

Feedback, plain and simple, will happen whether or not.  And flame wars, sadly, do erupt whether or not the said system is good (or whether or not the said dish is delicious).  Plain and simple, there will always be people who will be overly emotional over things, and there will always be people who will not know how to properly give feedback in a more respectful or orderly fashion.

Hiding one's product from the public as a whole might seemingly reduce the number of flames that erupt due to your work.  But in my opinion, what that really does is limit your work from reaching your desired audience, and even worse, shows that there is a huge lack of confidence towards one's own product.  The fellow gamer wrote, "You don't see how introducing that kinda firestorm into the kickstarter period would be an negative thing? It would be potentially disastrous. better to wait until the kickstarter is done, at very least."  While the feedback might not necessarily reflect the thoughts of the people behind the product, that line of thinking quite frankly pushes once more the huge lack of confidence in one's product.   If that was the reason the people handling the product are not releasing more info about it, that doesn't quite bode well on what level of quality the product actually has.   I'd even add that such a fear is greatly unnecessary given the supposed Kickstarter goal has already far exceeded its target amount.

Trust in your Material.
That ultimately is what I feel more have to embrace.   Trust in your material, and let it out for the world to enjoy.  Embrace the fact that you can't please everyone, and try to be aware of sensing when something you've created is good, or really is crap.  Learn to embrace the fact that flames will always erupt, and the most you really can do is be thankful for those who appreciate your work, celebrate those who celebrate it, and always push yourself to make something better than your last output.

I've supported a lot of other Kickstarter projects before, and even helped out in checking for errors and sharing feedback with those who asked.  Living in the Philippines, more often than not these projects are still quite expensive to pay for, but given my desire to see these projects come out I do what I can to shell out what I can afford and support them.

Exalted 3rd Edition admittedly was one of the more costly Kickstarter projects that I've chosen to support.  I love Exalted, and I truly enjoyed the 1st edition version of the game far more than the second.    When I heard that a third edition was coming out, I was pretty psyched for it and excited to support it.  The idea that I had to shell out US$30 for the PDF, and over US$100 for the actual book was a painful fact that I had to accept.  I've purchased many other books before that ranged from $50 to $80 and those were already quite a punch to one's pocket than usual.    Having to pay so much more was a challenge I had to reconsider a few times.  In the end, I've decided to go for it and have it shipped instead to my brother in Los Angeles.  Maybe sometime in the middle of next year, I can afford to have someone bring it here to Manila.

But now, with 19 days to go before the Kickstarter ends, with it having struck $400,000+ which is far more than the $60,000 goal they set, I feel very disappointed that no actual clear system previews have been shared.  Given the huge promise of how the game will be approached in so many different ways, it would have been nice if the people behind the project were releasing far more than just fiction samples at this point in time.

And no, I still don't agree that keeping the crunch hidden is necessary because it keeps any flame wars from erupting, which may damage the Kickstarter campaign.    We've all chosen to contribute to the project because we believe in the team and want the product to succeed.    Block yourself from any possible negative feedback, and you just end up like that couple with the restaurant who blocks out all criticism immediately as words from haters, and become blind to when you might actually are doing some crappy work.

I am still hoping they soon release more information as well, to at least show us how confident they are with the product so many of us have already pledged money to pay for.


This, for example, was a nice thing to get.  It is a tangible example of how some changes in direction are happening.  Fourteen Updates so far, and we've had some fiction, some artwork, a table of contents, and two merits.   I really just hope to see more in the days to come.

I trust in you, guys.
But I need you to trust in your material, and send us some trust in you system notes.

I don't get TPK at all

I Don't Get TPK At All
by Tobie Abad

Total. Player.  Kill.  Those three words every now and then appear in my Google plus feeds and the remarks  range from very excited to proud.  Total.  Party.  Kill.  I've seen comics laughing about it.  I've seen dungeons designed with that as the goal.  Total.  Party.  Kill.

I don't get it.  I don't get the appeal.
Yes, it probably seems odd to read me saying this, given my recent article was all about indulging in violence every now and then.  While I do confess to enjoying in indulging in a bit of crazy combat antics every now and then, I'm not quite certain if that is the same area of enjoyment which others are touching on.  Perhaps it is.  But given how frequent I see it come up, I can't help but wonder if there's a different scenario going on.

Could it be there are GMs who actually like killing off the whole party when they can?

This isn't going to be an in depth post.   This won't be a an article that seeks to villify or glamorize the concept of TPK.  This is just more an editorial post from me, if anything, about my personal feelings about TPK.

As a GM, I find the idea of running  a game that leads to the whole party dying on appropriate if it was dramatically appropriate in the game.   If the game, for example, was a dark game where the characters were more victims of circumstance than heroes who were out to save the day, I would find it dramatically appropriate and acceptable if the story ends with the heroes meeting their doom.  Games such as The Last Best Hope, Fiasco, and even the World of Darkness nicely explore such themes and challenge both the players and storytellers to help form a fun and engaging narrative even if it leads to the deaths of the characters they created for the game.  Some might even embrace such an end in a romantically charged game if they were inspired by tragic tales such as those of Romeo and Juliet.

Or perhaps if the game clearly was intended to have the grittiness and danger as part of the setting's explored themes, I wouldn't really feel there's anything wrong if the game called for self-sacrifice.  Or reflected how death comes frequently given the harsh scenario (like say games set in the Warhammer Universe.  Or for Sabbat vampire troupes.)

But for your typical Dungeons and Dragons sessions, I find it very strange when some GMs seem to proudly proclaim they accomplished a TPK again.  I mean, since you're the GM, you already have the capacity to throw in a dragon at a starting group of characters.  Why all the joy and thrill of accomplishing TPK when as a GM, nothing really is there to keep you from fudging the set-up or scenario to kill the players.  Or maybe the GM didn't balance out the stuff properly.  Or was too determined "this was the right way" that the players  kept going a different path and it lead to them dying.

And more importantly, why get off enjoying killing the characters of your players?

There's definitely a side to this TPK thing which I don't quite grasp.   And it probably connects more to the reason I'm not a fan either of games like Tekken or Mortal Kombat.  I love games that have a story.  I love games where the characters matter.  I love games where they are the main cast of the play.  The lead roles in the movie.  And yes, while I wouldn't occasionally mind a Games of Thrones kind of "even lead characters can die" approach, I still don't see myself enjoying the idea that I might have "TPK tonight!  Crazy awesome!"

It just feels like power-tripping to me.  Or a misprojected trash talk.  Or something like that.  I understand it sometimes does happen due to a string of bad luck.  Or if some players just keep rolling bad.  (A player in an Exalted game I ran once got a measly two successes out of a thirty seven dice pool.  Yes, sad indeed.  But no, I didn't kill him and the rest of the group.)  I guess ultimately it just isn't a gaming style for me.