Not really the point MM - the number of threads just shows how poorly the current system works for many people. And lets face it -  the argument hasn't been won by either side in most of those threads - it has just ground on and on, going around in  circles.

Sure - it works for you - and as you said it allows you to put your games in front of every one who expresses an interest in Fantasy -  whether they are interested in your specific scenario or not.

To me, I would rather have system that discourages people from spamming fantasy with every game they ever create.  It is different perspectives -  you look at it as a GM marketing you game, and from the comments you have made in similar threads before, you like to take a shotgun approach to your advertising.  I look at it as a cynical old player used to wading through all the  gash adverts that cover up the ones I an interested in.

*grin*  I don't think there's a way to actually discourage people from using Fantasy as a catch-all genre, sort of someone else going in and arbitrarily categorizing their game.  People label their games according the the way they envision them, and a lot of people just think 'Fantasy' right off the bat, when trying to describe a role-playing game.  No matter what kind of system you have in place, if that reaction continues, Fantasy is going to continue to get heavily stacked with lots of games.  And having someone else go through and review the categorization is open to a lot of complaints of "Why did my game get reassigned?  This is the way I was planning to run it, so it fit this category..."

Let's face it, genre assignment is largely an arbitrary decision.  No matter what kind of system you have in place, human judgement is going to be the determining factor in where games actually get assigned, and as a result, somewhere along the line, someone is going to look at it and say, "Well, wait...shouldn't that be over here, instead?  I don't think that fits at all right there..."

And I don't think the same people keep bringing up the question of steampunk...to the best of my recollection, the first post on each thread is a different user.  But it seems to be usually the same four or five (at the most) people who seem most vocal about it.

Nope but you can have sensible sub-genres that cut it down -  such as swords and sorcery  etc etc  ...

Personally - I would do away with Fantasy completely -  and just find suitable sub-genre  :)

Except that such a plan would just annoy the people who, as has been pointed out before, use Fantasy because that's what their game is, and nothing else describes it any better.

ATM - any games that truly belong in fantasy and couldn't fit anywhere else are buried under so much other stuff -  I would think their GMs would be pleased to see a bit of a clear out  :)

It really doesn't take all that much imagination  to come up with some other categories that fit more closely.   It does take a bit of courage to move away from the concept of genre that everyone seems to be so strongly wedded to :)

It also takes somebody to actually come up with a genre definition which everybody can agree on - something which nobody has been able to do so far.

I suggested a new fantasy genre definition but no one gave any critical advice about what they did or didn't like about it. 'I don't agree' and 'I use the current definition' are not actually useful. Frankly I don't think anyone has been actually trying.

I finally stopped following this argument last time when Jase said point blank that he wouldn't get rid of any categories. Since we can't just add categories without swamping the system, there is no scope to reorganise anything.

We got the current systems that doesn't (IMO) work particularly well,  because we were trying not to upset people.  As I have said on a number of occasions -  I think it needs a rework to make it at useful.  ATM, it works very well for classifying some game types - others get lost completely in  the catch all of fantasy.

But this is old ground -  and Jase has made his decisions on it :)

Er, it's *really* useful when what someone's saying is "I don't want it changed at all because there's no problem" or "I don't LIKE your classification and would prefer the current one over it."

Now, I haven't gone back and re-read the thread in a while, but that's what I remember ALL of the responses to your suggestion saying that didn't agree to it. How is change, for change's sake when it's a bad change, more useful than saying "I'd rather keep it the same"?

Jase actually agreed that the fantasy genre is bloated, so there is a feeling that there is a problem. What there isn't is any willingness to compromise to find a solution.

I don't see much point going over it again, but when I offered my definition noone indicated where it failed to describe fantasy. We were offered plenty of examples of games currently in fantasy which didn't fit my definition, but frankly didn't fit the current definition either. Those arguing for the status quo offered no real support for the system as is, and were not prepared to say what it was they didn't like about suggested changes. Yes, you are entitled to stick to your guns, but then you lose any entitlement to say noone can offer an alternative definition, since you are the obstacle. I'm pretty sure there is some rhetoric term for it but i'm no classicist.

BBR was the only person other than me to offer a definition of fantasy, that was lifted whole cloth from the current definition. I suggested this was too broad a definition, and again ran into a wall of refusal to compromise.

I've got better things to do than debate with those completely unwilling to either move or offer anything to the debate, and since the system won't be changed anyway for the dual reasons that some users might not like it, and others can't or won't use it as intended, it's generally a big waste of my time.
This message was last edited by the user at 12:23, Fri 27 Nov 2009.

There might be a problem. However, its not a big enough problem that anyone beyond a very small percentage of the RPOL population care enough to want it changed. If it ain't broke, don't fix it. And it ain't broke.

Ok I am reading all this and I just have one question.  Why is there a Cyberpunk category?  What about it marks it as so that classing it as Sci-Fi is not enough?

I am not trying to be difficult, I am just confused.

The Cyberpunk category was put in place before the current system was set up.  It used to be that each game could only be listed in a single category, so it made sense to create categories for some narrowly defined genres.

and there's the rub. The choice of which categories to use with the new 3 tag system was based on the categories extant under the old 1 tag system, and I gather there was fierce debate over which to keep, although I wasn't involved.

Unfortunately this has never (to my knowledge) been readdressed, so we find some very tightly defined categories, others which may be interpreted very broadly, and generally quite a lot of ambiguity. Of course the tag system isn't exactly central to rpol's function, so one can pretty much ignore it.
This message was last edited by the user at 12:24, Fri 27 Nov 2009.

Which brings me back to the point where it isn't a problem, so much as a minor annoyance, except to the small percentage of people who actually care about it for some reason.

Saying that it's unimportant that it doesn't work is not the same as saying that it's not broken.

One can run a game quite happily in just a simple forum. Does that render Jase's efforts to add features and improve the RPoL experience useless? If there were no facility for private lines in public posts we could work around it with private posts, which would be a minor annoyance, but how much better is it that one can address private lines in public posts?

I can live perfectly happily without the genre system, but if it could be made to work, it would be a good thing. However, I think the biggest obstacle to making such a system work is the users, who would need to be trusted to use it as intended.

I used to agree with you.  However, RPoL has grown so large that the Players Wanted system for advertising and finding games has become unwieldy to the point of being almost useless :)  The search function that goes with it doesn't really help me find games I want, nor does the proposed games systems field.

Nor will they help people find my games.

With (IMO) a next to useless genre system and a next to useless 'players wanted' function -  the overall system is broken.

It more or less comes down to reading Players Wanted / GMs Wanted on a daily basis  ....

In reply to JohnB (msg #28):

Not to mention that the search function is still buggy as h***.

In reply to burlingk (msg #29):

If you're referring to search (actually a filter) function at the top of the page in W-P, yes, it's been reported, and will be fixed when jase gets a chance to do it.

If you are concerened with people finding your games then put Steampunk in the title.  This goes with any thing that isn't "covered" by the system.  I know that doesn't fix the problem but it helps work around it.  Why would sci-fi and historical not work with maybe fantasy thrown in?  These categories aren't supposed to describe something exactly or there would have to be too many categories.  It was mentioned earlier that if people would use the categories properly then it would help and that is the truth.

Arby - I am afraid it isn't as simple as a Steampunk game  :)

Part of the problem, of course, is that people do use the Genres properly.  However,  something like 90% of the games here could probably fit into fantasy IF the genre structure were used properly.

Which is why people have the option to choose two other categories, to split things up a little.

A game classed as Fantasy/Historical/Sci-Fi will not turn up in the same search as a game classified as Fantasy/Horror/Strategy.  However, if somebody decides to search for just Fantasy, then both will show up.  But, IMO, just searching for Fantasy is not using the system properly.
This message was last edited by a moderator at 14:17, Fri 27 Nov 2009.

Ron -  as I said it is an old discussion that you and I have had before.  If you like I will go back and collect the points I made abouyt those categories in  a previous thread - but I can't see the point of going over the same ground again and again.

Maybe what is needed is not new genres, or even a restructuring of genres available now, but a tutorial on how to create and advertise an RPoL game properly. I, for one, have yet to find one of these here on RPoL. I know a tutorial would have been very helpful at the beginning of my DMing career. Heck, it might still be. Who knows what kind of Hints and Tips I've missed perusing threads and FAQs related to 'How to DM an RPoL Game'.

  Can steampunk be adequately represented by other genres?  Technically yes: Fantasy, Sci-Fi, and Historical.  The problem is, that leaves no other options for adding genres.  Suppose it’s also more of tongue-in-cheek game that needs a Comedy listing to properly represent it?  Or an Arena styled game with a Western flair?  It’s not so much a matter that it can be represented by a mix of other genres, it’s that it has to be.