• they/them

i am into accessibility and game design. i go by sysopod on other platforms as well



Inumo
@Inumo

As someone who's A Fan Of PbtA Games: yeah, there's nothing exactly wrong with your analysis of TSL, or PbtA games in general. PbtA as an engine has attracted an audience of gamers & designers who A) already have a sense of the kind of genre-first, static-ish-character story they want to tell and B) are looking for tools that help them maintain that story & guide their improv to stay in-genre. What this means is that you get a lot of mechanization of aesthetic such that yeah, it matters that you have quippy moves about doing quippy things. The goal of a PbtA system isn't to inform players about how to act, it's about giving positive reinforcement for staying on-theme.

I think it helps to understand that PbtA games (and, to some extent, games in that lineage like BitD) are generally built for people w/ a very particular understanding of narrative. To be an academic for a moment, Hiroki Azuma in Otaku: Japan's Database Animals called it the "database model" of consuming media. In short, the database model atomizes media down to its component parts – first to the individual characters, setpieces, and events, then further into the individual tropes or mannerisms. Think like TVTropes or fan wikis. For PbtA gamers, it usually doesn't matter who you are as a player character. What matters is, what kind of story are you going to tell? What's the genre, what tropes are you applying? Thus, it's no wonder that the player agenda, the political principles of the designers, all the romance mechanics, etc are all frontloaded before the character info. That's the stuff that tells a PbtA gamer, "Is this game for you?"

I think TSL is, in some ways, this kind of game design ideology at its purest. I know April's mentioned elsewhere that she was surprised people wanted settings for the game – for her, that was the easy part, because all you really have to do is throw some evocative background down and you can be on your way. I do think TSL suffers most from the TTRPG rulebook practice of implying narrative instead of handing readers narrative, because if you aren't already on board with its genre it can be hard to figure out a narrative that fits the mechanics.

Somewhere in here is also a discussion about how like, FitD systems kept the player solipsism & partial successes of PbtA but gave players more explicit verbs that they can actively choose from instead of PbtA's "tell a story until you hit a trigger" approach, and maybe a comparison between TSL and Dungeon Bitches (a more grungy & explicit pro-horny game that also feels like an overenthusiastic punk lesbian trying to invite sex-averse ace folks to an orgy), but like, I dunno if that's actually productive here, comment if you want that ramble I guess. Something something check out Crucible of Aether by @Jackie-Tries-Internet.


You must log in to comment.

in reply to @TalenLee's post:

Something that caught me off-guard when I read TSL was how much of the book was committed to settings/scenarios. I do wonder if the business considerations of physical publishing (i.e. desire to publish a particular size of book) led to that. Ultimately when I ran the game it was in another setting entirely.
I suspect I am not the only PbtA-head that does this, but I tend to look at the playbooks before even opening a system's rulebook. This might influence how PbtA game books are written but can't back that up with solid evidence.

I am trying to not just go 'this isn't the thing I'm used to ,so it's bad' but the comparison I kept wanting to draw was to BITD and D&D - where BITD starts from 'here's the playbooks, now let me explain the rules' and D&D starts with 'here's how to start creating your character' - I feel like so much of TSL was dedicated to almost the philosophy of its own game choices, rather than players' investment in it

I get what you're saying about feeling like not the target audience or not belonging to the place that is created or reflected by the game, and have bounced off of VNs that are 99% lesbian flirting vehicle. On the other hand I really like steven universe and am an undertale evangelist. Am I like, liking them for different reasons than prevailing fandom? I don't know.

Its rare that I see a TSL review that's not glowing, and also rare that I identify with these specific struggles, not just in regards to the game but to queerness in general

It’s not like it doesn’t have an aesthetic: It’s a very specific vibe from a very specific type of queerness, a very specific vibe of Brightly Coloured Deliberately Not The Normal Type Of Queer that I know sings to a lot of people. I know, I have a lot of friends in this space. The game even renames the Gamemaster to the Gaymaster and I can imagine the people who wrote that line beaming happily about it even as I imagine the editor I live with rolling her eyes so hard they fall out of her skull.

“Everyone’s included except fascists and bigots” is a great principle, but it’s a lot harder to do. I don’t feel welcome. I feel like this is a book that has firm opinions on its vibes, a demand for how the game should feel and if you can’t get along with it, it doesn’t have advice for you to do so. It doesn’t know how. It’s not like the game is putting you under pressure to play it! It’s just like walking into someone’s dressing room and going: Oh, I do not belong here.

Its one of the biggest reasons why I find it hard to identify with online communites, and even dislike using the term queer for myself. There's something inherently bright and exaggerated about it, which feels so artificial that's almost like people are trying to make themselves marketeable.

I have actually played a couple of TSL one-shots, and one thing that I really like about it is that you can roll moves with different stats, which I think its an interesting implementation of people doing the same thing but in their own way. However I also empathize with feeling lost in regards to what to do about. The first time I played it, I remember being in a bit of a hurried game and I kept asking the GM what they wanted to do, and they just kept repeating that we could do a lot of things, and listing some vague scenarios, but not really giving me a drive to want any of those.

Other PbtAs without a clear setting at least have a very clear goal; Monster of the Week is about investigating and nullifying a monstrous threat, Monsterhearts is - as I like to call it - an Abusive Relationship Simulator, but even those can be easily compared to, say, Buffy and Supernatural in one hand or Beauty & the Beast and Twilight (But With Actual Consequences) in the other, and it'll at least give people an idea of what to expect. TSL is purely vibes-based, with not clear setting or goal, just someone who keeps saying "Be gayer!" while turning up the pastel settings

BTW another detail that bothers me about the game is, despite the title, its not really about lesbians, thirsty or otherwise. There's even some very explicit pages in the manual that state that; this is a game about queerness (even if its not my brand of queerness), not a specific gender or orientation; Yet I've seen pretty much 99% of players and GMs taking the title at face value, to the point where one of my TTRPGs groups has an open-table running where they only allow women to play, which feels extra gross to any other queer person.

Wow, that last note sucks.

It's especially funny though that people are taking a vibe from the title that's not spoken in the game rules as a truth, like I think that tells you a lot about how this kind of game works for people.

in reply to @Inumo's post:

For PbtA gamers, it usually doesn't matter who you are as a player character.

I was nodding along until here.

I can’t speak for every table, but I’ve played a lot of PbtA over the years (my name is in the playtesters list in Apocalypse World), and I’ve never witnessed this. I don’t think I’ve ever witnessed it outside of PbtA either.

What leads you to believe this?

I prolly could've phrased it better, but like, IME PbtA players don't come to the table saying "this is the specific extremely nuanced character I want to play," they say "this archetype/character arc interests me, I'm excited to see how my performance of it bumps against y'all's performance of your own characters." When I say "it doesn't matter who you are," I mean more that the first step to buying into PbtA is buying into the story/genre, and you figure out how you want to explore the story as a character later. It's the driver behind "play to find out" as a play philosophy, and means that (to a certain extent) your character doesn't really exist until you're at the table.

Does that make sense?

That’s much more true, that pbta invites/demands that players come to the table without prebuilt characters. I don’t think that leads to players caring more about genre than honest portrayal of their characters, tho, if that’s a point you were trying to make.

Hard to say, tho! There are many ways to play games and I’ve only seen a tiny set of them.

Depends on what you mean by "honest portrayal of their characters" & when you're doing the evaluation? Once play starts, yeah, the character is a player's vehicle in the world, it's their priority. I don't know that the available playbooks are more important than a PbtA system's genre when it comes to game selection, though. Like, I've never heard someone say, "I want to play a character that has a complicated relationship to a mentor," and then go hunting through systems to find e.g. the Seeker in TSL, the Scion in Masks, or the Runaway Nun in Dungeon Bitches.

Oh that’s interesting. I’ve had folks say, “we’re playing Monster of the Well? Hell yeah, I wanna be a weird redditor researcher.” or “The Sprawl? Sick, can I be like Deckard in Blade Runner?” and then we look over the playbooks to match. Is that what you mean?

You got it right about my meaning of honest portrayal.

Yeah, exactly. People go, "Oh, we're doing this genre? Cool, I want to be [character that fits into that genre]," rather than the other way around. From the perspective of laying out a PbtA book, then, it's more important to say "here's the genre you're playing in" first, "here's who we've built tools to let you play as" second.