Not true at all, there are plenty of decent reviews that are fair.

Go over to RPG.net and eat crow.

Not true at all, there are plenty of decent reviews that are fair.

Go over to RPG.net and eat crow.

I don't mean necessarily for the system itself, but rpg.net is hardly an indicator of every rpg review site on the internet.

I agree.

However, it is a given that nerds tend to be overtly critical just for the sake of it... Or so I have experienced over the years.

So I don't have to eat crow, you just have to see that your experiences aren't mine.

Hah, this premise, down to having only what is around your game table, is exactly the same as the old BTRC "Timelords" game. Should be fun!

So I don't have to eat crow, you just have to see that your experiences aren't mine.

You must be great at parties and social gatherings...

It's billed as a "narrative game", so similar to FATE, the point is likely not escapism, but cooperative storytelling to a degree. Yes, there are groups and players out there who are not about leveling and looting, but about just coming together and telling a story.

Playing yourself (=i.e. a flawed, but familiar and utterly three-dimensional person) seems to add additional empathy and conflict potential, making for more interesting storytelling.

I don't see how any of the above can't be done overall via a new character. I don't think such things are inherent to whether you play yourself or not but to the group, GM and story being told.

With that said I find it unlikely that you'll have to play as yourself. More likely it will be more just playing a normal person overall. So kinda like playing a normal mortal using just the blue book for nWoD. No large gun arsenals, big and over the top stats, no powers. Just your run of the mill average person.

Still in the nineties I played a zombie apocalypse game as myself and it wasn't fun. It had nothing to do with being myself, the major problem was people's expectations about realistic responses. Pretty boring! Same happened everytime I played as myself, too much expectations about realistic responses. Different groups same results. But I'm going to give it a try. Who knows? It can be fun this time.

I get what you're saying Sergio, the game was to mundane for you?

No, I'm ok with mundane. The boring part was that very moment you face your mom as a zombie and try to blow her brains out and someone says: Man it's your mom, you wouldn't do it. This kind of thing bothered me, at least that time it bothered me, nowadays I cannot tell.

To be a little bit more precise about my frustration. I believe we cannot possibly know our real responses to such extreme situations, so every action taken seems like a valid course, That's why I didn't enjoy that game so much.

Yeah I get that.

Yeah it's difficult to make a disconnect between what players are ok with not in an apocalypse and what they'd be willing to do in an apocalypse.

Generally why you shouldn't zombify loved ones.

Luckily I'm thinking the rules will be less about forcing you to make yourself and more about making just a normal average person with no real special abilities and just encouragement to play you.

Being able to play myself or at the least GMing my group as they act themselves is actually a major draw for me.

The way I see it is as the ultimate escapism because you are literally the hero of the story rather than a stat block that has merely been mapped out.

In addition the game will have tons of really weighty ethical and story roleplay opportunities for the group
I think the game could also act as something of a cathartic experience even confidence building. Don't think you're interesting or adaptable? Well you had the stones to beat cuthulu
(Or at least survive).

I can't wait to try this game a either!

Moral dilemas like "would you use a bullet to put a bitten person out of his misery?", "Can you trust that group of armed men?" and "Do you let another survivor in your hideout, even tough they have no food or usefull items/skills"

Of course depending on the group you might get answers that disturb you: for instance the power gamer of the group deciding to go canibal two days in the zombie apocalypse...

It will certainly be intresting!

Altough in case of the great old ones returning, my game group will find me joining the cultists extremely fast!

Ia ia shub-niggurath! Hey, if you can't beat them, join them!*

* now i think about it, thats how zombies work: if you can't beat them, you'll end up joining them.

I don't think any of that is intrinsic to playing as yourself. All of those elements are present in any given game depending on what is going on. Playing as yourself doesn't automatically make any of what you've said happen. It comes down to the group and the story being told. I can certainly think of plenty of situations where playing as myself would be boring.

Also every character I've played has been more than a state block.

Edit: I was speaking to Visitor Q but the forum doesn't seem to want me to do quotes.

I don't think any of that is intrinsic to playing as yourself. All of those elements are present in any given game depending on what is going on. Playing as yourself doesn't automatically make any of what you've said happen. It comes down to the group and the story being told. I can certainly think of plenty of situations where playing as myself would be boring.

Also every character I've played has been more than a state block.

Edit: I was speaking to Visitor Q but the forum doesn't seem to want me to do quotes.

Maybe years of GMing has made me jaded to the kind of characters PCs create. Lol

Also I don't find myself or my friends boring so I guess that's a plus.

I don't think any of that is intrinsic to playing as yourself. All of those elements are present in any given game depending on what is going on. Playing as yourself doesn't automatically make any of what you've said happen. It comes down to the group and the story being told. I can certainly think of plenty of situations where playing as myself would be boring.

Also every character I've played has been more than a state block.

Edit: I was speaking to Visitor Q but the forum doesn't seem to want me to do quotes.

Well perhaps

Maybe years of GMing has made me jaded to the kind of characters PCs create. Lol

Also I don't find myself or my friends boring so I guess that's a plus.

I don't find myself boring either. I actually think I'm the awesomeist man alive. I find it unlikely the rule set will be able to capture the brilliance that is me.

But there's a difference between finding role playing as myself boring and me thinking I'm boring. I already know how I'd respond to a zombie apocalypse. Me and my friends have mapped it out. Playing as me in a game presents no challenge, I already know what I'll do. What would be fun is figuring out what someone not me would do.

But there's a difference between finding role playing as myself boring and me thinking I'm boring. I already know how I'd respond to a zombie apocalypse. Me and my friends have mapped it out. Playing as me in a game presents no challenge, I already know what I'll do. What would be fun is figuring out what someone not me would do.

There's also the fact what you plan on doing may fail miserably, hope you have a plan B-Y (Z is excluded for obvious reasons). Plans rarely survive first contact with the actual situation they are for.

I don't think any of that is intrinsic to playing as yourself. All of those elements are present in any given game depending on what is going on. Playing as yourself doesn't automatically make any of what you've said happen. It comes down to the group and the story being told. I can certainly think of plenty of situations where playing as myself would be boring.

Also every character I've played has been more than a state block.

Edit: I was speaking to Visitor Q but the forum doesn't seem to want me to do quotes.

Well perhaps

Maybe years of GMing has made me jaded to the kind of characters PCs create. Lol

Also I don't find myself or my friends boring so I guess that's a plus.

I don't find myself boring either. I actually think I'm the awesomeist man alive. I find it unlikely the rule set will be able to capture the brilliance that is me.

But there's a difference between finding role playing as myself boring and me thinking I'm boring. I already know how I'd respond to a zombie apocalypse. Me and my friends have mapped it out. Playing as me in a game presents no challenge, I already know what I'll do. What would be fun is figuring out what someone not me would do.

I would have thought putting the plan into action would be an awesome test of whether you had thought of everything?

Well sure my plan may fail. But I have backup plans and backups for my backups and backups for my backups backups. The point is that I've already considered most things in evolving the zombie apocalypse. Playing me in an RPG is basically an exercise in have I out thought my GM. And where's the fun in that?

Playing a new character who has never considered the end of the world and is thus forced to adapt is what would be fun to do. But me, I've thought this through. I even have a designated role to play in such a situation with my friends.

Where's the fun in that? That's the fun in itself.

So just as a thought excercise....

'Zombie apocalypse starts with people dying of the infection and then a couple minutes later rising from the dead. Driver dies at wheel of 18 wheeler truck. This careens off the road into the house your playing RP at. Causes massive damage. In the collison, carnage etc you break both your legs, your friends are unhurt but there is a fire and gasoline is spilling into the front room...There's not too long before the whole place goes up. At this stage there aren't actually any zombies. What's the plan?'

Where's the fun in that? That's the fun in itself.

I'm not denying that you woulnt have fun playing you. I'm stating I won't. And its not because I think I'm dull or boring. I just get a bigger enjoyment out of exploring new mindsets. And I've already explored the zombie apocalypse as myself.

It's cool if you guys think it's awesome. The biggest problem I see are people trying to define fun for some one else or stating that now you can truly have deep meaningful play since you're finally yourself. Everything fun about being you can also be had by playing someone else. Deep and compelling rp is a function of the group, not the rules PR the method you create a character. I've had a blast playing games whose rules I think blow chunks. And it's all because the people you game with are more important than the rules and types of characters.

A character is the hero of the story because the GM crafts the stories around the group. Not because the rules say you are playing you.