Questions, concerns, befuddlements
Vulpinoid:
I'd love to participate, but my email and general internet access is getting really erratic lately. I could generate something up in 24 hours, but can only access the internet twice a week (at best), so I probably wouldn't be able to post up my work until six days had passed.
I don't know how that would affect my eligibility for the contest, especially if feedback becomes a concern.
I've got a few ideas kicking around that just need a touch of creative spark to set into motion.
Ron Edwards:
Hi Michael,
That might not be a problem. Keep me informed about when you've actually finished the submission. If you finish it within the round's duration, then I'll accept it from you when access allows. If you're in the continental U.S., we can communicate by phone. If there are some circumstances that make communication especially difficult (military deployment, imprisonment; don't laugh, these have been issues before) then let me know by private message.
Also, to clarify, there's no feedback during the period of submission or prior to getting the reward. This doesn't follow the Iron Game Chef sequence. It goes like this:
- period of submission, during which people make games in 24 hours apiece.
- closure of the period of submission, with either of two criteria described in the main thread
- assignment of the award(s) with minor comments on the general performance
- unscheduled and extensive discussion of the games, with at least one thread for each
So the main work is actually done after the awards are known.
Best, Ron
Callan S.:
Perhaps this is a question that just occurs to me, but is the 24 hours just in terms of getting down to scratching on paper or hitting keys/working up a document? As ones brain is probably going to come up with stuff beforehand. Possibly even drawing on stuff from quite some time prior. Probably the answer is just a "Yeah, that", but it's worth clarifying.
Ron Edwards:
Hi Callan,
Totally legitimate question. Jake VanDam asked it in the original rounds. From November Ronnies! Start your engines for the 6th:
Quote
... I already have a basic rules set that I've been working on, and have grown quite attached, which raises two concerns:
1. I will slip into that kind of rules structure, which seems to be against the spirit of a 24 hour rpg.
2. I will be so concerned with making it not resemble that basic stucture in any way that it would get in the way of good design.
At what point should I draw the line on #1? Is there any advice on avoiding #2?
And my answer hedged so bad it's practically a whole designer landscaping shrubbery project:
Quote
unfortunately there isn't any good answer.
On the one hand, the goals of the 24-Hour activity (and by extension the Ronnies) aren't met simply by shoehorning a new setting or whatever onto a pre-existing system framework.
On the other, if that framework is still in development, especially early development, then the 24-Hour activity can help you get it into the shape it needs to be, or help you try it out in a more focused way.
Speaking for myself, I don't especially value the "originality and insta-inspiration" ideal when it comes to game design - I actually think it paralyzes the game designer more often than it helps. However, I do value the focus and specific insights that come from putting as much of the game design process into the 24 hours as possible.
Ultimately, that question has to be answered by you alone. I'm willing to accept your submission based on your commitment to producing, here and now, the best possible game design you can. Even if you work with some material you have sitting around already, my hope is that during the 24 hours, you'll be willing to twist, break, and re-design any aspect of that material that you see fit, in order to meet the goals of generating that best possible game design for those two terms you choose.
The way I'd put it today is that I recognize that any amount of novel inspiration today may well dovetail nicely with any amount of previously-conceived material you may have on hand. The last bit of the above quote isn't bad. If we're talking about the best design for the kind of play you want concerning those two terms (and their various associations and related terms that you introduce), then drawing upon what you already have on hand is fine - as long as it works and is at the service of the immediate design, rather than the other way around.
Oh, and there was also this rudely harsh bit from The Ronnies, September 2005, which is true but I would like to withdraw the implication that a majority of readers here succumb the problem I describe. It was exhibited very strongly by one person and got up my nose at the time.
Quote
People try to make it harder than it is. They re-cast the guidelines as brutal, impossible standards and then hold themselves to them. Here are the most common examples. Let me (be) absolutely clear: All of the following is total bullshit.
"1. Inspiration must arrive during the 24 hours. The entire creative process must be encompassed in those 24 hours. Nothing can arise from any influences, thoughts, notions, or what-ifs that date before that time. You can't even get inspired, then start the clock, 'cause that's cheating too.
"2. You can't even friggin' ask anyone how to do something on your computer, for layout or format or whatever. No, you must lock yourself in a wretched garret and dine on Saltines alone, with only the gifts God gave you.
"3. The rules, setting, and so forth cannot have any antecedents whatsoever in your role-playing history. No! All original, all the time, total innovation, from the moment of inspiration in the 24 hours."
Lest someone misread this list as criteria, let me put it plainly again: All of the foregoing is total bullshit.
Frankly, I think this is a defensive, loser posture: "Oh, I won't cheat. I'm an artist of integrity. [and then, later] Oh, well, see, I couldn't find the time or concentration to do it to the most rigorous standards, and rather than cheat, I'll pass. I could have finished a fine little game, but I won't, because I'm so virtuous." It's an arrant and grotesque way to justify what a big wanker you are being.
Look, people, the point is to make games without having time to second-guess yourself and distract yourself by crusting on a bunch of pseudo-industry crap in lieu of making sure all the parts are there. This is an easy and fun way to make games. Let's say in the future that one of the four words I provide is, oh, beer. Wow! You say. I had an idea for a fun beer-ish role-playing game a while ago, but never did anything with it. Let's see, where's that notebook?
Is that cheating? No, it isn't. It really isn't. Now, if you'd written up a whole notebook worth of beer clans and aggravated beer damage, and just 'ported it from the notebook, that would be against the point. But using the contest to jump-start your original inspiration is totally by the rules at the site. If you've been interpreting the rules at the site in that bullshit way I listed above, you are missing the point.
So, uh, scrub out the ranty tone, and that stands up well today too.
Best, Ron
Bret Gillan:
So our game should be a 24-hour design but can designed/submitted anytime before the deadline?
Meaning I can design my game on the 3rd (assuming the deadline hasn't hit before then), it just needs to be done in 24 hours and is on the good old honor system?
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page