It really sounds like your problem is that at least one of your players doesn't actually want to play.
And I dunno if I'd say DFRPG is nothing like D&D. It's a lot more similar to D&D than, say, Nobilis.
And for what it's worth, GNS theory has deep flaws.
It's actually a pretty good example of what I mean when I say that trying to classify games tends to be insulting.
It's neither an insult or close minded. It's worth noting here, that the poem is very much not about a talking raven. The Raven probably doesn't talk at all, and may not even be real, depending on your reading of the poem. The poem is about a man driven mad by despair, and the raven is a metaphor for his internal monologue. I may also find the Raven cool, but the talking Raven is not the point of the poem, and there's thousands of essays and literary theory backing up that position. You are entitled to thinking it'a about a cool talking Raven, it the same way some one is entitled to believe the earth is flat. I can show you evidence that it isn't, but you don't have to believe my evidence.
Now if you didn't believe an obvious scientific fact, I would might begin insulting you lightheartedly, but for literature and RPG's where the right answer is much harder to determine, might not exist, and really isn't that worthwhile besides on a theoretical level. Yes there is a correct way to read and interpret the raven, but it's such a good poem, who cares if you skip over the metaphor? It works really well as a literal story too. It also works really well if you just listen to how the words flow together. Same with Fate, There is probably a more correct way to interpret the rule and play the game. But it doesn't invalidate any other way of playing it.
You're making a pretty basic error, here. And that's to assume that subjective interpretation like literary research is the same as objective observation like scientific research.
The author is dead. Metaphorically and in this case literally. If he had some intrinsic truth in mind that went beyond what he wrote, it's gone. All we have is the text, and any interpretation compatible with that text is valid.
Saying that only the prevailing literary theories are true is just awful, and kind of elitist to boot. There is nothing wrong with not agreeing with the common consensus.
If a scientist were to discover solid evidence that the earth was flat, they'd be obligated to take the possibility seriously. That's what science is about; changing your mind when new evidence shows up.
Of course, they won't discover that evidence because it doesn't exist because the earth is vaguely ellipsoid.
Similarly, nobody is going to interpret The Raven as a story about a shark-girl who fights aliens. But if they can back up a "talking raven" interpretation then that's just fine. Because The Raven might actually be about a talking raven. The text supports that interpretation.
Also, it's always worth showing people new things that you think they'll enjoy. Especially if you think they will enjoy it more than the thing they currently enjoy. You may be wrong, but if you're right, you just did them a favor. Yay you.
Recommending something is one thing. Recommending something instead of another thing is something else. The latter involves telling people that they won't or shouldn't like whatever that other thing. Which is pretty arrogant, if they've told you that they do like it.
*sigh* I'm not sure how you can deny that being an achievement without redefining one or more words. For "the rules to work properly" to still apply to an RPG, it has to apply to either killing stuff, exploring stuff, socializing, or another achievement. If it does not, then the only possibility is that you are no longer participating in a RPG or are redefining one of more words to something wildly different from their meaning.
It's possible that I'm misunderstanding the model here. So, please give me a hand here.
Which one of your profiles would be interested in considering the relative merits of 4dF vs d6-d6?
See, it seems to me that your model is mostly about playing games. But honestly, I play games as a side activity for my real hobby of reading and writing them. I like playing, but I can't fit myself into a play-centric category.
I also find it bizzare how you keep going out of your way to find insult where there clearly is not one. Is english not your first language? If that were the case, it could explain both points if there is simply some mistranslation going on.
No, there clearly is one.
Insults don't have to be intentional to be there. For example, asking somebody if English is there first language (it is mine) involves telling them that they don't speak/write/understand very well.
I'm not terribly offended, honestly; little insults are a part of everyday life and I've used a few in this thread myself partially by accident. It's not always avoidable...there's really no non-insulting way to tell someone you think they're offended over nothing.
But the "we're real roleplayers, not like those awful D&D rollplayers" thing has been bothering me over and over again for years and I've gotten pretty sensitive to it.
