|
Post by Stu Venable on Feb 25, 2013 13:46:49 GMT -8
I don't think "don't game with assholes" and "if you're having fun, you're doing it right" are necessarily mutually exclusive. The first statement is about my game. The second statement is about everyone else's games.
|
|
|
Post by Stu Venable on Feb 25, 2013 14:06:19 GMT -8
And in all seriousness, "if your having fun, you're doing it right" came up specifically about the edition war, and someone's compulsion to critique someone's game only by their chosen edition.
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Feb 25, 2013 15:06:08 GMT -8
And in all seriousness, "if your having fun, you're doing it right" came up specifically about the edition war, and someone's compulsion to critique someone's game only by their chosen edition. Yes, that whole edition wars thing was kind of sad - understandably conflict-ridden from a marketing perspective - but still needlessly divisive. I did not grok it at first until someone stated the obvious: the editions are different games. That said, doing it wrong in 4e or AD&D 1e or BECMI has common signs and the same goes for doing it right. Fun is one of those words that says allot but means nothing, including "if everyone has fun", without a context. I speculate that a good definition of right from wrong would encompass all RPGs, though I am not experienced in every RPG game/system extant. It would have much to do with group dynamics: social etiquette more than game rule sets. Something akin to sportmanship in sport. Without thinking too hard, I'd hypothesize this would separate RPGs from every other game. Even Hyvemynd's Monsterhearts, a game designed as a "fucked up characters" player vs player game, would share these etiquette norms. The importance of such a definition is not to lord it over the 4e WoW players or the AD&D 1e megalomaniacs. If they play it wrong and like it that is not the point. The purpose would be to provide a unified message that breaks down perceived barriers to play for new-to the-hobby people. A defined "right way" to play is like a safe word.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Feb 26, 2013 3:17:14 GMT -8
To be fair to gamers and other geeks, the "you're doing it wrong" problem exists within any pastime, profession, or vocation about which people are passionate. Historians, architects, musicians, sports fans, UX designers, cartoonists, etc. can be haters, too! You are very right. I think that because we've all experienced to some greater or lesser degree the slings and arrows of popular culture because we were different that we would be more understanding and more accepting of things that are different. Unfortunately we as gamers are no less cliquish and no less elitist than any other segment of society. JiB +1 As has often been argued thru out the forum . . . As I keep saying "you don't have to game with douchebags but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed to game period" Aaron
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Feb 26, 2013 3:47:35 GMT -8
An interesting observation of edition differences in play. The AD&D 1e group I DM have finally grokked the difference between story and problemsolving. The story is theirs but, as one player put it, "I dick the players about - not deliberately but because my world responds to their actions appropriately even if they can't see why as first". If they come up with a better idea I'll steal it but things do happen because of stuff already in motion. They're enjoying the change in play style because it's not just a story it's also problem solving exercise as things twist and turn and information comes to light and their actions affect things that they have yet to discern. The players are the center of the story because they are affecting the wheels they put in motion and it's less about gaining levels and power and more about how to navigate their way through and survive. Success is now being measured by what they now know rather than how many XP they have and when they next ping a level. Plus I'm being a proper douche DM and bringing their backstories into the game: you want a mysterious backstory? Great! That means I can create something really interesting when I really need it. It's this flexibility and extra development of a character as a 'character' that sets table top RPG's apart from MMORPG'S. Our brains are still infinitely better at this than any current logarithms or server sided processing power - we can extrapolate from small bits of information and create new associations and possibilities far more efficiently. When AI driven mmorpgs come of age things might change . . . Til then we organics have the edge on creativity. This also goes along way in to how much prep you should do: you could prep for every outcome but it's a bitch to do. Better to end the session with discussion between players and GM about where they intend to go next. That cuts down a lot of needless prep and let's the GM concentrate in 'exactly what does happen next' Aaron
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Feb 26, 2013 4:04:13 GMT -8
You are very right. I think that because we've all experienced to some greater or lesser degree the slings and arrows of popular culture because we were different that we would be more understanding and more accepting of things that are different. Unfortunately we as gamers are no less cliquish and no less elitist than any other segment of society. JiB +1 As has often been argued thru out the forum . . . As I keep saying "you don't have to game with douchebags but that doesn't mean they should be allowed to game period" Aaron Exactly! And since we cannot stop the truly fucked up playing with the other truly fucked up, roping in innocent bystanders along the way, it is worthwhile to get a message out that a right way to play exists, right? A code that all players, regardless their role within the gameplay, acknowledge? (A subsection on conduct, or how to play, that is copy and paste into every RPG book.) I mean, we all seem to be in agreement here. Granted I am beating the drum a little loud but the tattoo is not completely offensive. There is no argument about a right way existing. The industry is disinterested in propagating such a message because they make money from selling splat books to the fucked up douche bag arms race. The message has to come from the grass roots. A unified message, like, even an Indian call centre cut and paste is better than a passionate cacophony for getting the word out and rebutting the douche bags that do use the "no wrong way to play" as a defense.
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Feb 26, 2013 4:18:42 GMT -8
bringing their backstories into the game: you want a mysterious backstory? Great! That means I can create something really interesting when I really need it. For example, a love child from the Hommlet of Rocky Horror episode. Great Scott Dr! I'll back off the douche bag war drums for a while. Love that Rocky Horror side quest you have planned for your players BTW, Aaron!
|
|
|
Post by ericfromnj on Feb 26, 2013 4:58:42 GMT -8
I'm more of a seperatist. Let the mouth breathing cunts play, but let them play OVER THERE AWAY FROM ME.
There was a guy my friends and I met who bragged about his character having the hammer of Thor and talked about how his character could probably beat all of my player's characters. Any chance I had to try and explain differing GMing styles generate different types of games was thrown upon deaf ears.
My players, who I shall call the Degenerates, decided that this guy was cheating and thus a plan was concocted to beat the living shit out of this guy and leave him in the woods where all of us were drinking. Once I realized this was a serious plan I had to threaten to never GM again to stop my players from potentially causing permanent damage to some goofball from a Monty Haul campaign.
I preached live and let live that day, and it has stuck with me ever since. If a DM and a group of players want to be idiots together and in their enclosed environment, then so be it. Just let them go and ignore them. If you are worried about new players ending up having their new experiences with a group like that, be public and loud about getting players to your own group to teach them right.
I really don't think this attitude is all PC, because I consider cetain groups to be complete fuck ups who shouldn't play, but it is not my place to take away their books, so to speak.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Feb 26, 2013 5:02:32 GMT -8
bringing their backstories into the game: you want a mysterious backstory? Great! That means I can create something really interesting when I really need it. For example, a love child from the Hommlet of Rocky Horror episode. Great Scott Dr! I'll back off the douche bag war drums for a while. Love that Rocky Horror side quest you have planned for your players BTW, Aaron! Hopefully next week or week after . . . Depends on how long it takes them to work out 'what really happened to their prisoner in Penwick'. They're Nulb bound after that when the Rocky Horror side quest gets inserted whilst enroute (the weather is suitably foul for the next few weeks - so shelter will be sought) Aaron PS already have an illegitimate child on the way - that was the big reveal the other week but it was/is pretty twisted. Hey I watching Excalibur at the time and well the idea just sort of grew from that: a proper mythic story and a true moral dilemma for the PC.
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Feb 26, 2013 6:05:58 GMT -8
Ok ... Diatribe time ...
I think it is very dangerous to say that there is a "RIGHT way to play." Here's why. Who gets to set that definition? You? Me? The mouth breathing fat beard who still lives in his parent's basement? The misogynistic creepoid who thinks that the porn movies he watches are really what women are like? Saying that there is right and wrong is very dangerous.
What I can safely say is that there is my idea of right and your idea of right and that other guy's idea of right. So, when I say that there is no wrong way to play and if you're having fun you're doing it right, that's a qualified statement. If a group is having fun they're doing it right FOR THEM, and there is a group of players for whom that is the right way to play. It may not be right for you or me and we might even be horrified by it but that doesn't necessarily make them WRONG. It does make them wrong for us.
It might also be that we don't want potential participants in our hobby to think that's what we find fun. It is not only beyond our abilities to prevent the mouth breathing ... from playing it's morally reprehensible to try. What gives us the right? Nothing. We do not have the right to look at someone and for whatever reason say, "You don't get to play."
What we do have the right and the responsibility to do is to each one of us be a living banner for the hobby that we love and for the way that we believe is the right way to play and there by hopefully draw like minded people to the hobby to help it to grow in the way that we think is best.
We also have the right to say, "I don't enjoy the way (X) plays so I'm not going to play with them." By extension we have the right to tell other people that we play differently from those people that they're watching. I would suggest that we do so without rancor or judgement but that's for an individual to decide for themselves.
I run six or more games at conventions every year and that number is likely to go up if I am able to add more conventions to my calendar this year. There are people who enjoy the way I run games and look for them at conventions. There are also people who don't like the way I run games. Do they get to decide that I don't get to play because I do it differently?
I think it is VERY important that we try (within limits) to be more inclusive rather than exclusive. If we want to discuss WHAT they are doing in qualitative terms that's fine. If we want to compare HOW they play to HOW we play and assert that one is better than the other that's fine as well. But to judge and condemn others because their idea of fun is different than mine is a step I am unwilling to take.
I have three lists for gm's at cons. I have a white list (If they're running a game I jump on it), I have a black list (If they're running a game I look elsewhere) and I have a grey list (If there's not a white list game I'll play or I don't have enough information to make a determination yet.) As a rule I prefer to not give names when I'm talking about the quality of a game. If someone asks me specifically if they should play in game X being run by gm Y I will tell them honestly what I would do but I will not try to stop even the black list gm's from running games. Why? Because I don't have the right and even if I did I would be wrong to do so. Besides, every con I see them having tables of players having fun.
It's very easy to judge and to point fingers. But if we're pointing fingers at others who's pointing fingers at us?
JiB
|
|
|
Post by jazzisblues on Feb 26, 2013 6:07:38 GMT -8
+1 As has often been argued thru out the forum . . . As I keep saying "you don't have to game with douchebags but that doesn't mean they should be allowed to game period" Aaron Exactly! And since we cannot stop the truly fucked up playing with the other truly fucked up, roping in innocent bystanders along the way, it is worthwhile to get a message out that a right way to play exists, right? A code that all players, regardless their role within the gameplay, acknowledge? (A subsection on conduct, or how to play, that is copy and paste into every RPG book.) I mean, we all seem to be in agreement here. Granted I am beating the drum a little loud but the tattoo is not completely offensive. There is no argument about a right way existing. The industry is disinterested in propagating such a message because they make money from selling splat books to the fucked up douche bag arms race. The message has to come from the grass roots. A unified message, like, even an Indian call centre cut and paste is better than a passionate cacophony for getting the word out and rebutting the douche bags that do use the "no wrong way to play" as a defense. The industry is about making money. They're running a business, it's not altruistic or necessarily even about quality, it's about selling a product. One would hope that the better product would win the evolutionary battle of survival, but Microsoft proves that is not always the case. JiB
|
|
|
Post by ericfromnj on Feb 26, 2013 6:28:15 GMT -8
OK, ignore my post about beatings in the woods and read this one. It's said a lot better.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Feb 26, 2013 6:57:16 GMT -8
Exactly! And since we cannot stop the truly fucked up playing with the other truly fucked up, roping in innocent bystanders along the way, it is worthwhile to get a message out that a right way to play exists, right? A code that all players, regardless their role within the gameplay, acknowledge? (A subsection on conduct, or how to play, that is copy and paste into every RPG book.) I mean, we all seem to be in agreement here. Granted I am beating the drum a little loud but the tattoo is not completely offensive. There is no argument about a right way existing. The industry is disinterested in propagating such a message because they make money from selling splat books to the fucked up douche bag arms race. The message has to come from the grass roots. A unified message, like, even an Indian call centre cut and paste is better than a passionate cacophony for getting the word out and rebutting the douche bags that do use the "no wrong way to play" as a defense. The industry is about making money. They're running a business, it's not altruistic or necessarily even about quality, it's about selling a product. One would hope that the better product would win the evolutionary battle of survival, but Microsoft proves that is not always the case. JiB Xtree Gold with QDos and an NDos command shell plus Qemm memory manager to eke out every morsal of conventional memory possible - my OS system of choice 1993 to 95. I miss OS Warp as well . . . That's showing my age . . . (still have my Dos disks as the ultimate backup should all else fail to bring a system back to life). Then mico$oft came along and dumped on everyone from a great height (win 95 plug and play? You're having a fucking laugh aren't you) However we MUST be inclusive and live and let live or we become the very thing we rally against. RPG producers and designers are like Amaterdam window ladies . . . The narrower your client focus the smaller cliental the higher the price. Burning Wheel being a case in point . . . The authors approach limits it's appeal, so no matter how good the system it won't get a sizeable market penetration . . . People will go else where for their kicks. WoTC fucked up by abandoning the previous editions, because they are different games with s few shared tropes: a mistake they're trying now to fix. But the cat is out of the bag OSRIC and Pathfinder continue on from where WoRC left off - its the same mistake TSR made when it dropped 1e and limited its support for Basic and Expert . . . There's still life in the old dogs yet . . . A quick glance at the forums and you'll find people who have never moved on from Shadow Run 2nd or Old WOD. There is a preoccupation amongst game companies to produce new systems rather than develop support for existing products. As I age disgracefully I find I'm less bothered by buying fluff books because it saves me time and idea worth stealing is worth stealing. Even when I was younger I traweled thru dragon and dungeon and white dwarf for ideas not new systems - and it cost me a small fortune every month to buy these august volumes but worth every penny. I still paw thru those old dragons and white dwarf's when I need an idea, so money well spent . . . Aaron
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Feb 26, 2013 7:27:36 GMT -8
Exactly! And since we cannot stop the truly fucked up playing with the other truly fucked up, roping in innocent bystanders along the way, it is worthwhile to get a message out that a right way to play exists, right? A code that all players, regardless their role within the gameplay, acknowledge? (A subsection on conduct, or how to play, that is copy and paste into every RPG book.) I mean, we all seem to be in agreement here. Granted I am beating the drum a little loud but the tattoo is not completely offensive. There is no argument about a right way existing. The industry is disinterested in propagating such a message because they make money from selling splat books to the fucked up douche bag arms race. The message has to come from the grass roots. A unified message, like, even an Indian call centre cut and paste is better than a passionate cacophony for getting the word out and rebutting the douche bags that do use the "no wrong way to play" as a defense. The industry is about making money. They're running a business, it's not altruistic or necessarily even about quality, it's about selling a product. One would hope that the better product would win the evolutionary battle of survival, but Microsoft proves that is not always the case. JiB Exactly my point, JiB and ericfromnj. In the meantime, I am looking up an old philosophical quotation on Google - actually made into a poster I recall seeing with some Greek philosopher's bust as the image - that expresses an irony I have witnessed in many situations (including our hobby apologists) something like the intelligent are too busy thinking while the idiots are busy doing without hesitation. I am having some difficulty finding that quote, if anyone would care to help…. I want to ferret that quotation before posting it and then look like a fool myself if I have it out of context. Ericfromnj, just so my words do not get misconstrued: I am unconcerned about whether someone is a Monty Hauler or a munchkin; plays D20 games vs D6 games; goes diceless; or is a roll player vs. a role-player. Does the GM fudge…? It does not matter. That is personal preference, as Stu points out, aimed at the edition warriors. Can I correlate those kinds of minor concerns between players as ‘nerd rage” bigotry strong enough? Your indignation at your “Degenerate players” puts us on the same page in the same story. Those are the people that need what I am addressing. Not the Monty Hauler. I do not know if you grok that but I hope so. We often seem to see the same thing but in an opposed mirror reflection that language does not seem to solve. Preferences in a game (or its editions) are not the reason a game is wrong. If someone wants to bring a hockey stick to play baseball and everyone is in agreement with that, then it is fine. I think something like getting the agreement of the other players to bring that hockey stick is something to formally address however. That’s why I am thinking so strongly of etiquette and rather not system/game rule sets. Some kind of recognition officially within RPGs of a social contract – something that matters more between strangers than between long time friends whose default is friendship.
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Feb 26, 2013 7:42:30 GMT -8
The industry is about making money. They're running a business, it's not altruistic or necessarily even about quality, it's about selling a product. One would hope that the better product would win the evolutionary battle of survival, but Microsoft proves that is not always the case. JiB Xtree Gold with QDos and an NDos command shell plus Qemm memory manager to eke out every morsal of conventional memory possible - my OS system of choice 1993 to 95. I miss OS Warp as well . . . That's showing my age . . . (still have my Dos disks as the ultimate backup should all else fail to bring a system back to life). Then mico$oft came along and dumped on everyone from a great height (win 95 plug and play? You're having a fucking laugh aren't you) However we MUST be inclusive and live and let live or we become the very thing we rally against. RPG producers and designers are like Amaterdam window ladies . . . The narrower your client focus the smaller cliental the higher the price. Burning Wheel being a case in point . . . The authors approach limits it's appeal, so no matter how good the system it won't get a sizeable market penetration . . . People will go else where for their kicks. WoTC fucked up by abandoning the previous editions, because they are different games with s few shared tropes: a mistake they're trying now to fix. But the cat is out of the bag OSRIC and Pathfinder continue on from where WoRC left off - its the same mistake TSR made when it dropped 1e and limited its support for Basic and Expert . . . There's still life in the old dogs yet . . . A quick glance at the forums and you'll find people who have never moved on from Shadow Run 2nd or Old WOD. There is a preoccupation amongst game companies to produce new systems rather than develop support for existing products. As I age disgracefully I find I'm less bothered by buying fluff books because it saves me time and idea worth stealing is worth stealing. Even when I was younger I traweled thru dragon and dungeon and white dwarf for ideas not new systems - and it cost me a small fortune every month to buy these august volumes but worth every penny. I still paw thru those old dragons and white dwarf's when I need an idea, so money well spent . . . Aaron I agree. I agree with your comment and its stress of inclusion within the context you place it here Aaron. I am hardly a systems man - right? I mean I have communicated that elsewhere right? "Proper" systems and their systematic implementation is not the topic my comments address.
|
|