|
Post by ardentfinder on Feb 27, 2013 2:28:12 GMT -8
There is a fundamental meanness in those people. It is not a mature, healthy mind that says, "hey, here's someone who's interested in my hobby. Think I'll fuck with him for a few hours to set him straight." Maybe they think they're putting you through some sort of rite-of-passage? I don't know. When the perennial complaint of gamers is that there aren't more of us, no, it doesn't seem like the product of a rational mind. I almost have to wonder if it's some version of the "cycle of abuse". They got picked on or treated poorly for getting into gaming (or whatever genus of geekdom) in junior high, so they have a subconscious need to haze the next generation. This seems a likely explanation to me. Which only makes sense intellectually to me. When I was tortured by my peers in school I only wanted to get catharsis on THEM, not others like me. But I am not everyone and have different reactions, as do we all. I think the issue here really is one of behavior as people rather than how we game. At a certain point, a person is treating the other people around the table a certain way, rather than playing a certain way. When that line is crossed, this becomes an issue of treating other people unacceptably. I think that is the problem some people are having. And I just refuse to associate with people who do it. Also, JiB's post was excellently put.
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Feb 27, 2013 2:39:26 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? Easy answer. Right now it is the first person to speak it. If that person is you greeting people new-to-the-hobby, I am happy with that. If it is a douche bag, I am not happy. I highly recommend that situation change. It can. Easily. I am going to do something productive now to justify my existence to this planet. I think, taken as a whole within this thread, I have developed what I want to articulate and have sufficiently expressed it. The rest would be symantics.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Feb 27, 2013 3:01:20 GMT -8
It's all still about social power and that's the point that is missed. Unfortunately the use of the word 'power' brings with it other baggage which is irrelevant in its proper use re: social interaction/conflict. When you were being bullied you wanted the power of catharsis against your tormentors. Your tormentors were demonstrating social power over you for their own reasons - how best to eliminate the threat of someone smarter? Ridicule and humiliation. Human history is rife with it - look at the struggle for enlightenment during the renaissance and treatment of those individuals by the catholic church because their ideas threatened the status quo: the war of ideas and the blood spilt during the Protestant reformation. Recontextualising it, thevstruggle for power, as anything else just reinforces the observation. As that is itself a struggle for power and ownership of an idea. CC please, as a personal favour, don't use Maslow's Hierarchy in an argument because it's the fucking bane of my professional life : it's wrong . . . Plain and simple it doesn't work it's an over simplification and was poorly research. The empirical evidence so disagreed with Maslow that he himself rejected it . . . After various attempts at modifying it to reconcile it with the evidence. It sounds good and seems 'logical' but it just doesn't pass muster - it a favourite of health sciences because it's easy to grok but it's still wrong (like saying the earth is obviously flat until you stand on a mountain and see the curvature of the horizon). A clear example of the first cracks in Maslow's Hierarchy : a mother jumps in front of a bus to save a child, an athlete takes steroids to improve his performance despite the risks to his long term health, anybody who enjoys extreme sports . . . They all clearly violate his hierarchy of needs. As research mounted, these exceptions to the rule end up disproving the rule all together. The best reconciliation was a 2 tier hierarchy with mutable subdivisions - but that was, IMHO, a sloppy fudge to maintain the relevance of a faulty tool. Why does his hierarchy persist? It's like urban legends that never happened: professions informed by conventional wisdom perpetuate it while the profession that created it remains bitterly divided with no clear resolution. That's academia, especially in social sciences and philosophy, half the fun is the argument - plus ego and reputations are at stake (the struggle for power of one paradigm over another). Aaron PS: I'm firmly of the existential paradigm . . . Identity is a social construct not a quality that exists in isolation. Like memory and recall, identity can be affected by the conditions it is engaged with at any given moment. These things exist as an emergent property of interaction - change the interaction you change the identity or how a memory is recalled. eg: some recollections are either traumatic or colourful anecdotes depending on the social context in which it is being recalled - the social context gives it meaning, the events themselves are meaningless until we ascribe meaning to them (thats sort of how CBT works) PPS: it's a bit of a head fuck to get your head around it the first time but once you do it's enlightening. It's like reading Sarte's Being and Nothingness - when the penny drops its like: 'what a fucking clever Frenchman'. Then Camus comes along with his Myth of Sisyphus and the idea of the absurd: again it's worth the effort . . .
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Feb 27, 2013 4:07:15 GMT -8
Oh yeah and the cycle of abuse - all to true. Haze the next generation because we suffered is very human. At my high school we wore boaters - to the constant ridicule of other schools. Each year the leaving seniors were given a vote to keep or discard the boater - guess what, they still wear boaters today. Aaron
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on Feb 27, 2013 5:47:16 GMT -8
CC please, as a personal favour, don't use Maslow's Hierarchy in an argument because it's the fucking bane of my professional life Ah. I was using the " Maslow-Lombadi" model, as you'll notice. But you are quite right about Maslow's over simplification (the Christian mythology of Jesus Christ - Frankl, Gandhi, etc. - being my prime example throughout my developing life) and his model's rigidity. In my career dealing with social groups and the creation of culture, I related more to Clayton Alderfer's ERG Theory, which succeeded it. I had greater practical application of ERG in HR communications programming as well as being a good shorthand for understanding shareholder and stakeholder identification and programming - especially where the groups overlap. Maslow was more for psychiatry rather than sociology. I never got into Lombadi except for Google quotes on RFQs.
|
|
|
Post by ericfromnj on Feb 27, 2013 5:54:24 GMT -8
What the hell is a boater and who the fuck is Maslow? a hat? do you mean an actual hat? HAZING: I don't get it. Then again, I played with metalheads from high school on and really no one picks on your pot dealers' dungeon master. D&D surrounded me with people who were willing to protect that guy who ran their game at a time my mother was with a very scary man. Outside of my immediate house is was more of a situation of people knew who I was tight with and did not screw with me. Overall good people around the gaming table. Nice to newbies. Combat heavy but that was to be expected. Just a different world. I have become horrified over the years learning what people who found the love I did in RPGs have gone through. VIGILANTIES: State of New Jersey reporting, Stu. The Five Minute Re-education Process in Treatment of Other Human Beings led by Professors Eric, Biker Jer, and Bill the Locksmith pride themselves in getting results and getting them very quickly. We use a patented process known as Fear. Fear will keep the local systems in line. Fear of this battle - sorry geeked out there for a second. CC: What we do agree on makes me think we would have similar processes even if there are nuances in our reasons for doing it. Be the beacon. Never give up trying to be a positive role model in the hobby. Always learn how to be a better role model. Outshine the mouth breathers so that no new players go looking for them in the dark. Sound right? AARON: Yes, now you know why I was confused as hell.
|
|
|
Post by ericfromnj on Feb 27, 2013 5:55:55 GMT -8
CC please, as a personal favour, don't use Maslow's Hierarchy in an argument because it's the fucking bane of my professional life Ah. I was using the " Maslow-Lombadi" model, as you'll notice. But you are quite right about Maslow's over simplification (the Christian mythology of Jesus Christ - Frankl, Gandhi, etc. - being my prime example throughout my developing life) and his model's rigidity. In my career dealing with social groups and the creation of culture, I related more to Clayton Alderfer's ERG Theory, which succeeded it. I had greater practical application of ERG in HR communications programming as well as being a good shorthand for understanding shareholder and stakeholder identification and programming - especially where the groups overlap. Maslow was more for psychiatry rather than sociology. I never got into Lombadi except for Google quotes on RFQs. can we stick to one syllable words? I am starting to lose the conversation here, unless this is a reply for Aaron directly. ...I can't tell...
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Feb 27, 2013 6:37:55 GMT -8
Maslow came up with a model of human behaviour - based on the precedence of needs. Safety is the first etc etc all the way up to being 'self actualised'. Self actualisation.? Let's just say it took 2 hrs in lecture for the lecturer to communicate exactly what that is supposed to mean - and I still didn't like it then (when I understood what he was driving at). I think our group was not very popular because we continually refused to accept as rote the material presented nor could we agree with each other, but that was part of the learning process as I understood it to be. We were a rather 'challenging' class for any lecturer . . . Not because of misbehaviour but because we constantly questioned the accepted wisdom of the times. That's why I went rogue later on and found myself firmly ensconced with the academic rebels . . . A boater is a horrible pillbox style straw hat with a fixed rim and a pretty band with your school colours plus the school badge. If you were caught outside school in uniform not wearing it it was an automatic detention - if you did wear it other school kids would make fun of you in the manner that only high school kids can (very meanly and viciously). Think of a scene from Edwardian England with the man punting on a canal - he's wearing a boater. That went with the full attire - school tie, tie clip, v neck pullover with school colours and blazer. Meant to be character building - that's why I dress in anything but a suit now , so that social experiment failed with me anyway (on leaving school my mother always bemoaned my bohemian dress sense - more in common with a young Bob Dylan than, say, a Frank Sinatra) Aaron
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Feb 27, 2013 6:52:51 GMT -8
Eric: I had a similar experience with D&D - one of my best friends and a long time player back in Oz was a year above me and school rowing champ. No one argued with him . . . Plus he came back after he left school as a rowing coach so was still there to spanner the pricks if they wanted to start on me. He is the munchkin I frequently refer to and why I had/have so much tolerance for them - he was a friend and benefactor first. Sure his style of play wasn't my cup of tea but I accommodated it because he was having fun and, after a while, I found my own way to enjoy DMing his preferences. Usually by rising to the challenge and getting creative in game in trying to lead him away from munchkinism . . . usually with NPC's that had little personal power but great influence or knowledge. They weren't antagonists either, frequently they were people he needed to cooperate with or attempt to sway to his side and him give assistance. Aaron
|
|
D.T. Pints
Instigator
JACKERCON 2018: WITH GREAT POWER COMES GREAT RESPONSIBILITY June 22-July 1st
Posts: 2,857
Currently Playing: D&D 5e, Pathfinder, DUNGEONWORLD, Star Wars Edge of the Empire
Currently Running: DUNGEONWORLD, PATHFINDER
|
Post by D.T. Pints on Feb 27, 2013 9:33:46 GMT -8
Just finished this Episode while doing "nautical shit"...And I have to say this Episode is the style that got me to listen to HJ's and keep coming back and become one of those "statistical listeners' that doesn't listen to very many other RPG podcasts save HJ.
If I recall correctly Stu's plan for creating this podcast was from a realization that there were too few GM's and a hope to get more "relatively functional" (focusing on the positive with hopes of avoiding the derogatory) folks to expand the hobby. The email question about prepping a big campaign and the host's subsequent answers did just that; in a clear, concise, non-philosophers playing football sort of way...
Don't get me wrong I love some quantum mechanic equation-like discussions of this weird activity we all love. But I god damn guarantee, that like the email regarding getting spouses playing; if I had tried to get my wife into playing with discussions like the above she would have struck the idea down with GREAT VENGEANCE AND FURIOUS ANGER.
I gotta go to work kids, but I really am looking forward to the coming episodes bringing back the idea of PRACTICAL tips for GMs especially those that someone new to the hobby can wrap their heads around.
Have a good day, see ya on the 'webs.
Cheers,
Curtis.
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Feb 27, 2013 16:34:45 GMT -8
I just finished the episode last night, and wanted to echo D.T. Pints. It's great to have a segment about GMing tips in the show again. I mean, I love the usual foul-mouthed banter and insults, and you guys always give solid advice when someone writes in with a problem, but it's nice to have a part of the show dedicated to general advice again. Please keep it up. Also, I paused the episode when Stu brought up the munchkin on Postcards from the Dungeon. I went and listened to that cast (they're one of the few other podcasts I listen to) and wanted to fucking punch all the babies of every fucking species in the fucking universe! Did I add enough fucks there? The munchkin was reasonable at first, but I still disagreed with most of his points. Then he starts bashing Apocalypse World and saying how the system is broken. Hey, buddy. I got something for you. Fuck you. That game fell apart because of you, not the system. You broke the explicit contract of that game. The game says that, as a player, you are responsible for playing your character like a real person. I don't care what your stats say, or how much of a bonus to your die roll you can stack up. That is secondary to the fiction. Why are you doing what you're doing? Because the stats and game say you can? Fuck you, get away from my table. The game also states to do it, you have to do it. So you don't get to roll dice or make a move unless your character takes appropriate action in the fiction of the game. So you want to use the "combat" move sieze by force. What are you attempting to sieze and how? By rolling 2d6 and adding my +5 bonus. No, fuck you. Try again. How are you doing it? Forget the rules of the game, and tell me, in narrative terms, what you are doing. You walk over there, put the gun in his face and pull the trigger? OK, that's better. Oh, now you're trying sieze someone's will with the same move? Trying to sieze the sun out of the sky? Sure. By the letter of the rules you can do that. So long as you narrate to me how you're getting inside that guy's head and grabbing his will. So long as you narrate how your dude is getting himself up into the fucking sky to grab the giant ball of fire we call the sun and dragging it back down here. I didn't think so. Now shut the fuck up. And with that, I am going to go punch every single baby who ever was, is, or will be born in the entire fucking timestream.
|
|
|
Post by ardentfinder on Feb 27, 2013 16:46:33 GMT -8
I just finished the episode last night, and wanted to echo D.T. Pints. It's great to have a segment about GMing tips in the show again. I mean, I love the usual foul-mouthed banter and insults, and you guys always give solid advice when someone writes in with a problem, but it's nice to have a part of the show dedicated to general advice again. Please keep it up. Also, I paused the episode when Stu brought up the munchkin on Postcards from the Dungeon. I went and listened to that cast (they're one of the few other podcasts I listen to) and wanted to fucking punch all the babies of every fucking species in the fucking universe! Did I add enough fucks there? The munchkin was reasonable at first, but I still disagreed with most of his points. Then he starts bashing Apocalypse World and saying how the system is broken. Hey, buddy. I got something for you. Fuck you. That game fell apart because of you, not the system. You broke the explicit contract of that game. The game says that, as a player, you are responsible for playing your character like a real person. I don't care what your stats say, or how much of a bonus to your die roll you can stack up. That is secondary to the fiction. Why are you doing what you're doing? Because the stats and game say you can? Fuck you, get away from my table. The game also states to do it, you have to do it. So you don't get to roll dice or make a move unless your character takes appropriate action in the fiction of the game. So you want to use the "combat" move sieze by force. What are you attempting to sieze and how? By rolling 2d6 and adding my +5 bonus. No, fuck you. Try again. How are you doing it? Forget the rules of the game, and tell me, in narrative terms, what you are doing. You walk over there, put the gun in his face and pull the trigger? OK, that's better. Oh, now you're trying sieze someone's will with the same move? Trying to sieze the sun out of the sky? Sure. By the letter of the rules you can do that. So long as you narrate to me how you're getting inside that guy's head and grabbing his will. So long as you narrate how your dude is getting himself up into the fucking sky to grab the giant ball of fire we call the sun and dragging it back down here. I didn't think so. Now shut the fuck up. And with that, I am going to go punch every single baby who ever was, is, or will be born in the entire fucking timestream. I like Hyvemynd.
|
|
|
Post by ericfromnj on Feb 27, 2013 17:45:04 GMT -8
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Next up, this guy from this podcast starts talking about how Savage Worlds is so much better than any other gaming system that ends in "world."
I love you, Hyvemynd.
|
|
HyveMynd
Supporter
Dirty hippie, PbtA, Fate, & Cortex Prime <3er
Posts: 2,273
Preferred Game Systems: PbtA, Cortex Plus, Fate, Ubiquity
Currently Playing: Monsterhearts 2
Currently Running: The Sprawl
Favorite Species of Monkey: None
|
Post by HyveMynd on Feb 27, 2013 18:20:40 GMT -8
LOL. Yeah, I do take digs at Savage Worlds. But you know what? That's mostly just to get JiB all riled up. It's fun. I don't think Savage Worlds is a bad system, there are simply rules and mechanics in the system that are not to my tastes. That doesn't make it "broken" or "poorly designed" as that munchkin in the PftD claimed Apocalypse World was. Plus, Pinnacle has made some smart fucking choices about how to present Savage Worlds and all the supplements. There is a very well deserved reason that the game is so prevalent.
Plus, Apocalypse World is hard to run. I went down like a hungry hobo giving a blowjob when offered a can of soup on my first MCing attempt. It was so bad that one player now refuses to touch anything that's based on the AW system. It's just not to some people's tastes, and I get that. However, the openness and interpretive nature of the rules in AW-based games is not a weakness, it's a strength. Why do you need to kill an entire forest of trees to print an epic book of rules covering every possibly action and edge case? All you need is a task resolution system and some common fucking sense how and when to apply it.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on Feb 28, 2013 2:16:58 GMT -8
I just finished the episode last night, and wanted to echo D.T. Pints. It's great to have a segment about GMing tips in the show again. I mean, I love the usual foul-mouthed banter and insults, and you guys always give solid advice when someone writes in with a problem, but it's nice to have a part of the show dedicated to general advice again. Please keep it up. Also, I paused the episode when Stu brought up the munchkin on Postcards from the Dungeon. I went and listened to that cast (they're one of the few other podcasts I listen to) and wanted to fucking punch all the babies of every fucking species in the fucking universe! Did I add enough fucks there? The munchkin was reasonable at first, but I still disagreed with most of his points. Then he starts bashing Apocalypse World and saying how the system is broken. Hey, buddy. I got something for you. Fuck you. That game fell apart because of you, not the system. You broke the explicit contract of that game. The game says that, as a player, you are responsible for playing your character like a real person. I don't care what your stats say, or how much of a bonus to your die roll you can stack up. That is secondary to the fiction. Why are you doing what you're doing? Because the stats and game say you can? Fuck you, get away from my table. The game also states to do it, you have to do it. So you don't get to roll dice or make a move unless your character takes appropriate action in the fiction of the game. So you want to use the "combat" move sieze by force. What are you attempting to sieze and how? By rolling 2d6 and adding my +5 bonus. No, fuck you. Try again. How are you doing it? Forget the rules of the game, and tell me, in narrative terms, what you are doing. You walk over there, put the gun in his face and pull the trigger? OK, that's better. Oh, now you're trying sieze someone's will with the same move? Trying to sieze the sun out of the sky? Sure. By the letter of the rules you can do that. So long as you narrate to me how you're getting inside that guy's head and grabbing his will. So long as you narrate how your dude is getting himself up into the fucking sky to grab the giant ball of fire we call the sun and dragging it back down here. I didn't think so. Now shut the fuck up. And with that, I am going to go punch every single baby who ever was, is, or will be born in the entire fucking timestream. Yeah I had listen too and did wonder WTF he was talking about with his 'seize the sun by force' rationale. I just hated the guy because all he could rabbit on about was how by breaking a game he was playing the game . . . That's like those rich kids when you were at primary school who got the newest and best toys and basically spent their time smashing them for fun because they could. Aaron
|
|