Quote from: S'mon;1011572CR/EL encounter 'balanced' encounter building contributes to the problem, it means that mechanically more powerful characters have a disproportionate impact - they can beat any encounter - whereas weak builds threaten the survival of the whole group. I find in old school status quo play this is far less of an issue, I can have 1st & 5th level PCs adventuring in the same levels of Stonehell, 1st and 3rd in the same PC group, and it works fine. Because many encounters are beatable by anyone while some encounters are unbeatable by anyone.

True, but old school status quo play had it's own CR/EL system-wandering monster tables based on dungeon level. Sure, there was more heteroskedasticity, but there was still level 1 monsters, level 2 monsters, etc. Nothing new under the sun and all that. But the general trend of feeling like there is supposed to be a set level of effectiveness at a given level, and if you're below that point you are either falling behind or not contributing your fair share is undoubtedly an impetus for powergaming.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1011542How would you coach?

I use coaching as opposing to teaching because coaching involves training somebody to do an active activity. While not an athletic sport, tabletop roleplaying is an active activity that is best learned by doing. A good  coach not only teaches in a traditional fashion but guides the players during play. At first there likely going to be a lot of hand holding and then as the player gain proficiency less and less until the player is more than capable of handling things.

As for how to be a good coach there are dozens of good books on the topics. Since most are oriented toward athletics you want to look for ones that deal more with the psychology of coaching than anything with actual sport technique. My mother was a great swimming coach and her teams competed at the state level. Her and the people she brought onboard for my high school taught me a lot about how to teach people these kind of things.

Have the battle though is knowing that yes it possible to coach otherwise poor players into being better players. That people been doing it for other things for decades. Just look through Amazon or google coaching and start reading. And most important is to try something, if it doesn't work then try something else. Every good coach I know develops their own take that works for them and their teams. And every good coach I know slightly adapts to the actual people that are part of the team.

There are various situations in tabletop roleplaying where coaching may or may not be relevant. First among friends it not likely I will be a coach of anything. Due our shared history the situation is what it is. However it changes if there is a newcomer to the group. Then I may have to be a coach for the new player. Likewise if I am running a convention game or a game store campaign, then it highly likely I will have to be a coach for one or more of the players.

As a related sidenote remember good sportmanship is really the system of good manners between people who are in competition with one another. Again it is useful to read material on how to foster good sportmanship in a team to deal with the lawncrapping asshole that may show up at a table.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1011542Wouldn't the "setting rules" be just as limiting?

Not really, IF you have the knowledge or experience with the subject matter. It hard to adjudicate anything involving wilderness survival if you don't know anything about the subject matter.  But if you do know the subject matter then you can coach the players on how to deal with that situation. And you can decide what are the relevant factors and how detailed you need to go.

For example due to my extensive camping and hiking experience along with mad orienteering skills. I have a pretty good idea of how an encounter would go with line of sight and all that. I look at the terrain. If it possible I roll to see if it is a close initial encounter (like in a forest)  otherwise it is a far encounter and go from there.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1011542Unless you make the rules super complex.

The reason I criticize Gronan (and others) criticism of complex RPGs (like GURPS) is that among other things a good set of rules impart knowledge of the subject matter. And if written well, the buyer doesn't need to go to the library to read up on the topic the RPG covers. Sure it would help and always recommended, but who I am to say that a person should make the time for it?

For example Pendragon is an excellent treatment of the Arthurian mythos. There is no reason why an Arthurian Campaign can't be run with OD&D but that assumes the referee (and maybe the players) have read enough about King Arthur to run a decent campaign.

Greg Stafford took the time to a great summary (along with rules) to allow referee to run a campaign centered around the myths of King Arthur.

And tying back to the OP, if one or one's group has a decent knowledge of medieval combat or experienced it as a reenactor then you don't need a set of rules with a lot of fiddly bits. Microlite and OD&D will work just as well as GURPS with all the options. People are not doing "whatever" because the reality of medieval combat imposes the boundary of what possible.

But if you don't have this knowledge or it is too shallow then a good set of combat rules with fiddly bits is likely going to be a lot more fun to play. By good I mean you grasp the basic mechanics easily, and the special cases are easy to remember or extrapolate from the central design. Because of that and the differences in how you and I think, what a good set of rules for me to use easily may not work well for you.

Although going back to coaching, the differences in different designs is not as broad most make out to be. Because most of the time it ties back to pretending to be an imaginary person living out a imaginary life in imaginary setting. Unless the setting is that way out weird, then many things are constant. In Runequest I may roll a d100, in D&D I roll a d20, in GURPS I roll 3d6 but I am trying the same damn things as the same damn character in the same damn setting in all three just the specifics differs.

New gamers at my store always wind up thinking GURPS is simpler than D&D 5e.  It isn't really but it has a lower learning curve as you can describe your actions in real terms rather than rules terms.  I always tell people, "a round is one second, if you need to say 'and' it's more than you can do."  I'm thinking about putting together a one page summary of the GURPS rules.  Yes, I believe the rules can be summed up in one page.

But even I think there are places where GURPS should be simpler.  Interestingly I find that for people who've played D&D a fair bit, Rolemaster is easier to pick up than GURPS.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;1011492One example is Charisma. It's one thing to just style your character as charismatic -- but if you don't have any abilities related to it, or a high stat representing it, then you're just making stuff up. The stat is what makes the fact that you have high Charisma real, and the abilities coming out from that.

Only if you're pants-shittingly stupid and have no imagination whatsoever.

Quote from: estar;1011589The reason I criticize Gronan (and others) criticism of complex RPGs (like GURPS) is that among other things a good set of rules impart knowledge of the subject matter. And if written well, the buyer doesn't need to go to the library to read up on the topic the RPG covers. Sure it would help and always recommended, but who I am to say that a person should make the time for it?

People make time for what matters to them.

Buying a model of a Baltimore and Ohio Railroad boxcar will teach you jack shit about the Baltimore and Ohio railroad.

For that matter, buying a sailboat will teach you fuckall about sailing.

Every other hobby I've ever been involved in requires effort.  Why is gaming the magical exception?

On the other hand, gamers have some fucked up attitude.  One good example is the "getting people to commit".  Lots of hobbies and leisure activities are group endeavors.  I've just started studying martial arts; class meets at a fixed time and place, and I'm expected to be there.  Elks, Rotary, Lions, Masons, et al, all have meetings.  You're expected to be there.  Model railroaders not only have clubs, but also some host gatherings in their homes; you're expected to be there at a certain time and place.

I have never, in 62 years of walking this earth, seen a group as bad as keeping commitments as gamers.  Are we as referees so fucking pathetic for attention that we accept being treated in a way that literally no other group on earth finds ok?

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1011599I have never, in 62 years of walking this earth, seen a group as bad as keeping commitments as gamers.  Are we as referees so fucking pathetic for attention that we accept being treated in a way that literally no other group on earth finds ok?

You get stood up by gamers recently? That what brought back the 'faceless generic gamers are all stupid' and poop-talking Gronan?

I can't honestly tell you, because I do not have the same experience. My game groups have week to week unavailability because most people in it have at-home kids and so forth, but they generally know by Wednesday if they can make it on Saturday (and, barring illness or emergency, follow through). As for referees being pathetic for attention, no. We just want this piece of effort we've put into this project to actually pay off, dammit! I do hope your gaming situation (and general living situation, if it's still as you've described) turn around, or at that the martial arts and model railroading hobbies are treating you better than the gaming.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1011461It's different because I don't have to read hundreds of pages of fucking rules.

Translated to full size pages OD&D is less than 64 pages.  Fuck these multi-volume multi-hundred page rule sets.  Fuck them to death with an axe while holding their face into a fire and laughing as they scream.

Oh Boo Hoo. No one is forcing you to play.

Quote from: estar;1011524The rules are found in reading medieval history.

But how is this substantially different than some codified manuvers? Instead of having the "rules" in the main book, they're now dispersed amongst history texts that some players may not have.
*Edit* I see you elaborated later on. Consider this a rhetorical question then.

QuoteWhat Gronan and other don't get is that by and large most gamers need this coaching than not. And always had from the beginning.

I like that players can negotiate their actions. But I also like some benchmarks and common rules to provide a springboard for ideas and tactics.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1011602You get stood up by gamers recently? That what brought back the 'faceless generic gamers are all stupid' and poop-talking Gronan?

I can't honestly tell you, because I do not have the same experience. My game groups have week to week unavailability because most people in it have at-home kids and so forth, but they generally know by Wednesday if they can make it on Saturday (and, barring illness or emergency, follow through). As for referees being pathetic for attention, no. We just want this piece of effort we've put into this project to actually pay off, dammit! I do hope your gaming situation (and general living situation, if it's still as you've described) turn around, or at that the martial arts and model railroading hobbies are treating you better than the gaming.

Read this, or any other of a number of online forums.  They are FULL of threads about players not keeping commitments, and have been for years.

I do not have that problem because I do not tolerate it.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1011599Every other hobby I've ever been involved in requires effort.  Why is gaming the magical exception?

It not. Except we are 40 years in and have dozens of books that people can choose to learn how to referee or play tabletop roleplaying games. So of course it rare to find those who start with first principles and work it out for themselves.  In one respect your generation is not all that different, Jason and the Argonaut, Sinbad, Hammer Horror, etc.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1011599On the other hand, gamers have some fucked up attitude.  One good example is the "getting people to commit".  Lots of hobbies and leisure activities are group endeavors.  I've just started studying martial arts; class meets at a fixed time and place, and I'm expected to be there.  Elks, Rotary, Lions, Masons, et al, all have meetings.  You're expected to be there.  Model railroaders not only have clubs, but also some host gatherings in their homes; you're expected to be there at a certain time and place.

I have never, in 62 years of walking this earth, seen a group as bad as keeping commitments as gamers.  Are we as referees so fucking pathetic for attention that we accept being treated in a way that literally no other group on earth finds ok?[/QUOTE]

I think this

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1011599People make time for what matters to them.

Answers the above.  My experience is that people view tabletop roleplaying as an optional leisure activity.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1011606I do not have that problem because I do not tolerate it.

And that the key, which is way I harp the focus should be on building better referees not better rules. Coaching, good sportmanship, all the things I advocate are about the referee (and players) showing leadership and learning the things they need in order for a group to function in a way that is fun and entertaining.

It kind of like being involved in scouting. Yeah you have scoutmasters but their job is not to lead the boys in their activities. Their job is to teach the boys to lead the activities themselves.  Otherwise it would be a chaotic gaggle of kids heading in a dozen different direction with half annoying the other half.

What interesting to me is the rise in actual play videos on Youtube. Seeing (as opposed to reading) how people are supposed to act can be a an effective teaching tool.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1011605I like that players can negotiate their actions. But I also like some benchmarks and common rules to provide a springboard for ideas and tactics.

Absolutely but there is no answer that the same for everybody.

For example

I have two 51 year old best friends who I game with who have 40 years of gaming and read dozens of history books and genre books.

Then I have a 13 year old son and friends.

The two groups don't need the same benchmarks and common rules. The 13 year old kids need a lot more coaching, explanations, and text to get going than my two 51 year old buddies.

Another example

I played with a referee at a local game store who is imaginative and a great person but is a terrible  teacher. Can't explain anything technical (like rules) worth shit. So we, players, all made him spell out the rules he using in greater detail than usual to make sure we understood what going on.

I been personally told numerous times by my players that the only reason they play GURPS is when I am running. Because I am able to lay it out everything and make it make sense for them.

My opinion is that learning to be a good coach and teacher will pay off in that you will have to do less work in giving players benchmark and common rules. Will never eliminate it but will be way less than what you are used too.

Quote from: Ratman_tf;1011605But how is this substantially different than some codified maneuvers?

To make this point I swapped the order of posts. Above I said that the answer to what common benchmarks and common rules is not the same for everybody.

How it substantially different? Well if my group is a bunch of folk who were medieval reenactors, like my current Thursday group. They don't need a lot of codified maneuvers. They just describe what they are doing. I know, because of my reenactment experience, what to rule on, and they know what to expect.

However for my 13 year old son and his friends. They need codified maneuvers.

Because tabletop roleplaying is about the experience of being a character in a setting doing interesting things. The setting part of that potentially covers an entire imaginary world as rich as our own. So what need codified rules can be a varied as life itself. Just as different groups need different common benchmarks and common rules, different groups need different things codified.

For example I been running the Majestic Wildelands using modified OD&D rules (my Majestic Wilderlands supplement). A few month ago the Thursday group wanted to own a sailing ship, have sea adventures, and do trading (think fantasy Traveller). I had very basic bartering rules. So I came up with a set of Merchant Trade (mostly based on ACKS) rules that I used since then.

I wrote the rules so I am consistent in the future. Of course people will say "wing it". But I know my limitations and I wouldn't be consistent doing that. It designed it by listing the minimum I needed to know when the players get into port and what were the most important factors. I edited it and made a short pamphlet and that was that.

The rules, I hope, show in a compact form what valuable and what is not. Also list in compact form the factors that effect trade. Having it avoids the players from playing twenty questions on stuff they would know.

Of course some would say "Let them discover it all!" and to them I say they are not fucking running my campaign, and don't know my group or what they need. And such criticism misses the point that the booklet is about general principles. The specifics of what each town or city wants they will have to discover for themselves. Along with making the contacts and connections to create a profitable trade route. Which of course will invariably involve adventures because nobody is going to do anything without something in return.

Even writing the booklet still doesn't absolve my coaching responsibilities as the referee. Reading about something is different than experiencing it. So I have to coach the players the first few rounds of trading.


All of this part of my general thesis is that what is needed to fix tabletop roleplaying is better referee not better rules.

Quote from: estar;1011609Answers the above.  My experience is that people view tabletop roleplaying as an optional leisure activity.

Well, yeah, but...

Model railroading is an optional leisure activity.  Nonetheless, the Cumberland Northern Railroad operates at 7:30 every Wednesday at a place in Minnesota.  If you said you'd be there and don't show up and don't call... and if you CONTINUE that pattern... you will be un-invited.  The same with hundreds of other model railroads throughout the country.

Martial arts class is an optional leisure activity.  Sailing classes are an optional leisure activity.  Lions' club, et. al.  Everything I named earlier is an optional leisure activity.

Yet its practitioners make and keep commitments, and if they can't, notify the appropriate people.

Or more to the point, that is the expectation.  The gaming community seems to have really low expectations in terms of showing up when promised or notifying if you can't.

Estar, interesting point about your 13 year old and his friends.

I got a 13 year old hooked on OD&D a couple years back at Gary Con.  He now runs it.

I run all my games as "Just tell me what you want to do.  Don't worry about the rules."  So I don't think codified rules are needed for new players.

Of course, to your excellent point about good referees, I use "just tell me what you want to do" to encourage players, not to look for ways to "gotcha" them.  Free Kriegsspiel only works if the umpire is trustworthy.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;1011423That's what solo adventures are for.  Yes, we used to go into Greyhawk castle alone.  No other players, no NPCs.  Just your player character.

To be honest, I think you're overstating the Role aspect.  With armies, sure, but the idea that a Fighter is a MMO Tank, meant to soak up damage, Taunt opponents, and let the DPS do the actual killing is a very modern view.

Except for backstab, which can be hard to get if Fighters are holding a hallway, the Fighters are going to be doing as much damage as any other melee, especially if you look to AD&D1, where they have Str bonuses the "DPS" classes don't have.

In a smaller conflict, tactics are vital, but the role of the fighter is hardly "keep the bad guys in place and wait for everyone else to kill them".  It's "kill as many of the fuckers as you can while controlling and shaping the battlefield through clever positioning and tactics."