Quote from: Black Vulmea;928125If by 'Long Game' you mean reciprocal favors between player characters as part of shared effort in achieving individual character goals, then the answer is, there isn't one, implicitly or explicitly.

As described in the Boot Hill campaign setup, it's neither an expectation nor necessarily a goal that we should be working together, and the way things are shaping up, my character is quite likely to find himself in a bloody disagreement with the other characters in the none-too-distant future. The only good news for me is I don't expect the two of them to gang up on Eladio, since they're acting orthogonal to one another: one focused on the ranchers and the coming range war, the other on the town and the coming election.

Another mix of characters could result in a very different situationt. One of the four dead player characters in the campaign was a mixed-race civilian Army scout, and our two characters cooperated very well - they planned for the scout to lead out my character's cattle drive. It's a shame a rifle ball splattered his brains all over an arroyo while searching for the Lost Conquistador Mine.

I meant the "Long Game" in the sense CRK said it in this post so basically, "getting allies, money and assets by adventuring". Which, in your game, should probably amount to a cattle raid, I'm not sure:).
But what I wanted to imply is that the thing you're doing in that Boot Hill game is still adventuring, despite or rather because of being a farmer;).

Obviously Logan's player couldn't be there for that session.

Quote from: CRKrueger;928148That was classic.

Obviously Logan's player couldn't be there that week.

Quote from: Willie the Duck;928153Obviously Logan's player couldn't be there that week.

ROFL probably.  

Although if he was being a stick-in-the-mud, Charles could have made him get up and sing "I'm a little Teacup" and then Erik could have Magneto'd him out the front window and then...
Charles - "Let's try this again, shall we?"

BV is currently doing things that are, to classic adventuring games, non-adventures.  Now, he's in a Western game, so to a more realistic western game, these are adventures.  However, they are still 100% his goals, and all the other players are doing 100% their goals, which may or may not intersect, and may not involve the way the "classic adventure" model is usually brought to westerns, doing some kind of ad-hoc law enforcement/mercenary work/get rid of the BBEG who isn't Thulsa Doom, but Dent Baxter.

My point was though...that even though he is non-standard adventuring following 100% PC goals, there still is a point for him to do standard adventuring, non-immediate PC goals - like getting rid of bandits, aiding US Marshalls, getting favors owed and reputation built.  Not by interaction with PCs necessarily, but NPCs.  

Get your Spencer rifle and help Clem defend his Beeves against some lowdown rustlers, and later on, when you need men, money, resources, a place to hide out because you're basically now in the Lincoln County War vs. The Cattle Barons, you now have resources to call on from all those "non PC-goal, random standard western adventures" you got sidetracked into.

If the Troll-Hunter can't find a reason that helping a Vampire-Hunter might come in handy, or a Cattleman can't figure out how helping a Gold Miner might be worth doing...well the campaign and players have bigger issues.

Right. Dont make a character who is totally antisocial or incapable of co-operating with the rest of the group when needed.

One of the reasons I DESPISED the Nega Psychic in Beyond the Supernatural was one player took it and then was a total pain in the ass with the rest of the party and played them refusing to work with the group and only tagged along to debunk them. That was a not fun session and through the player (and/or characters) own stupidity, got the PC excessively dead. The other players effectively said "Dont ever take that sort of character class/personality again." Just short of the Player or PC refusing to adventure.

The digging character was just an extreme hypothetical. I wrote out how I might theoretically react to it without just shutting it down quickly, to try to show how the whole thing doesn't seem like necessarily a big problem, if no one is too invested in every player necessarily having a PC who is a trusted, cooperative, always caring and doing what the party is supposed to be doing, kind of thing. So ya it's not an actual play example and might not be how exactly I would handle it, but it was an attempt to show that digressions and retirement or NPC-ization to do whatever doesn't have to be a problem and can be handled organically rather than by shutting down by force, or by the players conforming their ideas to the play conventions more than they really want to.

Quote from: CRKrueger;928174BV is currently doing things that are, to classic adventuring games, non-adventures.

Yeah, I posted there are two kinds of games, didn't I? But in the more general sense of "adventures", these are "his adventures" - in the sense that if his character lives long enough and becomes wealthy enough, he might write a book titled "I'm BV's character: My Life and Adventures".

QuoteNow, he's in a Western game, so to a more realistic western game, these are adventures.

Indeed.

QuoteHowever, they are still 100% his goals, and all the other players are doing 100% their goals, which may or may not intersect, and may not involve the way the "classic adventure" model is usually brought to westerns, doing some kind of ad-hoc law enforcement/mercenary work/get rid of the BBEG who isn't Thulsa Doom, but Dent Baxter.

And we're trying to be closer to people living there, right? Or are we trying to emulate the genre model of the "classic adventure games"?

QuoteMy point was though...that even though he is non-standard adventuring following 100% PC goals, there still is a point for him to do standard adventuring, non-immediate PC goals - like getting rid of bandits, aiding US Marshalls, getting favors owed and reputation built.  Not by interaction with PCs necessarily, but NPCs.

Sure there is. But if he doesn't want to, he doesn't need to - that's the main difference between "games about adventurers doing adventures", and "games about people just being there and chasing their own goals".
I've lost track of the times when some part of the group wanted to have adventures, and another part of the group wanted to have local goals. I allow them to either split, or I get the players with goals to become a sort of "patrons" for the rest of them.

QuoteGet your Spencer rifle and help Clem defend his Beeves against some lowdown rustlers, and later on, when you need men, money, resources, a place to hide out because you're basically now in the Lincoln County War vs. The Cattle Barons, you now have resources to call on from all those "non PC-goal, random standard western adventures" you got sidetracked into.

Sure, that's possible.
Or, if I decide to, I might get such resources from PC-goals, successfully achieved.

QuoteIf the Troll-Hunter can't find a reason that helping a Vampire-Hunter might come in handy, or a Cattleman can't figure out how helping a Gold Miner might be worth doing...well the campaign and players have bigger issues.

Or it's not an issue, but working as intended. BV just said no such things are expected. He seems to enjoy it, and the other players rolled new PCs after losing the first. I'd suspect that's a sign they enjoy it, too!
Of course, nothing wrong with players who have complementary goals. It's just not the only way to play!

BV, which Boot Hill edition are you using?

Are there any fantasy games that provide a similar level of "large scale" structure? Or any RPGs in general? Flashing Blades seems to be a candidate, but I don't remember too well. Gangbusters? En Garde sort of does but I think it was sort of rudimentary. (And let's not get into SG stuff that basically give a bunch of social/relationship/metagame mechanics and then breezily tell you to create/improvise the world structures.)

Quote from: Omega;927746From another threads sidetrack...

The subject came up of players having their character effectively refuse the call to adventure and instead want to stay a lowly farmer or peasant.

And have any ever tried to set up businesses? Howd that go?

Refuse the call of adventure? Only once, but it made sense. The character had reached 5th or 6th level, and circumstances came to be that he found a woman to marry and a couple of orphans to adopt. He became the "power behind the throne" in his town, and the player discovered that the character was content. He retired the character and made a new one.

Effectively demand that the adventure come to them or I provide motivation? Yeah, but if you aren't interested in your allies' escapades, the 2-3 hooks that I provided, or come up with something on your own... they sat there until they decided to play ball. I can appreciate that there are content or indifferent people in the world. Don't make one of those.

I have had players make use of trade and arbitrage as a way of making money while exploring the world. Also, a jewelry shop that the party kept in gold and lived above.

Quote from: James Gillen;927754I once had an Elven Fighter/Magic-User who wanted to be a dentist.

JG

I had a wizard who was a cobbler by trade. He only adventured when he was bored or occasionally wanted to increase his power. As for not participating, its best to simply tell the players what to expect and if they don't want that, either try and meet expectation if that will make you happy or get another GM.

Quote from: AsenRG;928149I meant the "Long Game" in the sense CRK said it in this post so basically, "getting allies, money and assets by adventuring". . . [W]hat I wanted to imply is that the thing you're doing in that Boot Hill game is still adventuring, despite or rather because of being a farmer;).

Quote from: CRKrueger;928174BV is currently doing things that are, to classic adventuring games, non-adventures.  Now, he's in a Western game, so to a more realistic western game, these are adventures.

Our characters live in a world in which the stuff of everyday life is the call to adventure.

Quote from: CRKrueger;928174However, they are still 100% his goals, and all the other players are doing 100% their goals, which may or may not intersect, and may not involve the way the "classic adventure" model is usually brought to westerns, doing some kind of ad-hoc law enforcement/mercenary work/get rid of the BBEG who isn't Thulsa Doom, but Dent Baxter.

As I mentioned, we're playing through the first four Boot Hill modules and we're in the process of putting a bow on BH4 Burned Bush Wells, which is pretty close to what you described here. It's one of my favorite published adventures for any roleplaying game, not least because while it's predicated on the "get rid of the BBEG" model, it explicitly allows for the player characters to do nothing, for the events of 'the adventure' to exist wholly in the background. If you want your character to hunt wolves for bounties and play cards to pass the winter and ignore the struggle between the Burned Bush Business Council and Lyle Underhay, then do it - the text of the adventure expects and accepts this as a reasonable choice and notes how the game-world changes as a result.
 

Quote from: CRKrueger;928174My point was though...that even though he is non-standard adventuring following 100% PC goals, there still is a point for him to do standard adventuring, non-immediate PC goals - like getting rid of bandits, aiding US Marshals, getting favors owed and reputation built.  Not by interaction with PCs necessarily, but NPCs.
 
Get your Spencer rifle and help Clem defend his Beeves against some lowdown rustlers, and later on, when you need men, money, resources, a place to hide out because you're basically now in the Lincoln County War vs. The Cattle Barons, you now have resources to call on from all those "non PC-goal, random standard western adventures" you got sidetracked into.

Exactly right.
 

Quote from: CRKrueger;928174If the Troll-Hunter can't find a reason that helping a Vampire-Hunter might come in handy, or a Cattleman can't figure out how helping a Gold Miner might be worth doing...well the campaign and players have bigger issues.

Indeed.

May I say that you've been killing it this whole thread, Mean Green?
 

Quote from: Willie the Duck;928153Obviously Logan 's player couldn't be there that week.

 

Quote from: Arminius;928228BV, which Boot Hill edition are you using?

2e Boot Hill, the first boxed-set edition of the game, the one many gamers say is 'really a tabletop miniatures game' as it 'lacks the features' of a 'true' roleplaying game, and by 'many gamers' I mean sphincter-faced shit-for-brains.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;928584Our characters live in a world in which the stuff of everyday life is the call to adventure.

Exactly. And the stuff of everyday life, as your example with the hunting shows, can also be ignored.
For some reason, that notion is hard on some Referees, including some I've met in person.

Quote from: Black Vulmea;9285842e Boot Hill, the first boxed-set edition of the game, the one many gamers say is 'really a tabletop miniatures game' as it 'lacks the features' of a 'true' roleplaying game, and by 'many gamers' I mean sphincter-faced shit-for-brains.

I have to remember that next time I play Mechwarrior or Phoenix Command or use Battlesystem for an entire session.

Quote from: Krimson;928622I have to remember that next time I play Mechwarrior or Phoenix Command or use Battlesystem for an entire session.

Mechwarior is an RPG for Battletech. Battletech itself is not an RPG. If you used Battlesystem for a whole session and didnt do any role playing then you were playing a wargame. If Im playing Agricola instead of RPing a farmer then Im playing a board game.

Back on topic.

One player group I met at a con way back in 99 mentioned that they had been playing as sort of fantasy prospectors. I believe they were a party comprised of just dwarves and gnomes. Any adventuring was incidental to finding that mother lode.You could also do that in Star Frontiers. buy a mining and refinery ship and set off to prospect.