Quote from: Krimson;1004946I would love to pay a paltry $50 a month for internet.

I pay a bit less than $50, for super super fast internet. Uruguay has some of the fastest internet per capita in the world.

Quote from: Dumarest;1004561Mainly unreliable people agreeing to parameters such as frequency of posting and then going silent and ruining a game. Both for refs and players. One reason I am hesitant to run anything online is because I don't want to be the jerk who says we'll post at least once a day (or however often) and then find myself unable to honor my agreement.  I've run several in the past that all broke down after three to six months due to players fading out without explanation, and unfortunately the situations were such that moving forward without them was pointless and unenjoyable so we agreed to just drop it.

Other than that, I find the slow progress of a game online to be frustrating. Maybe a Skype-type game would work better for pacd, but I dont have the technology for that.

I ran a Star Wars game starting late last year for about five months until about March or so. I used Roll20 and Discord, and functionally, this worked just fine. Roll20 Requires significant prep time to run a game with, although once you learn the macro-coding it does go somewhat quicker, but still requires a lot more prep than a tabletop RPG session. Problems for the game... lets see...

It ran at a decent enough pace, but the players were just horrible. I had a wide divergent mix of players, several that were highly experienced, and some with virtually no online roleplaying experience at all. They never got along, and several primadonna's in the group pretty much wrecked the game for everyone else. I'm an old school GM, not a baby-sitter, if the players want to duke it out, I just let them, and let the dice fall where they may.

The result of this style, was that two players just ragequit, and most of the remainder just quietly dropped the game. For about a month the game limped on with the two Primadonna's each trying to outdo the other, and then the last one quit. The last player wanted me to run a game exclusively for him, even though he had pretty much wrecked the game for a bunch of other players (as well as me) with his play style. I put way too much time into running a campaign game to allow a small percentage of the players wreck the game for the rest of the group, so I quit Roll20 as well.

As a technology, Discord and Roll20 are mature enough to run a game, but the lack of face-to-face accountability, and the honesty that actually physically meeting and sitting down to amicably playing a game, remains lacking using the anonymizing online gaming tools that are available these days. This is a problem that persists with online MMO games as well, where player metagaming  and bullshit politics often ruins what would otherwise be a really good RPG gaming experience.

GameDaddy thanks for the writeup. I'm going to post about my experiences using Roll20 and Hangouts. A couple of years back I ran a game of The One ring via Roll20 over hangouts (before the Hangouts API was dropped) and had several months of gaming with folks I had met on the Cubicle7 forums. They were a mix of US and UK players and everything worked out fine until changes in employment status disrupted the game. (One player moved across country and others just couldn't mange a consistent day/time across four time zones).

I just come off playing the whole Zalozinhyi Quartet (GUMSHOE) over about a year and a half, I'm currently playing Curse of Nineveh (CoC), just finished up an Ashen Stars game (GUMSHOE again) and am currently running a Blades in the Dark game plus playtesting a Trail of Cthulhu campaign. All of these are being (or have been) run via Hangouts and recently using a separate die roller (after Google dropped the API).

All these games I've played with a group of friends from all over the UK that I know from meeting them at various conventions. Now that is a smaller pool than you are likely to find but gaming with random strangers for any period of time is not my idea of having fun and doesn't appear to be yours either.

The pool of people I play with aren't always up for the same game and drop in or out depending on the genre of system. But we are friends and no-one get's off on being a dick.

At a convention you know you are only having to play with folks for 3 or 4 hours at the most at one time but for a regular on-line game the ones I've seen to work are those where friends who have spread out and can't make a FTF games except occasionally and use the on-line game to stay in touch.

Maybe altering your on-line group to match different criteria might result in a better on-line game.

Quote from: GameDaddy;1005362Requires significant prep time to run a game with, although once you learn the macro-coding it does go somewhat quicker, but still requires a lot more prep than a tabletop RPG session.

I say this is highly dependent on one's refereeing style. In general I find it to be a wash. Some things are easier , and somethings are more fussy. But the really fussy thing are when you use advanced features like dynamic lighting, macros, or automated character sheets. None of which are need to make a game happen on Roll20. They are just in the "nice to have" category.

Quote from: GameDaddy;1005362As a technology, Discord and Roll20 are mature enough to run a game, but the lack of face-to-face accountability, and the honesty that actually physically meeting and sitting down to amicably playing a game, remains lacking using the anonymizing online gaming tools that are available these days. This is a problem that persists with online MMO games as well, where player metagaming  and bullshit politics often ruins what would otherwise be a really good RPG gaming experience.

Was this is a public game? If so then it isn't surprising that you had this experience because it like running at a game store, you don't know who is going to drop in. My experience with Roll20 that the only unique social issue are the once afflicting any type of teleconferencing like talking over each other on whatever it is you are using with voip (like discord).

The other social the same ones you get in face to face gaming.

Quote from: Hermes Serpent;1005364Maybe altering your on-line group to match different criteria might result in a better on-line game.

I agree 100% with this. Being on-line doesn't change the need to keep on top of things socially. Game with people you like.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1005330It's hard for me to imagine not needing internet.

You and me both.  I rarely buy and read print books these days with the exception of RPG core rulebooks.  Most of the books I read these days are eBooks, either bought from Amazon, DriveThru, or Kobo, or borrowed electronically from the library.  For comic books, I buy them digitally on Comixology or Google Play Books.  For movies and television, I use a combination of Internet services - CBS All Access, PlayStation Vue, VUDU, WWE Network, and YouTube Red.  Also, most of my family and friends live all over North America, so I use a combination of instant messaging services to keep in touch with them.  I would be quite screwed without the Internet at home.

Quote from: GameDaddy;1005362As a technology, Discord and Roll20 are mature enough to run a game, but the lack of face-to-face accountability, and the honesty that actually physically meeting and sitting down to amicably playing a game, remains lacking using the anonymizing online gaming tools that are available these days. This is a problem that persists with online MMO games as well, where player metagaming  and bullshit politics often ruins what would otherwise be a really good RPG gaming experience.

As others have said, run with people you know.  Stranger danger is real, whether online or off.

Quote from: GameDaddy;1005362...The result of this style, was that two players just ragequit, and most of the remainder just quietly dropped the game...

Sounds like you let two assholes derail your game, not sure how that makes you an 'old school GM.'

Quote from: Voros;1005452Sounds like you let two assholes derail your game, not sure how that makes you an 'old school GM.'

When I started GMing in 1977 we had formed a gaming group based on our wargame group. There were three of us in my original wargaming game group. We played wargames often, just about every day, and weekends too. Weekends were the best becuase no school, we could play all day, and even stay up late playing. When we started playing RPGs everything went pretty much the same...

When we got into high school, our gaming group grew. Before we finished, we had about six-seven regular players. We played a mix of wargames and RPGs mostly D&D, and AD&D, but also Tunnels & Trolls, The Fantasy Trip, Bloody Arduin (that's what we called it), Traveller, Metamorphosis Alpha, Gamma World, and Chivalry & Sorcery alternating as GMs,  as Refs, and as Players. Up to a dozen more or so would play part time, or once in awhile if they were interested in trying a new game out, ...and would stop in and play depending on what games we played, ...or when the game was scheduled. Our Club was about twenty gamers in size total.

Me, Paul, Tom C., Doug B.(when he was in town), John, Rodney, Dale, Mike, Merv, Doug W. (when he was in town), Shane,  and Tom Chimo, Dennis (PT), Rod (PT).

It wasn't until 1982 before I saw my first ragequit. And that was not a guy in our regular gaming group, but a guy at another wargaming club across town, and he wasn't even playing one of our guys, but one of his guys, and he was losing playing a wargame, and simply flipped the entire table and started yelling. For us, this was a total shock event, and I only returned to play games with one guy in that club after that, who was cool enough not to get all bent out of shape over a boardgame or a tabletop game.

We went to conventions, and game shows, and not once was there an asshole around to derail one of our games because we didn't invite anyone who was obviously socially maladjusted, or hostile, to play.

The first time I had to step in and break up an attempt to derail one of my games was in 1983, and I was in the military already, and was GMing a regular campaign Friday & Saturday Night, with smaller game sessions being run for several player subgroups on weeknights for fourteen regular players, with about ten more regular observers, who would sit around the rec room just watching us play in amazement because none of them had ever seen a full-fledged RPG campaign game underway. Two players picked opposite alignments, and their personalities clashed as well, and they got into an epic fight, so I split the parties and ran their sessions separately.

Assholes were just not around for the most part, for the first five years we played RPGs. So, I'm not sure what kind of "Old School" gaming you played if your group was constantly at each others throats, or if they were trying to derail your game. With wargames, we always focused on playing a good competitive game, but always had a ref available to decide so we wouldn't waste much time arguing. With RPGs it was the players forming up a team to accomplish a tough goal (because our games were extremely lethal) and the GM was the Ref, who was in the words of Doug (who taught me how to play D&D) your job as GM to remain completely neutral and objective when running the game, favoring nor disfavoring no individual player. GM always made combat rolls openly on the table, and it was our gentleman's agreement to play with good sportsmanship, and good conduct.

The first time I witnessed a player deliberately try to derail one of my D&D games was in 2003 at GenCon. The crowd there was mostly RPGA players who played AD&D, or 3e, and at the time, ...some were still hostile towards original D&D. The OSR had not taken off yet, so there was not alot of popular support, although usually only one or two guys would show up for a 0D&D round who wanted to play like in the old days. Worst derailment attempt was a double whammy at two other separate games at GenCon in 2006. Both were 3.5e Eberron games.

So these hostile folks you speak of are around now, but really weren't around at the dawn of the hobby.

Quote from: estar;1005369I agree 100% with this. Being on-line doesn't change the need to keep on top of things socially. Game with people you like.

Oh yeah, my regular tabletop gaming group had a pool going trying to guess when the online game would implode, and making various wagers about the timing concerning that. To be honest, I didn't expect much. I always wanted to run a Dark Force user game, and it was a Dark Jedi game, that began the day Darth Vader died. Imagine my surprise when I saw the first new trailers for the Star Wars Battlefront that is scheduled to be released this Christmas, and it showed Imperial Troopers on Endor when the Death Star explodes. Only real difference is that my game started at a secret Dark Jedi training academy/Imperial Base on one of the Sith Home worlds near Hutt space, when the Death Star exploded.

Quote from: GameDaddy;1005516So these hostile folks you speak of are around now, but really weren't around at the dawn of the hobby.

I just didn't see what was 'Old School' about letting two players ruin the game for everyone else.

I have never had too many issues at the table since I was a teen as I played with friends and family once I was an adult.

Are you claiming that in 'Old School' playing there were never assholes? I understand in your personal circles you stuck mostly with friends and so didn't have many encounters but I fail to see what is 'Old School' about that.