Quote from: SethwickI havn't gamed face to face in a long time, because those people aren't intense.

Like Abyssal Maw said, BNG.

I'm ashamed. I didn't pick this one. I thought he just had crap games, I didn't think he had no games at all. Usually I can pick the BNGs! I guess I should just go back to my blanket assumption that if you're a Forger, you're a BNG.

Anyway, what it comes down to is that Sethwick's game advice is coming from someone who doesn't game, because when he followed his game advice, he didn't get the games he wanted. He blames it on the people he played with, but... the one thing all your crap games have in common was you.

We should take game advice from someone who doesn't game, and when he did game, didn't have fun?

See, David R, this is why I said his game advice was no good. If he had this different approach and had a wonderful time, great! But he has a different approach and because of that, doesn't game at all.

My approach pretty consistently leads to everyone having fun. Sethwick's approach leads to him not having fun, and him giving up gaming. I think even a moral relativist might raise their eyebrows at the idea both approaches are equally worthy.

Sethwick, if you keep doing something one way, and it keeps making you unhappy, then it might be a good idea to change your approach. Just a thought. So either give up gaming - including talking about gaming - or open your mind to different approaches.

Fuckin' BNGs.

I think we need a BNG-sign smilie.

Quote from: JimBobOzLike Abyssal Maw said, BNG.

I'm ashamed. I didn't pick this one. I thought he just had crap games, I didn't think he had no games at all. Usually I can pick the BNGs! I guess I should just go back to my blanket assumption that if you're a Forger, you're a BNG.

Anyway, what it comes down to is that Sethwick's game advice is coming from someone who doesn't game, because when he followed his game advice, he didn't get the games he wanted. He blames it on the people he played with, but... the one thing all your crap games have in common was you.

We should take game advice from someone who doesn't game, and when he did game, didn't have fun?

See, David R, this is why I said his game advice was no good. If he had this different approach and had a wonderful time, great! But he has a different approach and because of that, doesn't game at all.

My approach pretty consistently leads to everyone having fun. Sethwick's approach leads to him not having fun, and him giving up gaming. I think even a moral relativist might raise their eyebrows at the idea both approaches are equally worthy.

Sethwick, if you keep doing something one way, and it keeps making you unhappy, then it might be a good idea to change your approach. Just a thought. So either give up gaming - including talking about gaming - or open your mind to different approaches.

Fuckin' BNGs.

I think we need a BNG-sign smilie.

Sure, ignore the fact that I game online. Entirely. I just don't game face to face. I had a bad time gaming face to face. I have a good time gaming online.

What the fuck? Do people just not read? Or do you just focus on one sentence that you like and ignore the rest and use that sentence sans context to discount an arguement?

I thought better of you JimBob. I disagree with you a lot, but I always considered you a very smart guy who argued in an honest manner, but you are simply ignoring a large part of what I say because I don't game face to face.

So, call me a bitter non-gamer if you want. I play an awful lot of RPGs for a bitter non gamer, but what the fuck ever, don't let the facts get in the way of your label.

Quote from: SethwickIs "enjoy spending time with" and "entertained by" really that different? I don't think so... Maybe we are just working off different definitions of "entertain."

I'd say they are fairly different.  Sure, some times and some freinds are entertaining when you hang out with them. Sometimes you just hang out with people because you are comfortable around them and vice versa.

If you really thing 'enjoy being with' and 'entertained' are the same thing, one of your definitions is wonky

Quote from: JimBobOzSee, David R, this is why I said his game advice was no good. If he had this different approach and had a wonderful time, great! But he has a different approach and because of that, doesn't game at all.

My approach pretty consistently leads to everyone having fun. Sethwick's approach leads to him not having fun, and him giving up gaming. I think even a moral relativist might raise their eyebrows at the idea both approaches are equally worthy.

You are correct.

Regards,
David R

Sethwick, there is a big difference between online and face to face play. JimBob's advice works pretty well IME for the reality of face to face games. I don't game online, so my opinion on the subject ain't worth much.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RYou are correct.

Regards,
David R

Only he's assuming I never have fun or rarely have fun and don't game anymore. As is I game atleast one or twice a week on IRC (with atleast one member of these forum atleast) and have fun.

Admittedly, my face to face gaming with friends didn't go so well, but like I said, long time (probably around a year) and I didn't really have the philosophy of GMing I have now. Also, I'm pretty sure I didn't say this GMing style would be for everyone, but it is what I would want from a GM and want as a GM, and it does require intense players, which was the original question posed in the thread.

Quote from: David RSethwick, there is a big difference between online and face to face play. JimBob's advice works pretty well IME for the reality of face to face games. I don't game online, so my opinion on the subject ain't worth much.

Regards,
David R

Eh, I don't think there is a big difference between, saying, playing Marvel Super Heroes in a chatroom and playing it face to face. I mean, people might feel a little more comfortable roleplaying, and you don't get to do voices, and... well, I guess not much else in a technical way.

Quote from: SethwickOnly he's assuming I never have fun or rarely have fun and don't game anymore. As is I game atleast one or twice a week on IRC (with atleast one member of these forum atleast) and have fun.

Admittedly, my face to face gaming with friends didn't go so well, but like I said, long time (probably around a year) and I didn't really have the philosophy of GMing I have now. Also, I'm pretty sure I didn't say this GMing style would be for everyone, but it is what I would want from a GM and want as a GM, and it does require intense players, which was the original question posed in the thread.

The problem, Seth, is that purely online gaming is radically different than table top, which MOST of us do at least part of the time (in my case, exclusively)...

Yes, in Chat only, quiet players ARE going to be a problem... one that they wouldn't be in TT. Maybe not a bad as you present.. I'm not the one to judge that.

So, if you'd stated...say... two freaking days ago while posting that you only IRC'd your games, that would make a HUGE difference in how you were read....

clear?

Quote from: SethwickEh, I don't think there is a big difference between, saying, playing Marvel Super Heroes in a chatroom and playing it face to face. I mean, people might feel a little more comfortable roleplaying, and you don't get to do voices, and... well, I guess not much else in a technical way.

:eek: Well, if you really think that there's no difference or that the differences are negligible, then, there's really nothing to discuss.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: SpikeThe problem, Seth, is that purely online gaming is radically different than table top, which MOST of us do at least part of the time (in my case, exclusively)...

Yes, in Chat only, quiet players ARE going to be a problem... one that they wouldn't be in TT. Maybe not a bad as you present.. I'm not the one to judge that.

So, if you'd stated...say... two freaking days ago while posting that you only IRC'd your games, that would make a HUGE difference in how you were read....

clear?

I don't see how quiet players really present a greater difficulty one way or the other. I would have stated it outright had I thought that was the case. Sorry

As is, I guess we can lay down our differences to that.

But I think that's interesting, what would be some of the primary differences between F2F and chat (not play by post, which I recognize is VERY different, but chat where everyone shows up at the same time and games for 2-3 hours) gaming is?

Quote from: SethwickBut I think that's interesting, what would be some of the primary differences between F2F and chat...

IRC is text only, and only what people take the trouble to type. So you don't have people's facial expressions, the sound and tone of their voice, sharing their cheetos, etc. It's less intimate, more pure words. IRC roleplaying is to face to face roleplaying as reading a play is to seeing it performed. Both are fun things, but they're different things.

In IRC, if someone is quiet, it could be because

• they're busy typing up something long,
• they're bored,
• got another window open with pr0n and having a wank,
• carefully considering what to say next,
• laughing hysterically at what someone else just said
• politely waiting while someone else has some spotlight time
• stumped in confusion as to what to do
• watching enraptured by the genius of the scene before them
• depressed
• computer froze and rebooting
• went to get a sandwich

and so on. Whereas in person, I can see immediately which of those is the case. I know if they're bored, delighted, busy doing something else, or what. I have a lot more feedback.

In face-to-face GMing, I can respond to this feedback they're giving me, even the feedback they're not consciously giving me (like a bored expression). In IRC, everything has to be spelled out. Some online GMs won't bother spelling it out, and I can't blame them - it's a lot to spell out. Easier just to let 'em sink or swim.

Because everything has to be spelled out in text online, I can't tell the difference between a player who "just a quiet guy", and a player who's bored, distracted, annoyed, etc. In person I can see the difference between a smile and a frown; online I can't. So, someone being quiet in person may still be telling you quiet a lot, while if they're quiet online they're telling you nothing.

Silence online tells us nothing. For example, if people are arguing on a thread, and one of them doesn't reply any more, what is that telling us? Did they admit defeat? Did they decide the other guy was too stupid to bother talking to? Did they lose the thread, get the flu and stop posting, or what? Online, we have no idea. In person, we'd know - see the person nod thoughtfully and walk away, or wave their hand in disgust, etc.

It's extremely relevant whether you're playing online or face-to-face. The way of running the game is entirely different. You must recognise that it's different, otherwise why would you enjoy one so much, and not the other?

Also, you should realise that when people say "a roleplaying session," they're imagining a bunch of people sitting around a table with their dice and cheetos. They're not imagining several people scattered across the world tapping away at their keyboards. So if you mean the online stuff, you have to be clear about it. Another case where silence tells us nothing.

Quote from: JimBobOzIRC is text only, and only what people take the trouble to type. So you don't have people's facial expressions, the sound and tone of their voice, sharing their cheetos, etc. It's less intimate, more pure words. IRC roleplaying is to face to face roleplaying as reading a play is to seeing it performed. Both are fun things, but they're different things.

In IRC, if someone is quiet, it could be because

• they're busy typing up something long,
• they're bored,
• got another window open with pr0n and having a wank,
• carefully considering what to say next,
• laughing hysterically at what someone else just said
• politely waiting while someone else has some spotlight time
• stumped in confusion as to what to do
• watching enraptured by the genius of the scene before them
• depressed
• computer froze and rebooting
• went to get a sandwich

and so on. Whereas in person, I can see immediately which of those is the case. I know if they're bored, delighted, busy doing something else, or what. I have a lot more feedback.

In face-to-face GMing, I can respond to this feedback they're giving me, even the feedback they're not consciously giving me (like a bored expression). In IRC, everything has to be spelled out. Some online GMs won't bother spelling it out, and I can't blame them - it's a lot to spell out. Easier just to let 'em sink or swim.

Because everything has to be spelled out in text online, I can't tell the difference between a player who "just a quiet guy", and a player who's bored, distracted, annoyed, etc. In person I can see the difference between a smile and a frown; online I can't. So, someone being quiet in person may still be telling you quiet a lot, while if they're quiet online they're telling you nothing.

Silence online tells us nothing. For example, if people are arguing on a thread, and one of them doesn't reply any more, what is that telling us? Did they admit defeat? Did they decide the other guy was too stupid to bother talking to? Did they lose the thread, get the flu and stop posting, or what? Online, we have no idea. In person, we'd know - see the person nod thoughtfully and walk away, or wave their hand in disgust, etc.

It's extremely relevant whether you're playing online or face-to-face. The way of running the game is entirely different. You must recognise that it's different, otherwise why would you enjoy one so much, and not the other?

Also, you should realise that when people say "a roleplaying session," they're imagining a bunch of people sitting around a table with their dice and cheetos. They're not imagining several people scattered across the world tapping away at their keyboards. So if you mean the online stuff, you have to be clear about it. Another case where silence tells us nothing.

I guess I'm just not good at reading people. I don't get much more feedback in person. And you gave a long list of what silence can mean online, it can also mean a variety of things in real life (I believe that was one of the points you made earlier, that silence doesn't neccessarily mean one is miserable).

As for me enjoying one more than the other, I know why and it has nothing to do with different mediums. It's the people. Online, I have access to a much wider pool of gamers, and not just those who happen to be nearby me. So I get to game with great GMs who I would have to drive for a few days or take a plane to see normally.

Quote from: SethwickI guess I'm just not good at reading people. I don't get much more feedback in person. And you gave a long list of what silence can mean online, it can also mean a variety of things in real life (I believe that was one of the points you made earlier, that silence doesn't neccessarily mean one is miserable).

You know, you're really not helping your argument here at all, or your public image for that matter.

RPGPundit