How many of you are actually NOT gaming at this time (with "not gaming" defined as having been at least one month without playing a game)? And if so, how long since you did?
I'll raise my hand to this one.
Right now work is changing our schedules from 10 hour shifts to 12 hour shifts on different days, so I'm having trouble nailing a regular time down. So, no game at the moment.
Instead, I've been doing demos at local conventions (the two most recent were pitiful due to low attendance due to poor advertising) and helping with the gaming charities of Extra Life and Save vs Hunger by running one-shots for them.
So, I'd say that I am not gaming regularly at this time. The last convention was three weeks ago.
I think since we missed this weeks season that puts us a month out from the last season of The Great Pendragon Campaign.
We normally do every other week but have missed to due to life.
Prior to that we've been more or less steady for 6 months or so. Prior to that I was in a different group that was steady for a year. Before that nothing since I came back from Korea (where I gamed fairly regularly if infrequently).
I was on a break for a bit last year. I had burned out on GMing for the current group. Too much drama not enough gaming. However I've fallen in with a new group of players and have had a chance to play. Currently we are on our second session of Numenera, before that it was Mutants and Masterminds. Once we are done with Numenera, I'll be taking a turn as GM, something I'm actually looking forward to again.
I'm gaming.
Due to life issues and depression, I've not played since December of last year.
I hope to change this with an upcoming GURPS game run by ExploderWizard.
Oh wait, I did teach one of my cousins girlfriend Pathfinder a few months back.
Are we talking video games, RPGs, wargames, or just all games?
-Brandon F.
Quote from: BrandonKF;748676Are we talking video games, RPGs, wargames, or just all games?
-Brandon F.
RPGs, I thought.
Quote from: jeff37923;748678RPGs, I thought.
Same.
If it's more that I play board games every week and video games nearly everyday.
I'm playing in a weekly Pathfinder game but I'd like to be running games more often than I have been lately.
Gaming every week, 4hrs on Friday nights (1e AD&D). Probably going to increase by a lot over the summer with two roll20 games (one running, 1e AD&D, one playing, jury is still out) and my other group that usually plays Hero System getting back together.
Since my group only met a half-dozen times a year anyway, I'm a non-gamer by Pundit's silly definition.
Quote from: jeff37923;748678RPGs, I thought.
Quote from: Piestrio;748681Same.
If it's more that I play board games every week and video games nearly everyday.
Thanks for clarification.
Play-by-post roleplaying game I do often.
No board games. No neighbors to play chess, Risk, Heavy Gear, Jovian Chronicles, or OGRE with.
No video games. Don't own a TV or console.
-Brandon F.
I haven't played an RPG in close to 10 years. Couple of weeks ago I joined the Amber PbP game that Renen advertised. Not sure if that counts.
Otherwise it's just been WoW and I quit that a couple years ago.
I run two games per week.
One group of 6 and another group of 4.
No player overlap in either group.
Each session is about 4 hours long.
I run my D&D home brew... and tweak rules based on actual play.
I game usually a couple times a week, typically one chatroom & one tabletop. I haven't had a break of more than a few weeks since 2010, I think. My last significant break was the year after my son was born, 2007-2008.
I usually play in a game once a month, and run a session once a month.
Quote from: Doughdee222;748692I haven't played an RPG in close to 10 years. Couple of weeks ago I joined the Amber PbP game that Renen advertised. Not sure if that counts.
Otherwise it's just been WoW and I quit that a couple years ago.
You're free of the addiction? :)
-Brandon F.
I aim for two sessions / 8 hours at the LFGS game day each month, but work schedules have been too crazy so that's been erratic, convention attendance has been erratic and I can't commit to a weekly group unfortunately. I missed our May event because I was trashed from the Sabaton / Iced Earth concert the night before. Who the hell knew that Iced Earth would result in a mosh pit?
But that said, I have mostly been a "binge gamer" for the past decade where our crew will get together for marathon 3 day weekend sessions where we get in 30 hours of gaming and do a minicampaign. So I certainly average out 8 hours/month, just sometimes its a couple months of non-gaming.
Once a week, 13th Age at the moment.
I don't play CCGs, LARP, MMORPGs (ever), and I'm not currently playing any CRPGs either and the only board games I've played recently are children's ones with my eldest.
I think I haven't gamed close to exactly 1 month. I don't mind since for 6 months before that I was consistently gaming around 1,5 times a week between a Pathfinder and a 3.5 game.
Quote from: RPGPundit;748668How many of you are actually NOT gaming at this time (with "not gaming" defined as having been at least one month without playing a game)? And if so, how long since you did?
I was playing in a weekly game for months (and was in two weekly games, running one, prior to that), but you picked the tail end of a two month gap to ask this (I'm supposed to start running a new game next week).
I'm starting a game the 31st of this month-blind audition.
It's been just shy of two years since I gamed in the flesh; PbP or email doesn't count-neither of these proved to be worth the time.
Looking very forward to getting back in the saddle.;)
I game every two or three weeks. We alternate between my OD&D game using Benoist's Marmoreal Tomb of Garm Patu'ul, and my buddy Bland Joe Dwarf's Vampire: The Requiem game.
We also had a L5R d20 game that's been on hiatus for nearly three months now.
Quote from: BrandonKF;748704You're free of the addiction? :)
Very easy to shake. I cling to it currently because my wife loves it, but we play 3, rarely 4 hours a week. We don't regularly raid or do PvP, mostly we just quest and do the odd LFG dungeon. Once in a blue moon we get into a raid.
If it was up to me I'd just play Guild Wars 2 and maybe Diablo 3.
I run a game on Tuesday evenings and a game every other weekend. On Tuesdays we've missed the last two session due to work related stuff, but we've been going strong for years. The weekends group is harder to schedule. We've been trying for 2 months,and now it seems that we're getting together again.
So, a regular weekly game and an irregular bi-weekly game.
Unfortunately, while school is in session, don't have time. So it has been about a nine months since I played anything. I will get about 3 months of play time, and then back on hiatus until my degree is finished.
My group has been playing mostly (say 80% of the time) boardgames for at least the past year.
Another "non-gamer" here. I'm in two groups, one of which I'm almost always the GM for, both of which game very irregularly. I also tend to spend a lot of time in prep limbo...
Since it seems that the only game I can get people to play regularly doesn't count (Magic the Gathering EDH) and I'm letting the frustration of trying to run yet another PbP game fade a little, I'm in the "non-Gamer" camp too.
=
My gaming came to a sudden halt when my mother-in-law suddenly passed away. As her house needs to be remodeled before it can be sold, we are now at her house -- 2+ hours drive from the 9 players in my game. One of the players has taken it over as temporary GM, but it will be sometime in July before I am back there for more than a few hours at a time -- and that's if my wife doesn't decide to trade houses once the remodel is done. Either way, I doubt there will any type of actual gaming for me until August or September. :(
It is a rather weird definition of "non-gamer".
I'd count as a gamer. I've been in a weekly group since 2010, and had a prior weekly group from 2007 to 2010.
One weekly game and two roughly-monthly campaigns, so... regular, like.
I'm about to start GM'ing new campaign this Friday. So freakin' excited.
However I have not played since late March because of a grotesque campaign crash and burn which basically involved me telling my regular gaming group of 10 years to fuck off and stop wasting my time. I was at fault too, but these people caused me so much stress and frustration over the years. Since I severed, I've never felt better.
My new players are awesome people who actually act like adults* (most of them have responsibilities beyond struggling to choose between which 40K army to paint first). And they're much more laid back and never use the expression "my character's INTEGRITY" or "I don't care: that's what my CHARACTER would do". :banghead:
* the irony of this statement is not lost on me: I realize that packing up my things and leaving the game table in a huff is pretty juvenile, but I feel better now so whatever
Gaming pretty regularly. Playing in 4E D&D campaign every other Friday, running GURPS fantasy on alternate Fridays and playing AD&D or running OD&D( we swap campaigns every few months) every Tuesday at the FLGS.
I play weekly, so I count as a gamer.
I know a lot of people who play at lads weekends, or at conventions, but don;t have a regular group. They consider themselves as gamers, but only play 3 or 4 times a year.
About two months back I had a month long break due to scheduling issues, but it seems mostly sorted out for now.
By pundit's definition, I would presently be a non-gamer.
Was suppose to play a pickup game of OD&D yesterday, but the other players flaked out and didn't show up. Ended up playing a few games of chess with the DM instead.
I run a roleplaying game pretty much weekly at the store and play a couple wargames a week.
After two years of running a store. I'm getting to where I wouldn't mind being a non-gamer for a while.
It very much means running and playing what other people want and leaving your own interests to lie fallow.
Non-gamer present.
As far as for how long its been...well....its been a bit.
As for "why," my guess its that I just don't know when to not be busy at work or otherwise; my wife chides me about this often - to the point where she pointedly states things about slowing down/enjoying life and so on.
Love the games, love the culture (and all its idiosyncrasies) and certainly enjoy catching up with things on-line but I just can't relax enough to get things going otherwise.
I game so much at the moment I'm too ashamed to say how much on an RPG forum :D.
I guess I technically fit the description if it's a month. Life happens, and we haven't gamed in just over a month. Which is OK, because I've been very busy writing and doing layout anyway. I will be running my playtests next month, so I'll get plenty of gaming in then.
Quote from: Rincewind1;748771I game so much at the moment I'm too ashamed to say how much on an RPG forum :D.
Out with it, it's not like any of us are in a position to criticise you.
Aren't people answering opposite to what the pundit is asking? In that vein, counting my pbp's, yes I am a "gamer". Not much into labels though.
I think I would go mad if I didn't game at least once a week. I live above my work, so going off to game is really the only time I leave a one-block radius.
I am, however, finding it interesting how many regular posters are not actually regular gamers.
//Panjumanju
Quote from: Panjumanju;748800I am, however, finding it interesting how many regular posters are not actually regular gamers.
It might be fun to correlate with people who complain about other gaming-related websites being full of non-gamers...
Quote from: BrandonKF;748704You're free of the addiction? :)
-Brandon F.
Yes I am! Took a while, a long period of slowdown but I did break it. Basically I had done everything I could in WoW, there was nothing left for me to prove. My guild raided only at 1:00 AM which I didn't care for, I was wealthy to the point of "I don't care" and was just tired of the whole deal. I sometimes miss it, miss my friends, miss being helpful and useful to people but not enough to go back. Maybe someday, but not now.
Quote from: Doughdee222;748806Yes I am! Took a while, a long period of slowdown but I did break it. Basically I had done everything I could in WoW, there was nothing left for me to prove. My guild raided only at 1:00 AM which I didn't care for, I was wealthy to the point of "I don't care" and was just tired of the whole deal. I sometimes miss it, miss my friends, miss being helpful and useful to people but not enough to go back. Maybe someday, but not now.
The wife and I had 5 accounts between us (2 for her, 3 for me) and now she barely plays (GW2) and I play Guild Wars 2 occasionally (meaning more when I'm not tabletop gaming, and less when I am) , though we went cold turkey and just stopped playing anything for a month or two and I purposefully take a month off every spring from all online gaming just to clear the mind.
I play minimum once per week, usually twice.
Quote from: Rincewind1;748771I game so much at the moment I'm too ashamed to say how much on an RPG forum :D.
I may be able to challenge you for the title.
I'm in a weekly gaming group. Now, in May it just so happens that in my new job I'll be working Tuesday nights, when my gaming group meets. But that's short term. Despite not "in the last month," fuck yes I'm a gamer.
I found a regular gaming group that meets on a weekly basis in a small town in South Dakota. I STILL have huge heaps of no sympathy for people who complain that they "can't find a game."
I'm in a weekly gaming group, have been since 1991. We missed last week but we played the week before and we're playing again tomorrow.
I've started playing Magic or board games every couple of weeks as well. I don't play computer games though.
Quote from: K Peterson;748736It is a rather weird definition of "non-gamer".
It's a dumbass definition of non-gamer.
Back when I was single, between camping and backpacking I spent a hundred nights a year outdoors. Now I get in a weekly trip once or twice a year. Does that make me not a camper or a backpacker?
Stupid.
I think I see what pundit is saying; the question isn't "Well, you don't game enough, do you?" but rather a more binary thing: you either game, or you do not game.
Thing is, I have seen posts by people at Big Throbbing Purple (not trying to turn this into a thread about them, just bear with me) where they proudly say "NO I am NOT a 'gamer'!" and these same people will pontificate about gaming, about what is Proper and what is Unacceptable, and so on.
I mean, I think it's fair to say even if you only are getting your game on every month or six weeks, or you've hit a dry spell from a formerly long time of gaming that you're still a gamer.
But, I think there's folks who have simply given up on gaming either having disavowed it completely or never did in any real sense whose opinions are Fucking Terrible and should never be given any consideration whatsoever. Those are "bitter non-gamers".
That's all my opinion though, pundit may have totally different thoughts.
Game weekly (two games on alternating weeks.) Seeing if I can put together another biweekly game for the kids.
I have not gamed since December, due to various other commitments taking up my evenings. Although those should come to an end this December.
If creating characters doesn't count, next week marks the end of a short dry spell. At the end of the summer it'll probably dry up again.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;748863Thing is, I have seen posts by people at Big Throbbing Purple (not trying to turn this into a thread about them, just bear with me) where they proudly say "NO I am NOT a 'gamer'!" and these same people will pontificate about gaming, about what is Proper and what is Unacceptable, and so on.
I wouldn't call myself a gamer, though, both because I have issues with labels and groupings, and because I don't want to associate myself with the nerdrage that sometimes spills out of it; the "gamer" stereotype is incredibly toxic (And I've seen some shit, hanging around video game forums), and I just want no part of that.
I know that the great majority of roleplayers are nothing like the stereotype, I can probably count the amount of catpissmen I've met on the fingers of one hand, but I'm not interesting in spending my free time reclaiming the word; the nerdrage folks can have it as far as I'm concerned. I love roleplaying games, it would take a lot to get me to skip a session, I'll happily join in a discussion about roleplaying, I just don't like being called a gamer.
Quote from: Ladybird;748879I wouldn't call myself a gamer, though, both because I have issues with labels and groupings, and because I don't want to associate myself with the nerdrage that sometimes spills out of it; the "gamer" stereotype is incredibly toxic (And I've seen some shit, hanging around video game forums), and I just want no part of that.
I know that the great majority of roleplayers are nothing like the stereotype, I can probably count the amount of catpissmen I've met on the fingers of one hand, but I'm not interesting in spending my free time reclaiming the word; the nerdrage folks can have it as far as I'm concerned. I love roleplaying games, it would take a lot to get me to skip a session, I'll happily join in a discussion about roleplaying, I just don't like being called a gamer.
Seconded.
At least where I'm from, the term "gamer" refers to a bloated man-child who fritters his life away playing games because he isn't competent to do anything else.
I play D&D on a regular (weekly) basis, and will run a game when I have the time. But that just makes me a D&D player, not a "gamer."
Not gaming at this time, and its been over 3 years. Last game I played was D&D 4E. I hope to be able to get a Shadowrun game or Star Wars:EotE game started soon.
Apply whichever label you like, you're not bitter non-gamers. I'm sorry you seem to think that "gamer" is an insult. I call catpissmen catpissmen and that's that. You can deal with your own emotional/social baggage. Call yourselves the Mickey Mouse Club for all I give a fuck; fact is, you game rather than not game.
Yeah, I was told I was being elitist by judging a game by actually playing it. I was like, huh?
Yeah, if somebody wants to attach a value to "gamer" beyond "somebody who plays games semi regularly as a hobby" that's their problem, not mine.
I think Pundit's definition, for the purpose of this thread, is a good one. I don't think you can do any activity less than once a month and still say you do it regularly. I'm sure he does not mean 'gamer' in a sub-cultural sense, but strictly as a noun.
I think it's a sound evaluation, especially when people get to explain their circumstance with posts.
//Panjumanju
I run a weekly D&D 5e game right now, that gets missed occasionally when we fail to have a quorum but generally we have most games. And I am in a weekly Numenera game, but I've been missing that a lot lately. So yes, I am currently a gamer according to this definition.
I'm somewhat ashamed to admit that I'm not a gamer. I haven't taken part in a regular TTRPG group for a couple of years.
My lifestyle doesn't lend itself to regular gaming sessions and I feel guilty if I join a group and then don't turn up to 25-40% of the sessions. It feels like I'm disrespecting the GM and the other players.
Sometimes I get the WFRP2e corebook down from the bookshelf and fondle it. My girlfriend looks at me like I'm some kind of freak. I plan to convene a group around our kitchen table (it seats eight) at some point in retaliation.
There has been no reason for me to tell you any of this. This confession has meant nothing....
Quote from: shuddemell;748728Unfortunately, while school is in session, don't have time. So it has been about a nine months since I played anything. I will get about 3 months of play time, and then back on hiatus until my degree is finished.
I read that the average American student studies for 12 hours per week. I take it you do more? :D
Quote from: Black Vulmea;748861It's a dumbass definition of non-gamer.
Back when I was single, between camping and backpacking I spent a hundred nights a year outdoors. Now I get in a weekly trip once or twice a year. Does that make me not a camper or a backpacker?
Stupid.
Agreed. I mean, I went on vacation for a couple of weeks, which required me to work superhard for the month before that to get all my projects done at work before leaving.
Apparently because I did that and didn't have time for TTRPGs for one month, I stopped being a gamer.
I game weekly if not more. I have too much free time on my hands.
There's obviously a difference between someone who hasn't gamed for two months (especially if there's some reason why, and especially if the plan is to game sometime within the next couple of months) and someone who hasn't gamed in two years and has no forseeable likelihood of doing so any time soon.
But the need for some kind of demarcation was to delineate between someone who's a very active gamer RIGHT NOW and someone who isn't. Likewise, to avoid allowing certain people from saying "well, I haven't actually played in or run a game in four years, but I still consider myself a gamer!"
RPGPundit
We aim to game weekly on Tuesdays 6-9pm. I DMed last year. We had none December because of various holidays, and January was spent with me saying, "I'll run something," and our guy Grant saying, "no, I will, I just have to organise the house rules," etc. So we started in February.
I've had 24 game sessions since 2013 July 1st. I'm happy with this, it was my goal to have it either every fortnight on average, or else a good run of weekly sessions for 6 months and then a break.
It's been 9 of them this year since far. It's supposed to be weekly, but we get the occasional day when 3 of the players are sick, or the DM is away for work, etc.
We run an open game table at a store, so we get anything from 4 to 8 players. It was 7 last time, plus 2 henchmen and 3 men-at-arms, plus lots of noise in the background from other gamers and card-players, when we had a combat I didn't know what the fuck was going on, we need a whiteboard or something.
Quote from: Panjumanju;748899I think Pundit's definition, for the purpose of this thread, is a good one. I don't think you can do any activity less than once a month and still say you do it regularly. I'm sure he does not mean 'gamer' in a sub-cultural sense, but strictly as a noun.
So if you can't get laid you're not gay anymore?
You're a gamer if you game
or want to. But it's fair to ask how many of us are actually getting laid. Er, I mean, actually gaming.
It's the whole "bitter non-gamers" crap that infests this place like social justice wank on that purple place. Really I think "bitter" is the key issue rather than how often one plays. I'm playing very frequently and hating it lately. Makes me crabby.
First they came for the non-gamers...
Quote from: RPGPundit;748668How many of you are actually NOT gaming at this time (with "not gaming" defined as having been at least one month without playing a game)? And if so, how long since you did?
Last Game session I ran was in January. Wednesday January 31st to be specific.
Its mostly been an issue of scheduling - got 4 to 7 people that WANT to game - we just can't make the schedules match
up.
- Ed C.
It depends on whether pbp counts. I haven't had a face to face group in about 10 years. I am almost always playing in or running a pbp game.
Quote from: Dan Vincze;748883At least where I'm from, the term "gamer" refers to a bloated man-child who fritters his life away playing games because he isn't competent to do anything else.
I resent that. I am NOT bloated.
Quote from: Ladybird;748879I wouldn't call myself a gamer, though, both because I have issues with labels and groupings, and because I don't want to associate myself with the nerdrage that sometimes spills out of it; the "gamer" stereotype is incredibly toxic (And I've seen some shit, hanging around video game forums), and I just want no part of that.
Yeah, I'd like to think that I am more than the sum of my hobbies so I don't call myself a gamer either.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;749732So if you can't get laid you're not gay anymore?
You're a gamer if you game or want to.
But it's fair to ask how many of us are actually getting laid. Er, I mean, actually gaming.
Roleplaying games are a *hobby*, not a lifestyle, and not a gender orientation. This analysis is like exercising. Are you exercising frequently? "Well, I last exercised two months ago - but I'm totally exercising, yeah." No.
It does not matter how badly you want to, if you haven't gamed in a month (which is a generous time) then you're not a gamer right now. You could well get back into it later, but it's clearly not a top priority for you if a month is lapsing.
//Panjumanju
We had a great session last night. No combat, just a lot of puzzle solving and role playing concerning how to kill something that at first glance seems unkillable. Players had a great time, and they were very inventive. Caught me off guard most of the time, but like all good sessions the rolling with the unexpected worked out for the better each time.
And the truth is I hadn't thought through how to kill the thing they're after myself - the player discussion is what gave me the ideas necessary to firm up how this thing works.
Quote from: David Johansen;749753It's the whole "bitter non-gamers" crap that infests this place like social justice wank on that purple place. Really I think "bitter" is the key issue rather than how often one plays. I'm playing very frequently and hating it lately. Makes me crabby.
Why oh why are you voluntarily doing something so frequently that you hate?
No gaming is better than bad gaming.
I play roughly twice a week. Right now I'm running a Pulp game (shifting from Hero to Supers!), and playing in a Superhero game (already shifted from Hero to Supers!). We generally play about 75% of the time, depending on time of year.
I can't remember the last time I had a significant "gaming gap". Pretty sure I've gamed at least once a month for the past ... 25 years or so.
I'd like to add something to this topic.
How long since you last gamed as a GM?
How long since you last gamed as a player?
Three weeks ago I gamed on the player side of the screen. For the past two weekends I've gamed on the GM side of the screen.
Quote from: Gabriel2;749823I'd like to add something to this topic.
I'd say it averages out two sessions per week. I GM about half the time. Play the other half.
I'm going through a new-kid+buying-a-house rpg-drought. Hopefully I will get back to some steady bi-weekly campaigning in August or there about.
Quote from: Gabriel2;749823How long since you last gamed as a GM?
These days I absolutely refuse to DM anything longer than a one-shot evening game.
I got sick and tired of being the unofficial "babysitter in chief" of a bunch of flakey 30+ year old gamers.
Perhaps "Time since last game:" could be added to our little info-blurb next to each of our posts, such that our opinions could be weighted based on the last time we played a game. Perhaps our posts could gradually fade away after, say, a month from our last session.
Quote from: Panjumanju;749801You could well get back into it later, but it's clearly not a top priority for you if a month is lapsing.
Grow up. It
is just a hobby, we're all adults here, and we all have adult responsibilities that sometimes have to take precedence over our hobbies. Would we like to game more? I'm sure some of us would. Is that always possible? No, the world doesn't stop because you really want to investigate the Caves of Hugh Givesafuck.
I'd think much worse of someone that blew off their real life for a game, than someone who dropped out of a game due to their real life.
Quote from: Ladybird;749859Grow up. It is just a hobby, we're all adults here, and we all have adult responsibilities that sometimes have to take precedence over our hobbies. Would we like to game more? I'm sure some of us would. Is that always possible? No, the world doesn't stop because you really want to investigate the Caves of Hugh Givesafuck.
I don't understand why you're getting personal. You're making the assumption that I'm arguing that a regular gaming schedule is somehow a superiour lifestyle. It's obviously not. There are always other, superiour, priorities in life. This isn't a qualitative judgement - people who are playing regularly are not better or wiser than people who are not.
But if you have not played a roleplaying game in a month, you are not playing regularly. This is a participatory medium. Your daydreams and intentions to game do not count.
If you haven't jogged in a month, you are not jogging regularly. You can't call yourself a jogger. If you haven't painted in a month, you're not painting regularly. You're not a painter. This is not an issue of maturity, it's word definition.
//Panjumanju
It's been over a month since our last RPG session, but I have been doing plenty of board and card gaming in the interim.
Actually, we're supposed to play this Sunday, so the drought will finally end.
Quote from: Panjumanju;749890I don't understand why you're getting personal. You're making the assumption that I'm arguing that a regular gaming schedule is somehow a superiour lifestyle. It's obviously not. There are always other, superiour, priorities in life. This isn't a qualitative judgement - people who are playing regularly are not better or wiser than people who are not.
But if you have not played a roleplaying game in a month, you are not playing regularly. This is a participatory medium. Your daydreams and intentions to game do not count.
Oh fair enough, I misread you. Apologies.
Quote from: Panjumanju;749890I don't understand why you're getting personal. You're making the assumption that I'm arguing that a regular gaming schedule is somehow a superiour lifestyle. It's obviously not. There are always other, superiour, priorities in life. This isn't a qualitative judgement - people who are playing regularly are not better or wiser than people who are not.
But if you have not played a roleplaying game in a month, you are not playing regularly. This is a participatory medium. Your daydreams and intentions to game do not count.
If you haven't jogged in a month, you are not jogging regularly. You can't call yourself a jogger. If you haven't painted in a month, you're not painting regularly. You're not a painter. This is not an issue of maturity, it's word definition.
//Panjumanju
So teachers who get the summer off or take a research sabbatical are no longer teachers? Interesting. Someone call Webster.
The idea that you stop being something the moment you have a short break in it (and a month is a short period of time really) is asinine.
If you wanted to say "how many of you gamed in the last month" then that would have made sense. Making that the definition of gamer doesn't.
So does that mean a guy who hadn't played in ten years but played one game yesterday is a gamer, but the guy who has played weekly for ten years but had to take a short break for work or family reasons isn't? That is just stupid.
My brother is home with horrible kidney stones that have lasted for 3 weeks, and our game the week before was cancelled because I was on vacation. Is he suddenly not a gamer either?
Quote from: Exploderwizard;749808Why oh why are you voluntarily doing something so frequently that you hate?
No gaming is better than bad gaming.
Well, a couple years ago I started a gaming store. And I'm significantly financially tied to it right now. And running games is part of how I'm making it work. Running games for whiney, obnoxious, vulgar teenagers who hate accepting the consequences for their character's actions and want to jump games every session even when I prepped for what we started last session.
As a result I'm constantly unprepared and not doing the best job of DMing. At the moment they're on an AD&D 1e kick so maybe I can make it stick. One kid even bought the rules.
But yeah, making a business out of your hobby sure sucks the joy right out of it.
Regular weekly Pathfinder game.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;748863Thing is, I have seen posts by people at Big Throbbing Purple (not trying to turn this into a thread about them, just bear with me) where they proudly say "NO I am NOT a 'gamer'!" and these same people will pontificate about gaming, about what is Proper and what is Unacceptable, and so on.
Why would somebody DO such a thing?!?
It'd be like, "I don't like motorcycles!", while being on the Harley-Davidson website. Ok, fine, go somewhere else and find something you do like, and we'll keep talking about motorcycles, here.
Seriously, why piss in some ones Cheerios, if you don't have to?:banghead:
Apparently this is a confessional topic. "Forgive me father for I have sinned, it has been X days since my last session."
I'm a gamer, I play RPGs, I GM and play. I run two current campaigns, have a third on hiatus, and am a player in three others (four by tomorrow), one play by post right here. How many benedictions am I lauded?
:p
Quote from: Koltar;749770Last Game session I ran was in January. Wednesday January 31st to be specific.
Its mostly been an issue of scheduling - got 4 to 7 people that WANT to game - we just can't make the schedules match
up.
- Ed C.
If you say "We're playing fortnightly Mondays, minimum 2 players", I suspect you could get a campaign going no problem.
I expect my players to tell me if they're not coming, but I'm happy to run with between 2 & 7 (1 on 1 can feel a bit icky...), so I can combine a fairly high pressure job with two fortnightly tabletop games.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;749808Why oh why are you voluntarily doing something so frequently that you hate?
No gaming is better than bad gaming.
I've learned so much from the bad games I've played, definitely wouldn't want those hours back. :D OTOH if the GM is really bad, I only play once. I'll play a flawed game for several months, though.
Quote from: Gabriel2;749823I'd like to add something to this topic.
How long since you last gamed as a GM?
How long since you last gamed as a player?
Three weeks ago I gamed on the player side of the screen. For the past two weekends I've gamed on the GM side of the screen.
I GM twice a week on average - Sunday or Monday tabletop, Thursday or Friday online chatroom. My last game was chatroom Thursday, then tabletop Monday, then tabletop (unusually) the day before - so three last week.
I think my last game as a player was tabletop Labyrinth Lord January or February this year; it was an irregular ca monthly game.
Quote from: Ladybird;749859I'd think much worse of someone that blew off their real life for a game, than someone who dropped out of a game due to their real life.
It's as important as any other hobby. It's as important as my wife's Rugby (IMO, doubt she'd agree). It's not as important as doing my job well. But it really pisses me off when people blow off a game, with other people relying on them, for other equally or more trivial leisure interests.
Quote from: CRKrueger;749950So teachers who get the summer off or take a research sabbatical are no longer teachers? Interesting. Someone call Webster.
I guess I'd go with "haven't taught for a year" as the divider.
Quote from: S'mon;749971It's as important as any other hobby. It's as important as my wife's Rugby (IMO, doubt she'd agree). It's not as important as doing my job well. But it really pisses me off when people blow off a game, with other people relying on them, for other equally or more trivial leisure interests.
I think this is a reasonable enough position to take, depending on how you judge "equally or more trivial leisure interests". If someone blows off a game because they want to attend some rare, one-night-only event that only comes around once or twice a year at most that's fair enough. (Like, if a player of mine were a huge Prince fan and they had this once-in-a-lifetime VIP ticket to a Prince concert, I'm not going to ask them to bin the ticket for the sake of the game.)
If you blow off the weekly game to hang out with people you hang out with on a regular basis anyway, or sit on your couch playing videogames, or whatever then I have less sympathy. (Unless the reason you want to stay home is because you have a cold or something, in which case yeah, please stay at home and avoid infecting the rest of us, we appreciate it and want you to get well soon.) It'd also bug me if it turned out the thing you were blowing us off for could have been rescheduled, but you didn't reschedule for our sakes, because fuck you, you knew Wednesday was game night.
EDIT: Anyway, updated my signature to include most recent session. I don't give two shits how regularly you game but since it seems some people care how often people on here game I might as well head them off this way.
Quote from: Gabriel2;749823How long since you last gamed as a GM?
5 days ago.
Quote from: Gabriel2;749823How long since you last gamed as a player?
Nearly 2 years ago.
Quote from: Warthur;749973I don't give two shits how regularly you game but since it seems some people care how often people on here game I might as well head them off this way.
I'm not overly concerned. Just idle curiousity. I know I go through dry spells where I just don't want to do the RPG thing because of just feeling down or not having the spark of imagination firing like it should. I hope I'm not alone.
I'm in a Monday night regular group, currently GMing the Great Pendragon Campaign, though I'm running an unrelated short 20s scenario this Monday then someone else will run for a few weeks - we just ended the Romance period and I need to catch my breath and prep the next phase of the GPC.
Quote from: Gabriel2;749982I'm not overly concerned. Just idle curiousity. I know I go through dry spells where I just don't want to do the RPG thing because of just feeling down or not having the spark of imagination firing like it should. I hope I'm not alone.
We have short hiatuses throughout the year on games I run, mostly because while I love gaming, I'm also not a very social person, and there are times where a month will come along that I don't want to interact with people. (And no, I have no problems with my social skills, I just enjoy being alone a lot).
If someone else is running a game, I'll probably go, because I don't like being a no show for an ongoing, but there is a lot of times I'm the only person running.
Quote from: CRKrueger;749950So teachers who get the summer off or take a research sabbatical are no longer teachers? Interesting. Someone call Webster.
Oh, come on! This isn't a universal definition of "gamer" to put in the dictionary of RPG terms - this was something that Pundit laid out in the moment in order to have a specified term to ask his question so we wouldn't get three pages of "What is a gamer, anyway?"
If you can think of a better definition for the purposes of this thread, then argue it, and stop being so needlessly persnickety.
//Panjumanju
I have GMed every other week on a regular basis for the last 20 years (since I got out of the Army).
I have sadly not played or GM'd anything substantial for far too long.
I think I managed a short one-on-one sometime last year, ....
Non-gamers? Hanging's too good for them. Burning's too good for them! They should be torn into little bitsy pieces and buried alive!
(http://i48.photobucket.com/albums/f219/OblivionDC/aa_hanovermutating.jpg)
Quote from: Panjumanju;750014If you can think of a better definition for the purposes of this thread, then argue it, and stop being so needlessly persnickety.
//Panjumanju
The easy solution is to extend the time period and go for more regularity than immediate. Say, have you played X number of times in the last year, or two years.
Think about it. The definition Pundit put forward says that a person who gamed once in the last 10 years, but it happened to be this month, is a gamer, while someone who has taken a month long break after playing weekly games for 10 years isn't.
(And actually, I would be more likely to use the term inactive gamer than non-gamer for someone who hasn't been playing recently, especially if the desire is still there to play, but circumstances aren't cooperating).
Quote from: Emperor Norton;750110The easy solution is to extend the time period and go for more regularity than immediate. Say, have you played X number of times in the last year, or two years.
Think about it. The definition Pundit put forward says that a person who gamed once in the last 10 years, but it happened to be this month, is a gamer, while someone who has taken a month long break after playing weekly games for 10 years isn't.
(And actually, I would be more likely to use the term inactive gamer than non-gamer for someone who hasn't been playing recently, especially if the desire is still there to play, but circumstances aren't cooperating).
You're right. But...
While I agree that 'inactive gamer' is a better term for someone who has not played recently, and that the simple definition of "in the last month" can be muddled by freak occurrences, I don't think your suggestion ultimately works any better.
This thread was never going to offer a reliable categorisation of current vs. not current gaming. I think you've reached a point of diminishing returns where your criteria is certainly more accurate, but it becomes more difficult to assess the resulting data in any practical way. The best this thread can hope for is a vague sense of "oh, isn't that neat" in regards to the proportion of active gamers among posters. Anything beyond that, I think, is approached with increasing pedantry.
I think it's better to leave people to trust. "I haven't gamed in 10 years but I did last week, so I'm not really an active gamer", or - playing to gamer's emotional proclivities: "I gamed every week for 35 years but I've been away for a freak month, so I'd hate to think of myself as not being an active gamer."
Regardless, we get interesting perspectives on how people interact with the hobby. I don't think it needs further categorisation.
//Panjumanju
Quote from: flyerfan1991;749906It's been over a month since our last RPG session, but I have been doing plenty of board and card gaming in the interim.
Actually, we're supposed to play this Sunday, so the drought will finally end.
Ha - I
know you.
You sort of have a group nearby most of the time that might want to game. I've seen all of you shop at the store (LOL)
- Ed
Quote from: dragoner;750068Hanging's too good for them. Burning's too good for them! They should be torn into little bitsy pieces and buried alive!
The most we can hope for is to get buried in secrecy so our graves don't get violated.
Quote from: Panjumanju;750124This thread was never going to offer a reliable categorisation of current vs. not current gaming.
Do you think that was the point?
The whole things stinks of more-gamer-than-thou Puritanism.
I love playing roleplaying games, but I love doing a lot of other things, too. My enjoyment of and engagement with the hobby isn't predicated on some ridiculous arbitrary standard of frequency.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;750184The most we can hope for is to get buried in secrecy so our graves don't get violated.
Nope, then the Loc Nar re-animates you. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpb8QNdVjJA
Game was had. XP delt out. Happy campers all around.
It's been a few months for me, unfortunately. Honestly, I was burned out. Our group wasn't all that tight, either, so it was going to happen sooner or later.
I've done this before. Take up to a year off, just doing other hobbies (right now it's anime and World of Tanks/Warplanes). Then I'll get the bug and go out and find a group and game hardcore for months on end.
Basically, if I'm not posting much, I'm not in an active game. If I'm posting multiple times per day, I'm gaming.
Quote from: dragoner;750189Nope, then the Loc Nar re-animates you. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lpb8QNdVjJA
Maybe you can settle an epic debate I have with another fan of Heavy Metal.
Did the Loc-Nar give Hannover fist his growth power, or did he have that naturally, and the Loc-Nar was just a bystander.
One guy says the Loc nar did it because Hannover was touching it.
The other Guy says Hanover had that power naturally, suggested by Captain Stern's nonchalant reaction when he paid Hannover the cash.
Which is it?
Quote from: Bill;750406Maybe you can settle an epic debate I have with another fan of Heavy Metal.
Did the Loc-Nar give Hannover fist his growth power, or did he have that naturally, and the Loc-Nar was just a bystander.
One guy says the Loc nar did it because Hannover was touching it.
The other Guy says Hanover had that power naturally, suggested by Captain Stern's nonchalant reaction when he paid Hannover the cash.
Which is it?
The Loc Nar gives him the power, imo it is what makes him turn against Stern as well. I always assumed it did though, and I have seen the movie a bunch of times; it is an interesting thought that it the bystander, but through the rest of the stories it seems it is always doing something, like changing people, only the cabbie is able to resist. Stern was a smooth operator, like when he was in court: "Don't worry about it, I got an angle."
Metal Hurlant has the same theme, just with the burnt out core(?) of a planet.
Quote from: Bill;750406Maybe you can settle an epic debate I have with another fan of Heavy Metal.
Did the Loc-Nar give Hannover fist his growth power, or did he have that naturally, and the Loc-Nar was just a bystander.
One guy says the Loc nar did it because Hannover was touching it.
The other Guy says Hanover had that power naturally, suggested by Captain Stern's nonchalant reaction when he paid Hannover the cash.
Which is it?
There's a Captain Stern comic which may have the answer to the question. I've never seen it. I make the completely wild and unsupported assumption that in the dedicated comic that Hannover Fist has the inherent power to monster out.
In the context of Heavy Metal, though, I'd have to say that Hannover is mutated by the Loc Nar. As for his changing back... Captain Stern and the one with the smiley ship (So Beautiful, So Dangerous?) are the unabashed humor pieces in the movie, so I think they're just meant to be enjoyed as such. Or if you want to read something into it, then I'd say Hannover's de-powering was meant to show that money has more power over him than any other force.
"I offered him 35 thousand zoolecks to testify on my behalf."
"Even when those have the will to discard me. My power is not diminished."
Quote from: Black Vulmea;750184The whole things stinks of more-gamer-than-thou Puritanism.
Your impression is unfounded. In fact, the opposite has been the case in this thread.
I see a lot of childish posts from people afraid they might be judged for not gaming, and I don't see any from a frequent gamer trying to count someone else's opinion as invalid. If I've missed one that does, I apologise, but the point is - I think the only conflict here is being generated by misplaced social paranoia.
//Panjumanju
I see. So its childish now to call a stupid definition stupid?
"Have you played in an RPG in the last month?" is an moronic definition of the word gamer.
If you want to know who has played RPGs in the last month, ask that directly. There is no reason to tie that to a definition that doesn't match it (gamer) except to somehow discredit their opinion.
Hell, every time there is a disagreement on this site, you'll see at least one guy pop in to talk about how people with one opinion or another isn't actually a gamer and just masturbates on rules. How about you not ignore the context of the fact that this site regularly uses "not a gamer" as an insult to discredit the opinions of others in arguments, and then see why maybe, just maybe, people don't like being told how they aren't a gamer (and therefore by extension shouldn't be listened to), despite playing regularly for years on end.
Quote from: dragoner;750449The Loc Nar gives him the power, imo it is what makes him turn against Stern as well. I always assumed it did though, and I have seen the movie a bunch of times; it is an interesting thought that it the bystander, but through the rest of the stories it seems it is always doing something, like changing people, only the cabbie is able to resist. Stern was a smooth operator, like when he was in court: "Don't worry about it, I got an angle."
Metal Hurlant has the same theme, just with the burnt out core(?) of a planet.
Actually isn't it a born power of Hanover Fiste in the original comics?
Quote from: Gabriel2;750456There's a Captain Stern comic which may have the answer to the question. I've never seen it. I make the completely wild and unsupported assumption that in the dedicated comic that Hannover Fist has the inherent power to monster out.
In the context of Heavy Metal, though, I'd have to say that Hannover is mutated by the Loc Nar. As for his changing back... Captain Stern and the one with the smiley ship (So Beautiful, So Dangerous?) are the unabashed humor pieces in the movie, so I think they're just meant to be enjoyed as such. Or if you want to read something into it, then I'd say Hannover's de-powering was meant to show that money has more power over him than any other force.
"I offered him 35 thousand zoolecks to testify on my behalf."
"Even when those have the will to discard me. My power is not diminished."
He certainly does in Running out of Time, but I think that's definitely after Loc - Nar storyline in Heavy Metal.
Quote from: Emperor Norton;750483I see. So its childish now to call a stupid definition stupid?
"Have you played in an RPG in the last month?" is an moronic definition of the word gamer.
If you want to know who has played RPGs in the last month, ask that directly. There is no reason to tie that to a definition that doesn't...
Quote from: Rincewind1;750485Actually isn't it a born power of Hanover Fiste in the original comics?
The best thing about this forum is the bifurcating tangents. :)
Quote from: mcbobbo;750195Game was had. XP delt out. Happy campers all around.
Me too - and I killed a PC in my 4e game tonight for the first time in two years! :cool:
Quote from: Rincewind1;750485Actually isn't it a born power of Hanover Fiste in the original comics?
I could dig through my stack of old Heavy Metals that I have somewhere, but I bet I don't have that one. It could be a natural power of his, though by the movie, it doesn't look like it.
As far as the term "Gamer" - mengtzu on tbp once warned me for being "profoundly" disconnected with gamer-culture.
I laughed.
/totally arrogant Austrian derisive snort
Quote from: dragoner;750499I could dig through my stack of old Heavy Metals that I have somewhere, but I bet I don't have that one. It could be a natural power of his, though by the movie, it doesn't look like it.
As far as the term "Gamer" - mengtzu on tbp once warned me for being "profoundly" disconnected with gamer-culture.
I laughed.
/totally arrogant Austrian derisive snort
Oh, in the film I'd agree (the ending's different as well, since Hanover is probably the only person that Sternn hasn't tricked...too much).
Quote from: Dodger;750487The best thing about this forum is the bifurcating tangents. :)
Better than watching various STERN ADVOCATES OF GAMING wiggling on the hook as they suddenly discover according to some other definition THEY are BNGs.
Quote from: Emperor Norton;750483people don't like being told how they aren't a gamer (and therefore by extension shouldn't be listened to), despite playing regularly for years on end.
See, THAT's the part where I'm having trouble understanding your perspective. I see no evidence of such sentiment, at least not in this thread. I think you're just being overly-sensitive.
You can call yourself a gamer, if you want, even if you haven't been gaming for ten years. I don't see that it really matters. For all I know you spent the previous 20 trapped in a small room with only a since 20-sided dice and a rulebook for company and know more about the deep interiour philosophies of mechanics than Gandhi did about small round spectacles.
//Panjumanju
Quote from: Panjumanju;750651See, THAT's the part where I'm having trouble understanding your perspective. I see no evidence of such sentiment, at least not in this thread. I think you're just being overly-sensitive.
You can call yourself a gamer, if you want, even if you haven't been gaming for ten years. I don't see that it really matters. For all I know you spent the previous 20 trapped in a small room with only a since 20-sided dice and a rulebook for company and know more about the deep interiour philosophies of mechanics than Gandhi did about small round spectacles.
//Panjumanju
Considering how condescending this site is towards non gamers, and Pundy in particular, it's a very understandable perspective.
"Non gamers are useless assholes and should not be listened to" (paraphrase but not inaccurate) combined with "if you haven't played in a month you're a non gamer" isn't going to go down well.
Quote from: Rincewind1;750485Actually isn't it a born power of Hanover Fiste in the original comics?
He certainly does in Running out of Time, but I think that's definitely after Loc - Nar storyline in Heavy Metal.
My theory that it is inherent is based on two things:
Stern says he has an angle, and without the hulking out to arrange for stern to physically escape, it seems absurd that meek hanover saying stern is a nice guy would sway the court at all.
And, Sterns reaction when he pays hannover simply makes more sense if he knew all along about hulking hannover.
I think the hostility isn't so much directed at non gamers per se, but to people who never game but insist on shoving their opinion of said games down your throat like they have some sort of authority.
Essentially, the hostility is towards adamant theorycrafters who don't actually play. Not just people who don't play that often in general.
Quote from: Bill;750657My theory that it is inherent is based on two things:
Stern says he has an angle, and without the hulking out to arrange for stern to physically escape, it seems absurd that meek hanover saying stern is a nice guy would sway the court at all.
And, Sterns reaction when he pays hannover simply makes more sense if he knew all along about hulking hannover.
That said, do notice when he pays Hannover he's paying him much more than he mentioned to the lawyer, like a cornered man who knows throwing a bonus might save his skin.
Quote from: Rincewind1;750661That said, do notice when he pays Hannover he's paying him much more than he mentioned to the lawyer, like a cornered man who knows throwing a bonus might save his skin.
That would apply in either case; Hannover is dangerous when hulked out.
But stern certainly seemed prepared to kill hannover; this strongly suggests the payoff was planned. And there is no way in hell a meek hannover testifying to sterns goodness was 'the angle.'
Quote from: Old Geezer;750655Considering how condescending this site is towards non gamers, and Pundy in particular, it's a very understandable perspective.
"Non gamers are useless assholes and should not be listened to" (paraphrase but not inaccurate) combined with "if you haven't played in a month you're a non gamer" isn't going to go down well.
Bingo.
Quote from: Panjumanju;749890I don't understand why you're getting personal. You're making the assumption that I'm arguing that a regular gaming schedule is somehow a superiour lifestyle. It's obviously not. There are always other, superiour, priorities in life. This isn't a qualitative judgement - people who are playing regularly are not better or wiser than people who are not.
But if you have not played a roleplaying game in a month, you are not playing regularly. This is a participatory medium. Your daydreams and intentions to game do not count.
If you haven't jogged in a month, you are not jogging regularly. You can't call yourself a jogger. If you haven't painted in a month, you're not painting regularly. You're not a painter. This is not an issue of maturity, it's word definition.
//Panjumanju
Gaming isn't exercising. No one says, "I'm an exerciser."
Someone might say, "I'm a runner," even if they haven't run in a month.
Gaming is part of an identity -- which is why we use a to-be form of the verb. Someone can have something as part of their identity even if they aren't participating regularly.
I'm a fan of Firefly. It's been quite awhile since I watched the show. I'm a Republican. It's been more than a month since I voted.
Gamerness is basically self-proclaimed membership in a club.
If someone wants to ask if we've gamed in the last month, and they don't want to be a cock about it, they should say, "Have you gamed in the last month."
Cheers,
-E.
Quote from: -E.;751384Gaming isn't exercising. No one says, "I'm an exerciser."
Someone might say, "I'm a runner," even if they haven't run in a month.
Gaming is part of an identity -- which is why we use a to-be form of the verb. Someone can have something as part of their identity even if they aren't participating regularly.
I'm a fan of Firefly. It's been quite awhile since I watched the show. I'm a Republican. It's been more than a month since I voted.
Gamerness is basically self-proclaimed membership in a club.
If someone wants to ask if we've gamed in the last month, and they don't want to be a cock about it, they should say, "Have you gamed in the last month."
Cheers,
-E.
Except if you've ran for the last time 2 - 3 months ago, the actual daily runners will snort at you calling yourself a runner.
Hank Moody nailed it in one if one of the most under appreciated quotes of the series.
"I'm not a writer. Writers write. I haven't written anything for months."
If you've not been gaming,
and had a chance, it means your identity is a pose. Of course it's a hobby, but if you're taking "gamer" as a part of your identity, this means it's serious enough for you (for a given value of serious), that the name "casual" drops by default - or you should perhaps mention it.
Rather than set an arbitrary time period, we ought to perhaps ask ourselves a simpler questions - do we game when we can, or do we replace that activity with something of more interest to us?
Quote from: -E.;751384Gaming isn't exercising. No one says, "I'm an exerciser."
You've never heard of Crossfit, have you?
Quote from: Rincewind1;751521Except if you've ran for the last time 2 - 3 months ago, the actual daily runners will snort at you calling yourself a runner.
Hank Moody nailed it in one if one of the most under appreciated quotes of the series.
"I'm not a writer. Writers write. I haven't written anything for months."
If you've not been gaming, and had a chance, it means your identity is a pose. Of course it's a hobby, but if you're taking "gamer" as a part of your identity, this means it's serious enough for you (for a given value of serious), that the name "casual" drops by default - or you should perhaps mention it.
Rather than set an arbitrary time period, we ought to perhaps ask ourselves a simpler questions - do we game when we can, or do we replace that activity with something of more interest to us?
The first question I would ask is, "why would you attempt to set a condition
of any kind for accepting someone's self-identification as a gamer?"
There are valid reasons to question self-applied titles, but in my experience the vast number of times someone tries to play gate-keeper for something as trivial as a hobby or fandom, it's dickish or at least dick-like behavior.
In the absence of a reason for asking the question, I think the presumption of cock-dom is warranted.
I'd be happy to learn I'm wrong, though, so in that spirit, let me ask you: what would be the point of framing the question the way you suggest in your post?
And why would it be superior to just accepting that anyone who wants to identify as a gamer, is a gamer?
Cheers,
-E.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;751763You've never heard of Crossfit, have you?
A good, point. But I thought the proper subject compliment for someone who does Crossfit was
champion?;)
-E.
Because the a metric, eg a month, is too tight, doesn't mean the concept is necessarily unsound. If you haven't played games for years and yet you act an expert on mechanics ...
Quote from: Sacrosanct;750658I think the hostility isn't so much directed at non gamers per se, but to people who never game but insist on shoving their opinion of said games down your throat like they have some sort of authority.
Essentially, the hostility is towards adamant theorycrafters who don't actually play. Not just people who don't play that often in general.
Bingo. Pundy believes, as do I, that theorycrafters have had a malignant influence on the hobby. Whether it's forgists crawling up their own ass to design games nobody plays, or char op obsessives and their insatiable appetite for more options and sublime balance, or grognards chasing after some platonic ideal of Gygaxian D&D - if you're not actually playing the game, you're probably advocating stuff that simply doesn't matter to most people who are playing. And when that theorycraft comes to dominate online discussion, and when publishers make the mistake of thinking these online theories, complaints, and schools of thought represent the real playing market, a lot of real useless shit can end up being published.
Quote from: Old Geezer;750655Considering how condescending this site is towards non gamers, and Pundy in particular, it's a very understandable perspective.
Is it? That must have passed under my radar.
What's even funnier is that I game more than many so-called "gamers" by this definition, yet it isn't something I consider part of my identity at all. Martial artist, certainly; gamer, nope. Playing RPGs is something I do, not something I am.
Quote from: BrandonKF;748676Are we talking video games, RPGs, wargames, or just all games?
-Brandon F.
While I'm pretty sure it's RPGs, I think that's as silly as the last month thing. "Gamer" means video games to way more people than any other kind of game, with serious board or card gamers coming in second I think. I also think the multitude of Warhammer (40K or Fantasy) players likely count as gamers too.
So, in addition to my previous post, I play Guild Wars 2 almost every day. To the vast majority of people that makes me more of a gamer than playing any TTRPG once a month.
Quote from: Panjumanju;749890I don't understand why you're getting personal. You're making the assumption that I'm arguing that a regular gaming schedule is somehow a superiour lifestyle. It's obviously not. There are always other, superiour, priorities in life. This isn't a qualitative judgement - people who are playing regularly are not better or wiser than people who are not.
But if you have not played a roleplaying game in a month, you are not playing regularly. This is a participatory medium. Your daydreams and intentions to game do not count.
Our D&D group tries to meet once every 3-4 weeks. Sometimes we don't meet for over 4 weeks. I have a regular boardgaming group a couple times a month, so I get my gaming fix other ways. But I know for some of the other guys in my group, D&D isn't just the only gaming they do, D&D is the only social leisure activity they do outside their family. Some people just have very busy lives between work and family. Even if they can only play D&D 10 times a year, if it's their primary leisure activity, it's fair to call them gamers.
Quote from: dragoner;751773Because the a metric, eg a month, is too tight, doesn't mean the concept is necessarily unsound. If you haven't played games for years and yet you act an expert on mechanics ...
I think it's not entirely sound.
If someone's wrong about the mechanics, they're wrong about the mechanics whether they've last gamed a month ago or ten minutes ago.
If you're looking at the validity of an argument, you should do so without caring about the source of the argument -- trying to dismiss non-gamer arguments
because they come from non-gamers, is simply weak ad hominem rhetoric.
There are a very small set of discussions where knowing how much or little a person actually games might be useful in evaluating where they're coming from (I wouldn't heavily weight game design preferences from someone who never gamed and wasn't likely to buy my product, for instance), but for the most part? I say let the argument stand on its own and leave the person out of it.
And in any event, I wouldn't frame this as saying "they're not a gamer" -- it's needlessly tribal.
Cheers,
-E.
If it's just RPGs then I am not in this circle as I run two games a week.
If it's "gamer" in the broad modern sense then I run two RPG tabletop games a week and get around 10-15 hours a week on different video games.
Quote from: -E.;752024If you're looking at the validity of an argument, you should do so without caring about the source of the argument -- trying to dismiss non-gamer arguments because they come from non-gamers, is simply weak ad hominem rhetoric.
The depends on what you're talking about. The RPG hobby is rife with issues that many forum wonks obsess about in theory, that aren't really problems at the table. Or not nearly as big of a problem as the theorists believe. Tyrannical GMs. Interaction between GMs and players that isn't strictly mechanically defined. LFQW. Minor imbalances in PC power. Minor imbalances in spotlight time. Rules sets that aren't comprehensive and iron-clad. A great deal of RPG forum debate is angels dancing on the head of a pin stuff. And the problem is, RPG publishers have demonstrated a vulnerability to letting theorycraft drive design decisions, while the preferences of the much larger community of people who are actually playing are neglected.
Quote from: -E.;752024I think it's not entirely sound.
If someone's wrong about the mechanics, they're wrong about the mechanics whether they've last gamed a month ago or ten minutes ago.
If you're looking at the validity of an argument, you should do so without caring about the source of the argument -- trying to dismiss non-gamer arguments because they come from non-gamers, is simply weak ad hominem rhetoric.
There are a very small set of discussions where knowing how much or little a person actually games might be useful in evaluating where they're coming from (I wouldn't heavily weight game design preferences from someone who never gamed and wasn't likely to buy my product, for instance), but for the most part? I say let the argument stand on its own and leave the person out of it.
And in any event, I wouldn't frame this as saying "they're not a gamer" -- it's needlessly tribal.
Cheers,
-E.
If it is based upon empiricism, same as science, ie such as actually playing the mechanic and seeing that it works, then it is very useful. Sans empiricism, how does one know?
Quote from: Haffrung;752035The depends on what you're talking about. The RPG hobby is rife with issues that many forum wonks obsess about in theory, that aren't really problems at the table. Or not nearly as big of a problem as the theorists believe. Tyrannical GMs. Interaction between GMs and players that isn't strictly mechanically defined. LFQW. Minor imbalances in PC power. Minor imbalances in spotlight time. Rules sets that aren't comprehensive and iron-clad. A great deal of RPG forum debate is angels dancing on the head of a pin stuff. And the problem is, RPG publishers have demonstrated a vulnerability to letting theorycraft drive design decisions, while the preferences of the much larger community of people who are actually playing are neglected.
I don't disagree -- there's a lot of pointless online wankery.
I don't even disagree that people who don't play are likely to have poor ideas about where the issues lie, or what would work / not-work in practice.
But I don't think the way to address that is to attack the person making the argument. Think of it this way: a person who rarely games making a good argument doesn't magically make it a bad argument. Someone who games constantly can still argue about angels dancing on pin heads.
I can see your point about game designers listening to the wrong people, but really, but that's really their problem and I think the market will take care of that.
Either way, coming at this from the standpoint of calling people who don't game enough 'non-gamers' is basically being a pecker. To the extent that recent, practical experience should be accounted for in evaluating someone's position, it can be done without any identity politics framing.
Cheers,
-E.
Quote from: dragoner;752036If it is based upon empiricism, same as science, ie such as actually playing the mechanic and seeing that it works, then it is very useful. Sans empiricism, how does one know?
I hear what you're saying, but I think a lot of self-reported empirical experience is hopelessly biased and subjective -- as awful as any hypothetical imaginsturbation of an pure theorist.
Take GNS as an example: the theory was that adolescent, on-going power struggle was somehow the fault of the game. Lots of people claimed to experience it. Hell, in the Brain Damage thread, you can find people standing up and saying "I Was Brain Damaged" by games.
Ridiculous, right?
In practice, someone who games a lot is going be a lot more credible, not because of their gaming resume, but because they'll be able to explain things clearly and obviously from practical experience.
I mean look at the mapping thread: lots of direct experience. People talking about what works for them. Not everyone comes to the same conclusions about how to do it, but most of it seems to come from direct experience and the people responding were both able to explain what worked for them and why.
That's what matters.
Cheers,
-E.
Quote from: -E.;752050In practice, someone who games a lot is going be a lot more credible, not because of their gaming resume, but because they'll be able to explain things clearly and obviously from practical experience.
I mean look at the mapping thread: lots of direct experience. People talking about what works for them. Not everyone comes to the same conclusions about how to do it, but most of it seems to come from direct experience and the people responding were both able to explain what worked for them and why.
That's what matters.
Cheers,
-E.
That is empiricism.
I don't know GNS theory, and from what little I have seen of it (like on Wikipedia), don't care. It is the same as someone using labels pejoratively, they hurt themselves more than anyone else. I know people attach something other to the name gamer, other than a player of games, however, there isn't another simple term for someone who plays games. I usually say I am a casual gamer in those discussions, though those discussions are largely irrelevant, so it doesn't matter anyways.
Quote from: Haffrung;752035The depends on what you're talking about. The RPG hobby is rife with issues that many forum wonks obsess about in theory, that aren't really problems at the table. Or not nearly as big of a problem as the theorists believe. Tyrannical GMs. Interaction between GMs and players that isn't strictly mechanically defined. LFQW. Minor imbalances in PC power. Minor imbalances in spotlight time. Rules sets that aren't comprehensive and iron-clad. A great deal of RPG forum debate is angels dancing on the head of a pin stuff. And the problem is, RPG publishers have demonstrated a vulnerability to letting theorycraft drive design decisions, while the preferences of the much larger community of people who are actually playing are neglected.
I think its more that people freak out over games that aren't designed for them. Every one of those things could be an issue for SOMEONE's table, whether its legitimately an issue at yours or not.
I can list a bunch of things that have never been a problem at my tables: Hero point/bennies, Fate Compels, Marvel Heroic's Doom Pool, Leverage's flashback mechanics, etc.
And actually... none of the things on your list have been problems at my tables either. Some rules are just wrong for some tables is all, and a lot of people want to yell really loudly how the ones that are wrong for their tables are travesties.
Quote from: Emperor Norton;752053I think its more that people freak out over games that aren't designed for them. Every one of those things could be an issue for SOMEONE's table, whether its legitimately an issue at yours or not.
This is the very same as my experience. I'm tempted to even just say: "This", but I don't know if I'm comfortable enough with Internet-lingo to try.
//Panjumanju
By the standards set out here, the last time I was a non-gamer was sometime around 1999.
Quote from: RPGPundit;752524By the standards set out here, the last time I was a non-gamer was sometime around 1999.
By the standards set out here, despite having a regular gaming group since 2010 and participating in three cons and two game days as a referee and player, I'm a non-gamer.
Does that sound right to you?
I think the definition is ludicrous, but it is also not my row to hoe.
I'm a gamesman. I play Pathfinder, GURPS, and AD&D semi-regularly (aiming for once a month, twice a month optimally). I irregularly attend Netrunner nights at my LGS and open board game nights at a friend's place. I'm prepping a Trail of Cthulhu one-shot. I play video games every day, usually to relax a bit after work.
I don't quite understand how people can play every week, regularly and without cessation, frankly.
Quote from: Géza Echs;752881I don't quite understand how people can play every week, regularly and without cessation, frankly.
Yeah, pretty much the definition in this thread is: "If Roleplaying isn't your #1 hobby that takes priority over all others, you aren't a gamer."
Seriously. I do board games, roleplaying games, I write, I play video games, I read novels and comic books, I have tons of hobbies, and only so much free time a month. I usually do RP once or twice a month, but some months I don't. I don't suddenly stop being a gamer the moment I don't.
Quote from: Géza Echs;752881I don't quite understand how people can play every week, regularly and without cessation, frankly.
It's a weekly commitment, like taking the boy to soccer or the lassie to gymnastics.
Quote from: Novastar;753175It's a weekly commitment, like taking the boy to soccer or the lassie to gymnastics.
Precisely, it's the same as any other regular commitment you make. You put it in your schedule and you stick to it. It's really not that hard.
No different to the way that when I was regularly training Muay Thai, I would be there every Monday and Wednesday, week in, week out for something like three years. I missed less than a dozen sessions in all that time.
Quote from: Novastar;753175It's a weekly commitment, like taking the boy to soccer or the lassie to gymnastics.
I don't have kids, but I can understand spending the hour or so for each. I can't understand being able to get together a group of at least three adults on a weekly basis for years on end. I've never known anyone - gamer or not - that had that much unwavering free time available to them.
Quote from: Géza Echs;753192I don't have kids, but I can understand spending the hour or so for each. I can't understand being able to get together a group of at least three adults on a weekly basis for years on end. I've never known anyone - gamer or not - that had that much unwavering free time available to them.
People who are genuinely committed to something, and don't have "unwavering free time" and are thus forced to prioritise and plan can do it.
My Thursday evening gaming session doesn't move for anything, other things are planned around it in our family diary, just as some immovable events in my wife's diary don't move. If someone rings me up and tries to plan something on a Thursday evening, they get an immediate "sorry, I've got plans then", no matter who it is and no matter what they intend.
Again it's never people with lots of free time who are the most reliable and able to commit to things, but those who have shortages of it. You make your free time work when it's highly constrained.
Quote from: Kiero;753202People who are genuinely committed to something, and don't have "unwavering free time" and are thus forced to prioritise and plan can do it.
My Thursday evening gaming session doesn't move for anything, other things are planned around it in our family diary, just as some immovable events in my wife's diary don't move. If someone rings me up and tries to plan something on a Thursday evening, they get an immediate "sorry, I've got plans then", no matter who it is and no matter what they intend.
Again it's never people with lots of free time who are the most reliable and able to commit to things, but those who have shortages of it. You make your free time work when it's highly constrained.
Yeah, I get that. In my experience, though, well, my various gaming friends have very little free time and what free time they have needs to be flexible in order to deal with other priorities - work, school, inter-personal, etc. As such it isn't uncommon for our scheduled gaming sessions to have to be cancelled and rescheduled at the drop of a hat. The option of having a gaming session that "doesn't move for anything" simply isn't available to us.
For a little while I may be a gamer only by orientation. I am trying to transition away from the gym where I work in the mornings, and have people in my garage gym in the evenings. A few people have signed up, so I can't set aside the weeknight I've been doing.
I'm free during the day, but the only gamers free during the day are long-term unemployed, and generally there's a reason they're unemployed, and this reason makes gaming with them rather less fun than gaming usually is. There are some shift workers and stay-at-home parents but their schedule is all over the place.
So I had to leave my game group with my character Fabio the Most Beautiful Fighter in the Cosmos...
Quote from: Novastar;753175It's a weekly commitment, like taking the boy to soccer or the lassie to gymnastics.
Which is great if those commitments never change.
Over the holiday weekend my son played in two baseball tournaments, one with his travel team and one with his All Star team. That meant a different schedule all three days, starting at nine in the morning and running as late as 8:30 at night, scattered between two different fields. Next weekend he has another tournament with his All Star team as well as his regular season playoffs. The weekend after that is the same.
Now let me tell you about my daughter's cheer competitions and exhibitions.
But this is all quite beside the point, as the asinine presumption of this thread is that if you don't play regularly within an arbitrary time interval, you are a non-gamer. The specifics are irrelevant - the whole idea that frequency determines cogency is too stupid to deserve serious consideration.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;753312Which is great if those commitments never change.
Over the holiday weekend my son played in two baseball tournaments, one with his travel team and one with his All Star team. That meant a different schedule all three days, starting at nine in the morning and running as late as 8:30 at night, scattered between two different fields. Next weekend he has another tournament with his All Star team as well as his regular season playoffs. The weekend after that is the same.
Now let me tell you about my daughter's cheer competitions and exhibitions.
But this is all quite beside the point, as the asinine presumption of this thread is that if you don't play regularly within an arbitrary time interval, you are a non-gamer. The specifics are irrelevant - the whole idea that frequency determines cogency is too stupid to deserve serious consideration.
Not to mention that RPGs require more than one person. So if I have commitments to my kids stuff, that change regularly, so might my other players. Or some of my players might not have set work schedules. Or some of my players may have legitimate issues like an autistic son who sometimes acts up in a way that makes it impossible for him to go out.
Look, if your life lets you set aside one afternoon at a set time every week for years on end, along with all your players as well, then more power to you, but man, that is not my life.
Quote from: Géza Echs;753192I don't have kids, but I can understand spending the hour or so for each. I can't understand being able to get together a group of at least three adults on a weekly basis for years on end. I've never known anyone - gamer or not - that had that much unwavering free time available to them.
It's fairly easy, really.
You find a group of people who want to play weekly, have a regular time slot, have a long-running campaign and be very tolerant of people who have to drop out occasionally.
I've played in a weekly game for over 10 years. One of our players has 2 weekly games, so is in 2 gaming groups.
The only problems we have are:
- Sometimes the games clash with other things and each player makes a personal call as to which is important
- Work sometimes gets in the way
- Partner objections (For example, My wife hates the fact that I have a "crazy hobby" and doesn't like that I spend every Monday evening out of the house)
The people who are gaming less are not necessarily the ones stirring up shitstorms about "spherical cow" scenarios and other non-game-table-relevant minutiae.
Quote from: The Butcher;753371The people who are gaming less are not necessarily the ones stirring up shitstorms about "spherical cow" scenarios and other non-game-table-relevant minutiae.
Yes, they necessarily are.
People who are actually gaming have better things to worry about, like how can I get that last 50xp to level up so I don't have to wait until after this session, will Jerry bring his Aspberger's buddy with him again, why am I the only one who ever brings snacks, and where did all my d6es go and howcome I have so many fucking d12s?
Quote from: Emperor Norton;753329Not to mention that RPGs require more than one person. So if I have commitments to my kids stuff, that change regularly, so might my other players. Or some of my players might not have set work schedules. Or some of my players may have legitimate issues like an autistic son who sometimes acts up in a way that makes it impossible for him to go out.
Look, if your life lets you set aside one afternoon at a set time every week for years on end, along with all your players as well, then more power to you, but man, that is not my life.
No kidding.
My 3.0 group has only one person without kids, and we all have time commitments for various things that change on a (seemingly) daily basis. While we keep the session time the same, we're not always able to make things work out.
It all reduces to what your priorities are. If your priorities are Gaming > Family > School commitments > Friends, then yeah, you're going to always make that weekly game night. If that gaming priority is somewhere lower, then sorry, you're not going to always make a weekly game.
Unless you're hard core, you probably don't have gaming as your highest priority.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;753382Yes, they necessarily are.
People who are actually gaming have better things to worry about, like how can I get that last 50xp to level up so I don't have to wait until after this session, will Jerry bring his Aspberger's buddy with him again, why am I the only one who ever brings snacks, and where did all my d6es go and howcome I have so many fucking d12s?
Really? Because you describe regular chatter at my games (well, except for the Asperger's buddy bit), while I have no idea what a "spherical cow" is.
Quote from: Emperor Norton;753329Not to mention that RPGs require more than one person. So if I have commitments to my kids stuff, that change regularly, so might my other players. Or some of my players might not have set work schedules. Or some of my players may have legitimate issues like an autistic son who sometimes acts up in a way that makes it impossible for him to go out.
Look, if your life lets you set aside one afternoon at a set time every week for years on end, along with all your players as well, then more power to you, but man, that is not my life.
Quote from: flyerfan1991;753387No kidding.
My 3.0 group has only one person without kids, and we all have time commitments for various things that change on a (seemingly) daily basis. While we keep the session time the same, we're not always able to make things work out.
It all reduces to what your priorities are. If your priorities are Gaming > Family > School commitments > Friends, then yeah, you're going to always make that weekly game night. If that gaming priority is somewhere lower, then sorry, you're not going to always make a weekly game.
Unless you're hard core, you probably don't have gaming as your highest priority.
+1. I have a group of five, including myself. All but one have kids. Our priorities are: family > work > leisure (of which gaming is anywhere from #1 to #3 depending on the time of year). Work commitments, and more especially family commitment, don't hold to a tidy schedule.
I question people who have families for whom gaming trumps all of these considerations.
Sorry honey, you'll have to tell your boss you can't go out of town that weekend - D&D.
I don't care if that's the only weekend the campground has sites available - that's D&D night.
The kids can't do soccer this year - the schedule will interfere with D&D.
You can go out for dinner with my parents by yourself - it's D&D night.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;753382Yes, they necessarily are.
I don't think so.
I have good reason to believe that a goodly amount of people aren't gaming because they don't have the time to game. Let alone spout off irrelevant bullshit about them on the Internet.
Not all non-gamers (whatever definition you're using) are Bitter Non-Gamers. The BNGs are just the more vocal segment.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;753312But this is all quite beside the point, as the asinine presumption of this thread is that if you don't play regularly within an arbitrary time interval, you are a non-gamer. The specifics are irrelevant - the whole idea that frequency determines cogency is too stupid to deserve serious consideration.
I think Pundit was looking for a 'Practicing Gamer', much like my wife is Roman Catholic, but the only time we've been in a church in the last 15 years has been for weddings and funerals; while she has a lifelong identification as a Roman Catholic, she is by no means a 'practicing' Catholic.
...and if you want to talk about people able to gather in large groups, for several hours, for years at a time, well... ;)
haven't played in 3, going on 4 years, i think. left my old longstanding group and haven't felt the urge or need to hunt down a new one. video games or solitaire adaptations of other games fits the bill these days.
Some folks simply don't have the bandwidth in their lives to live tabletop game. Anyone who wants to call themselves a gamer should be able to do so. I however identify myself as an active gamer - I play in a live tabletop once every other week, run 1 live game bi weekly, and participate in seveal PBPs.
Quote from: Haffrung;753470I question people who have families for whom gaming trumps all of these considerations.
Sorry honey, you'll have to tell your boss you can't go out of town that weekend - D&D.
I don't care if that's the only weekend the campground has sites available - that's D&D night.
The kids can't do soccer this year - the schedule will interfere with D&D.
You can go out for dinner with my parents by yourself - it's D&D night.
I play on a weekday evening, not at the weekend, which makes all of these moot.
Can I ask who moved the goalposts? OP -
QuoteHow many of you are actually NOT gaming at this time (with "not gaming" defined as having been at least one month without playing a game)? And if so, how long since you did?
Wherein lies "regular"? Where is the criteria that you can never miss or reschedule?
Also I would say that it should be a call to action. If you fit the definition but don't want to, maybe you can game some more? What would be the harm in that?
Especially in the internet age... Isn't there PBP on this very forum?
Quote from: Kiero;753539I play on a weekday evening, not at the weekend, which makes all of these moot.
You must not have kids, because their after school activities aren't limited to weekends.
Quote from: Haffrung;753470+1. I have a group of five, including myself. All but one have kids. Our priorities are: family > work > leisure (of which gaming is anywhere from #1 to #3 depending on the time of year). Work commitments, and more especially family commitment, don't hold to a tidy schedule.
I question people who have families for whom gaming trumps all of these considerations.
Sorry honey, you'll have to tell your boss you can't go out of town that weekend - D&D.
I don't care if that's the only weekend the campground has sites available - that's D&D night.
The kids can't do soccer this year - the schedule will interfere with D&D.
You can go out for dinner with my parents by yourself - it's D&D night.
Exactly.
My brother-in-law games twice a week (and works on a podcast as well)
because he and my sister-in-law don't have kids. They are as active as they are because they have that free time, which her sister, my wife, and I don't have with our three kids.
Is one better or worse than the other? No, it simply is what it is.
Are my brother-in-law and I both active gamers? Yes, because we both game as much as we can fit it into our schedules. He just is able to do more than I am.
I solved the kids problem by involving them. Well the oldest anyway.
Quote from: mcbobbo;753577I solved the kids problem by involving them. Well the oldest anyway.
So have I, but they do their own thing these days. I still want the schedule to settle down so I can have some prep time to run some RPGs with them, but I recognize reality.
Quote from: flyerfan1991;753573My brother-in-law games twice a week (and works on a podcast as well) because he and my sister-in-law don't have kids. They are as active as they are because they have that free time, which her sister, my wife, and I don't have with our three kids.
The person in our group who games twice a week has 3 kids, the rest of us don't have kids.
I think it depends on the person and the situation.
Quote from: flyerfan1991;753573Is one better or worse than the other? No, it simply is what it is.
That is the important thing.
It doesn't matter if you play RPGs every day, or every week, or every month, or every year, or just at conventions, or at lads' weekends or not at all.
Nor does it matter if you think of yourself as a gamer or hate the word gamer, identify with a gaming culture or just play now and again.
Some people have inferiority complexes about the fact that they don't play very often, other feel superior because they play a lot. It doesn't really matter.
What matters is that you have fun when you game.
Quote from: soltakss;753589It doesn't matter if you play RPGs ... at all.
...
What matters is that you have fun when you game.
How do you have fun gaming when you don't game at all?
Quote from: Kiero;753539I play on a weekday evening, not at the weekend, which makes all of these moot.
Bullshit. My son's had four different practice schedules this spring - three for baseball, one for soccer, and after the spring football season ended, my daughter added a jazz technique class at her studio. My wife and I rejigger our schedules weekly, sometimes daily.
The idea that everyone's week is as unwavering as yours reflects your paper-narrow perspective on, well, pretty much every gawddamn thing under the sun.
Quote from: mcbobbo;753552If you fit the definition but don't want to, maybe you can game some more? What would be the harm in that?
Or maybe we could try working from a less fucked-up definition?
What makes gaming 'in the last month' a standard anyone should accept? Is someone who play only at conventions two or three times a year a non-gamer? Is someone who breaks out his old campaign for a weekend when his high school buddies are in town a non-gamer?
The whole premise of this thread is fucked from the giddyup.
Quote from: Kiero;753539I play on a weekday evening, not at the weekend, which makes all of these moot.
Work trips happen during the week: one of the guys in my group travels 4-8 days a month for work; another has to watch the kids 8-10 days a month while his wife works as a flight attendant. Kids activities happen during the week. Around here, soccer is Mon + Wed or Tues + Thur. If you have two kids, that's Mon-Thur gone. Scouts/Guides are Tues/Wed. Even in the winter, indoor soccer (which one of the guys in my group coaches) is 2-3 evenings a week.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;753598Or maybe we could try working from a less fucked-up definition?
What makes gaming 'in the last month' a standard anyone should accept? Is someone who play only at conventions two or three times a year a non-gamer? Is someone who breaks out his old campaign for a weekend when his high school buddies are in town a non-gamer?
The whole premise of this thread is fucked from the giddyup.
As others have said, there's no RPG police to force you to agree to any definition. But if you're going to use them, it makes a certain kind of sense to set limits on what they do mean.
I agree that if you're out of play for over a month you're not an active gamer. I am often not an active gamer, so I say this in earnest. But I do think it is fair to 'require' that one frequently game to be considered active. Why?
1) A month is a long time. Note too that this language is pretty loose. So we're not even necessarily talking a strict 30 days. If you gamed in April, you're probably good. Hell the thread is almost a month old itself.
2) You have options for gaming. And forgive me if this seems too personal, but I know for a fact that you have ran solo games via Mythic. Tunnels and Trolls is good for a quick solo game, too. And then there's the internet, which deserves its own bullet...
3) Between Skype, G+, Fantasy Grounds, Roll20, play by post, etc etc etc you have almost 'no excuse' for not being active if you want to be. You could. Easily. I bet people here would jump into a Flashing Blades game if you'd run it. It could be done.
So, at a certain point it becomes worth asking whether or not you want to play. Not publicly. (Put away the rotten tomatoes guys.) But inwardly, because this is probably a hobby you do love. I know I do...
Like I said, I can't throw stones. I don't game as much as I should either. I prefer face to face games and hate meeting new weirdos. But this advice applies to me as much as anyone.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;753598Bullshit. My son's had four different practice schedules this spring - three for baseball, one for soccer, and after the spring football season ended, my daughter added a jazz technique class at her studio. My wife and I rejigger our schedules weekly, sometimes daily.
... I'll admit I'm really happy that neither of my kids are into that many different things. My daughter is into theater (and when she gets into a production, rehearsals for her blocks can be a REAL pain in the ass), and my son isn't into anything that is scheduled.
Quote from: mcbobbo;7536113) Between Skype, G+, Fantasy Grounds, Roll20, play by post, etc etc etc you have almost 'no excuse' for not being active if you want to be. You could. Easily. I bet people here would jump into a Flashing Blades game if you'd run it. It could be done.
Part of the fun in RPGs to me is the face to face time. I've done online RP, and I just don't enjoy it as much. And the difference in that enjoyment is enough that I would rather go do something else.
If I was free for 4 hours and playing tabletop RPGs with some friends was one of the options, I would pick that one 9 times out of 10. But doing online RP just doesn't work for me. I'd rather play board games, or video games if no one is around. Or read.
Quote from: Emperor Norton;753613Part of the fun in RPGs to me is the face to face time. I've done online RP, and I just don't enjoy it as much. And the difference in that enjoyment is enough that I would rather go do something else.
If I was free for 4 hours and playing tabletop RPGs with some friends was one of the options, I would pick that one 9 times out of 10. But doing online RP just doesn't work for me. I'd rather play board games, or video games if no one is around. Or read.
I'm right there with you. I want to like online play. I really wish I did.
But I still hold that it's an option not being chosen.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;753598Bullshit. My son's had four different practice schedules this spring - three for baseball, one for soccer, and after the spring football season ended, my daughter added a jazz technique class at her studio. My wife and I rejigger our schedules weekly, sometimes daily.
The idea that everyone's week is as unwavering as yours reflects your paper-narrow perspective on, well, pretty much every gawddamn thing under the sun.
If you think it's bad for sports, my oldest is in marching band. Now
there's some grueling schedules. I never knew there that many fucking parades and events in my hometown, and that's not counting the "regular" evening events that the wind ensemble plays for the public.
QuoteThe whole premise of this thread is fucked from the giddyup.
You said it. It's all about waving e-peens around.
Quote from: flyerfan1991;753572You must not have kids, because their after school activities aren't limited to weekends.
I have two, and the eldest goes to school this September.
Quote from: Haffrung;753600Work trips happen during the week: one of the guys in my group travels 4-8 days a month for work; another has to watch the kids 8-10 days a month while his wife works as a flight attendant. Kids activities happen during the week. Around here, soccer is Mon + Wed or Tues + Thur. If you have two kids, that's Mon-Thur gone. Scouts/Guides are Tues/Wed. Even in the winter, indoor soccer (which one of the guys in my group coaches) is 2-3 evenings a week.
I've been away two nights a week with work for the past five months; it's always Tuesday-Wednesday at my instigation. Because I didn't want to be travelling with every other bugger Monday or Friday and Thursday is my gaming night and I wasn't going to have that interfere. No one objected to the days I chose.
Quote from: Géza Echs;753415Really? Because you describe regular chatter at my games (well, except for the Asperger's buddy bit), while I have no idea what a "spherical cow" is.
Yes, that's the point.
The conversations of people who are gaming are about practical and silly stuff. The conversations of people who aren't gaming are more likely to be about abstruse theory bullshit.
I know my flexible schedule at work is driving some of my gaming friends mad. They keep rescheduling the Netrunner tournaments at my LGS for me, but every twelve weeks (when a new class begins) they inevitably have to move it again because now I'm suddenly teaching on their night. Same with my friends in the Skype AD&D game I play in - I work seven days a week, and I'll often hit a spike where gaming on the weekend (their preferred days, since they often go for eight or more hours) becomes untenable for a week or two.
Quote from: mcbobbo;753611I agree that if you're out of play for over a month you're not an active gamer.
Why?
What makes a month special? Why not two weeks? Or two months? Or six months? What rational basis is there for using one month as a line of demarcation?
Quote from: mcbobbo;753611. . . [Y]ou have almost 'no excuse' for not being active if you want to be.
I
am as active as I choose to be.
I have a gaming group with whom I've played since 2010. We play in short bursts of two or three game nights in a couple of weeks when one of our members is in the States on business every five or six months, and in the interim we get together via Skype once every few months.
In that same time span, I've participated in a couple of game days organised by other gamers I've met online, and refereed and played at three cons.
There's never been a time in my life when I played more frequently than one or two times a month tops, and those periods were notably short.
This utterly ridiculous thread is about branding gamers as less-than-serious by how often they play. The whole idea of using a frequency interval to determine who is among the righteous is pathetic dick-waving.
Quote from: mcbobbo;753611I don't game as much as I should either.
Why the fuck do you think SHOULD is a word that should ever be applied to playing roleplaying games?
I assume he meant "should" in the sense of "given how much I like it."
I mean, if you only sorta like and enjoy something, there's less of a sense of urgency to doing it than if you really like and enjoy it.
Quote from: Haffrung;753470+1. I have a group of five, including myself. All but one have kids. Our priorities are: family > work > leisure (of which gaming is anywhere from #1 to #3 depending on the time of year). Work commitments, and more especially family commitment, don't hold to a tidy schedule.
I question people who have families for whom gaming trumps all of these considerations.
Sorry honey, you'll have to tell your boss you can't go out of town that weekend - D&D.
I don't care if that's the only weekend the campground has sites available - that's D&D night.
The kids can't do soccer this year - the schedule will interfere with D&D.
You can go out for dinner with my parents by yourself - it's D&D night.
I've gamed regularly (one night a week for 3 hours) for the last... hrm... 7 or 8 years? Before that it varied (periods of weekly gaming with periods of no regular games).
We do occasionally miss weeks looking at my log, no more than 2 or 3 a year, due to things like work, etc.
We have a group of 5 (me, inclusive), and I usually GM. If I can't make it, the game doesn't go, but it's a pretty serious commitment -- I work around it as much as possible.
Just about everyone in the game is a professional (one's unemployed) in the same time zone, and the game takes place after the workday ends.
For things like "soccer schedules" (in my case -- little league), we've moved the gaming night. We used to do Sunday nights, now we do Mondays.
I find that the more regularly we play the easier it is to get everyone together: when you're extremely sure your buddies are all going to show up, it makes showing up a priority. We're understanding when someone can't make it, of course, but that's by far the exception.
Cheers,
-E.
Quote from: mcbobbo;753590How do you have fun gaming when you don't game at all?
By reading gamebooks, frequenting RPG forums, attending conventions and so on.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;753692I assume he meant "should" in the sense of "given how much I like it."
I mean, if you only sorta like and enjoy something, there's less of a sense of urgency to doing it than if you really like and enjoy it.
Bingo.
Also I have spent a measurable portion of my income on games and game materials. If I am not actually gaming, maybe that would have been better spent on my 401k?
Time sunk, too.
Quote from: mcbobbo;753590How do you have fun gaming when you don't game at all?
Mathematically analyzing the game mechanics.
Quote from: soltakss;753719By reading gamebooks, frequenting RPG forums, attending conventions and so on.
I think any hobby that didn't separate this type of participant would be very inclusive.
If you went over to dad's black powder forum to discuss ballistics, but didn't actually post pics of your shot groupings, they'd be polite at best. Or ignore you outright, more likely.
Less inclusive groups might start calling one out as a 'poser' or similar. To be fair, I don't really think 'BNG' goes that far.
Quote from: -E.;753714I find that the more regularly we play the easier it is to get everyone together: when you're extremely sure your buddies are all going to show up, it makes showing up a priority. We're understanding when someone can't make it, of course, but that's by far the exception.
Cheers,
-E.
I think this is very important. I have a baby girl, a psychology practice and a business as trainer and consultant, apart from teaching at two colleges. I have a regular Tuesdays game (now RuneQuest, woot!) and a semi-regular D&D B/X Sundays game that is restarting again. The Tuesdays group play if there are at least 50% of the players present, so we end up playing around 3 of every 4 weeks. Not bad. We miss a session here and there, but the game goes strong. The other group didn't have these rules, and it shows.
But I also agree with Black Vulmea. The definition of active gamer given here is pretty terrible.
Quote from: Imperator;753867But I also agree with Black Vulmea. The definition of active gamer given here is pretty terrible.
What would be a better definition? Preferably one that's not "if you say you are active, you are"?
I'd be on board with a wider period, for example. I'd be on board with exceptions for unavoidable dry spells, e.g. moving. I'm not so much on board with "I was active in high school", "I enjoy reading the books", etc.
It would be kind of neat if we could arrive at a consensus. Pie in the sky, I know. But still.
Quote from: mcbobbo;753876What would be a better definition? Preferably one that's not "if you say you are active, you are"?
I'd be on board with a wider period, for example. I'd be on board with exceptions for unavoidable dry spells, e.g. moving. I'm not so much on board with "I was active in high school", "I enjoy reading the books", etc.
It would be kind of neat if we could arrive at a consensus. Pie in the sky, I know. But still.
It's the obscenity test: I know it when I see it.
Trying to define what an active gamer is, beyond that pretty basic shrug, only holds meaning to those who prefer splitting hairs.
I feel there's nothing to be gained from labeling posters as "gamer" or "not a gamer". "Non-gamer" is becoming the new "Swine", it seems. What happened to judging people's posts on their own merit?
Get a grip, people.
Quote from: The Butcher;753972I feel there's nothing to be gained from labeling posters as "gamer" or "not a gamer". "Non-gamer" is becoming the new "Swine", it seems.
The issue is not that they're a non-gamer, but that they're a
bitter non-gamer. People who are not gaming have lots of useful ideas to contribute.
Bitter people have nothing useful to contribute.
I never used the term "swine", that's a Punditism.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;753977The issue is not that they're a non-gamer, but that they're a bitter non-gamer. People who are not gaming have lots of useful ideas to contribute. Bitter people have nothing useful to contribute.
I never used the term "swine", that's a Punditism.
So your entire charge is hollow. Even funnier the number of times you've levelled this at me, when the "non-gamer" part has been patently untrue since 2008. Moreso when I apparently game much more frequently than some of my more vocal detractors.
I've played in more face-to-face games than many people who would label me as a non-gamer right now. Whatever. It's not like rpg's are my only hobby.
In any case, I get bored if I game too much for too long. I'm of the firm belief that taking breaks from the hobby is actually good for you.
Personally, I'd find it useful as a motivator.
Plus words work better when we agree on the general meaning. We have people comparing non-gamer to Swine(tm), people claiming gamer includes never having played, etc.
YMMV
Quote from: Géza Echs;753192I don't have kids, but I can understand spending the hour or so for each. I can't understand being able to get together a group of at least three adults on a weekly basis for years on end. I've never known anyone - gamer or not - that had that much unwavering free time available to them.
I know people who play a weekly sunday afternoon football game, quite a few women who play in a weekly netball league, the guy in the office next to me has choir practice one evening a week, I used to do a language class one evening a week.
It's not that rare a thing.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;753977The issue is not that they're a non-gamer, but that they're a bitter non-gamer. People who are not gaming have lots of useful ideas to contribute. Bitter people have nothing useful to contribute.
:rolleyes:
That's the point I was making a few posts above (not all "non-gamers" are spouting off senseless babble about RPGs on the Internet) and, if memory serves, you were refuting. In any case, I'm glad we're in agreement.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;753977I never used the term "swine", that's a Punditism.
But you use "bitter non-gamer" (BNG) a lot. And the line does get pretty damn blurred at times.
Quote from: mcbobbo;753996Personally, I'd find it useful as a motivator.
I wanted to say that the motivator for gaming should be enjoying games, not getting incensed at people on the Internet. But a recent, funny real-life episode happened to me a few months ago, and suggests that you may have a point.
It was my birthday a few months ago and I was hanging out with a bunch of friends, gamers and non-gamers, and one of the guys from the old gaming crew showed up. I introduced him to the current gaming crew as "this is so-and-so, he
used to play RPGs with me too."
I turned to him and the look on his face was
priceless. Here was someone who clearly thought of himself as a gamer, even if he hadn't gamed (or even talked about games, with me at least) for nearly a decade. And he was livid, not with rage, but with the realization that he had gone long enough without gaming that I didn't even think of him as a gamer.
Playing RPGs was so central to his identity, to his idea of himself, that in the middle of a years-long and entirely self-imposed gaming drought, he still thought of himself as a gamer.
Long story short, he decided to get his shit together and join my current OD&D game.
Still, on the Internet, among strangers, with no non-verbal cues to communicate friendliness and no alcohol to go around, I'm not sure labeling someone as a "non-gamer" will get them to game, any more than labeling someone a "Swine" will get them to drop the Grey Ranks and try AD&D 1e.
Quote from: danbuter;753993It's not like rpg's are my only hobby.
In any case, I get bored if I game too much for too long. I'm of the firm belief that taking breaks from the hobby is actually good for you.
Right on on both counts. Not my only hobby and it's quite OK to take a break when there are other things competing for your attention.
Quote from: The Butcher;754054Playing RPGs was so central to his identity, to his idea of himself, that in the middle of a years-long and entirely self-imposed gaming drought, he still thought of himself as a gamer.
Long story short, he decided to get his shit together and join my current OD&D game.
FWIW, I was referring to a self-motivator. Putting my own geek cred into question if I'm not diligent in practicing my hobby. Otherwise I might get lazy and placate myself by buying yet another PDF I'll never use.
Quote from: The Butcher;754064Right on on both counts. Not my only hobby and it's quite OK to take a break when there are other things competing for your attention.
Agree, totally okay to take a break. I still feel like people are insinuating an accusatory term that isn't necessarily there.
For my own point of view, at least, it isn't that the 'BNG' is automatically wrong. It's more like their opinion might be more nuanced by actual play.
We have been weekly for some time, but we are about to take a short break (close to a month) due to one player going on a work trip and another couple going on vacation, but we are slated to resume playing when they get back from vacation.
I GM some games online with my friends. Haven't touched an actual IRL game in forever.
Quote from: mcbobbo;753876What would be a better definition? Preferably one that's not "if you say you are active, you are"?
I'd be on board with a wider period, for example. I'd be on board with exceptions for unavoidable dry spells, e.g. moving. I'm not so much on board with "I was active in high school", "I enjoy reading the books", etc.
It would be kind of neat if we could arrive at a consensus. Pie in the sky, I know. But still.
What you say is reasonable. For example, I understand how a group of adults that play every two weeks may miss two sessions in a row, due to RL problems. Still, they're gamers.
I think that what would define being a gamer would be playing regularly, or having an expectation of playing in the near future (cons and similar events included). You may be going through a dry spell due to many causes (moving to another city, your group disbanded) and still be a gamer.
Quote from: The Butcher;753972I feel there's nothing to be gained from labeling posters as "gamer" or "not a gamer". "Non-gamer" is becoming the new "Swine", it seems. What happened to judging people's posts on their own merit?
For me if someone tells me they are a gamer, then I assume they are one. It is no skin off my back if some guy never plays in a game, but has an interest and adopts the moniker. I do think there is something to Kyle Aaron's point about butter non-gamer, that is a much more specific thing and does sometimes appear to be behind certain arguments you encounter online. It is also kind of a different animal.
Being worried about non-gamers is like rooting out the posers in high school to me. I mean, it isn't exactly a prestigious organization we belong to here. Do we really need to start putting up the velvet ropes and inspecting peoples' gamer cards?
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;754370I do think there is something to Kyle Aaron's point about butter non-gamer, that is a much more specific thing and does sometimes appear to be behind certain arguments you encounter online.
Oh great, now the gamers want to EAT the non-gamers. Run for the hills!!!
Quote from: mcbobbo;754389Oh great, now the gamers want to EAT the non-gamers. Run for the hills!!!
I've been watching Attack on Titan, so this conjures to mind an extremely fucked up image.
The real point here wasn't to shame anyone, just to analyze exactly how many people here are current and active gamers. I have a theory that there's a larger proportion of actual gamers here than on other forums.
The whole premise and by extension the definition set by said premise and question is silly. The question asked should be..."how many here are active gamers?" And then further define what is considered "active". Which would better support the actual premise.
Meh you guys go argue whats the right internal. I play online every other week. Lately we've had more players with issues in real life ao it's been a months or more since the last session. We're meeting in Tahoe on August for a three day live session. On average I'd say I'm a gamer. This month apparently I'm not. I'm not happy about this last month.
Quote from: RPGPundit;755229The real point here wasn't to shame anyone, just to analyze exactly how many people here are current and active gamers. I have a theory that there's a larger proportion of actual gamers here than on other forums.
I'm not seeing the evidence - there seems to be plenty of "anyone who actually games regularly must be fucked up/hate their kids" type stuff here from the BIGs (Bitter Irregular Gamers). :D
Quote from: Géza Echs;753192I don't have kids, but I can understand spending the hour or so for each. I can't understand being able to get together a group of at least three adults on a weekly basis for years on end. I've never known anyone - gamer or not - that had that much unwavering free time available to them.
My wife has no problem playing Rugby & going to Rugby practice twice a week. She makes me accommodate her schedule. Why shouldn't I do the same with D&D?
Because she plays rugby? Just sayin'.:D
Quote from: Marleycat;755830Because she plays rugby? Just sayin'.:D
Luckily she's only violent on the pitch...
Quote from: S'mon;755769I'm not seeing the evidence - there seems to be plenty of "anyone who actually games regularly must be fucked up/hate their kids" type stuff here from the BIGs (Bitter Irregular Gamers). :D
Eh, mine is more that if you have 5 adults that all have schedules that allow you to schedule the same time every week, without fail, you have much nicer daily schedules than my group does.
One has a variable schedule at work, two of my players have near opposite M-F schedules (one is 9a-5p, the other is 3p-10a) so our games are on the weekends, another has an autistic son and has to miss games occasionally due to that. I'm actually the one person who has a really super flexible schedule (I work from home and have tasks and deadlines rather than set hours), and even I have to bow out of games occasionally if a big project deadline is coming up.
Yeah, not everyone's group looks like mine, that is no doubt. But it isn't through lack of desire to play, and it isn't due to lack of commitment. Its just that work and family come first, and the specific commitments we have to work and family are a lot harder to plan around than some people's are.
If you have a game group of 5, you'll regularly get 3 of them showing up.
When they are young and have not much else to do, they're disorganised so miss sessions. When they're older and busy, they're organised but busy, so miss sessions. So whatever the age of the players, whatever their lifestyles, people will miss sessions.
This is why you have more people in your game group than you actually want, it's rare they'll all show up each time.
If you have 2 players, when one's absent things are a bit intimate.
3, the one absent is too often the one tying the other 2 together, and it's easy to end up with just 1 person there.
4 players is good, at least 2 will show up.
5 players is better, at least 3 will show up, though it might be different ones each week, there'll usually be at least 1 player's worth of overlap between sessions giving you some continuity, and if all 5 come it'll still work well.
6+ players gives you a lot of slack for missing players, but it's big enough that if everyone shows up this week it's pretty busy, and players may feel disengaged so that when you have just 3 next week, things are a bit flat.
This is why I've long found 5 to be a good number to have in a game group and then stick to the rule of - the game must go on. We play with whoever shows up.
Quote from: Emperor Norton;755916Eh, mine is more that if you have 5 adults that all have schedules that allow you to schedule the same time every week, without fail, you have much nicer daily schedules than my group does.
One has a variable schedule at work, two of my players have near opposite M-F schedules (one is 9a-5p, the other is 3p-10a) so our games are on the weekends, another has an autistic son and has to miss games occasionally due to that. I'm actually the one person who has a really super flexible schedule (I work from home and have tasks and deadlines rather than set hours), and even I have to bow out of games occasionally if a big project deadline is coming up.
Yeah, not everyone's group looks like mine, that is no doubt. But it isn't through lack of desire to play, and it isn't due to lack of commitment. Its just that work and family come first, and the specific commitments we have to work and family are a lot harder to plan around than some people's are.
I clear a date, say Monday nights, and say "I'm running this game fortnightly on Mondays 7pm-10pm. Who wants to play?" Then people who can meet that schedule sign up to play that game, and people who can't, don't. Players occasionally have to miss sessions, that's ok if they let me know in advance.
As GM I don't cancel* sessions. My wife is responsible for childcare on Monday nights and Thursday nights, just like I am on Tuesday, Wednesday, Friday. I give the game the same priority I do work, I plan around it, I'll make sure my work deadlines don't stop me running the game. So only a serious (eg) medical emergency would stop it.
*I once recently provisionally scheduled an extra game on a Tuesday (Monday the pub was shut for Bank Holiday) and had to cancel that. Never cancelled a regular scheduled Monday session in 3.5 years of my current game.
Edit: Actually this Monday I had a massive work deadline, had to work till 6.55pm, and was 15 minutes late to my 7pm game. First time that's ever happened.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;755921If you have a game group of 5, you'll regularly get 3 of them showing up.
When they are young and have not much else to do, they're disorganised so miss sessions. When they're older and busy, they're organised but busy, so miss sessions. So whatever the age of the players, whatever their lifestyles, people will miss sessions.
This is why you have more people in your game group than you actually want, it's rare they'll all show up each time.
If you have 2 players, when one's absent things are a bit intimate.
3, the one absent is too often the one tying the other 2 together, and it's easy to end up with just 1 person there.
4 players is good, at least 2 will show up.
5 players is better, at least 3 will show up, though it might be different ones each week, there'll usually be at least 1 player's worth of overlap between sessions giving you some continuity, and if all 5 come it'll still work well.
6+ players gives you a lot of slack for missing players, but it's big enough that if everyone shows up this week it's pretty busy, and players may feel disengaged so that when you have just 3 next week, things are a bit flat.
This is why I've long found 5 to be a good number to have in a game group and then stick to the rule of - the game must go on. We play with whoever shows up.
This is true, although my players are a bit more reliable - with 5 players we have 5 there maybe 60% of the time. I expect to run with 3+, and I might run with 2 depending on the game. Until recently I had 7 players and that was too many for high level 4e when everyone turns up, around half the time. I like 5 players for most campaigns; my Pathfinder one has 4 and we always get at least 3 show, so that's fine.
Quote from: Emperor Norton;755916But it isn't through lack of desire to play, and it isn't due to lack of commitment. Its just that work and family come first, and the specific commitments we have to work and family are a lot harder to plan around than some people's are.
I don't think it's a bad thing that your gaming is a lower priority than your work and family. But it is possible to set them all as equivalent commitments - obviously if your child is in a serious accident then you'll have to cancel your game, but there are plenty of regular family commitments that aren't inherently more important. Your child's leisure activities and your own leisure activities have much the same inherent importance afaics, and if you have a wife/partner then you can block off days when she is responsible, just as there are days when you're responsible. On Mondays my wife is responsible for childcare; if she can't fulfil her commitment for some reason then she hires a babysitter (with my money). :)
Quote from: Emperor Norton;755916Eh, mine is more that if you have 5 adults that all have schedules that allow you to schedule the same time every week, without fail, you have much nicer daily schedules than my group does.
One has a variable schedule at work, two of my players have near opposite M-F schedules (one is 9a-5p, the other is 3p-10a) so our games are on the weekends, another has an autistic son and has to miss games occasionally due to that. I'm actually the one person who has a really super flexible schedule (I work from home and have tasks and deadlines rather than set hours), and even I have to bow out of games occasionally if a big project deadline is coming up.
Yeah, not everyone's group looks like mine, that is no doubt. But it isn't through lack of desire to play, and it isn't due to lack of commitment. Its just that work and family come first, and the specific commitments we have to work and family are a lot harder to plan around than some people's are.
Yes, I agree with that.
Hell, I have trouble even taking vacation days because about half the time I get pulled into an emergency and/or regular work because of illness or whatever, and my team is perpetually understaffed because it's cheaper that way.
So when I hear people who get together at the same time weekly for years for something, whether it an RPG or for a night at the bar having drinks and watching the game, that's a foreign thing to me.
Quote from: flyerfan1991;755958Yes, I agree with that.
Hell, I have trouble even taking vacation days because about half the time I get pulled into an emergency and/or regular work because of illness or whatever, and my team is perpetually understaffed because it's cheaper that way.
So when I hear people who get together at the same time weekly for years for something, whether it an RPG or for a night at the bar having drinks and watching the game, that's a foreign thing to me.
I'm thinking it could be a public sector/private sector thing - 9-5 jobs in the private sector are getting pretty rare these days. Public sector jobs tend to be a lot more stable I think, and either less demanding, or at least the high-demand periods are more predictable.
Yeah, I think the issue isn't so much a gamer finding a night every week to play RPGs, but getting five adults to find the same night every week to play RPGs.
Quote from: Haffrung;756088Yeah, I think the issue isn't so much a gamer finding a night every week to play RPGs, but getting five adults to find the same night every week to play RPGs.
I don't know. I know people who have card gaming get togethers where the four people involved haven't missed a single card game night in 20 years.
I know people who always get together on Sundays during NFL season and watch football all day, without fail.
I've known people who got together every Saturday morning to play football or baseball during the summer.
They didn't have any problem committing. It's only gamers who mysteriously have "emergencies" and more pressing engagements on game nights. It tells me they really don't want to be gaming, and that gaming is just something they do to fill time until they can do something they actually want to do.
I guess that's a gamer to me. You game because you want to. You game because you find it important enough to spend your time on regardless of other options.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;755921If you have a game group of 5, you'll regularly get 3 of them showing up.
When they are young and have not much else to do, they're disorganised so miss sessions. When they're older and busy, they're organised but busy, so miss sessions. So whatever the age of the players, whatever their lifestyles, people will miss sessions.
This is why you have more people in your game group than you actually want, it's rare they'll all show up each time.
If you have 2 players, when one's absent things are a bit intimate.
3, the one absent is too often the one tying the other 2 together, and it's easy to end up with just 1 person there.
4 players is good, at least 2 will show up.
5 players is better, at least 3 will show up, though it might be different ones each week, there'll usually be at least 1 player's worth of overlap between sessions giving you some continuity, and if all 5 come it'll still work well.
6+ players gives you a lot of slack for missing players, but it's big enough that if everyone shows up this week it's pretty busy, and players may feel disengaged so that when you have just 3 next week, things are a bit flat.
This is why I've long found 5 to be a good number to have in a game group and then stick to the rule of - the game must go on. We play with whoever shows up.
I have generally found this to be the case.
Quote from: Gabriel2;756095I don't know. I know people who have card gaming get togethers where the four people involved haven't missed a single card game night in 20 years.
I know people who always get together on Sundays during NFL season and watch football all day, without fail.
I've known people who got together every Saturday morning to play football or baseball during the summer.
They didn't have any problem committing. It's only gamers who mysteriously have "emergencies" and more pressing engagements on game nights. It tells me they really don't want to be gaming, and that gaming is just something they do to fill time until they can do something they actually want to do.
I guess that's a gamer to me. You game because you want to. You game because you find it important enough to spend your time on regardless of other options.
I have seen the behavior in pretty much every hobby or activity I have been involved in. There are people who show up regularly and those who are less consistent (for a wide variety of reasons). If you are part of that core group of consistent attendees the best thing to do is not make the activity itself contingent on the presence of the inconsistent people. If it is a competetive activity that is a bit different. Since the inconsistent people will hurt your performance come game day.
At the end of the day, while I would like for everybody to make it to the game, it is just a game, and i don't want people putting strain on their work or marriage to attend if something they need to attend to comes up. I'll have fun whether it is six people or four people. I know some guys for example who have jobs where they may suddenly have to write a proposal on game night and it is a choice between attending or not completing a major project. It can come up on occassion and I am not going to lecture someone who can't make it for that kind of reason.
... Its amazing that people don't realize that not everyone does a M-F 9-5 job. Yeah, if everyone in your group is a 9-5er, or has a consistent schedule that leaves a specific time open, its not that hard to have a consistent event every week.
Not everyone has that. Some people's schedules are different every week, sometimes you have multiple players with very conflicting schedules that makes hunting a time they are all off really difficult.
Even my schedule, which is usually very flexible, has times where not only is it not, but I work ridiculous numbers of hours in one week. I literally worked 40 hours straight once during a product release (I work in online marketing). And you know, I can't tell them to change the release date of a multimillion dollar product because I have a D&D game.
(Hell, even my games with my kids are on hold for the next couple of weeks because of summer camps, and that is the easiest of games to get organized)
I'm currently on hiatus. It was about 6 weeks since my last game. Until I get settled (sometime in August), I probably won't have a regular game.
I almost exclusively GM. Rarely, I will play, usually to try out a new game, or at a convention for fun, or with a couple GMs I enjoy playing with.
My hope is to start up a group sometime in Aug - Sept with a setting of my own creation.
Quote from: BedrockBrendan;756122I have seen the behavior in pretty much every hobby or activity I have been involved in. There are people who show up regularly and those who are less consistent (for a wide variety of reasons)
I'm a personal trainer, and people have payments for the sessions going out regularly. If they fail to show without notice, they just lose the session - and thus the money. It's exactly equivalent to buying a pizza, standing there with your money in hand, and then when they're about to give you the pizza, you just drop the money on the floor and walk away without a pizza.
Clients in general will fail to show for sessions 1 in 6 times. But that's the overall rate, in practice if you've 10 clients, 3-4 will show up even with a broken arm and a fever, 3-4 will be there only 1 time in 3 (these tend to quit after a couple of months), and the other 2-3 are there the average 5 times in 6.
As well, in both this and my previous career I've been involved in hiring people, and about 1 in 4 people simply don't show up to their job interview. And 1 in 4 people who get hired don't show up to sign up. In both cases they're never heard from again.
So I also don't think this is something only gamers do. Even when they'll actually lose money or a job opportunity (ie chance to make money), they still flake out. And what you find is that this is an individual character trait, the person who flakes out on rpg sessions is late to work, forgets to do the shopping, and so on. Some people just have their shit together, some don't.
I'm only ordinarily well-organised, I make 5 sessions in 6, unless I'm hosting then it's 6/6 :)
Quote from: Gabriel2;756095I don't know. I know people who have card gaming get togethers where the four people involved haven't missed a single card game night in 20 years.
I know people who always get together on Sundays during NFL season and watch football all day, without fail.
I've known people who got together every Saturday morning to play football or baseball during the summer.
They didn't have any problem committing. It's only gamers who mysteriously have "emergencies" and more pressing engagements on game nights. It tells me they really don't want to be gaming, and that gaming is just something they do to fill time until they can do something they actually want to do.
I guess that's a gamer to me. You game because you want to. You game because you find it important enough to spend your time on regardless of other options.
do you think there is a degree of spousal approval here?
I mean poker night, football night, baseball games are all more generally socially acceptable than "playing elves with your geeky friends" so if you have to cancel something the more political thing is elf night?
I don't have that problem. I never ever miss a session and by that I mean in the last 35 years if I said I was going to be at a session I would be there.
Here in Sing we play bi weekly on Sundays because work sucks up all the free time M-F til about 11pm til midnight most nights. In a year I think we have cancelled 3 or 4 sessions because of people being out of the country or away. I have 4 regular players all of whom were new to RPGs a year ago. A few other players have come and gone.
i play in a (more or less) weekly warhammer game plagued by cancellations and delays and i judge weekly (more than less) DCC game that will soon be plagued by scheduling conflict with a pathfinder campaign two of my players are involved with. pf GM is back from a prolonged trip and i presume they will be trying to catch up. i'll have to think something up for the rest of us to do. but yes, it is quite rare for me not to chuck dice at least once a week.
Quote from: Gabriel2;756095I don't know. I know people who have card gaming get togethers where the four people involved haven't missed a single card game night in 20 years.
I know people who always get together on Sundays during NFL season and watch football all day, without fail.
I've known people who got together every Saturday morning to play football or baseball during the summer.
They didn't have any problem committing. It's only gamers who mysteriously have "emergencies" and more pressing engagements on game nights. It tells me they really don't want to be gaming, and that gaming is just something they do to fill time until they can do something they actually want to do.
I guess that's a gamer to me. You game because you want to. You game because you find it important enough to spend your time on regardless of other options.
Yeah I'm not giving mad respect to anyone who prioritizes the Jets vs the Packers or bridge or D&D over their kids first soccer game. What you call commitment I call lame.
Sure I'll miss an event of my family's on occasion but I'll miss or be late to a game more often.
Quote from: RPGPundit;755229The real point here wasn't to shame anyone, just to analyze exactly how many people here are current and active gamers. I have a theory that there's a larger proportion of actual gamers here than on other forums.
You're deluding yourself then.
Quote from: Bunch;756251Yeah I'm not giving mad respect to anyone who prioritizes the Jets vs the Packers or bridge or D&D over their kids first soccer game. What you call commitment I call lame.
What, you mean the baby can't get it's own milk, or change it's own soggy diaper?!? Next you'll tell me I shouldn't throw it in the oven, either!
:rolleyes:
I don't think anyone's advocating ditching the wife or kids to do gaming. That's pretty lame.
But some of us have worked out a consistent system that
allows us to game regularly (weekly, in my case). It's a commitment we've worked out. Some people, like flyerfan1991 for example, have commitments that make that nigh-impossible. I'm not going to say he's "a non-gamer", but he isn't as active as others. I don't think he's "less of a man" (in fact, I think his priorities are commendable) because he doesn't game as much as me. But I think it's accurate to say he's not as active. Two years ago, he would have been more active than me; I had a year I didn't play after moving to New Mexico.
Quote from: jibbajibba;756216do you think there is a degree of spousal approval here?
I mean poker night, football night, baseball games are all more generally socially acceptable than "playing elves with your geeky friends" so if you have to cancel something the more political thing is elf night?
I definitely get that impression - spouses are more willing to lean on players than they would be for other group social activities such as bowling, team sports, even poker maybe. Players - and sometimes even GMs - often don't prioritise it the way they would other group-dependent social activities, where the absence of one player has a deleterious effect on the group. The weirdest thing to me is when they don't even prioritise it as highly as passive, non-group-dependent activities like going to the cinema. At that point I wonder why they signed up to play; but as GM these days I mostly try to accommodate 'occasional' players when possible - it's a lot easier in some systems (AD&D) than others (4e D&D), though. I did recently boot a player who missed two of her first three sessions.
Quote from: Novastar;756341What, you mean the baby can't get it's own milk, or change it's own soggy diaper?!? Next you'll tell me I shouldn't throw it in the oven, either!
Yup, I missed a year when my son was born. I guess if I had had a decent-sized family, three or four kids, that could have been three or four years of no gaming, or Internet-only gaming, which would have sucked (but would have been worth it later, of course). And from what I see a lot of gamers here in London either have no children, or drop out when their first child is born, or (like me) only have one child and schedule games so their spouse is minding the critter on game nights. Low gamer fertility is definitely an issue when it comes to breeding the next generation. :)
Quote from: S'mon;756478I definitely get that impression - spouses are more willing to lean on players than they would be for other group social activities such as bowling, team sports, even poker maybe.
Haha, my wife is more likely to be angry if I schedule games at times she can't play.
Quote from: S'mon;756480Yup, I missed a year when my son was born. I guess if I had had a decent-sized family, three or four kids, that could have been three or four years of no gaming, or Internet-only gaming, which would have sucked (but would have been worth it later, of course). And from what I see a lot of gamers here in London either have no children, or drop out when their first child is born, or (like me) only have one child and schedule games so their spouse is minding the critter on game nights. Low gamer fertility is definitely an issue when it comes to breeding the next generation. :)
Yeah I'm on kid two about to try for number three. So pretty much I've either had a vomiting moody pregnant wife or a newborn for three years and probably at least two more years. Almost all the gaming I do is internet based and highly interrupt prone. I'm doing my damndest to find an afternoon game.
My gamers are all pretty reliable; but then, reliability is something I select for.
Quote from: Emperor Norton;756508Haha, my wife is more likely to be angry if I schedule games at times she can't play.
QFT
Due to kids we were hosting games at our place, but to be honest, it was just too much hassle dealing with kids and trying to game. We even tried playing with other gamers with families at their place, but if our two kids are a hassle during the game, adding in 4 others was almost insane. One of our additional hassles is we can't hire just any babysitter due to one of our kids having "special needs." So we each now get a night off to game or do whatever individually.
Quote from: Brander;757232QFT
Due to kids we were hosting games at our place, but to be honest, it was just too much hassle dealing with kids and trying to game. We even tried playing with other gamers with families at their place, but if our two kids are a hassle during the game, adding in 4 others was almost insane. One of our additional hassles is we can't hire just any babysitter due to one of our kids having "special needs." So we each now get a night off to game or do whatever individually.
Yeah each person's child situation is different but gaming with mine so far has been borderline impossible. That and my wife's pregnancyare just horrible for her so it's not an option to just say you take an evening all by yourself. I so look forward to preschool.
I never found kids as distracting as the wife.
My kid is 9 now when she was 1-4 she woudl be in bed by 7pm my mates show up at 7:30 after storytime. No kid issue.
Now she is 9 she walks in on Sunday and her and her mates poke fun as the geeky nerds for a while. Last sesisona s no one else was about she sat and advised the players. "Since you have turned into a dragon why not just bite him in half rather than trying to be clever"
Never really been an issue.
Wife has be come immune and demands for attention have been replaced with painting eggs or sitting on teh balcony and skyping her mates.
One thing you should all try though is staff. Makes like a lot easier when you have staff :)
Staff? Like a butler or maid?!?
So if I game once a month, does that mean Im not a gamer for any few hours difference between one session & the next?
I took up game and campaign design as a hobby... All my table time is play testing stuff. Does that count as gaming, or is that something different?
Quote from: Scott Anderson;757851I took up game and campaign design as a hobby... All my table time is play testing stuff. Does that count as gaming, or is that something different?
Playtesting is work. By creating game stuff instead of playing with it, that makes you a non-gamer, and we all know that gaming stuff designed by non-gamers is rubbish.
Basically, you're the cancer killing gaming. I hope you're pleased with yourself. Insert random terms of abuse here. Etcetera.
Quote from: TristramEvansSo if I game once a month, does that mean Im not a gamer for any few hours difference between one session & the next?
It does indeed, but on the other hand, that means your GM can say they bring back a lapsed gamer EVERY MONTH, and that's good for like seven forum points.
Quote from: Marleycat;757841Staff? Like a butler or maid?!?
I read that and thought "he has GOT to be joking."
Each kid is really different. We've adjusted our gaming schedule according to the sleep schedule of my girl. Since December she sleeps 10-12 hours a noght, starting at around 20:00, so that is when we start our games. Typically, we play 3 hours, very focused.
I think she will be more disruptive when she grows older and she starts going to sleep later.
Quote from: Marleycat;757841Staff? Like a butler or maid?!?
I was thinking more like the Game shop owner in "Gamers 2: Dorkness Rising", who had his employees make 50 Bard characters, for his weekly game night ( he died A LOT).