Quote from: Shasarak;1144440I would say to put me down for lazy fun but it does seem like a lot of effort.

Some would say your comment is a wiener, but I think it's your wurst.

Quote from: Garry G;1144405In another thread somebody posted the idea that railroads are for lazy players. This is something I've not come across before. Normally we'd say railroading is a GM failure. They've negatively affected the player experience by pushing their sub-par want to be novelist thing. Now it may be a player problem.

I'm not sure I'm keen on the idea that a hobby should deride people for being lazy. It's supposed to be a fun thing. So is a lazy Sunday afternoon of RPGs a bad thing?

Linear adventures best suit lazy or less-involved players. Players may prefer linear campaigns & adventures.
Railroading is the GM making PCs do things they don't want to do, and is a bad meta-game technique.

Some really bad linear adventures include railroading as the recommended GMing style - forced captures for instance, that must succeed for the adventure to continue. This is more a '90s thing though.

Have I mentioned some people have really fucked up ideas of what a "railroad" is? Yes I have.

Quote from: Omega;1144481Have I mentioned some people have really fucked up ideas of what a "railroad" is? Yes I have.

Not in this thread, you haven't.

I like this analysis - https://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/36900/roleplaying-games/the-railroading-manifesto

Quote from: Spinachcat;1144415There are different versions of the "lazy + casual" gamer.

It think its important we define these terms. They're not the same thing.

One of my favorite players was somebody who never read a RPG book, never owned any dice or minis, never was interested in RPG forums or even chatting about the game between sessions, but he was absolutely proactive during the game session and thought railroads were beyond boring. It was all about the action/reaction inside the setting and the immersion. He was what educators used to call an "audio/kinesthetic learner" so he loved RPGs for the social aspects, but sitting down for long periods wasn't fun. Unsurprisingly, he was a great LARPer.

Yes.  Plus there are distinctions within both lazy gaming and casual gaming within a single player.  I've had a couple of players that were neither lazy nor casual by default, but could turn into one or the other or even both when they'd had a rough week.  Sometimes it is someone else's turn to carry the session.

Quote from: S'mon;1144488Not in this thread, you haven't.

I like this analysis - https://thealexandrian.net/wordpress/36900/roleplaying-games/the-railroading-manifesto

Lemme take a stab at it, and then go read the article.

A railroad is where player choice is minimized or absent in how an adventure plays out.

*Edit. Ah the Alexandrian. That was easy.*

My current group of players are too fucking lazy even for railroads. I describe a situation to them and ask what they want to do; or roleplay an NPC, in the hope they'll interact, and all I get is fucking silence back, or some stupid question unrelated to what's really going on. I tried a sandbox with them, explaining beforehand that the idea was to explore and engage with the setting, and it was one of the most painful RPG experiences of my fucking life.

They come alive a bit when there's a combat, and they get to use all the cool things on their character sheet, but they don't employ any tactics; they don't plan interesting ways of moving the combat forward. It's roll the dice, apply spell/feat/effect, whoop when they inflict some damage, and frequently ask 'is it dead yet?'

Thing is, some - many - players are like this. They like having the GM telling them what the fuck is going on, and then reacting to what they see as the key part of the moment. They really don't want to put in the work of exploring the setting or the adventure through question and dialogue: What they want is a constant drip-feed of factoids that they react to, and then have the plot roll on regardless.

One of the players has taken on the GM mantle, and so I'm a player with the same crew. And it's even more fucking frustrating, because I end up being the one who does all the talking, generates the ideas, or suggests what the party should do, and I feel like I'm the attention hog. In reality I'm not; I'm just trying to engage with the scenario and what the GM's prepared. But fuck, it's tough.

But hey, they're good people, and we get to have a laugh, and they rarely complain, and they don't insist on X cards or safety tools, and they seem up for just about any game system I suggest, so I can live with the frustration, I guess. But it was way refreshing to play in a couple of GenCon games online last week, and actually get to roleplay with guys who did engage and think about shit, and explore, and suggest crazy stuff, knowing the GM will riff on it.

So yeah. There's some lazy roleplaying out there, and it's a fucking grind. I blame a lot of it on MMORPGs, where its easy to be propelled by the system and no real incentive to engage and explore. They're used to one set piece at a time, where the real rewards come from a tactics-free, effects-laden combat. I personally find that fucking dull, and one of the reasons I rarely play computer RPGs anymore.

Quote from: BrokenCounsel;1144499My current group of players are too fucking lazy even for railroads. I describe a situation to them and ask what they want to do; or roleplay an NPC, in the hope they'll interact, and all I get is fucking silence back, or some stupid question unrelated to what's really going on. I tried a sandbox with them, explaining beforehand that the idea was to explore and engage with the setting, and it was one of the most painful RPG experiences of my fucking life.

Time for more timed threats.  I have a couple of dice that are exclusively used as random timers... if the party is sloppy, noisy or moving too slow, enemy reinforcements arrive in d_ rounds - and I toss it right into the middle of the miniatures area.  

Don't announce it either.  Just keep turning the face to the next lower number.  Use random encounters if there aren't appropriate direct reinforcements.  

If they're zoning out in social situations, have a high-ranked NPC take offense to their silence; throw them out and hire someone else.  Put away your adventure notes and grab another, less rewarding one, and make sure the NPC party that got the job brags about how rewarding it was.  (...and surreptitiously recycle that adventure)

Snake Plisskin them.  Poison/curse/disease them with something lethal and have a big 'ol timer where they can see it.  (Use something digital so you can pause when the game pauses, you're trying to wake them up, not be a dick.)

Most importantly, make sure its not your fault - make sure there is something to engage every character both in and out of combat.  

Make sure they have at least a small background for their characters and use it.  Give the bard a chance to entertain, the druid a quirky squirrel friend that lives near their base and loves to gossip, the wizard a cranky but doting master that checks in at somewhat inopportune times (but is in no position to Deus ex machina them out... well, maybe once when stakes aren't too high, just to show he cares).  Give the thief a loving mum that somehow always finds out where he is and sends care packages.

Quote from: BrokenCounsel;1144499My current group of players are too fucking lazy even for railroads. I describe a situation to them and ask what they want to do; or roleplay an NPC, in the hope they'll interact, and all I get is fucking silence back, or some stupid question unrelated to what's really going on. I tried a sandbox with them, explaining beforehand that the idea was to explore and engage with the setting, and it was one of the most painful RPG experiences of my fucking life.

They come alive a bit when there's a combat, and they get to use all the cool things on their character sheet, but they don't employ any tactics; they don't plan interesting ways of moving the combat forward. It's roll the dice, apply spell/feat/effect, whoop when they inflict some damage, and frequently ask 'is it dead yet?'

Thing is, some - many - players are like this. They like having the GM telling them what the fuck is going on, and then reacting to what they see as the key part of the moment. They really don't want to put in the work of exploring the setting or the adventure through question and dialogue: What they want is a constant drip-feed of factoids that they react to, and then have the plot roll on regardless. [...]

Been there myself and it is frustrating watching the disengagement. I try honest talk about what they want and what motivates them, but it rolls back to roughly the same: blank stares & silence or "combat, w00t!"

Been trying the safe-space method where there is a ready supply of what they want (rolling dice) with only a bit of a thinking stretch, like asking about time/space tactics or potential peaceful resolution. But mostly I've letting them take it at their own pace so trust is built and waiting for when they feel ready to explore pushing back at the world. It helps that I try to isolate such players in small tables so we can remove skittishness and discover play motivations.

That said, it is not easy and seems to be epidemic to this new crop of gamers. Daring, resilience, purpose, attention span... it feels like starting behind even elemetary basics, more like trying to find a will to be alive. Kinda spooky honestly.

Quote from: BrokenCounsel;1144499My current group of players are too fucking lazy even for railroads. I describe a situation to them and ask what they want to do; or roleplay an NPC, in the hope they'll interact, and all I get is fucking silence back, or some stupid question unrelated to what's really going on. I tried a sandbox with them, explaining beforehand that the idea was to explore and engage with the setting, and it was one of the most painful RPG experiences of my fucking life.

They come alive a bit when there's a combat, and they get to use all the cool things on their character sheet, but they don't employ any tactics; they don't plan interesting ways of moving the combat forward. It's roll the dice, apply spell/feat/effect, whoop when they inflict some damage, and frequently ask 'is it dead yet?'

Thing is, some - many - players are like this. They like having the GM telling them what the fuck is going on, and then reacting to what they see as the key part of the moment. They really don't want to put in the work of exploring the setting or the adventure through question and dialogue: What they want is a constant drip-feed of factoids that they react to, and then have the plot roll on regardless.

One of the players has taken on the GM mantle, and so I'm a player with the same crew. And it's even more fucking frustrating, because I end up being the one who does all the talking, generates the ideas, or suggests what the party should do, and I feel like I'm the attention hog. In reality I'm not; I'm just trying to engage with the scenario and what the GM's prepared. But fuck, it's tough.

But hey, they're good people, and we get to have a laugh, and they rarely complain, and they don't insist on X cards or safety tools, and they seem up for just about any game system I suggest, so I can live with the frustration, I guess. But it was way refreshing to play in a couple of GenCon games online last week, and actually get to roleplay with guys who did engage and think about shit, and explore, and suggest crazy stuff, knowing the GM will riff on it.

So yeah. There's some lazy roleplaying out there, and it's a fucking grind. I blame a lot of it on MMORPGs, where its easy to be propelled by the system and no real incentive to engage and explore. They're used to one set piece at a time, where the real rewards come from a tactics-free, effects-laden combat. I personally find that fucking dull, and one of the reasons I rarely play computer RPGs anymore.

To be fair that sounds like no fun at all and I wouldn't play with that group.

I'm also up for effort in hobbies, roleplaying being one. I've started getting back into wild swimming, which is far too much effort for a fat bastard like me, cos I can't go lazy swimming. I also like the extra effort and the cold water running down the back of my wetsuit. Effort is good in general.

I also like art films but don't want to spend all my time watching another great but impenetrable 4 hour movie. Sometimes I want to watch the whole Blade trilogy, I just did that even the awful third one and loved it. I'm happy to run and play in games that stretch us all as we go where we want from what's there but a lot of the time a Sunday afternoon lazy movie feel is just fun.

I'm fairly lucky. I have one hard-driving player, one lump, and two moderates in my group. The driven and lump players tend to balance out.

I feel like a lot of D&D cut it's teeth on the railroad and it's been bashed a bit too much. Those convention games which became the core set of adventure modules were all railroads. They were so railroads they assumed all the same encounters with a score sheet to judge how well different groups did doing the identical set of things. And some of those were superb adventures! There is nothing wrong with the players liking a railroad. A ride can be lots of fun.

I recently finished playing Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan and damn that module was fun! But it's a total railroad. You start in the dungeons lowest level, and your goal is to escape alive. You can decide what you do or do not want to mess with, and which directions to go and such, but everyone is following mostly the same path through that dungeon, up the levels to the outside, or dying trying. You cannot even rest, as there is poison gas that will kill you if you delay. That railroad will drive your forward like a taskmaster with a whip.

I just started a new game for newbies, I'm seeing if a Hommlet type setting, the most stripped back version of 5e D&D rules, and some 1e-isms like a reduced levelling rate and a need for training (with mentor) to level up has an impact on play style.

We just spent the first 2 hour text chat session roleplaying in the tavern, which was fun - will see how it goes from there.

Quote from: Philotomy Jurament;1144461I guess I can understand that, as I tend to favor more specific or complicated (although not super-complicated) wargame rules. While I don't intend any condescension, I wouldn't be shy about saying "I like this" and "I don't like that." In my experience, stating a preference like that can often be read as condescension (or even hostility), especially online, and especially these days.


Sure; everyone should play what they like.

Definitely agree; I was referring to legitimate borderline hostility toward more casual rule sets. I tend to like more complex ones for more simulation but just do not understand bashing more lightweight rules. Also agree with other posters that there's a huge difference between casual and lazy play. Lazy to me is what someone else described in this thread: a group that just puts forward the least amount of effort.

Quote from: Garry G;1144528To be fair that sounds like no fun at all and I wouldn't play with that group.

I'm also up for effort in hobbies, roleplaying being one. I've started getting back into wild swimming, which is far too much effort for a fat bastard like me, cos I can't go lazy swimming. I also like the extra effort and the cold water running down the back of my wetsuit. Effort is good in general.

I also like art films but don't want to spend all my time watching another great but impenetrable 4 hour movie. Sometimes I want to watch the whole Blade trilogy, I just did that even the awful third one and loved it. I'm happy to run and play in games that stretch us all as we go where we want from what's there but a lot of the time a Sunday afternoon lazy movie feel is just fun.

Yeah, it's a tough one, but where I am, not easy to find a group that isn't all about 5ed or Pathfinder to the exclusion of all else. And as I say, they're unimaginative, but not disruptive, argumentative, or SJWs, so I can live with the drawbacks.