Quote from: gleichmanI have no idea how it works in your group, but in mine it's often a matter of the players stating where they are going next week- and then the GM works out of the detail of what's to found there. Sometimes the turn around time is far less than a week.

I pretty much work that way as well, Brian.

Quote from: VBWyrdeThat, I'd say, even depends on the GM and how prepared they are. I know of some GMs where they spend a week on an adventure that's where you go.  

Keep in mind guys, that I agree with the "tabletop games are infinitely more open than PC games" concept. Still, I have to admit, Bradford's comment struck me as having some truth to it: the knee-jerk reaction to PC vs. Tabletop is to invoke the wonders of the improvisational human GM as opposed to the fascist pre-programmed computer. Thinking about it, for many GMs, in many campaigns, Brad is probably correct, the human is not really THAT flexible. (Obviously, I think the human is much more flexible with regards to the other scales of tabletop gameplay.)

Quote from: VBWyrdeI know others (myself included) who create a World of potential adventures and they know at least something about every direction you could head as a group or individual PC. And they are able to spontaneously fill in the blanks as they go when necessary.

See, the MMO/PC developer does this already. Before they release the game, they populate the world with NPCs, dungeons, villages, adventure sites, oddities, etc. Thus, there is no need to spontaneously fill in the blanks as they go. The MMO is on a superficial level equivalent to some peoples' idea of a sandbox tabletop game -- the PCs can go anywhere, at any time, even to places that would kill them outright. There isn't one preplanned adventure for the week because all the adventure opportunities have been written and await the PCs to interact with them.

I think this is a pretty good point to be made in favor of the MMO.

Quote from: VBWyrdeAnd they are able to spontaneously fill in the blanks as they go when necessary. And usually the adventures relate directly to the PC group in some way (their history, or motives, or stray comments, funny asides, etc). The difference being that in WoW it is not spontaneous, nor is it flexible, nor do you get that direct Player-GM-Story effect.

This is, of course, where tabletop wins on the campaign level. Every group of players has a unique play experience every night of every campaign. The adventures play off of their characters' goals and desires. The news they hear includes snippets of other campaigns. Heck, my current campaign is taking a turn to where it looks like it is going to pick up where my last campaign left off because the players want it to... even though that was not the original intent.

Quote from: cmagounThinking about it, for many GMs, in many campaigns, Brad is probably correct, the human is not really THAT flexible. (Obviously, I think the human is much more flexible with regards to the other scales of tabletop gameplay.)

That's likely why (with some other reasons) MMORPGs are more popular than PnP rpgs- and also why they have different markets. One appeals to those good at making up their own fantasy worlds, and the other appeals to those who don't need or want that.

However I'd like to point out that even in the non-flexible model Brad used as an example- there is still flexibility beyond any MMORPG.

Consider this article: http://movies.ign.com/articles/815/815454p1.html and imagine it applied to a G.I. Joe Online MMORPG.

Even a non-flexible GM and group has the ability to ignore switches in background like that. And this is often a major draw to PnP IME- to do the story right after the official owners created a train wreck. The Online version would be fixed by the owner to the 'new image', but a PnP version could be the cartoon from the 80s or even the serious version from the 60s.

I make huge use of this in my own rpgs. I run a re-imgained Marvel setting without all the crap that's happened in the comics. I've ran Star Trek without the politically correct coating (and tech nerfing) it got in TNG and later. I've ran my own version of Shadowrun where I gutted the background and replaced it with my own.

Online, I've played in EQ, Matrix Online, SWG, and LotRO- and done the same thing in the same places, with the same history as thousands of other players. It kills a night and it's fun. But it's no PnP RPG.

Quote from: gleichmanThat's likely why (with some other reasons) MMORPGs are more popular than PnP rpgs- and also why they have different markets. One appeals to those good at making up their own fantasy worlds, and the other appeals to those who don't need or want that.

Actually, I think the main reason MMORPGs are more popular than PnP RPGs is the same reason I always gripe when I see threads about "making PnP RPGs mainstream." Quite simply, the PnP RPG experience doesn't appeal to the vast majority of the mainstream and never will. Sitting around a table and playing "Let's Pretend" with minis and dice makes many people uncomfortable and just seems like an uninteresting waste of time to many others.

This ickiness transcends any attempt at redefining the hobby or making the perfect light game designed to draw in the non-gamer; it doesn't matter what color or shape you make the parachute, or how easy you make it to deploy, the experience of skydiving does not appeal to me.

MMOs manage to strip out the icky factor by being a video game that you play from the comfort and anonymity of your own home. At the same time, they grab a couple key points of the RPG experience (combat, character building) and add a whole glob of other addictive factors (you can play any time, randomized loot) to the mix.

Quote from: gleichmanHowever I'd like to point out that even in the non-flexible model Brad used as an example- there is still flexibility beyond any MMORPG.

Agreed.

Quote from: gleichmanI make huge use of this in my own rpgs. I run a re-imgained Marvel setting without all the crap that's happened in the comics. I've ran Star Trek without the politically correct coating (and tech nerfing) it got in TNG and later. I've ran my own version of Shadowrun where I gutted the background and replaced it with my own.

That sounds cool. I knew you did LoTR with Age of Heroes, but I did not know that you ran other customized "third party" settings.

Quote from: gleichmanOnline, I've played in EQ, Matrix Online, SWG, and LotRO- and done the same thing in the same places, with the same history as thousands of other players. It kills a night and it's fun. But it's no PnP RPG.

Frankly, I love the concept of MMOs. The idea of living the life of a hero in a fantastic world, all in a reactive, 3d environment appeals to me. Unfortunately, the current implementation falls way short of this idea and what you get is a repetitive, sorta-tactical combat game that falls short of the tabletop experience in all the important ways.

Quote from: Pierce Inverarity2. ChiXXors: What's the M/F ratio on WoW? 10 to 1? 50 to 1?

There are legal statues that complicate getting reliable reports on that.  In real terms, Blizzard doesn't have to talk and there's no way to get verifiable counts from a third party.  The best information I can offer is strictly related to my main guild, which is about 55% female.

Quote from: Bradford C. WalkerThere are legal statues that complicate getting reliable reports on that.  In real terms, Blizzard doesn't have to talk and there's no way to get verifiable counts from a third party.  The best information I can offer is strictly related to my main guild, which is about 55% female.

Hard numbers are difficult, but the online hobby is reported as a whole as being female 'light', although some games are markly different.

The lack of official numbers don't stop people from trying however, for example: http://www.nickyee.com/daedalus/archives/001369.php gives the following for WoW:

The RL gender distribution is 84% male vs. 16% female.
The in-game gender distribution is 65% male vs. 35% female.

Quote from: cmagounActually, I think the main reason MMORPGs are more popular than PnP RPGs is the same reason I always gripe when I see threads about "making PnP RPGs mainstream." Quite simply, the PnP RPG experience doesn't appeal to the vast majority of the mainstream and never will. Sitting around a table and playing "Let's Pretend" with minis and dice makes many people uncomfortable and just seems like an uninteresting waste of time to many others.

I don't disagree with this although I'm uncertain about it being the *main reason*. Even if not the main one however, it certainly is an important one.

Quote from: gleichmanThe RL gender distribution is 84% male vs. 16% female.
The in-game gender distribution is 65% male vs. 35% female.

By my reckoning, that puts the creepy-dude-playing-a-female distribution at 19%. :raise:

Quote from: HaffrungBy my reckoning, that puts the creepy-dude-playing-a-female distribution at 19%. :raise:

Is that behavior necessarily creepy?  I've never done an MMO but it always occurred to me that if the same character was on my screen all the friggin' time then maybe I could see choosing a chick for my PC.

Quote from: jrientsIs that behavior necessarily creepy?  I've never done an MMO but it always occurred to me that if the same character was on my screen all the friggin' time then maybe I could see choosing a chick for my PC.

Most all of my Alliance side characters are chicks, because the human male is horrifyingly ugly, gnomes are creepy, and the Night elf male isn't much better.  The Dwarf is good though.  I like the dwarf.  

Now, that changes on Horde side, 'cause the guys there actualyl look badass.  Except maybe the Belf male.

Quote from: jrientsIs that behavior necessarily creepy?  I've never done an MMO but it always occurred to me that if the same character was on my screen all the friggin' time then maybe I could see choosing a chick for my PC.

There's disagreement on the subject without a doubt with some finding it creepy on the face of it and others (I would guess most here) not.

Myself, I find it a little creepy although I can to a degree understand a few counter arguments- i.e "watching a female backside running across the screen is more appealing" and the "ugly male characters" complaint. However I think it goes over edge when someone specifically misrepresents themselves which is often the case.

I wonder if the increasing use of voice clients is altering these stats any...

Quote from: jrientsIs that behavior necessarily creepy?  I've never done an MMO but it always occurred to me that if the same character was on my screen all the friggin' time then maybe I could see choosing a chick for my PC.

That was the exact reason cited by someone in my Rifts group for having his WoW character be female.

Quote from: jrientsIs that behavior necessarily creepy?

Dude I used to work with told me he was getting grief from his wife over how much he played Everquest. She really flipped when she found out he got 'married' in-game. Turns out the guy was playing a female character, which makes it even weirder. Oh, and he's a virulent homophobe.

To me, guys impersonating women on the internet is de facto creepy.

There's a difference between picking a female avatar, and actively impersonating a woman.

I see a lot of the former, and very little of the latter, save one snot-nosed little kid who would do it to get free stuff.

My guild knew full well I was a guy, and while a few people were initially surprised when they heard me over Teamspeak, no one really cared.

Quote from: J ArcaneMy guild knew full well I was a guy, and while a few people were initially surprised when they heard me over Teamspeak, no one really cared.

Or they kept it to themselves. I know I do because it's just not worth the drama.

I'd still think you're creepy however.

Quote from: gleichmanOr they kept it to themselves. I know I do because it's just not worth the drama.

I'd still think you're creepy however.

And I'd still think you were an idiot, and probably question your confidence in your sexuality.