I had a discussion on my blog and G+ about what I called Whiners. These are the people who play one specific edition, any edition, and complain about it perpetually, about how it doesn't do what it's supposed to do, about how it's "broken", about how the publisher needs to fix it... and never, ever, do they switch to a different game or use a house rule to make their current game play the way they want it to play. They just whine about it continually.
It's possible that some are these are players only. They don't want to GM, they can't convince their fellow players to go along with any kind of change (or are afraid to suggest a change.) That might be an excuse, but then, why not find a group that plays the way they prefer?
No, I suspect something else. In particular, with regards to D&D, I suggested on G+ that most of the whiners have been the same people, across multiple editions. They have always played whatever the most recent edition is, and they have always whined. They whine and whine until a new edition comes out, they switch to that, and they keep whining. They are never satisfied.
Thus, some (all?) of the negative opinions of "4e players" is not really about 4e players, but about a particular group who just happens to be playing 4e *now*, but they were just as annoying back before there was a 4e, and were also the same people who whined back before there was a *3e*, perhaps even the same people who whined before 2e. When 5e comes out, they will switch, because they always do, but they will keep whining. They probably also whine about a lot of other, non-game things.
Thoughts?
There's probably truth to it. Some people just love to whine about everything. I certainly get that impression from reading certain forum boards. You just want to reach out and slap them, "All you've done is bitch and moan, so why in God's name are you still reading/playing it?"
However, the problem with most of the 4vengers is not that they whine about everything. Quite the contrary, they whine about everything BUT 4e, which is the greatest thing ever and if you like anything else, you're engaging in badwrong fun.
Quote from: talysman;653574Thoughts?
This thread is
1) Too meta.
2) Too whiny.
3) Too speculative.
There's really nothing good about it.
I knew people like that with 3e, bitched about it constantly but never made a move to find something else. Though to be fair in my area it is a chore to get a game of anything but 3e or Pathfinder going. That may play a part in it, though I suspect they are just chronic whiners.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;653575There's probably truth to it. Some people just love to whine about everything. I certainly get that impression from reading certain forum boards. You just want to reach out and slap them, "All you've done is bitch and moan, so why in God's name are you still reading/playing it?"
However, the problem with most of the 4vengers is not that they whine about everything. Quite the contrary, they whine about everything BUT 4e, which is the greatest thing ever and if you like anything else, you're engaging in badwrong fun.
I'm thinking I wouldn't even call what 4vengers do "whining". At worst, they're just fanatical about the thing they love. At best, maybe they're just ribbing people who play other editions?
I know I, as someone who prefers 0e, occasionally make jokes about 3e or 4e, but it's not like I really lose any sleep over those games, or worry about people playing them. I figure they probably like their game, so they should probably play it. And I figure there's got to be players of other editions who do the same: joke about how they think 0e sucks or 1e sucks, but really they don't care that much. I think there's too many cases where sensitive people interpret this kind of ribbing as some kind of "attack". Anyone who thinks you can "attack" a game, though, is an idiot; you can only attack a *discussion* about a game, swamping it with negative commentary to interrupt any useful conversation.
In that context, I think the 4vengers are very sensitive and have gone into some kind of permanent combat mode, but I don't think they're really whining about other games. A whine, I think, has to implicitly contain a plea that someone "fix it". 4vengers aren't asking that anything be fixed, except may that other gamers should stop playing other games or saying that other games are better for some purposes than 4e.
In their case, the whining is in the context of Next being announced and playtested. A LOT of whining going on there. It isn't just good enough to be content playing the game you like. Nope, you have to be sure everyone knows, every day, how you're getting screwed.
Quote from: beejazz;653576This thread is
1) Too meta.
2) Too whiny.
3) Too speculative.
There's really nothing good about it.
And none of the other versions of this thread were any good, either.
The next one's gonna rock, though.
Then again, Warhammer 1e was the best Warhammer.
Quote from: Rincewind1;653607Then again, Warhammer 1e was the best Warhammer.
Damn fucking straight.
Third is second, and second is third.
Quote from: talysman;653595In that context, I think the 4vengers are very sensitive and have gone into some kind of permanent combat mode, but I don't think they're really whining about other games. A whine, I think, has to implicitly contain a plea that someone "fix it". 4vengers aren't asking that anything be fixed, except may that other gamers should stop playing other games or saying that other games are better for some purposes than 4e.
Five years of being constantly under fire from fans of the other editions will do that to the hardest core fanbase. "It's not real D&D!" Yeah, maybe not, so go off and play a version that you think is D&D. Stop fucking going on about it, unless you care more about the name than the game.
Quote from: talysman;653574Thoughts?
I'm sure its one among many problems. Ultimately I think it comes down to many people simply enjoy complaining. Its easier than coming up with something nice to say that is actually interesting and worth a response. Some people just crave attention. Some people are genuinely looking for honest debate. And some people genuinely dislike a system, have legitimate reasons for it, and very urgently want everyone in the world to know that. (shrug)
The thing about posts online, it doesn't matter how stupid, self-absorbed, offensive, or infuriating they are, reading them is always optional.
Quote from: Rincewind1;653607Then again, Warhammer 1e was the best Warhammer.
Preach it like it is.
Quote from: beejazz;653576This thread is
1) Too meta.
2) Too whiny.
3) Too speculative.
There's really nothing good about it.
You're just an edition-churner trying to get ThisThreadNEXT to ship too soon and gouge us fans of our hard-earned electrons.
Quote from: talysman;653574I had a discussion on my blog and G+ about what I called Whiners. These are the people who play one specific edition, any edition, and complain about it perpetually, about how it doesn't do what it's supposed to do, about how it's "broken", about how the publisher needs to fix it... and never, ever, do they switch to a different game or use a house rule to make their current game play the way they want it to play. They just whine about it continually.
To sum it up, you had a discussion about The Gaming Den.
Quote from: Ladybird;653628Five years of being constantly under fire from fans of the other editions will do that to the hardest core fanbase. "It's not real D&D!" Yeah, maybe not, so go off and play a version that you think is D&D. Stop fucking going on about it, unless you care more about the name than the game.
That's probably true. But again, I think there's some instances of taking things out of context. I've seen many cases where someone asks for opinions in a thread, and other people will post comparisons or personal experiences, and a sensitive soul will take the negative statements as some kind of crusade ("edition warring".) It's not. It's just someone expressing an opinion. If someone is busting into threads that are about 4e only or 3e only to say that those aren't real D&D, that's disruptive. In another context, though, it's just expressing an opinion. If someone doesn't like it, they can express a contrary opinion.
As an aside, this is one of (many) problems with The Banning Place. They interpret all negative comments (about 4e or Pathfinder, at least,) as "edition warring". They have no concept of context. They also interpret all positive comments about OD&D or 1e as edition warring, and the mods have a tendency to start off the negative comments themselves and reprimand anyone who disagrees with them, but that's another kind of stupid...
Sometimes partisans of other games offer a similar (but inaccurate) portrayal of people who have kept using old D&D or T&T books but house-ruled the hell out of them.
I have a friend who is basically an "AD&D forever" (and preferably all the time) guy. However, it's sometimes startling how ignorant he is of the actual by-the-book rules.
Quote from: talysman;653663That's probably true. But again, I think there's some instances of taking things out of context. I've seen many cases where someone asks for opinions in a thread, and other people will post comparisons or personal experiences, and a sensitive soul will take the negative statements as some kind of crusade ("edition warring".) It's not. It's just someone expressing an opinion. If someone is busting into threads that are about 4e only or 3e only to say that those aren't real D&D, that's disruptive. In another context, though, it's just expressing an opinion. If someone doesn't like it, they can express a contrary opinion.
As an aside, this is one of (many) problems with The Banning Place. They interpret all negative comments (about 4e or Pathfinder, at least,) as "edition warring". They have no concept of context. They also interpret all positive comments about OD&D or 1e as edition warring, and the mods have a tendency to start off the negative comments themselves and reprimand anyone who disagrees with them, but that's another kind of stupid...
(http://thechive.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/very-inspirational-2.jpg?w=500&h=499)
Quote from: talysman;653574Thoughts?
Your whine sucks. Mine is better.
There once was a great DM. He ran our group through two of the most awesome
Pathfinder campaigns, best I've played in for quite a while. Then, during a lull in gaming, he decided to get married. We never saw him again.
I ran into him at the used book store today and asked him how he was doing. He told me he was fine, the marriage was great and he had a son now who was two. I asked him if he was going to teach him about RPGs when he was older and he said no. When I asked him why he told me, "Well, I'm an adult now married and with a family so I have to give up gaming. My wife thinks its for the best."
One of the best DMs I ever had, pussy-whipped into giving up RPGs.
Quote from: jeff37923;653684One of the best DMs I ever had, pussy-whipped into giving up RPGs.
Or he simply prefers the company of his wife to that of a bunch of geeky guys, and is too polite to say so, so he relies on one of the most stale stereotypes there is, ever had been, or ever will be, secure in the knowledge that it will never be questioned by a bunch of geeky gamer guys.
Quote from: taustin;653686Or he simply prefers the company of his wife to that of a bunch of geeky guys, and is too polite to say so, so he relies on one of the most stale stereotypes there is, ever had been, or ever will be, secure in the knowledge that it will never be questioned by a bunch of geeky gamer guys.
"Many women are quick to complain about their boring husbands after they are done moulding them into their image of a perfect man."
So the take-away for the umpteenth time for these kinds of threads is: walk on eggshells v. grow a thicker skin.
Well that was a fun topic revisit. Next!
Quote from: Reckall;653661To sum it up, you had a discussion about The Gaming Den.
:rotfl:
Quote from: Reckall;653661To sum it up, you had a discussion about The Gaming Den.
I see what you did there. :D
People complain about the RPGs for a lot of reasons. But the one that sticks out for me - and it may be what you're referring to here - are the D&D math wonks.
They want to D&D to be a fine-tuned model of mathematical beauty. To them, the game should be built from the ground up based on PC balance and scaling. If a 5th level Wizard does 15 per cent more DPS than a 5th level Rogue, then the designers are blithering dolts and the game is utterly broken. This group also tends to overlap with the char op group, who want lots of customizable PC options to build their awesome PCs. They resolutely and relentlessly try to break the game, and then they complain that it's broken.
The math wonk crowd found their edition in 4E. It wasn't perfection, but it was the closest an edition of D&D had come to their ideal of a balanced, analytical tactical skirmish game. D&D Next has sent them into apoplexy, not only because it means their favourite edition isn't being supported anymore, but because it doesn't look as though the math will be as uniform and transparent as it was in 4E.
As for why they don't play another game, WotC have always tried to appeal to these players - call them the Magic the Gathering generation. It's just that D&D is a heck of a lot tougher to balance than a lot of other games, and if you go too far with the symmetrical math, you get a game like 4E, that alienates a lot of players who enjoy different aspects of D&D and find a math-forward system unappealing.
And then we need to question how much of this stuff is simply forum fodder. Do players at the table in the real world complain endlessly about quadratic wizards and linear fighters? Maybe some. But I'm betting not nearly as much as you see on forums. Debating (and complaining about) the math of D&D is a sub-hobby in and of itself.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;653575However, the problem with most of the 4vengers is not that they whine about everything. Quite the contrary, they whine about everything BUT 4e, which is the greatest thing ever and if you like anything else, you're engaging in badwrong fun.
Indeed, quite 100% true and agreed. They treat 4e as Holy Writ. Just check this used-to-be-decent forum wherein you'll get sanctioned for criticizing 4e while taking a big crap all over other editions is 110% hunky-dory. BleaRGH.
I've come to think of 4e as "D&D: Bitch Edition" due to these people. Dear GAWD what a bunch of whining bitches...
Quote from: The Ent;654351Indeed, quite 100% true and agreed. They treat 4e as Holy Writ. Just check this used-to-be-decent forum wherein you'll get sanctioned for criticizing 4e while taking a big crap all over other editions is 110% hunky-dory. BleaRGH.
I've come to think of 4e as "D&D: Bitch Edition" due to these people. Dear GAWD what a bunch of whining bitches...
Yeah, well, it sucks if you actually hate everything about D&D and the only edition you liked is getting thrown into the garbage bin.
I'm not being especially sympathetic, but I understand them.
Quote from: vytzka;654355Yeah, well, it sucks if you actually hate everything about D&D and the only edition you liked is getting thrown into the garbage bin.
:rotfl:
Yeah, I get that. "Oh noes the D&D ed for D&D-haters is getting ganked!!!" :D
Quote from: Haffrung;653780As for why they don't play another game, WotC have always tried to appeal to these players - call them the Magic the Gathering generation.
I don't know, I'd probably call them the MMO gang to be honest, that charop stuff and character building, maths crunching etc is lifted directly from WoW and its ilk.
This culminated in the bizarre spectacle of posters like Mr GC and presumably others who appeared to be unable to comprehend RPGs outside of MMO tinted glasses. I think he started out with MMOs and then moved to tabletop RPGs confident that the online experience would give him the edge. But instead he wound up talking greek, most of what he was saying made no sense whatsoever in the context of TTRPGs. Not that it was wrong, it literally was nonsensical
unless you mentally changed tracks and imagined he was talking about an MMO. Then it made perfect sense.
Quote from: The Traveller;654362I don't know, I'd probably call them the MMO gang to be honest, that charop stuff and character building, maths crunching etc is lifted directly from WoW and its ilk.
This culminated in the bizarre spectacle of posters like Mr GC and presumably others who appeared to be unable to comprehend RPGs outside of MMO tinted glasses. I think he started out with MMOs and then moved to tabletop RPGs confident that the online experience would give him the edge. But instead he wound up talking greek, most of what he was saying made no sense whatsoever in the context of TTRPGs. Not that it was wrong, it literally was nonsensical unless you mentally changed tracks and imagined he was talking about an MMO. Then it made perfect sense.
If it makes you feel better, GC didn't have a much more successful career at the Den either.
Quote from: vytzka;654365If it makes you feel better, GC didn't have a much more successful career at the Den either.
Didn't make me feel bad in the first place, just a mild sense of... O_o when I figured out what was going on. However while he's an extreme example I feel with a good degree of certainty that MMOs are where much of the charop and build sentiment comes from.
Quote from: talysman;653574No, I suspect something else. In particular, with regards to D&D, I suggested on G+ that most of the whiners have been the same people, across multiple editions. They have always played whatever the most recent edition is, and they have always whined. They whine and whine until a new edition comes out, they switch to that, and they keep whining. They are never satisfied.
....
Thoughts?
I've read everyone else's comments, too, but basically I think it's fair to say that you're somewhere between most wrong and completely wrong.
First, it's important to acknowledge that if you are a player of RPGs, there are a limited number of people with which you will be able to play. This might be a result of Geography (in a 'live game' only people who can get to the game are potential players), but among the possible players, it will get winnowed down further.
If you play Warhammer 1st edition, but someone else plays Warhammer 2nd edition, and neither of you are willing to compromise, you're not going to be able to play together.
If you have thoughts on which edition is 'the best' or what game you'd prefer to play, you have a vested interest in increasing the player base for that game. Not only does it make it easier for you to find a group, it also increases the amount of product support available to you.
A game that has 100 players (spread around the world) is only going to get the support from the developer that is truly 'labor of love'. A game that has the support of 10 million players around the world will be more likely to provide 'niche' products - a setting on Elizabethean England or Tripoli Pirates might only appeal to a small segment of the player base, but with enough players, that might be enough to justify the development and production costs.
So, from a purely selfish point of view, if you have a preferred edition, having more players play that version is 'for the best'. The more you like variety and you value having multiple different systems with different quirks, etc, the less this will apply. But considering the investment of time involved in learning a new system, there is definitely a bias against experimentation.
So, once you establish that you have a preferred edition (or an edition that has such broad support that it is really the only option available to you), that doesn't mean you have to accept it's perfect. Most products can be improved. RPGs aren't like cars where the 'technology' advances and needs to be incorporated into the latest models - but even outside of blue tooth and GPS, there are improvements that can make the car work better. Most people would agree that key ignition is better than hand-cranking the car to start; automatic transmission is easier to drive than manual. In an RPG, streamlining and simplifying the rules but maintaining or improving performance is desireable. Resolving an action in 5 seconds with the same level of granularity is better than resolving the same action in 45 seconds.
So, if you have a preferred edition, and you identify ways the game could be 'better' (which is admittedly subjective), you have a vested interest in communicating that improvement to the designers and the players. It's possible that you could just communicate it to your group, but the more your group differs from the 'base', the less value additional supplments have for you.
For example, if you completely change the way clerics and clerical magic work in your D&D game, any published adventure that presumes a cleric opponent will require modification. Any source book that focuses or includes clerics as members of religious hierarchy with specific required abilities requires changing...
So, ultimately, having more people play the same game you play in the same way you play it is best for you personally. There's nothing wrong with advocating for your preferred game and/or style. Now, obviously, if your preferred style differs, you have a vested interest in stopping others from 'winning converts'. That's what this is all about.
Some people are happy with the status quo; some people would prefer changes to the game in one way, and others would prefer changes to the game another way. I liked 3.x, but I wanted to see some serious improvements. 4th edition didn't 'fix' anything that I had a problem with and instead created totally new problems (I don't play that edition). Ultimately, I had to create my own game and now I have to create all the support material for that game. The advantage is I get
exactly what I want, but the disadvantage is that it takes more work - I can't be lazy and passively consume products created for my benefit.
Quote from: deadDMwalking;654393I've read everyone else's comments, too, but basically I think it's fair to say that you're somewhere between most wrong and completely wrong.
I suppose I would be, if I were talking about what you're talking about.
But I'm not talking about people afraid that they can't find players, or people who have a list of improvements they wish would be incorporated into their favorite game. I'm talking about people who
don't enjoy the game they play, don't enjoy any other game, either, but won't make any changes, won't stop playing, and won't stop whining.
I think it's because the game they really enjoy playing is The Whining Game. It's what that Transactional Analysis book
Games People Play called "Why Don't You Yes But": someone says "I have a problem", gets other people to suggest solutions, but always has a reason why that solution can't work, so there's no point in trying. they don't really want a solution; they want to revel in the effect they have on the conversation.
If you like 90% of the rules in your favorite game, but there's a couple changes you wish would be made, you could *probably* make several of those changes, but if not, you'd still enjoy the game. But if you don't enjoy your "favorite" game and just want to loudly complain about how you don't enjoy it, can't change it, and don't want to play any other game, you have another agenda.
Quote from: deadDMwalking;654393First, it's important to acknowledge that if you are a player of RPGs, there are a limited number of people with which you will be able to play.
In your world maybe. To me, having played an RPG before is not a requirement to play at my table, and I haven't been in shortage of players since... ever, in fact.
Quote from: deadDMwalking;654393If you play Warhammer 1st edition, but someone else plays Warhammer 2nd edition, and neither of you are willing to compromise, you're not going to be able to play together.
In my world these people are called douches. I would play an AD&D 2nd edition game, Skills and Powers, 4th edition game, you name it, as long as I think I can enjoy the presence of the other players and DM. It's one thing to debate the merits of this or that game on the internet. It's quite another to get together with a bunch of friends and roll some dice for fun.
Quote from: deadDMwalking;654393If you have thoughts on which edition is 'the best' or what game you'd prefer to play, you have a vested interest in increasing the player base for that game. Not only does it make it easier for you to find a group, it also increases the amount of product support available to you.
A game that has 100 players (spread around the world) is only going to get the support from the developer that is truly 'labor of love'. A game that has the support of 10 million players around the world will be more likely to provide 'niche' products - a setting on Elizabethean England or Tripoli Pirates might only appeal to a small segment of the player base, but with enough players, that might be enough to justify the development and production costs.
So, from a purely selfish point of view, if you have a preferred edition, having more players play that version is 'for the best'. The more you like variety and you value having multiple different systems with different quirks, etc, the less this will apply. But considering the investment of time involved in learning a new system, there is definitely a bias against experimentation.
That's debatable. On one hand I see what you mean and can see where you are coming from on this, not to mention the personal investment one feels having fun with a particular game for decades, but on the other hand, if you take into consideration that you do not *have* to close your table to newcomers, that you can basically play games with anyone you want, and that you can publish these things which support the game you like, then I think that point gets heavily mitigated. This is not the 90s anymore where RPG publishers controlled the fan material, shut down websites and aficionados could only rely on the LGS to provide their game products. This reality simply doesn't exist anymore.
Quote from: deadDMwalking;654393So, once you establish that you have a preferred edition (or an edition that has such broad support that it is really the only option available to you), that doesn't mean you have to accept it's perfect. Most products can be improved. RPGs aren't like cars where the 'technology' advances and needs to be incorporated into the latest models - but even outside of blue tooth and GPS, there are improvements that can make the car work better. Most people would agree that key ignition is better than hand-cranking the car to start; automatic transmission is easier to drive than manual. In an RPG, streamlining and simplifying the rules but maintaining or improving performance is desirable. Resolving an action in 5 seconds with the same level of granularity is better than resolving the same action in 45 seconds.
Not necessarily, that too is a matter of taste. I've argued that easier is not always better some time ago, and there is some evidence pointing out that some people, under the right circumstances, will actually get more satisfaction out of hard choices and considerations, instead of defaulting to the simplest one. Just like there are aficionados of rules light single-mechanics games, there are aficionados of rules heavy many parts and subparts rules systems. The idea that "streamlined" everything is necessarily best for everyone is basically wrong.
Now that's not to say that somehow one has to accept a preferred game or games as "perfect" for some reason. I agree with that idea.
Quote from: deadDMwalking;654393So, if you have a preferred edition, and you identify ways the game could be 'better' (which is admittedly subjective), you have a vested interest in communicating that improvement to the designers and the players. It's possible that you could just communicate it to your group, but the more your group differs from the 'base', the less value additional supplements have for you.
True.
Quote from: deadDMwalking;654393So, ultimately, having more people play the same game you play in the same way you play it is best for you personally. There's nothing wrong with advocating for your preferred game and/or style. Now, obviously, if your preferred style differs, you have a vested interest in stopping others from 'winning converts'. That's what this is all about.
It's not necessarily best for you personally, but I think that's a right everyone has. You can like what you like, dislike what you dislike, and be vocal about it. You should also be ready for the disagreements and eventual backlash, if you are extremely vocal about it.
Quote from: deadDMwalking;654393Some people are happy with the status quo; some people would prefer changes to the game in one way, and others would prefer changes to the game another way. I liked 3.x, but I wanted to see some serious improvements. 4th edition didn't 'fix' anything that I had a problem with and instead created totally new problems (I don't play that edition). Ultimately, I had to create my own game and now I have to create all the support material for that game. The advantage is I get exactly what I want, but the disadvantage is that it takes more work - I can't be lazy and passively consume products created for my benefit.
There's a third option: designers could stop trying to reinvent the wheel and actually name these new versions and variants differently, as the different games they really are. If D&D 4E had been named "13th Age", there wouldn't nearly have been so much backlash around it.
Quote from: The Ent;654356"Oh noes the D&D ed for D&D-haters is getting ganked!!!" :D
"Suck it, grognards! All your sacred cows have been filleted at last! Now we finally have the
D&D we always want - whaddya mean, new edition?!"
Quote from: Black Vulmea;654481"Suck it, grognards! All your sacred cows have been filleted at last! Now we finally have the D&D we always want - whaddya mean, new edition?!"
That's pretty much verbatim I'd say. Just add some screaming at the end.
Quote from: Benoist;654467The idea that "streamlined" everything is necessarily best for everyone is basically wrong.
There are many 'fiddly bits' sweet spots out there.
Quote from: Benoist;654467There's a third option: designers could stop trying to reinvent the wheel and actually name these new versions and variants differently, as the different games they really are.
Except then they wouldn't have what they really want: control over the flagship game of the hobby.
Many gamers want
Dungeons & Dragons to reflect their deep-set personal preferences, and the owners of
D&D, fingers perpetually stuck into the wind, accommodate them, sure that gamers will follow their lead and remain true to the brand as they cater to naysayers instead of those who actually like the game as it is.
Quote from: Benoist;654467Not necessarily, that too is a matter of taste. I've argued that easier is not always better some time ago, and there is some evidence pointing out that some people, under the right circumstances, will actually get more satisfaction out of hard choices and considerations, instead of defaulting to the simplest one. Just like there are aficionados of rules light single-mechanics games, there are aficionados of rules heavy many parts and subparts rules systems. The idea that "streamlined" everything is necessarily best for everyone is basically wrong.
Just a point of clarification - I'm talking specifically about maintaining all the same level of granularity (ie, not reducing choice), but making it easier.
For example, if all hit points are in thousands, and all damage is in hundreds (ie, the smallest amount of damage is 100), there's no reason not to divide by 100. Then your hit points and damage are in small numbers. Small numbers are easier to work with than large numbers.
Likewise, you could have a table that says 'roll a d10 - consult table; roll a d10 - consult table. That works out to 100 possible outcomes. If you roll a d100 and have only a single table to look at, that's faster.
If two processes yield the same result, the simpler one is usually better for an RPG.
Quote from: BenoistIn my world these people are called douches. I would play an AD&D 2nd edition game, Skills and Powers, 4th edition game, you name it, as long as I think I can enjoy the presence of the other players and DM. It's one thing to debate the merits of this or that game on the internet. It's quite another to get together with a bunch of friends and roll some dice for fun.
I've noticed that there are people who will play only D&D 4E and there are people will refuse to play D&D 4E. Now, these are tenable positions because both sorts have plenty of opportunity to find their own social circles for gaming.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;654491Many gamers want Dungeons & Dragons to reflect their deep-set personal preferences,.
Meh, the sooner people realize that they aren't that special, the better the hobby will be for it. "Official" D&D going to 3e and then 4e didn't really impact my gaming at all. I just stayed with the games I liked. I'm not special enough to think that they should cater to my whims if I'm in the minority. They are a business, and their only goal should be trying to make the most money. Obviously that's not 4e, so 4e fans should learn to get over themselves.
Welcome to the generation where everyone gets a ribbon, and everyone's a winner, so everyone thinks they are special and deserve special attention.
Quote from: Benoist;654467In your world maybe.
BTW, happy birthday Benoist!
Quote from: deadDMwalking;654493Just a point of clarification - I'm talking specifically about maintaining all the same level of granularity (ie, not reducing choice), but making it easier.
For example, if all hit points are in thousands, and all damage is in hundreds (ie, the smallest amount of damage is 100), there's no reason not to divide by 100. Then your hit points and damage are in small numbers. Small numbers are easier to work with than large numbers.
I understood, and I actually disagree with that point. I know that seems counter-intuitive in a world of everything simpler, faster, stronger, "better," but that simply isn't true for everyone. The effort you have to make to understand some issues and solve them for yourself may very well end up giving you more satisfaction with the end result. Some people like it when not everything is given to them on a silver platter, or when they have to furnish some effort into getting what they want out of a specific problem (or system).
It's actually part of the attraction to some in regards to say, Gygaxian prose, or the way the DMG is organized, the way you have to basically immerse yourself in the reading to follow the threads and trains of thoughts as an active reader, instead of just treating the game as a series of equations, or the rules book as a manual to program a toaster oven.
So no. What you are saying is in fact not true. Easier is not necessarily better. Not for everyone, in any case.
Quote from: Mistwell;654502BTW, happy birthday Benoist!
Hey! Thanks Mark! Much obliged! :)
Quote from: Benoist;654507I understood, and I actually disagree with that point. I know that seems counter-intuitive in a world of everything simpler, faster, stronger, "better," but that simply isn't true for everyone. The effort you have to make to understand some issues and solve them for yourself may very well end up giving you more satisfaction with the end result. Some people like it when not everything is given to them on a silver platter, or when they have to furnish some effort into getting what they want out of a specific problem (or system).
It's actually part of the attraction to some in regards to say, Gygaxian prose, or the way the DMG is organized, the way you have to basically immerse yourself in the reading to follow the threads and trains of thoughts, instead of just treating the game as a series of equations and using the rules book as manuals to program a toaster oven.
So no. What you are saying is in fact not true. Easier is not necessarily better. Not for everyone, in any case.
That's like the conversation we had a week or so ago re: the AD&D matrix vs BAB. One is objectively simpler, but I made sure I never said that one was better.
If simpler was always better, than everyone would be playing B/X and no one would be playing any other version.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;654509That's like the conversation we had a week or so ago re: the AD&D matrix vs BAB. One is objectively simpler, but I made sure I never said that one was better.
I actually don't think one is simpler than the other. That was the source of our disagreement, in fact. ;)
Quote from: Sacrosanct;654509If simpler was always better, than everyone would be playing B/X and no one would be playing any other version.
Correct.
Quick! Let's have the argument all over again!
Ok, it's your birthday....maybe not ;)
Quote from: Benoist;654507The effort you have to make to understand some issues and solve them for yourself may very well end up giving you more satisfaction with the end result.
Words to design a game by. Of course I'v taken it to a level that would drop a strong man to his begging knees, but hey- someone had to create the most complex RPG ever.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;654511Quick! Let's have the argument all over again!
Ok, it's your birthday....maybe not ;)
Yes, yes. Good things to avoid arguments, these birthdays thingies. :D
Maybe we'll debate the thing again some time. But I really don't feel like it today. :)
Quote from: gleichman;654512Words to design a game by. Of course I'v taken it to a level that would drop a strong man to his begging knees, but hey- someone had to create the most complex RPG ever.
LOL :D
Hell, I'm re-reading Mythus in my spare time and having a blast with it. Some people would call that sadomasochistic, or insane! :)
Yeah, I doubt that Age of Heroes has gathered enough chrome to put it in the same league as Dangerous Journeys!
Quote from: Benoist;654517LOL :D
Hell, I'm re-reading Mythus in my spare time and having a blast with it. Some people would call that sadomasochistic, or insane! :)
Speaking of which, I got my Dangerous Journey's book in the mail yestereday. Half of the pages fell out. I'm so mad. The description said it was in good condition, with no mention of half of the pages having lost the binding.
My second thought was, "Well, I guess after leaving TSR, Gygax used the same shitty printer for Dangerous Journeys that he used for Unearthed Arcana and Oriental Adventures"
Quote from: Sacrosanct;654521Speaking of which, I got my Dangerous Journey's book in the mail yestereday. Half of the pages fell out. I'm so mad. The description said it was in good condition, with no mention of half of the pages having lost the binding.
My second thought was, "Well, I guess after leaving TSR, Gygax used the same shitty printer for Dangerous Journeys that he used for Unearthed Arcana and Oriental Adventures"
I saw a guy who had taken his Mythus and Mythus Magic books apart voluntarily and had gone to a binder to make one big 800+ pages tome out of them. It was a thing of beauty. I am REALLY tempted to acquire some more copies and do the same thing.
Sorry for your book though. :(
Quote from: Benoist;654517LOL :D
Hell, I'm re-reading Mythus in my spare time and having a blast with it. Some people would call that sadomasochistic, or insane! :)
Re-reading... not reading... re-reading...
You know, I don't think I've ever so much as seen a copy of that. Found a review (http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/reviews/rev_5496.html) and it looks like I could get a used copy on ebay for under $20 including shipping. I must pass I fear, trying to cut down on expenses.
Reading the review... I don't know quite what to say. I think I match the game in number of acronyms but may well be beat on the oddity of what they stand for. I didn't think to rename PCs to HPs, pity for there is genius.
His core book has 152% of my page count and like mine doesn't have any setting information. So I'm whipped there too.
So it's looking bad for my claims of top-end complexity. However I have cube roots in mine, and I see nothing like that in the review. Besides even in the worse case there's the planned version 5.0.1 update and I could add in some stuff like quadratic equations. I used them when designing the game, shouldn't be hard to make them more visible...
Quote from: gleichman;654535So it's looking bad for my claims of top-end complexity. However I have cube roots in mine, and I see nothing like that in the review. Besides even in the worse case there's the planned version 5.0.1 update and I could add in some stuff like quadratic equations. I used them when designing the game, shouldn't be hard to make them more visible...
Wait wait wait. There are cube roots in your game? That is awesome! :D
Maybe I should create an RPG that requires proficiency in knowing how to factor polynomials and finding y intercepts just to create a character ;)
Quote from: Black Vulmea;654491Many gamers want Dungeons & Dragons to reflect their deep-set personal preferences, and the owners of D&D, fingers perpetually stuck into the wind, accommodate them, sure that gamers will follow their lead and remain true to the brand as they cater to naysayers instead of those who actually like the game as it is.
TSR, under any ownership, has always relied on churn. Most of their customers get in to the hobby for a few years, and then move on. Every few years, they have a whole new customer base, who don't remember, or care, what the last edition was like.
We are exceptions, as are nearly all the people who you notice talking about gaming on the internet. We should try to keep that in mind.
Quote from: deadDMwalking;654493Likewise, you could have a table that says 'roll a d10 - consult table; roll a d10 - consult table. That works out to 100 possible outcomes. If you roll a d100 and have only a single table to look at, that's faster.
If two processes yield the same result, the simpler one is usually better for an RPG.
That isn't necessarily true. A d10 plus a d10 can, as a rule, be put in to a matrix that takes up a lot less space on the page than a table, and is far easier to process on the fly.
But that actually agrees with your point.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;654546Maybe I should create an RPG that requires proficiency in knowing how to factor polynomials and finding y intercepts just to create a character ;)
The Time Cube of RPGs. (http://www.timecube.com/) :D
No but dead seriously now: I'm sure there's a guy somewhere who could be fan of both advanced calculus and RPGs who'd get a kick out of such a game. Would he be objectively "wrong" to like it? Fuck no!
Quote from: Sacrosanct;654546Maybe I should create an RPG that requires proficiency in knowing how to factor polynomials and finding y intercepts just to create a character ;)
That sounds disturbingly like Space Opera.
I don't remember any advanced maths in Space Opera chargen, but then again it has been a lot of years ere I last looked at it.
Quote from: taustin;654563That sounds disturbingly like Space Opera.
I have fond memories of Space Opera. And Star Patrol. And Star Trek: Adventure Gaming in the Final Frontier.
All replaced by HERO System. But still, fond memories.
Quote from: Phillip;654577I don't remember any advanced maths in Space Opera chargen, but then again it has been a lot of years ere I last looked at it.
Not, perhaps, those actual functions, but character generation was complicated enough that it might as well have.
Quote from: gleichman;654583I have fond memories of Space Opera. And Star Patrol. And Star Trek: Adventure Gaming in the Final Frontier.
All replaced by HERO System. But still, fond memories.
The problem with Space Opera wasn't that it was a bad game. It was a good game. In fact, it was about five or six good games. Once you get rid of the games you don't want to play, what was left looked pretty good. We didn't play it much, because I never had time to computerize character generation, though.
Quote from: taustin;654590The problem with Space Opera wasn't that it was a bad game. It was a good game. In fact, it was about five or six good games. Once you get rid of the games you don't want to play, what was left looked pretty good. We didn't play it much, because I never had time to computerize character generation, though.
Space opera is a bit clunky, but has a TON of personality.
Quote from: Bill;654595Space opera is a bit clunky, but has a TON of personality.
So you're saying that Space Opera is the fat chick at the senior prom?
Quote from: taustin;654596So you're saying that Space Opera is the fat chick at the senior prom?
Blatant sexism will not be tolerated. Unless you happen to be an attractive guy. Then mockery is allowed.
Yeah, check your thin privilege, bigot.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;654546Maybe I should create an RPG that requires proficiency in knowing how to factor polynomials and finding y intercepts just to create a character ;)
Well, if popular culture depictions of gamers from 80s are to be trusted, you will strike a goldmine.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;654600
Blatant sexism will not be tolerated. Unless you happen to be an attractive guy. Then mockery is allowed.
Hey, I
like fat chicks! Never really cared for Space Opera, though.
Quote from: jasmith;654608Hey, I like fat chicks!
Chubby chaser.
Quote from: taustin;654596So you're saying that Space Opera is the fat chick at the senior prom?
Space Opera is the president of the Key Club, and Model UN.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;654600
Blatant sexism will not be tolerated. Unless you happen to be an attractive guy. Then mockery is allowed.
Ha! I'm good, then.
*puts Big Bottom by Spinal Tap on*
Quote from: Sacrosanct;654600
Blatant sexism will not be tolerated. Unless you happen to be an attractive guy. Then mockery is allowed.
Is having an enormous penis good enough?
Psssssst. 4" is not enormous.
Quote from: Sacrosanct;654600
Blatant sexism will not be tolerated. Unless you happen to be an attractive guy. Then mockery is allowed.
:rotfl:
*puts Spinal Tap's Bitch School on*
*turns the volume to 11*
Oh, did he mean mockery OF the attractive man?
SHIT
Quote from: gleichman;654583I have fond memories of Space Opera. And Star Patrol. And Star Trek: Adventure Gaming in the Final Frontier.
All replaced by HERO System. But still, fond memories.
No wonder you are so fucked up.
Quote from: vytzka;654661Oh, did he mean mockery OF the attractive man?
SHIT
:rotfl:
Well
d'uh.Attractive men =
PATRIARCHY!!!!
I think patriarchy is attractive OLD men.
Attractive young men is... bishonenocracy? I'd like to live in that.
Quote from: vytzka;654665I think patriarchy is attractive OLD men.
Patriarchy = attractive old men = attractive men who've gotten old! My point stands!:D
Attractive men = PATRIARCHY!!!
(Allthough it's okay to mock unattractive men too really, more or less.)Quote from: vytzkaAttractive young men is... bishonenocracy? I'd like to live in that.
Hm, sounds okay. Depends on wich bishonen is in charge I guess.
Quote from: taustin;654650Is having an enormous penis good enough?
You kind of need an enormous wallet to go with that.
Quote from: jeff37923;654663No wonder you are so fucked up.
I have fond memories of Space Opera....may I be fucked up too?
I wish I still had the game; very curious how I would react to the space opera system so many years later.
Fond memories do not guarantee 'like it in the present'
Quote from: The Ent;654669Hm, sounds okay. Depends on wich bishonen is in charge I guess.
The... bishonest.
Quote from: Bill;654694I wish I still had the game; very curious how I would react to the space opera system so many years later.
I actually don't remember much of the system. Just that we had a good time with it.
Class based, and a kitchen sink approach to the rules that attempted the whole range of sci-fi with mixed success, and that's about it.
And a time when we were caught in a much larger foe's tractor beam. So as the engines fought against it we dump all the fuel canisters out the back, let the tractor beam slam them into the other ship and detonated them. After that I was always of the mind that tractor beams were fine tools, but not so great as weapons...
Quote from: vytzka;654695The... bishonest.
Well as long as he's not
dishonest...
(Ent = master of bad puns)
Quote from: vytzka;654648Ha! I'm good, then.
*puts Big Bottom by Spinal Tap on*
Quote from: taustin;654650Is having an enormous penis good enough?
What I meant was, if you happen to be an attractive guy, then others are free to mock you. Guess I worded that poorly ;)
Quote from: gleichman;654696I actually don't remember much of the system. Just that we had a good time with it.
Class based, and a kitchen sink approach to the rules that attempted the whole range of sci-fi with mixed success, and that's about it.
And a time when we were caught in a much larger foe's tractor beam. So as the engines fought against it we dump all the fuel canisters out the back, let the tractor beam slam them into the other ship and detonated them. After that I was always of the mind that tractor beams were fine tools, but not so great as weapons...
I remember a player whining when a squadron of police ships arrived to arrest him for piracy.
The player seemed to think it was unfair for the government to send 4 ships after his one ship.
Duh.
Quote from: Bill;654724I remember a player whining when a squadron of police ships arrived to arrest him for piracy.
The player seemed to think it was unfair for the government to send 4 ships after his one ship.
Maybe he should have used whatever arguments he had to support this obviously insane conclusion for an in-character complaint to the government?
Quote from: Sacrosanct;654719What I meant was, if you happen to be an attractive guy, then others are free to mock you. Guess I worded that poorly ;)
You're breaking character. When called upon unclear wording, you're supposed to get pissy, then lock the thread.
Quote from: vytzka;654734You're breaking character. When called upon unclear wording, you're supposed to get pissy, then lock the thread.
My bad. And when someone creates a TT ticket to ask what I was talking about, I can reply with "because" and close it with "asked and answered", even if I never really answered it.
Quote from: vytzka;654654Psssssst. 4" is not enormous.
Yeah, it's only >< this long, but it's > < this fuckin' big around.
Quote from: Bill;654693You kind of need an enormous wallet to go with that.
No, not at all. You need a wallet full of an enormous amount of money, regardless of how large the wallet is. And by "wallet," I mean "bank account."
(I live within spitting distance of Hollywood. I know all about this subculture. If you see a grey haired old man with a really young woman, the natural assumption is that she's a trophy wife/goldidgger, not daughter, because it's a lot more likely.)
Quote from: Bill;654694I have fond memories of Space Opera....may I be fucked up too?
I wish I still had the game; very curious how I would react to the space opera system so many years later.
Fond memories do not guarantee 'like it in the present'
It is still available (http://www.fantasygamesunlimited.net/category/Space-Opera-4). Pretty much the entire product line is still in print.
Quote from: gleichman;654696And a time when we were caught in a much larger foe's tractor beam. So as the engines fought against it we dump all the fuel canisters out the back, let the tractor beam slam them into the other ship and detonated them. After that I was always of the mind that tractor beams were fine tools, but not so great as weapons...
Our first experience was a gun fight in a bar. One guy had a gauss pistol. Turns out, a gauss pistol can actually sever the head from the body entirely with a single shot. We were impressed.
Quote from: Bill;654724I remember a player whining when a squadron of police ships arrived to arrest him for piracy.
I recall a Traveller game, where one guy had a 200 ton merchant ship with a bunch of stupid/high tech artefacts that made it pretty much impossible to hit, for turret based weapons. The meson spinal mount, however, need a -4 or higher on 2d6 to hit, and each hit did an automatic 30+ criticals. He did stand down to be boarded at that point.
Quote from: Bill;654724The player seemed to think it was unfair for the government to send 4 ships after his one ship.
Quote from: Bill;654724Duh.
And a guy who showed up, one time, to play Top Secret. Found out that unarmed civilians were worth experience points, so he set up on a shopping mall roof with a sniper rifle. Was just
outraged when the SWAT team showed up. I don't think it was the GM killing his character that caused him to never come back, so much as the other players offering to help the SWAT team (because we were better shots - and full agents were worth a
lot of experience).
Quote from: taustin;654757I recall a Traveller game, where one guy had a 200 ton merchant ship with a bunch of stupid/high tech artefacts that made it pretty much impossible to hit, for turret based weapons. The meson spinal mount, however, need a -4 or higher on 2d6 to hit, and each hit did an automatic 30+ criticals. He did stand down to be boarded at that point.
And a guy who showed up, one time, to play Top Secret. Found out that unarmed civilians were worth experience points, so he set up on a shopping mall roof with a sniper rifle. Was just outraged when the SWAT team showed up. I don't think it was the GM killing his character that caused him to never come back, so much as the other players offering to help the SWAT team (because we were better shots - and full agents were worth a lot of experience).
How DARE the police send a swat team after a murderous sniper! The Nerve!
Quote from: Bill;654694I have fond memories of Space Opera....may I be fucked up too?
BY THE POWER OF MY VIKING HAT, YOU TOO MAY BE FUCKED UP DUE TO
SPACE OPERA!
(Now I feel like Brian Blessed.)
Quote from: Bill;654694I wish I still had the game; very curious how I would react to the space opera system so many years later.
Fond memories do not guarantee 'like it in the present'
If you look through my library, you'll find several
Space Opera adventures and star sector atlases - mainly for the Jeff Dee artwork.
I just remember how disjointed and confused the rules were.
Quote from: taustin;654749Yeah, it's only >< this long, but it's > < this fuckin' big around.
Tuna Can Tommy (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Tuna%20Can%20Tommy)?
Quote from: taustin;654757I don't think it was the GM killing his character that caused him to never come back, so much as the other players offering to help the SWAT team (because we were better shots - and full agents were worth a lot of experience).
:rotfl:
Quote from: Bill;654772How DARE the police send a swat team after a murderous sniper! The Nerve!
Yeah, that was pretty much his reaction. Our reaction, as noted, was to figure how much experience
he was worth.
Quote from: Black Vulmea;654780Tuna Can Tommy (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Tuna%20Can%20Tommy)?
No idea where it originated. I got it from an old buddy, many years ago. That, and "Yeah, but a million bucks will buy a
lot of mouthwash." And, of course, "In the Marine Corps, they teach
us to not pee on our hands."
Quote from: taustin;654810Yeah, that was pretty much his reaction. Our reaction, as noted, was to figure how much experience he was worth.
Someone was living in delusional land where PC's have immunity to cause and effect.
Quote from: Bill;654812Someone was living in delusional land where PC's have immunity to cause and effect.
Briefly. And let's face it, in a D&D world (especially that long ago), it was a reasonable world view for a character (if not the player).
We have, perhaps, matured, at least a little bit, in the 25+ years since. Or perhaps we've just gotten better and destroying the evidence.
Quote from: Bill;654812Someone was living in delusional land where PC's have immunity to cause and effect.
"Your SWAT Team deprotagonized me!"
Quote from: Benoist;654815"Your SWAT Team deprotagonized me!"
I am so searching on ebay for the new Deprotagonizer 3000 rifle!
Quote from: Bill;654819I am so searching on ebay for the new Deprotagonizer 3000 rifle!
I think we need to merge this thread with the on on favorite magick items.
Quote from: Bill;654819I am so searching on ebay for the new Deprotagonizer 3000 rifle!
"Renders opposing weenies into 'fun size'!"
Quote from: Sacrosanct;654546Maybe I should create an RPG that requires proficiency in knowing how to factor polynomials and finding y intercepts just to create a character ;)
That game exists , it was called Alternate Realities. the base mechanic had frelling
cosigns as part of the equation.
Quote from: Benoist;654815"Your SWAT Team deprotagonized me!"
To be fair, the character's actions were driving the 'story'. Ie, the game world responded to his actions. He, more than the rest of the group, created the situation that required the DM to formulate what the response of the game world would be to the event he created. This is the essence of being the protagonist - not that you're immune to consequences - but that you generate consequences through your actions.
Deprotagonizing him might have taken other forms, like saying 'You can't do that. You're a well-trained Patriotic soldier and your psych exam indicates you're not likely to crack under pressure and start killing civilians' or maybe 'while you guys explore the mall, Super McCool (the DMPC) locates the bomb, cuts the blue wire with 1 second to spare, seduces the attractive woman and is showered with praise and accolades back at headquarters'. You know, making it so the PCs either can't contribute to the story or leaving them completely out of it.
No such thing as a "story" in my games. What there is is a bunch of player characters and a world around them. If you go about sniping people from rooftops, sooner or later, law enforcement will be aware of the problem, and will try to intervene. It's just the world responding to the characters' actions. It's got fuck all to do with "stories" and "protagonists".
Quote from: deadDMwalking;654893To be fair, the character's actions were driving the 'story'. Ie, the game world responded to his actions. He, more than the rest of the group, created the situation that required the DM to formulate what the response of the game world would be to the event he created. This is the essence of being the protagonist - not that you're immune to consequences - but that you generate consequences through your actions.
Deprotagonizing him might have taken other forms, like saying 'You can't do that. You're a well-trained Patriotic soldier and your psych exam indicates you're not likely to crack under pressure and start killing civilians' or maybe 'while you guys explore the mall, Super McCool (the DMPC) locates the bomb, cuts the blue wire with 1 second to spare, seduces the attractive woman and is showered with praise and accolades back at headquarters'. You know, making it so the PCs either can't contribute to the story or leaving them completely out of it.
He wasn't adding to the story, he was just an obnoxious fool.
On the examples, I agree on the second one. On the first, I'd rather say that, as a GM, if the player would start doing such stuff off the hook, while we weren't meeting to play GTA the RPG, I'd first go with the voice of Common Sense speaking to the player: "Do you really think this is logical"?
If ignored, I'd let the things roll with SWAT, and have a stern discussion about expectations after the game.
Quote from: deadDMwalking;654893This is the essence of being the protagonist - not that you're immune to consequences - but that you generate consequences through your actions.
I would have Deprotagonizied (is that a word?) him on the spot, by booting him from the gaming group and the house.
Quote from: deadDMwalking;654893To be fair, the character's actions were driving the 'story'. Ie, the game world responded to his actions. He, more than the rest of the group, created the situation that required the DM to formulate what the response of the game world would be to the event he created. This is the essence of being the protagonist - not that you're immune to consequences - but that you generate consequences through your actions.
Or he was just an asshat and the GM (rightly) figured that'd get rid of him.
Quote from: Rincewind1;654902He wasn't adding to the story, he was just an obnoxious fool.
On the examples, I agree on the second one. On the first, I'd rather say that, as a GM, if the player would start doing such stuff off the hook, while we weren't meeting to play GTA the RPG, I'd first go with the voice of Common Sense speaking to the player: "Do you really think this is logical"?
If ignored, I'd let the things roll with SWAT,
Other than we were well past "do you really want to do that" at that point, that's pretty much it happened. He was an asshat from the moment he walked in the door. That was just the point at which he realized we knew it.
Quote from: Rincewind1;654902and have a stern discussion about expectations after the game.
The discussion after the game was where we were going to dinner. He wasn't invited.
Quote from: gleichman;654906I would have Deprotagonizied (is that a word?) him on the spot,by booting him from the gaming
Wasn't necessary. For some reason, he felt no desire to ever come back.
Quote from: gleichman;654906group and the house.
Had it been in a house, that would probably have happened long before that moment. But it was a gaming club at a university, and we weren't really allowed to do that for anything short of lighting the furniture on fire (they were really sensitive about that, though it wasn't actually
us that did it.).
Quote from: gleichman;654906I would have Deprotagonizied (is that a word?) him on the spot, by booting him from the gaming group and the house.
"Deprotagonized" Yes, it's a word. For the Forge... *cough cough*
Quote from: Benoist;654524I saw a guy who had taken his Mythus and Mythus Magic books apart voluntarily and had gone to a binder to make one big 800+ pages tome out of them. It was a thing of beauty. I am REALLY tempted to acquire some more copies and do the same thing.
Sorry for your book though. :(
This happened to my Mythus set about 6 months in. I didn't combine (EPIC idea!) but I did have them all spiral bound except the adventure. For some reason the Necropolis was immune to deterioration. Strange...
All this talk of Mythus is making me want to seek out a set.
Quote from: Benoist;654896No such thing as a "story" in my games. What there is is a bunch of player characters and a world around them. If you go about sniping people from rooftops, sooner or later, law enforcement will be aware of the problem, and will try to intervene. It's just the world responding to the characters' actions. It's got fuck all to do with "stories" and "protagonists".
In the sense that the players experience the world through their characters, the 'action' such as it is, centers on them. There may be other actions that they are never aware of (other stories) and some they learn of second hand.
But in the sense that what the players experience becomes a describeable narrative, it qualifies as a story, just as I can refer to the (admittedly boring) 'story of my life'.
I regret that the Forge has ruined common terms as far as they relate to gaming for you. That strikes me as giving them too much power.
Quote from: deadDMwalking;655241I regret that the Forge has ruined common terms as far as they relate to gaming for you. That strikes me as giving them too much power.
Rest assured. Nothing's been ruined (these terms just mean the same thing as they've ever meant to me looking at a dictionary), and I have as much fun playing games as ever. But thanks for the sympathy. I appreciate it. :)
I don't let whiners in my game group.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;655307I don't let whiners in my game group.
Don't like the competition, eh?
(That's a joke, son. I have no idea if you're a whiner or not. But
somebody had to say it. Jokes don't tell themselves, you know.)