Does nobody else see the problem with Sett and his posts?

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RDoes nobody else see the problem with Sett and his posts?

Regards,
David R

You mean the posts where he posts some inscrutable zen-like koan which he expects will burst in our heads and enlighten us but instead kind of flops around in our brains like a mutant fish gasping on a river bank? No, not really. If you tell me, we'll both know.

-clash

Quote from: flyingmiceIf you tell me, we'll both know.

Maybe later. I misread your post as zen-like mutant fish and thought... what does After the Bomb have to do with this

Regards,
David R

Quote from: SettembriniYou are not acting it out. You are playing it. How´s that clichéd?

The structure of what you are playing is still heavily rooted in cliches, both of the 'genre tenet' variety and of the 'Creative Writing 101' variety. You're arguing that telling an introspective story is a some kind of crime against humanity because it is sooooooooo cliched but that adventuring for the sake of adventuring and fighting monsters for the sake of fighting monsters while pursuing classic, tried and true, goals cribbed straight from fantasy literature like "Save the kingdom!" or "Find the treasure!" is not cliched? Sorry, man -- that's bullshit.

You are an idiot. A real big one.

EDIT: And I pity you, because you must never have had a an adventure gaming session in your whole life.

DoubleEDIT: And because I pity you, I´ll explain:

When you say "Save the Princess!", that´s not the game.
Our games in which princesses are saved, are not concerned with the princess. We are concerned with shooting the TIE Fighters, dying via Thermal Detonator misfires, breaking the lock or cutting through the Star Destroyer Bridge window with a lightsaber, spending a force point, and still be blown out into outer space through decompression, flying out the Kazellis light freighter to rescue our jedi friend, donning spacesuits and storming the Star Destroyer once again, this time with a better plan and backup troops.

Fuck the Princess. She´s an excuse for going unto SPACE ADVENTURES!

Quote from: SettembriniYou are an idiot. A real big one.

Ummm... Which one of us?

-clash

The JDRAKEH, of course.

Quote from: SettembriniYou are an idiot. A real big one.

Why? Because I refuse to support your assertion that playing through a plot structure that has been in existence for thousands of years isn't cliche based solely on the criteria that you personally enjoy it?  I guess that I'd rather be a moron than a frothing, hypocritical, bigot with an agenda to force his personal vision of "adventure" on the unwashed masses.

QuoteAnd I pity you, because you must never have had a an adventure gaming session in your whole life.

What the fuck ever. You can't even nail down what an adventure game is, can you? When you can provide some examples based on something other than liquored-up anecdotal rants, maybe we can talk. That said, I suspect that you you will never be able to do this, since your platform is based entirely in the purely subjective realm of personal taste rather than fact.

Welcome to REALITY -- where your personal tastes don't set the standard for the rest if the free world.

Quote from: Settembriniestar,

The problem with both of us, is that we have the exact same taste and outlook!

Thanks, I think we are on the same page just trying to relate our separate experiences.

Quote from: SettembriniFor whatever reason, you don´t seem to have encountered the "story-creators" that I´m referring to.
Official


The point is, leaving Campbell aside, that wanting to be like Han Solo is totally different from wanting to emulate the "story"-structure of Star Wars.

But still there´s people out there thinking the family ties of the protagonists are something worthwhile to re-enact via copying plot twists from Grey´s Anatomy. Without effort, just by saying :"it would be cool, so it will be just like that."
Without any in-universe plausability.
Just like in the (blockbuster) movies

So in a nutshell you are talking about people who play the character directly. Like taking the Star Wars Saga Edition and one person plays Han, another Luke, and the other Leia?

I am going to give you an answer based on that because I have run into that situation.

Basically in my experience it comes down to player's ability and player desire.

First not all RPG players have the same ability or capacity for acting and imagination. It nothing to condemn it just how it is. So they find it easier and fun (the fun part is important) to play a character directly.

Second, they really really and I do mean really like a particular character and/or show. I don't know why this happens. Science still probably doesn't know why either. But it happens. They happen to like RPGs as well. The two intersect and they play. Note it seem to me that the younger a person is the more obessive they are about one thing. I know I got a 10 year old and  3 year old. Sometimes they never outgrew this obsession. (some friends I know).

BTW I not talking about the life crippling obsession as a hard core Trekkie. I am talking about the interests that influence what you want to do in your normal spare time. I known otherwise normal people that have nothing but star trek dvds in their dvd collection and are not really interested having anything else. delete Star Trek and substitute something else and you get what I mean.

That it really. There no deeper meaning or reason other they like it.... or it is a lot easier to play ... by far.

Now flipping over to the RPG table.

If you look at the totality of Role-playing sessions. I bet a donut that you find these type of games to be a very small percentage. Why? Because they are difficult to pull off well. The moment you enter "Bo Duke blasts Boss Hogg with a 12 gauge" land the whole feel is ruined. This compounded by a less than stellar GM who lapses into railroading his PCs all the time.

Btw your comment about red shirts is is a "Bo blasts Hogg" type feeling that ruins the game for you. I am not criticizing you for it just holding at an example why these type of games doesn't work for many people.

On the Good side, when these games work they really work. Because not only you get the fun of playing the "Game." you are getting what is essentially a whole new episode of your favorite show.

Finally one criticism of what you said. It is similar to what the Pundit said about D&D. Don't fall into the trap that American Show or any particular show is bad just because it has to be bad. If it had the numbers then it worked. We may not know why it worked at times. But it worked for a lot of people. And it doesn't work for you. Which is OK.

I am sure back in the 13th century some noble was ranting how cheesy ass this Arthur character was.


Finally, if my explanation isn't helping. Then just pull a page from the game you like a lot. The RPG. I am sure when you GM you don't use bullshit reasons for your plot and characters. You think it through.

Well pretend that you are making one of these "players". Use the skills you have honed for your game. Surely you made and played NPCs that you find personally idiotic. Come up with the plausible motivations for their actions. You make find such a character unappealing but at least you understand why.

That how I reasoned it and why I could run LARP events for ten years. (Lets say herding cats is easier).

@JDRAKEH

Now, Special Jim, I´ll be speaking s-l-o-w-l-y for your benefit.

Take a seat.
Good boy.
Take a look at "Saving the Princess".
It´s a cliché.
How often does it come up?
Twice. In the beginning and in the end.
That´s about five minutes of session time.
The rest of the session is spent on, let´s say storming a castle.
The gaming is done storming the castle.
Finding a way in.
Sneaking around.
Fighting the Guards.
etc.

Does Special Jim understand now?
Or Special Jim too tired, too many words?

Sett,

I think you are focusing too much on the Game aspect.

There is the role-playing side too. Not just in the sense that you are acting out your character but there is a plot and a campaign world as well.


 Game-----------------|------------------Role-playing
   
I like to be here where the | is at


 Game--------------------------------|--Role-playing

Some like it where the | is at
Some think its superior
This annoys me

                                       
 Game--|---------------------------------Role-playing
Some like it here
This is how it started   in 1974.
Since different players and game designers moved the bar to where they liked it.

Brilliant!

estar, you've latched onto something about Sett that's been noticed before: an overemphasis on "game/challenge".

Being sympathetic to his viewpoint, I interpret it in a way that's more attractive to me. Namely, it's not that challenges are inherently attractive or "the point" of the game, but that the hallmark of emphasizing "story" is making in-game challenges impossible.

E.g., if I want to storm the castle, then in game-world terms, that should be a challenge. But in "story" type play, it's not a challenge (because for aesthetic reasons I must succeed), or at most it's a challenge on a highly metagame level having nothing to do with the nature of my goal--I'll succeed if I've properly hoarded plot points, or if I've properly aligned my Spiritual Attributes with my goal.

I should qualify by stating I don't see this as a rigid distinction since metagame concerns can have a greater or lesser weight. E.g. in Burning Wheel you can accomplish things without spending Artha, and spending Artha isn't necessarily going to hand you success. However there are games where virtually everything happens for "meta" reasons, whether it be the GM fudging or stacking the deck in your favor, or "narration trading" mechanics with virtually no connection to concrete internal game-world dynamics.

I´m not even understanding the reasons for WANTING "story" in your gaming. I cannot see any redeeming value to it.

@estar: that axis of exchange you built up is ridicolous and damaging, it´s roll-playing vs roleplaying all over. But I know you and I mean the same when we think about what a good game is. The real axis of exchange for this debate is:


freedom -'------------------------- drama
(I´m over here *wave*)

To be clear, I think estar's post is brilliant because you could make those scales for a ton of different aspects in games - they are easily understood. And because they make little to no judgement about where one stands, only that the scale exists.

Combine a number of them, and you might just have something.