PDA

View Full Version : I am getting pretty tired of people insisting I play a system I don't want to...



Pika...
2009-08-26, 01:22 AM
Please don't make this into an editions battle!


OK, now that that is out of the way here's the thing. I respect that people who like their chosen edition like it. "To each his own" is a big thing for me. However, people are downright disrespectful in my opinion to me over constantly insisting.

I've stopped going to certain stores for a while (Yeah, I know you're reading this) over this issue, and now that I have started to go back to another store in the above's chain I am getting it constantly again. I finally got people, both staff(mostly anyway) and regular players (again, mostly) to leave me alone about it there, but now here I am afraid I will have to snap again like I did in the other store before they stop saying things like I am close-minded, or am "too stubborn to try new systems" when I had just finished trying about three to four of them within two months with said person's group. Now that 3.75 came out I had a nice little argument last week with two people I've known for a bit about it. :smallsigh:

I have gotten to the point where I say something on the lines of "I respect that you like your system. To each his own. I just don't want to play it. I am VERY happy with my system, now let's get off the subject before it breaks down to the same argument I have had a hundred times." as a reflex. What gets me is that people simply don't respect that. The last xxx number of people did not get me to change my mind, why would they be any different?


Anyway, sorry for the rant there. Have any other "holdouts" needed to deal with the same issues? Or similar ones?

Cyrano
2009-08-26, 01:23 AM
Well, these nincompoops are justified if you're wrong.

Audious
2009-08-26, 01:26 AM
{Scrubbed}

Pika...
2009-08-26, 01:27 AM
Well, these nincompoops are justified if you're wrong.

Wrong about what?

Mystic Muse
2009-08-26, 01:29 AM
I can see both sides of this argument. However I think in the end you're in the right. If you just don't like or don't think you'll like the game because it's not your style then you have every right to avoid it.

and he/she means wrong about how fun a certain game system is or how much you'll like it.

Catch
2009-08-26, 01:29 AM
Being a "holdout" implies a certain degree of obstinacy.

Most people are partially right and partially wrong about their choices, but it's the second half that's hard to admit.

Pika...
2009-08-26, 01:30 AM
{Scrubbed}

So trying 3-4 new systems (I even forget how many. There was Alternaty, Travler, Mech Wrarrior 3ed, and one other who's name I forget or it could have been a continuation of Travler's session) new systems with said person's group within a two month time-frame is close-minded?

Audious
2009-08-26, 01:31 AM
{Scrubbed}

Mystic Muse
2009-08-26, 01:32 AM
I'm going to say trying out four new systems in two months is extremely OPEN minded.

Pika...
2009-08-26, 01:32 AM
I'm going to say, "Yes."

Cool. I respect your opinion.

Audious
2009-08-26, 01:34 AM
{Scrubbed}

Doc Roc
2009-08-26, 01:34 AM
I'm going to say, "Yes."

And I'm going to say no. I've lost track of the number of systems I've played or run and I'm quite impressed.

Cyrano
2009-08-26, 01:34 AM
Wrong about what?

What game system you like.

Obviously Exalted is the only good one. I mean, duh. Who wouldn't want to be a crazy godlike uberdude? Probably a communist, that's who.

Tempest Fennac
2009-08-26, 01:37 AM
I'd say you're probably best trying to ignore people like that, Pika; if you're refusing to play systems which you've tried, there's no reason why you should be seen as narrow-minded, and as you said, this sort of thing is highly subjective anyway.

Doc Roc
2009-08-26, 01:37 AM
What game system you like.

Obviously Exalted is the only good one. I mean, duh. Who wouldn't want to be a crazy godlike uberdude? Probably a communist, that's who.

I wouldn't mind. I'd just like a system that doesn't shatter when the wind of my wake strikes it.

Pika...
2009-08-26, 01:42 AM
And I'm going to say no. I've lost track of the number of systems I've played or run and I'm quite impressed.

Why thank you. That means a lot from a vet player.

However, each game was a session or two/three long at most. I would have liked to actually learn Traveler at least (from what they told me the economy and such mechanics had me drooling).




What game system you like.

Obviously Exalted is the only good one. I mean, duh. Who wouldn't want to be a crazy godlike uberdude? Probably a communist, that's who.

Why do people always think I look down on said system (or I guess it would be systems at this point...)?

It is different, and I understand why some people prefer it to the one I prefer. It just does not appeal to me.

And I don't go annoying and/or arguing to death people so they switch back. I give them the respect they deserve.

Cyrano
2009-08-26, 01:46 AM
Why do people always think I look down on said system (or I guess it would be systems at this point...)?

It is different, and I understand why some people prefer it to the one I prefer. It just does not appeal to me.

And I don't go annoying and/or arguing to death people so they switch back. I give them the respect they deserve.

Out of curiosity, was it not clear that I was not actually putting down your choice of game, rather acting like the stereotypical crazy RPG fanboy for my own amusement? I don't even know how the Exalted system works.

Doc Roc
2009-08-26, 01:48 AM
Traveler is really cool. A friend of mine once spent three weeks building a galaxy for it. I don't think I've heard the d6 clatter that many times for that long, as he sat happily in my living room while we roomed together, just gradually plotting the stars of a world that wasn't. Just him, a book, some paper and a few dice.


Easy to forget how curiously majestic our hobby can be.

Pika...
2009-08-26, 01:49 AM
Out of curiosity, was it not clear that I was not actually putting down your choice of game, rather acting like the stereotypical crazy RPG fanboy for my own amusement? I don't even know how the Exalted system works.


My apologies. :smallredface:

arguskos
2009-08-26, 01:49 AM
Traveler is really cool. A friend of mine once spent three weeks building a galaxy for it. I don't think I've heard the d6 clatter that many times for that long, as he sat happily in my living room while we roomed together, just gradually plotting the stars of a world that wasn't. Just him, a book, some paper and a few dice.


Easy to forget how curiously majestic our hobby can be.
That... is about the best thing ever. And yeah, it's easy to lose that sense of wonder that RPGs have about them. It's why I still love Planescape, it has that wonder that so little else does. There's something about the symphony of the planes dancing in concert that makes me smile for hours on end. :smallredface:

Thajocoth
2009-08-26, 01:50 AM
How do you have time for that many different games? Or are you trying all those systems as one-shots?

I'm actually trying D&D 3.5e mostly due to a lack of D&D 4th ed people to play with. (My usual group meets less often than they used to.) I'm holding off on judging it until I've done at least a few sessions.

You should definitely play whatever brings you the most joy. That's the point, as defined by the fact that you're "playing" it. People that think everyone enjoys the same exact things are the ones who're close minded.

Pika...
2009-08-26, 01:52 AM
Traveler is really cool. A friend of mine once spent three weeks building a galaxy for it. I don't think I've heard the d6 clatter that many times for that long, as he sat happily in my living room while we roomed together, just gradually plotting the stars of a world that wasn't. Just him, a book, some paper and a few dice.


Easy to forget how curiously majestic our hobby can be.


Sounds pretty awesome.

I enjoy building my "world" quite a bit I have found. In a very strange fullfilling way.

However, an entire galaxy? I have spent about a year, and all I have is a poorly made website for an incomplete continent. :smalleek:

shadzar
2009-08-26, 01:52 AM
Welcome to 2000 when 3rd edition came out. I just started telling people to "blank" off when talking about RPGs after I had heard so many times people telling me "needed to try 3rd edition because I would like it better", after I told them I had no interest in it.

I even asked one person: "How are you and what to you THINK you know about me? Want to tell me which hand to wipe my rearend with next?" :smallfurious:

It is a problem because of the company and the stores dropping all older editions that cause this. I blame the players, but cannot solely lay on the blame on them for the company's actions. 3rd edition's players got the same treatment from 4th edition with the "Ze game sucks, but it will remain ze same." video.

The company is treating gamers like LW did, and now what is worse, is that the new gamers are doing the same thing. It has gone form being about the RPG you like, to some popularity contest.

In D&D's case it wasn't that you were "not worthy" because you didn't play D&D. Olden times didn't care. Now you aren't worthy of D&D if you aren't paying for the horse droppings printed each month for it. Again, this comes from players and the company alike.

But it isn't just gaming, look elsewhere in your life and you will find people all day long telling you you don't like what you claim to like, because you are wrong about your opinion. Just let the bigotry be ignored, and soon those people will get bored and find something else to do, and may even quit playing the game you play so they aren't even something that a newer edition would try to appeal to. Then gaming can become peaceful again arguing about "Time of Troubles" being about a change in FR, rather than just the next lustrum's edition.

Unless you like card games, then just avoid game stores all together, and that should save you many of those arguements. :smallsmile:

Mystic Muse
2009-08-26, 02:01 AM
I don't mean to be one of those people and sorry if I am Shadzar but you should generally try something before writing it off unless you're against it on some reason other than "I don't think I'll like it." however it's pretty clear you've thought about this and even if I wanted to convince you I couldn't.

Jerthanis
2009-08-26, 02:02 AM
So trying 3-4 new systems (I even forget how many. There was Alternaty, Travler, Mech Wrarrior 3ed, and one other who's name I forget or it could have been a continuation of Travler's session) new systems with said person's group within a two month time-frame is close-minded?

So you learned and understood the mechanics of four extremely different systems, some of which are extremely nonstandard from a D&Der's perspective, can't remember one well enough to say for sure it wasn't just the same game you were already playing, and decided they all weren't worth your time within two months?

Yeah, sounds pretty close minded to me. You'd impress me more if you played ONE game for two months and decided you liked D&D better.

Give them a real chance, not a session or two.

Kaun
2009-08-26, 02:08 AM
I think you may be taking things far to seriously.

If you can find enough people to play the games you like then why care?

If how ever the usual people you have played with have moved on to other things and your left on your lonesome pining over well worn source books then you might be in a slight bit more of a predicament.

In all honesty i believe if you have a good DM and a bunch of people you like to play with it will be a joy to play any system regardless of what it is as long as you keep an open mind and are willing to give it an honest crack.

AstralFire
2009-08-26, 02:10 AM
So you learned and understood the mechanics of four extremely different systems, some of which are extremely nonstandard from a D&Der's perspective, can't remember one well enough to say for sure it wasn't just the same game you were already playing, and decided they all weren't worth your time within two months?

Yeah, sounds pretty close minded to me. You'd impress me more if you played ONE game for two months and decided you liked D&D better.

Give them a real chance, not a session or two.

It may not have had much depth, but it had a lot of breadth. There's more than one way to be open-minded, and only so much time to devote to anything. We do say, 'don't judge a book by its cover', but if (and this is a big if) anyone is to blame for someone not continuing a book after the first chapter, it's at least half the authors' fault. (Though there are some things for which 'blame' is simply not an appropriate method of understanding causation.)

There is wisdom in what you say, but I don't think it's fair to call him close-minded.

Pika...
2009-08-26, 02:16 AM
So you learned and understood the mechanics of four extremely different systems, some of which are extremely nonstandard from a D&Der's perspective, can't remember one well enough to say for sure it wasn't just the same game you were already playing, and decided they all weren't worth your time within two months?

Yeah, sounds pretty close minded to me. You'd impress me more if you played ONE game for two months and decided you liked D&D better.

Give them a real chance, not a session or two.


http://www.giantitp.com/forums/images/icons/icon5.gif

I was the new guy. They were the ones who kept jumping around the place. I was just waiting to see on what the wheel of fortune would finally land for a longer-term adventure/campaign.

Eventually it did. Want to guess what system they chose for a full two month campaign? :smalltongue:

Jerthanis
2009-08-26, 02:18 AM
It may not have had much depth, but it had a lot of breadth. There's more than one way to be open-minded, and only so much time to devote to anything. We do say, 'don't judge a book by its cover', but if (and this is a big if) anyone is to blame for someone not continuing a book after the first chapter, it's at least half the authors' fault. (Though there are some things for which 'blame' is simply not an appropriate method of understanding causation.)

There is wisdom in what you say, but I don't think it's fair to call him close-minded.

Okay, I agree with you here. Not close-minded, but maybe not really open-minded.

EDIT:

http://www.giantitp.com/forums/images/icons/icon5.gif

I was the new guy. They were the ones who kept jumping around the place. I was just waiting to see on what the wheel of fortune would finally land for a longer-term adventure/campaign.

Eventually it did. Want to guess what system they chose for a full two month campaign? :smalltongue:

Well, if the people are running D&D, and are telling you, "You need to try something that isn't D&D! Stop being close minded!" Then just respond, "Well, jee whiz, I'd play anything if you guys run it, but your last four games in non D&D systems fell through." And you probably won't get in arguments with them, because you can always fall back on, "If you wanna convince me, run a game of it to convince me already."

It doesn't sound like it's your fault if they're the flaky ones.

Pika...
2009-08-26, 02:22 AM
I think you may be taking things far to seriously.

If you can find enough people to play the games you like then why care?

If how ever the usual people you have played with have moved on to other things and your left on your lonesome pining over well worn source books then you might be in a slight bit more of a predicament.

In all honesty i believe if you have a good DM and a bunch of people you like to play with it will be a joy to play any system regardless of what it is as long as you keep an open mind and are willing to give it an honest crack.


Well, it's more that I go to said store(s) anyway on a regular bases. If not roleplaying, I am probably looking for someone to throw my 40K army at. There I am a prime candidate for what shadzar unfortunately went through a generation back.

And yeah, I am sort of stuck in the predicament you mentioned. However, that was not the meaning of this thread. BUT, I in fact love my preferred system so much that I chose to attempt to become a DM in order to keep it's torch going, much like the now fading generations of 0ed-2ed have done until now (rest in peace :smallsigh:)

brujon
2009-08-26, 02:27 AM
One thing my folks always said to me was "There's three things you don't discuss: Religion, Soccer and Politics". The reason is that what soccer team you cheer for, what religion is yours, and what is your party, are most of the time, dogmas. Ever tried to convince a priest to abandon his faith? You can't. Is it wrong to defend one single point of view, religion, soccer team or political party? Some people will say that yes, but i digress. Part of what makes us unique persons are our opinions, and our convictions. Over time that may change, but who is to say that we need to change but ourselves, and who can say what we need to see and experiment, but ourselves? I don't know many people who have "tried" various religions, and most people i know who give a crap about Soccer have cheered for one team since forever and don't bother with other teams, same with left-wingers and right-wingers.

But what is the point? The point is that everyone has their zones of comfort. Some people don't like to try new systems just because they've gotten so used to their systems that they know their rules by heart. They've built so much of their lives around it that it became part of themselves. People have to respect your opinions and not bother you if you don't want a particular new system. You've heard them say it before, you know what they're talking about, and maybe at some point in the future you'll try it, but i think the main problem is how they speak it.

People like to be right, everyone, you, me... There's something about being right that makes us feel powerful, admired, and everyone likes that. And some people take that desire to be right too damn far and keep nagging you to do something you don't want. You really have to tell some people off, they just don't know better.

That said, don't feel pressured to try any system you don't like. Continue to tell them off, but try to read about other systems online, alone, in the privacy of your own room. Being faithful to one system is alright, as i've said, many people have their convictions set and that has to be respected. Being open-minded about new systems has their advantages, as with other aspects of life. If you read them, play with them in your head for a little, you may not even like the system as a whole, but it might give you some ideas for a campaign you plan to run, for a house-rule in your current game, or for a completely unrelated stuff.

I tried WoD for a while, for maybe 6 months, but really didn't like it that much... But the setting was cool, and the books had a lot of good suggestions for reading. Fiction books and films, mostly. I started reading H.P Lovecraft because of that, hadn't even heard of him before. And i'm loving it now.

So, when someone tells you to try something, just say you'll have a look at it later at home, and if they ask if you liked it or not, tell them the truth. Tell them off if they say you have to play it to like it, that's just not truth. You can tell by the gaming rules if something appeals to you or not. If you haven't looked at it yet, tell them that. You'll be surprised how much this helps. One friend of mine tried weeks to convert me to 4th ed, and finnally lent me the book. I read it, said to him the flaws i saw, the things i didn't like, and it stayed at that.

And if that doesn't work, well... Then you have to just tell them to back the **** off and respect your opinions on the matter or else you're going to take measures.

SimperingToad
2009-08-26, 02:59 AM
I wouldn't worry too much over someone pushing their drugs game on you. If you don't want to use play them, that's your decision, not theirs. And you're not being a 'holdout' because of it.

It's all a matter of peer pressure. If you like what you already play, there's no reason to give in just because. Enjoy what you already do. If they think you 'unkewl' over it, they're the ones who are not being open minded.

If something is not your thing, then it's not. My thing is AD&D. Sometimes the group decides to do something else, like James Bond, Star Wars, GURPS, or a number of others. Most of the time, they're just one-offs, so I don't mind a little diversion from the usual fare. Game-fatigue can and does happen, after all. It's like a little vacation.

Fortunately in my case, I don't think the group wants to go away from AD&D as our primary game, because we're having too much fun to change.

And isn't that what it really is about? Having fun playing what you do? And if you're having fun, why the need to change?

Yora
2009-08-26, 03:17 AM
3.5e is the only RPG I ever played and the only other game I somewhat know the rules of and might want to play is SWSaga.
If a group of friends wants to play an RPG I'll learn the rules, but as I'm usually the gm, I chose the one system I know and that can do any thing I ever wanted it to do.

Aotrs Commander
2009-08-26, 03:23 AM
So you learned and understood the mechanics of four extremely different systems, some of which are extremely nonstandard from a D&Der's perspective, can't remember one well enough to say for sure it wasn't just the same game you were already playing, and decided they all weren't worth your time within two months?

Yeah, sounds pretty close minded to me. You'd impress me more if you played ONE game for two months and decided you liked D&D better.

Give them a real chance, not a session or two.

Actually, if you're a rules mechanic at heart, you don't need to be able to do anything more than read the game rules to be able to judge the system.
(Background-specific fluff is irrevelevant to the dicussion, since if it's that good and the attendant system that lousy, you'd convert.)

I've read a lot of rules (both wargames and roleplaying) and but I've not played narly so many of those systems; because my reading is enough to understand how the mechanics work and be able to say "yes, that's good" or "no, that's pathetic" (most commonly with wargames rules) or (most likely with RPGs) "meh, that's nothing special". Very few sets of rules make me say "well, let's see how it plays" as I can usually judge from the mechanics. (If, incidently, from a reading of the rules, I fail to come away with at least a basic working idea of the game, then the rules have failed to be a usable system in the first place.)

Note that I deliberately used 'set of rules' throughout this post, as I was specifically referring to the actual game mechanics. That is the one and only criterion I look at when evaluating an RPG. If I buy a game for it's genera (which is rare; I prefer to homebrew, but examples are GURPS Discworld or Star Wars/Stargate SG-1 D20), I will evaluate whether the rules are usable and thus whether to suffer the sub-par rules or merely extract the background fluff using the RPG as source material. (In practise, as most sets of RPG rules are merely functionally moribund, I find it usually not worth the effort of converting, as the systems tend to run okay in their native environment.)



Personally, my preferred system is D&D 3.5; closely followed by what was the preferred system before the 3.x era, Rolemaster. (So complexitiy not much of an issue...)

I don't think Paizo's house rules are better than my own house rules and while I will play 4E as a player (but I'll play almost anything if I don't have to DM for a bit), I flat-out will not under any circumstances ever DM a game of same. (I find 4E is a 100% to gamist for my simulationist tastes; while, granted 3.5 is not realistic, I personally find it's gamist/simulationist compromises to be sufficiently acceptable - with plenty of house-rules).

I have, however, nicked some of the best ideas of both and retrofitted them to 3.5. There are no perfect rules, and any set of rules is best improved by stealing the better ideas of other rules. Notably there is not one single gaming system I have played in anger over nearly twenty years, wargame or RPG, that I have not moderately to heavily houseruled at some point.

So, as you can determine from that, my opinion is people can whine to me about their favoured system as much as they like, but if I don't think it's mechanically superior (not functional, not workable actually SUPERIOR to 3.5 and Rolemaster), it is not likely to make much of a difference...

But I appreciate most people look at an RPG as a 'game' (perhaps even an 'experience' in some cases) considering background and rules as a single unit; rather than clinical analysis of the rules mechanics first as I do.

huttj509
2009-08-26, 03:41 AM
One thing I'll point out is that it occurs in a gaming store.

Now, if what you like to play is an edition not sold any more by the store, and what the employees say you should try is an edition that they do happen to sell, well, there's a side motive from the employees.

I have not personally been directly involved in running a game store, but I was acquainted with the owners of the local one in college (one of my good friends knew them better, one of them often stopped by to hang out for a half hour during our house game night), and they can be really hard to keep afloat, especially with the increasing popularity of the internet, and RPG sections in larger chains. I earned a major stinkeye one time when a friend asked me to pass the Book of Exalted Deeds, the store owner said it wasn't out yet, and I confessed that I had picked it up that day at Waldenbooks. This led to me explaining it as an impulse buy, etc, but hey, Waldenbooks had it in, and the local game store hadn't gotten their shipment yet.

But anyway, the employees might not even directly be hinting for you to buy something, but if they're busy stocking a particular edition, it makes sense that they'll plug it.

Uec
2009-08-26, 04:30 AM
Have you considered that it might be that they find the game that you prefer to be extremely boring/stupid/extremely unbalanced*, but still wanting to play with you, so in a attempt to avoid whatever system they don't like, they are pushing for you through a bunch of systems in the hope of finding one you wont dismiss at once?

You say that you would have liked to get to know Traveler better, did you actually voice that opinion to them? Or did you go with a defensive "yeah, I guess it works, but it still have those *long list of the flaws present in said system*"? (all games have flaws, it's that simple)





*No offence, but it happens, people find D&D 3.5 to be a nice game. I detest the spell system, hate the level system, find half the classes boring and spellcasting to be ridiculous overpowered - so I refuse to play it.

Matthew
2009-08-26, 04:34 AM
You are pretty much going to have to suck this up, there is not really much you can do about it. I prefer TSR era D&D myself, though I am pretty familiar with D20/3e and have played a bit of D20/4e. I have played a lot of other systems over the years (more than I can recall off hand), and have no real interest in trying to convince people that system A is better than system B, as likes and dislikes are very subjective. That said, there is always going to be attached to the idea that "I like X" that this means I think that "X is better than Y", and not everyone finds that they can accept that, and will want to argue that I am in fact wrong and do not know my own preferences. Such discussions always boil down to one side not liking something that the other side does.

As others have pointed out, though, game stores need to push their product to make a living, so you probably should not be surprised if when you are in a game store somebody tries to convince you that the product they are promoting is better than the product you want, but they are no longer planning on carrying.

Kaiyanwang
2009-08-26, 04:44 AM
Now, if what you like to play is an edition not sold any more by the store, and what the employees say you should try is an edition that they do happen to sell, well, there's a side motive from the employees.


The store i currently buy from sells both 3.x and 4th edition. And the owner says that both sell well. So, apparently, is possible not to be forced to sell only the new edition and ask the customer to move on.*

Not that ONE shop can be statistically menaingful - it's just a case.

*EDIT: I'v seen 2e ravenloft setting, too :smalltongue:

BobVosh
2009-08-26, 05:25 AM
I've given up on 4ed. I promised myself when it came out that I wouldn't be like the older generation at the 2000 migration to 3rd ed.

Seems to be the same with all my friends. I have not ever noticed any sort of "get with the times" from anyone, though. This may be due to the fact that FLGS pretty much don't exist in NW Houston.

I have worked at several game stores. While the owners/managers gave the stinkeye to various people for buying from competition etc, I completly agree with people like Hutt: You shouldn't have to wait to buy various books/minis/whatever. Well, at least for common, current books.

Grey Knight
2009-08-26, 05:47 AM
Hmm, people actually do this? :smallconfused: Around here, somebody just decides they want to GM a game, they pick a system/setting/plot/etc, and then people just join in the fun. The mechanical system chosen has never been anything other than an incidental detail, as far as I can see; we have more important things to worry about, like why the barbarian's axe has sprouted an animate hand... Whether the hand is rolling 1d20 to attack us, or 3d6, or 2d10, is kinda missing the point.

Do they know you're upset about it? Maybe they just meant it as some good-natured ribbing, but haven't realised how annoyed you are.

Fiendish_Dire_Moose
2009-08-26, 06:36 AM
You shouldn't be angry when people suggest a system to you. It means they play it, and they want to play it with you. They want to play with you. They want to be your friend. DON'T BE MAD BECAUSE PEOPLE WANT TO BE YOUR FRIEND!

Fixer
2009-08-26, 07:23 AM
Pika, to put it in short terms, avoid people who tell you you need to do what they do.

In long terms, let me tell you a brief story to put things in perspective.

I started playing D&D *BEFORE* all those stupid crazy teenagers killed themselves in the 80s when their characters died. *BEFORE* that stupid comic book went out that portrayed all role-playing games as propaganda material for evil religious cults. *BEFORE* all the churches in the US declared D&D to be a game invented by Satan to harvest the souls of their children. *BEFORE* my aunts and uncles (most of whom were scary ordained ministers) told me for years, as a child of under 13 years, that I was going to burn in Hell for all eternity because I played D&D.

I still played, and generally told them I didn't care what they thought because I was enjoying myself with my games (and had no one to play with, so I played all by myself) and knew the basis of their arguments was ignorance, not facts.

All things considered, you don't have half the problem others have had to deal with. In that, you should consider yourself lucky you only have to deal with edition wars.

(EDIT: This is not meant as a "suck it up," post; this is more of a "I feel you, but it could be worse," post.)

Kaiyanwang
2009-08-26, 07:42 AM
all the churches in the US declared D&D to be a game invented by Satan to harvest the souls of their children.

This is a great idea for a D&D campaign. Maybe involving BoVD and FCs.

BobVosh
2009-08-26, 07:52 AM
I still played, and generally told them I didn't care what they thought because I was enjoying myself with my games (and had no one to play with, so I played all by myself) and knew the basis of their arguments was ignorance, not facts.

O.o

How could you avoid metagaming? Lol

Typewriter
2009-08-26, 08:20 AM
I keep my preferred system to myself whenever I'm in a game store because about half the time people will do what you say and try to convince me that I'm playing an inferior game, and that 'X game system' is better. The only time I'd involved myself in that is if I was asking questions, or if I was interested in joining a game, otherwise I'd keep it to myself.

You just have to learn the best ways to handle every situation. If you know that your game system isn't a popular one, don't bring it up yourself, and if anyone tries to just ignore them. Grunting works well for me. If you know there are people who like your system bring it up with them, and if the conversation turns towards systems you don't like bow out, or enjoy the conversation(if the people talking are capable of polite conversation). I don't talk about my game of choice in game stores, and I don't talk about enjoying playing certain classes that I enjoy while online because people always want to tell you that you're doing it wrong, and you should play something else. Know your audience.

Epinephrine
2009-08-26, 08:30 AM
Nothing wrong with new systems, but also nothing wrong with not liking a system.

To some extent though, it is easy to poison your experience - no system is perfect, and if you go in looking for problems you'll find them. Like many here, I've played a variety (dozens?) of systems over the past 25-30 years. There are almost always some good points to a new system, and always some things you end up not liking. Whether you view the glass as half-full or half-empty* is up to you.

*or you may feel that the glass is twice as big as is necessary.

Zuki
2009-08-26, 09:02 AM
What's comfy is comfy. 3.5 isn't my favorite system, but neither is it one I dislike. It'd be thrilled to find a group that would try four different things in two months, whether or not we went back to the same old thing right after hopping around like that.

Some people convert from the One True Way of a particular system to the One True Way of another system because they got burned out after years of playing it and becoming aware of its flaws or limitations. I'd suspect that at least a few of the proselytizers you've been dealing with are of this persuasion and think they're doing you a service. When, well...they aren't.

Here's an analogy about system preference. It's longer than it needs to be.

I love Indian food. I love sushi. I love ginger so much I"ll drink it in tea, eat it sweetened as candy, and marinate all my chicken in it. (Oh my gosh it's!) Astralfire, for an example, does not share these tastes. She's apathetic to Indian food, has less of a tolerance of hot and spicy than I do, and can't stand Japanese stuff because it's too bland compared to Korean or good Chinese.

I respect this, though it makes for a pain if we're trying to figure out where to eat sometimes. We find compromises that we both like (Korean! Red Lobster! A nice cheesburger!), and I go out for Crazy Asian Spicy Town with other friends.

To bring this analogy down to earth, I'd play SAGA with Astralfire (if we could just find a GM...), or we'd join a 4th edition game, or we'd play 3.5 if we were hard up for gaming, and I go play Exalted with my other gaming buddies and try to convince them to try the wonders of FATE. I've had a long conversation or two and tried to introduce Astral to FATE, and she concluded it wasn't really her thing. I was disappointed, but cool with that.

Where I was going with the food analogy is, there's something potentially visceral about gaming preferences. They can be a bit irrational and individual, like other preferences. If a reflexive "My thing is my thing, I respect your thing but I don't want it," isn't doing the job, maybe something a more concrete analogy would help?

Or maybe I'm just hungry, and need to go buy groceries. And some curry powder.

Tequila Sunrise
2009-08-26, 09:03 AM
I've stopped going to certain stores for a while (Yeah, I know you're reading this) over this issue, and now that I have started to go back to another store in the above's chain I am getting it constantly again. I finally got people, both staff(mostly anyway) and regular players (again, mostly) to leave me alone about it there, but now here I am afraid I will have to snap again like I did in the other store before they stop saying things like I am close-minded, or am "too stubborn to try new systems" when I had just finished trying about three to four of them within two months with said person's group. Now that 3.75 came out I had a nice little argument last week with two people I've known for a bit about it. :smallsigh:
Wait, you're arguing with people at stores? Are these people busy-body strangers, pushy salesfolk, or what? Just curious, as I can't remember the last time I had any kind of argument in a store.

Sinfire Titan
2009-08-26, 09:13 AM
I know the feeling. Everyone in my playgroup wants 4E, but I'm an avid 3.5 fan (not saying I haven't played 4E, I play a Paladin regularly). None of them are willing to play 3.5, and some of their reasons are a little odd (one player refuses to because of the resident power gamer being a better optimizer.

ken-do-nim
2009-08-26, 09:20 AM
You know, it's fine to say to someone, "I really enjoy this game, you should try it." It's not so fine to say, "That game you like, it's crap compared to this." It happens all the time though. I'm an avid Avalon Hill boardgamer, and I'm always told that the new Euro games are so much better. It is not that I haven't tried them, but I've yet to see why - except how much shorter the playing time can be.

Tiki Snakes
2009-08-26, 09:32 AM
My own FLGS is pretty cool in this respect. Not only do they still sell 3.5, you can regularly find loads of older stuff in their second hand section. Also, the delightfully dotty manager is really not the sort to get pushy about what your buying, I don't think I'd be comfortable with a gaming store giving me the Hard-Sell.

From friends and gaming-group-colleagues, I can understand edition-nagging, because as hilariously pointed out, they all have vested interests that you can in theory get behind (wanting people to like what they like so they can play what they like with the people they like. Like?)
But When you're having to sit through such nagging because they want to sell you something? That'd rather rub me up the wrong way, to put it gently.

That said, it's probably worth learning to tolerate the newer editions, because they are likely to become more prevalent over time. Especially if your local group has a preference for them. You don't have to consider the system better, or even very good, but I'm of the opinion that even a bad system can be suffered through for the other good elements, be they company, storyline, or merely socialising.
That said, if the groups of people in question cannot treat you with enough respect to see when a particular topic is causing you that much annoyance, perhaps there is no point in tolerating the systems in question.

woodenbandman
2009-08-26, 09:41 AM
I'm going to posit that if a system can't grab you in a session or two, it's not really that good of a system. I played DnD for a year, and it was all I knew, and I liked it a lot starting after a few sessions. But I played WoD and liked it almost immediately. Same with Paranoia. Same with a homebrew system a friend developed. Conversely, Dark Heresy didn't really get me "Drawn-In," neither with d20 Modern.

Not to say that the systems I like don't have glaring flaws and that Dark Heresy's resolution mechanic isn't naturally perfect and sensible, but to dislike a system initially is not close-minded. Systems only have so long to draw you in.

Now, I've never played Pathfinder nor 4e, but from what I hear, I wouldn't like PF but I might have some interest in 4e.

Plus, different game systems give you a different, usually better, perspective on what it is that you enjoy about your system of choice and about role-play in general.

pres_man
2009-08-26, 09:57 AM
Some folks just can't seem to accept that you might be totally comfortable with your old car, old pair of sweats, or old game system. "But it is old! They don't even make that module/style/edition anymore! They have new stuff! It is new! How could you be satisfied with that old stuff?" I play an older version of D&D. I am totally satisfied (I do some houseruling but nothing major). I don't feel anything is "lacking" that I feel I need to leave the system for something else. Of course if it never existed or I was just starting from scratch, I'd probably grab one of those newer systems and would be totally satisfied with that. But I feel no need to change when I am currently satisfied.

Raum
2009-08-26, 10:04 AM
@ Pika - short version: Don't respond to trolls unless you can do so with humor. That applies to real life as well as forums. :smallwink:

Longer version: Too many people tie their self identity to some external philosophy, group, or item. (See brujon's post on Religion, Soccer, and Politics for an example.) The most you can do is decide what you'll identify with yourself. You can't decide that for someone else and they can't decide it for you. Arguing over it is pointless more often than not...unless the discussion itself is fun, I recommend exiting once it gets repetitive.

For an even longer version, read Paul Graham's essay Keep Your Identity Small.

Mark Hall
2009-08-26, 10:06 AM
My current group, with Hzurr, plays 4e.

I am not fond of 4e for a variety of reasons, but I play it because I like the players, and the DM doesn't totally suck. :smallwink:

On the other hand, when I take the chair for a bit, I refuse to run 4e, 3.x, or Pathfinder, their other go-to games. I'll run C&C, or d6 Star Wars, and would run Palladium or older editions of D&D without question, because I like the games. I once got talked into running d20 L5R, which was a mistake, since I hated pretty much everything about that game (not a fan of d20, never particularly liked Asian fantasy... horrible situation, overall).

A good group of players can make a system you're not fond of fun. A bad group of players can make a system you love suck. So long as they're not insisting that you run the games you hate, if you like the group, suck it up.

Tiki Snakes
2009-08-26, 10:15 AM
My current group, with Hzurr, plays 4e.

I am not fond of 4e for a variety of reasons, but I play it because I like the players, and the DM doesn't totally suck. :smallwink:

On the other hand, when I take the chair for a bit, I refuse to run 4e, 3.x, or Pathfinder, their other go-to games. I'll run C&C, or d6 Star Wars, and would run Palladium or older editions of D&D without question, because I like the games. I once got talked into running d20 L5R, which was a mistake, since I hated pretty much everything about that game (not a fan of d20, never particularly liked Asian fantasy... horrible situation, overall).

A good group of players can make a system you're not fond of fun. A bad group of players can make a system you love suck. So long as they're not insisting that you run the games you hate, if you like the group, suck it up.

Wait, wait, wait. Someone convinced you to run a game system you disliked, based around a genre you disliked? That's a pretty nifty diplomacy check they must have made, there.
Luckily, that's not really a problem in my neck of the woods, due to the sheer number of dm's and the wildly varied games they are willing and eager to run. (We regularly have a pretty long waiting list of games waiting to go, in any number of systems, merely finding slots for them all is tricky.)

Fax Celestis
2009-08-26, 10:24 AM
Wait, wait, wait. Someone convinced you to run a game system you disliked, based around a genre you disliked? That's a pretty nifty diplomacy check they must have made, there.

Hzurr must have levels in bard. :smalltongue:

Mark Hall
2009-08-26, 10:26 AM
Wait, wait, wait. Someone convinced you to run a game system you disliked, based around a genre you disliked? That's a pretty nifty diplomacy check they must have made, there.

Now ex-wife, then wife.

Aotrs Commander
2009-08-26, 10:30 AM
Luckily, that's not really a problem in my neck of the woods, due to the sheer number of dm's and the wildly varied games they are willing and eager to run.

It's not a problem in our circles, either, for the exact opposite reason.

Player: I want to play a wild west campaign and/or be criminals!
Me: Off you go then, chap.
Player: You're not going to run it?
Me: Nope. You can though.
Player: You rotten old-
Me: *Hefts rocket launcher meaningfully*
Player: (very fast) Iseeyourpoint,ohgloriousdungeonmaster! Iwouldverymuchliketoplaywhateveryouwanttorun! MyLord! *Bows and grovels*
Me: Better.



With our groups, the DMs basically say "I'm going to run this next" and the players say "okay!" It's a bit you-get-what's-offered-you, but on the other hand, the players don't object (as all three of us regular DMs in both groups have been playing with the mostly same set of players for 10-20 years!) And when they occasionally do, we offer them the DM's chair (upon which they usually go quiet; on the rare occasions they don't we encourage and help as best we can.)

kamikasei
2009-08-26, 10:38 AM
Now ex-wife, then wife.

You must really hate L5R.

shadzar
2009-08-26, 10:53 AM
I don't mean to be one of those people and sorry if I am Shadzar but you should generally try something before writing it off unless you're against it on some reason other than "I don't think I'll like it." however it's pretty clear you've thought about this and even if I wanted to convince you I couldn't.

:smallconfused:

If food smells like sewage... I don't eat it. No need to try it because smell is a part of taste and vice versa.

Likewise I have an RPG I like. I don't need to change just for the sake of change when it works fine for me. So there is no need to try a new RPG considering I already have on, and cannot devote the money to a new one, and do not have that much time left in life to devote to a new one as I have the current one. :smallwink:

If it ain't broke....

:smallsmile:

Doc Roc
2009-08-26, 10:57 AM
Or maybe I'm just hungry, and need to go buy groceries. And some curry powder.

Damn it, and I just had vietnamese! :: heads to the car to go for thai ::

Grey Knight
2009-08-26, 11:17 AM
So there is no need to try a new RPG considering I already have on, and cannot devote the money to a new one, and do not have that much time left in life to devote to a new one as I have the current one.

I like free stuff, which solves the money situation. Totally with you on the time problem, though! Not enough hours in the day to get everything done as it is. When I meet people in Real Life who sing the praises of "you should learn every system there is", they always seem to be teenagers or university students, what a coincidence! I don't spoil their illusions, though. I'm not that mean. :smallcool:

Umael
2009-08-26, 12:25 PM
I like to try new things, and even if I have a bad experience, I like to be able to put it in context and determine if that bad experience was due to outside conditions, or whether I have legit reason to genuinely dislike it. Multiple bad experiences, even if not directly connected with something, will taint my view.

Such is the way with Palladium. I do not understand the rules, have no intuitive grasp of the system, and my experiences playing the game have been either unremarkable or bad. Even though I acknowledge that the experiences might be due to the other players and the GMs involved, and that there is the chance that I will one day learn the system, I will not play Palladium unless I was hard up for a game and the only game available was Palladium. Fat chance of that happening...

In another personal example, I have never liked psionics in D&D. When I mentioned my opinion and that I would never allow psionics in my game, someone (on this board, nonetheless) started attacking me and my position. This person's attitude so grated on me that it started tainting my opinion of psionics, period. Now, years later, I found a character concept that I adore, but to pull it off, I might need to use psionics to make it work. This person's behavior so turned me that I am still looking at other possibilities.

Pika, I don't know if you can do this, but next time someone makes a comment about how "great" X system is and how it is better than what you want to play, tell them, in an offended tone, "Well, I was considering playing X at some point, but now..."

If successful, it tells the offender that his attitude has turned off a potential "convert", which hurt "the cause". It might get one or two of those fanatics off your back.

Pika...
2009-08-26, 01:39 PM
Have you considered that it might be that they find the game that you prefer to be extremely boring/stupid/extremely unbalanced*, but still wanting to play with you, so in a attempt to avoid whatever system they don't like, they are pushing for you through a bunch of systems in the hope of finding one you wont dismiss at once?

You say that you would have liked to get to know Traveler better, did you actually voice that opinion to them? Or did you go with a defensive "yeah, I guess it works, but it still have those *long list of the flaws present in said system*"? (all games have flaws, it's that simple)


*No offence, but it happens, people find D&D 3.5 to be a nice game. I detest the spell system, hate the level system, find half the classes boring and spellcasting to be ridiculous overpowered - so I refuse to play it.

Oh yeah I told the DM who ran Travler after the game that I enjoyed it, and then he mentioned the economic mechanics would be to my tastes after I mentioned I liked that sort of thing in both MMOs and RPGs (which I find rare), and I was then instantly sold. But again I was the new guy, and they were the ones deciding to jump around the place.

When they were finally sitting together to vote on a 2 month long system/campaign, I got to vote. I wanted travler (oh yeah, the fourth one was Warhammer Fantasy. Duh. It was late last night...), but got then switched to Warhammer Fantasy in the final votes (Traveler was ruled out). Again, want to guess what system they settled on?

Yukitsu
2009-08-26, 01:50 PM
I just tell people that if they are willing to pay for my books, to plan and DM a campaign for me, and provide a venue for this game to take place, I would be more than happy playing said game.

They never ask me to play it again. :smalltongue:

TheThan
2009-08-26, 02:05 PM
Ok if youíve tried their recommendations, and disliked them, then they have no reason for complaint. You gave it a try, showing your not closed minded, and didnít like it. thereís nothing wrong with liking a specific system over another one.

Raum
2009-08-26, 02:37 PM
When they were finally sitting together to vote on a 2 month long system/campaign, I got to vote. I wanted travler (oh yeah, the fourth one was Warhammer Fantasy. Duh. It was late last night...), but got then switched to Warhammer Fantasy in the final votes (Traveler was ruled out). Again, want to guess what system they settled on?It happens. Not everyone's preferences are the same. Personally, I play the games my friends like. I GM the games I like. If I disliked a game my friends wanted to play enough, I'd find something else to do during those sessions.

If you're playing at a public location, such as a game store, you're probably limited to whatever games someone is running. For that matter, courtesy may limit the games you play at a game store to games they sell...you're using their premises after all.

If there's a particular game you want to play, find a group of like-minded friends and a place you can sit for a few hours. Start a group and run what you want!

Pika...
2009-08-26, 09:15 PM
I just tell people that if they are willing to pay for my books, to plan and DM a campaign for me, and provide a venue for this game to take place, I would be more than happy playing said game.

They never ask me to play it again. :smalltongue:

Ha.

However, what if someone eventually actually slaps a free 4.o player's handbook (or whatever it is called) in my face? :smallconfused:

Unlikely I know, but...




It happens. Not everyone's preferences are the same. Personally, I play the games my friends like. I GM the games I like. If I disliked a game my friends wanted to play enough, I'd find something else to do during those sessions.

If you're playing at a public location, such as a game store, you're probably limited to whatever games someone is running. For that matter, courtesy may limit the games you play at a game store to games they sell...you're using their premises after all.

If there's a particular game you want to play, find a group of like-minded friends and a place you can sit for a few hours. Start a group and run what you want!

EH. Currently trying that.

After a month or two I think I might have a group of three others, and we finally have a place where we can play late and not be forced to make our game "open" by management after they had original said we did not have to. >_>

I was surprised at how difficult it really is. I PM'd everyone in a 30 mile radius from me on www.penandpapergames.com. Only a small handful of replies. just like when I tried looking for groups.

Plus the DM canceled on us, so now I am the default DM. Thankfully you have all been helping me with my recent threads. Thanks for that guys/gals. :smallsmile:



p.s. If anyone in the Florida Orlando or Kissimmee area interested, well, you know...

Kallisti
2009-08-26, 11:16 PM
I think that you should be willing to try new systems, but your friends should be willing to accept it if there are systems you just don't want to play.

I'd play any system if I liked the group enough, but it would take a lot to sell me on, say, Mutants & Masterminds. The system is...so easily breakable that it makes D&D 3.0 look very balanced indeed. It's hideous...

...and I am currently playing in an M&M game, because the group and GM are people I want to game with. And I'm loving it, because our GM is just that good.

So, my point? Play what will be fun. Not what system you like, not what system your friends like, not what system anything--what game will be fun. If you're having fun, does it matter if the system's rules are poorly done? If you're not, does it matter if they're wonderfully balanced, clear, and interesting?

Thajocoth
2009-08-26, 11:26 PM
Ha.

However, what if someone eventually actually slaps a free 4.o player's handbook (or whatever it is called) in my face? :smallconfused:

Unlikely I know, but...

Actually, I believe Wizards made their pdf of it free. Though I suppose that's not slapped in your face, really.

shadzar
2009-08-27, 12:55 AM
I like free stuff, which solves the money situation. Totally with you on the time problem, though! Not enough hours in the day to get everything done as it is. When I meet people in Real Life who sing the praises of "you should learn every system there is", they always seem to be teenagers or university students, what a coincidence! I don't spoil their illusions, though. I'm not that mean. :smallcool:

Free stuff is often good. Someone gave me a 3.5 and 4th edition PHBs. I gave them to someone that would play. I just have no interest in them and the person got mad and said I should given them back to them. :smallconfused:

They got a new player from the other guy. I was once told I was oppressing people and forcing them to try to play 2nd edition because I told them I would only play or DM that. All because I would not play with them I was causing them somehow not to be able to play because I wasn't a part of it....too bad for them. They could still play 3rd or 4th if they REALLY wanted to. Just I had no interest in them. I think it is rather funny how people on forums talk when it comes to such things. Like as a D&D player I must play the newest edition or I am oppressing others because I don't join their games cause they play an edition I dislike. :smallconfused:

The simple fact is, people can play what they want...that goes for everyone. If someone doesn't want to play your edition not matter what, then they just won't. If you want to get upset because someone else doesn't want to play your edition, then "tough titty said the kitty cause the milks gone dry."

It is dumbfounding how some think everyone will want to play every game, or that because you play you owe it to everyone else to play everything they do. Humans are different and have different interests. C'est la vie.

Grey Knight
2009-08-27, 03:07 AM
I was once told I was oppressing people [...]

Help! Help! Just because some moistened bint lobbed the Dungeon Master's Guide at you! :smallsmile:

shadzar
2009-08-27, 04:06 AM
Help! Help! Just because some moistened bint lobbed the Dungeon Master's Guide at you! :smallsmile:

:smallconfused: Can you translate that to English so I might be able to laugh at it too?

"moistened bint" :smallconfused: I am hoping that means something other than a wet girl. :smalleek:

kamikasei
2009-08-27, 04:09 AM
It's a reference to Monty Python and the Holy Grail - the "oppressed peasant" complaining that having a moistened bint (Lady of the Lake) chuck a sword (Excalibur) at you don't qualify you for government.

Fiendish_Dire_Moose
2009-08-27, 05:17 AM
It's a reference to Monty Python and the Holy Grail - the "oppressed peasant" complaining that having a moistened bint (Lady of the Lake) chuck a sword (Excalibur) at you don't qualify you for government.

Funny, in the version I have, he says, "Moistened tart lobs a scimitar at me".

kamikasei
2009-08-27, 05:21 AM
You'll note I didn't put what I said in quote marks. I was paraphrasing; I don't remember exactly what was said, I just recognized the reference.

PairO'Dice Lost
2009-08-27, 09:34 AM
The only real way to get the system-pushers to see the light and quit, so far as I've seen, is to turn it back on them--find a system they don't like and try to convince them to play it. Hopefully, with the tables turned, they'll see where you're coming from.

I had one person in my FLGS back home try to convince me to play 4e. I told him that I'd ran a few games with my own group, we weren't impressed, and that I'd pass on the offer. He kept on pestering me about it, and kept coming back to the line "But it gets back to the old school style better than 3e ever did!" and variations on that. Finally, he annoyed me enough to snap at him, and the conversation went something like this:

Me: "Look, I've played 1e and 2e. I know what 'old school' feels like, and 4e doesn't 'feel like' that to me or to my group, however much it does to you. Tell you what--if you like the older editions so much, I'll run a 1e game for your group."

Him: "What? Us, play 1e? You've got to be kidding! All the classes are so boring, there aren't any options, the monster rules are so random, there aren't any rules for out-of-combat stuff, the--"

Me: "You know, I've heard it said that in 4e, all the classes are so boring, there aren't any options, the monster rules are so random, there aren't any rules for out-of-combat stuff, and so on and so forth. You'll notice that's not the impression that I got, but hey, if that's the 'old school feel' you're looking for..."

Him: :smalleek: "Oh."

Me: :smallamused: "Yeah."

Him: "You know, I think I'll...find someone else."

Granted, you probably won't be lucky enough to have someone walk right into it like that, but if you show him why you like your game, offer to run a game, etc. they might get the message.

valadil
2009-08-27, 10:40 AM
The only time I insist people try 4th ed is when they knock it without having played it.

shadzar
2009-08-27, 11:23 AM
The only time I insist people try 4th ed is when they knock it without having played it.

Why? Not everyone has to stick their finger in a light socket to not its not something they want to do. Likewise they don't need to play 4th edition if they didn't like what they read from it. Superhero powers are pretty dumb for a sword-and-sorcery genre game. So I don't need to play it to know I don't care to play a superheros game. Better yet, can you remove the entire powers system? If so, then I would try playing it.

Other people have other things they don't like, and if it is part of the game, they don't need to prove to you that they don't like it. Forcing someone to like something can easily backfire and they dislike it more than they thought.

Have you tried all games to know you don't like them all?

Not trying to single you out, but just saying some don't need to partake of something to know they will not like it from its description. I just find the concept that "you have to try it to know you won't like it" to be insulting.

valadil
2009-08-27, 11:38 AM
Why? Not everyone has to stick their finger in a light socket to not its not something they want to do.

There's a huge difference between electrocuting oneself and trying an RPG system. At worst, the RPG bores or frustrates you for 6 hours. A poor GM running my favorite system will bore or frustrate me for 6 hours too. It's not like you're giving up much to try out the game.

I don't even mind people saying they're not interested in the game. Fine, feel free to ignore it. It just irritates me when people hate on it and say what a bad game it is without trying to play it.

PairO'Dice Lost
2009-08-27, 11:49 AM
Have you tried all games to know you don't like them all?

Not trying to single you out, but just saying some don't need to partake of something to know they will not like it from its description. I just find the concept that "you have to try it to know you won't like it" to be insulting.

As valadil said, there's a difference between "I don't need to play it, I know I don't like it!" and "I don't need to play it, I know it's a bad game!" It's perfectly fine for you to not want to play a game, but if you turn around and complain about it without playing it first, that's when the problem arises.

Umael
2009-08-27, 11:54 AM
The only time I insist people try 4th ed is when they knock it without having played it.

The problem is that you get people like shadzar who:
* judge the book by its cover,
* or skim through it and conclude it is inferior based on a few (glaring) rules or obnoxious fluff
* listen to what other people (whose judgement they trust) have to say about it

...and worse, that's not entirely wrong.

I've been guilty of all of the above, at some point in time. I have been offended by the cover art or the title of various books that I don't want to waste my time.

Keeping it out-of-real-world, would you as an elf, read "Y Elf Sux" by Grumuush Jr., in which it depicts an orc with a happily sadistic grin braining an elf who looks completely shocked and horrified?

If a home-brewed game included bonus racial advantages above what they get in D&D, except humans, who have their bonus racial feat removed, would you want to play it - especially if you love playing humans?

If every single one of your friends picked up some lore book from 1st edition and said that the author was a drunk, misogynistic cultist radical who made thinly-veiled crude allusions to his deluded sense of self-importance and lack of self-esteem throughout the book and every one of your friends was offended, would you bother to read it?

In all three cases, my answer is no, without thinking twice.


There's a huge difference between electrocuting oneself and trying an RPG system. At worst, the RPG bores or frustrates you for 6 hours. A poor GM running my favorite system will bore or frustrate me for 6 hours too. It's not like you're giving up much to try out the game.

But you are missing the point here.

If I tried an RPG system that I already know I won't like, I won't like it. You can claim that I'm already setting myself up, telling myself not to like and judging it already, but that doesn't mean I'm judging it unfairly.

It gives me no pleasure to try a game that I already have very, very strong suspicions I will not like because it is racist/sexist/plain offensive, and then find out that I was right, I wouldn't like it.

Besides - I will have not just wasted 6 hours, everyone who got involved will have wasted 6 hours. My free time is far from limitless - I do not want to use what little I have on a wasted endeavor.



I don't even mind people saying they're not interested in the game. Fine, feel free to ignore it. It just irritates me when people hate on it and say what a bad game it is without trying to play it.

But again, if I have valid reason to dislike the game before I even pick it up, why should I not comment on all the good reasons to NOT play the game?

(Mind you, I am attacking your argument, not the subject. I actually want to play more 4E.)

Murdim
2009-08-27, 12:33 PM
The problem is that you get people like shadzar who:
* judge the book by its cover,
* or skim through it and conclude it is inferior based on a few (glaring) rules or obnoxious fluff
* listen to what other people (whose judgement they trust) have to say about itPlus, that's not even what shadzar does. He said that the fundamental premise of D&D4 - an uniformally power-based gameplay - doesn't appeal to him in the context of a "Sword & Sorcery"-type campaign. Of course, one can retort him that it's still not a good reason to refuse to try it and that he could grow to like the power-based system, but in my opinion this is still a pretty good justification for an initial dislike.

shadzar
2009-08-27, 12:53 PM
^^What they said.

I don't need to play 4th edition (sticking with same example) to know I don't like a superhero feel to D&D. I switched from 1st to basic, then to second. Prefer Basic myself, but so hard to get people to understand what they can do in such an opened-ended game with few rules so 2nd is fine with me too.

I just don't like the powers structure, so why waste anybodies time (especially my own) with something I know I have no interest in playing. I would be just sitting bored rolling dice like the Star Wars guy grappled in the D&D video Podcast with Dave Noonan as DM. That video showed me exactly what I thought a game would play like, and proved to me I did not like the system. Therefore I don't need to play it.

Who really loses if I choose not to play a new game? Only me if I am wrong. If others cannot play the game without me, then they are boned.

I am not just trying to pick on 4th, because I didn't like 3rd either. Just so I am not picking on WotC, I don't like Vampire, Alternity, Dragonlance 5th Age(Saga), GURPS, Traveller, FATAL...I do like RIFTS because it is a bit over-the top and silly. For those I don't like I could make lists of the things I didn't like about them. For those lists and the games I have played...I haven't been wrong yet.

The thing is if you already determine you aren't going to like something, then you go into it not liking it already. It is human nature, whther you are right about not liking it (myself not liking many of the parts of the systems which would make the game un-fun to play in bad systems), or others just judging the book by the covers rather than the rules.

Some people just know without having to play. I liked 3rd edition assault rules for 40k when they were in beta, and liked the game after 3rd came out. Prior, I wouldn't play 2nd edition, and dislike 4th and 5th edition rules. It just takes the right game with the right rules for some people to like. It is their money and time to spend on the games anyway right?

I have been told to my face I would like 3rd and/or 4th if I played it. I proved that wrong when it came to 3rd when asked during the game what I thought, and broke it down for about 30 minutes where it failed to deliver an interesting or fun game. Needless to say people were upset that I took 30 minutes of gametime to tear down the game, but they asked. I then continued to play with only the parts I liked and let the rest deal with the mess I didn't find fun, and enjoyed playing (by 2nd edition mentality and rules) slightly with them then. Only 1 person (the DM) noticed I was playing 2nd edition for the rest of the sessions in their 3rd edition game. He found it funny, and never told them that my playstyle they liked so much wasn't even the game they were playing. :smallbiggrin:

So if you have someone that doesn't want to try playing, there is no real need to waste your or their time to try to get them to play, when odds are you could have spent the same time finding someone else who was more interested in it. All that ever happens when bringing up editions in discussion to try to tell someone they need to try it first, is start a face to face edition war that fractures your local gaming community more than is being done online. Maybe even driving customers away from certain stores when a larger volume of people gang-up on someone to try to get them to play something the have little interest in and could cause yet another gaming store to close. That isn't good for anyone.

Its best to just agree to disagree, and move on to the next topic or gamer.

Each person has a set of criteria for what they want out of a game, and if the cons outweigh the pros, then that is their decision to make. :smallsmile:

Typewriter
2009-08-27, 01:01 PM
I think the point that everyone agrees on, but hasn't been specifically declared is that it doesn't matter if you like a game or not, regardless of any reasons, experiences, or lack thereof.

What matters is that you don't turn your personal dislike into an insult at the game. I don't like fourth edition, but I don't think theres anything inherently wrong with the system. I think it's a fine system. I own the three core books of it, and I played with it briefly after having been very excited for it's release, but then I proclaimed that I was done with it. I just didn't enjoy it.

Like what you want, but if you have a comment to make about a system you don't like specify what portion of the system you don't like and don't refer to it as a system problem. It's not a problem with the system, it's just something you don't like.

Yukitsu
2009-08-27, 01:04 PM
Ha.

However, what if someone eventually actually slaps a free 4.o player's handbook (or whatever it is called) in my face? :smallconfused:

Unlikely I know, but...


Take the book, spend some time with some people who are obviously generous enthusiastic folk, take their books and sell them on e-bay?

pres_man
2009-08-27, 02:43 PM
Certainly noone wants to make people feel like they shouldn't invite others to play the games they themselves are interested in. That is how you grow the population of gamers (well besides breeding them, but that is pretty hit or miss). But once you make the offer, if they are not interested then let it go. You might suggest that if they are interested in the future you'll be happy to game with them, but don't over sell your game. Unless you are an actual producer of the game (or maybe in the case of some merchants), you shouldn't be acting like a used car salesman.

As for buying products in game stores that you play at, absolutely. But unless they sell only one type of thing, you should be able to find something to purchase occasionally. The rare reaper mini. A new d20. A comic book. Something. But you don't have to go and start buying the newest game system to be a valuable customer. Getting butts in the door is the best way to get purchases, even if they are playing out of date systems.

valadil
2009-08-27, 03:33 PM
But again, if I have valid reason to dislike the game before I even pick it up, why should I not comment on all the good reasons to NOT play the game?

(Mind you, I am attacking your argument, not the subject. I actually want to play more 4E.)

Fair enough. But if you're someone who will dislike the game and doesn't want to waste their time, why attack it? That's what I take exception to. I don't care if someone says they aren't interested in learning a new system. Or if they aren't interested in 4e because it prioritizes the gamist aspects over creating a realistic model. Those are all fine reasons not to play. Maybe I'm still too susceptible to flame bait, but I read a lot of comments hating on 4e (from elsewhere on the internet) by people insisting its a bad game without having tried it. It's like they jump from not being interested straight to the game being bad for everyone.

Umael
2009-08-27, 03:51 PM
But if you're someone who will dislike the game and doesn't want to waste their time, why attack it?

"No, I don't like X!... "I said, I don't like it!... Look, you want to know why I don't like X? This is why: {reason} {reason} {reason}"

- OR -

"You want to play X!? Do you know what problems that game has?? I know it looks interesting, but it's got {reason}, which I think is a very bad idea. (If I know you, I might even point out how much you dislike {reason}.)"

Yes, you can get your point across without "attacking", but sometimes a game gets attacked because, well, it deserves to be attacked. The game is a CONCEPT, and as such, can be poked and prodded and found wanting... or found worthy of respect.



Maybe I'm still too susceptible to flame bait, but I read a lot of comments hating on 4e (from elsewhere on the internet) by people insisting its a bad game without having tried it. It's like they jump from not being interested straight to the game being bad for everyone.

1) Maybe you are. I wouldn't know.
2) This isn't elsewhere on the Internet.
3) Not trying is not the same as not knowing.

I almost sense that there is something of the notion of attacking a game system without reading it with putting a book on the banned list. If you want to protest a mandatory book that is a school reading assignment, you have to read it to acknowledge its cultural impact, negatively or otherwise. A game system is an economic product that survives by its quality, its popularity - peer pressure to vote by the dollar is a cultural tactic to attempt quality control. Denying a game system without having solid firsthand evidence is fair.

PLUN
2009-08-27, 03:52 PM
We are Fourth.
You will lower your sheets and prepare to be shifted.
Your illogical backstories will be added to our own.
Resistance is futile.

Mystic Muse
2009-08-27, 04:24 PM
[QUOTE=Umael;6809684]

"You want to play X!? Do you know what problems that game has?? I know it looks interesting, but it's got {reason}, which I think is a very bad idea. (If I know you, I might even point out how much you dislike {reason}.)"

you should only really do this If it's something that the person greatly dislikes. If it's something just YOU dislike there's no reason to blast the game. If the other person doesn't mind you shouldn't care either. Of course this is only if it's something they don't normally have anything against.

Umael
2009-08-27, 04:32 PM
"You want to play X!? Do you know what problems that game has?? I know it looks interesting, but it's got {reason}, which I think is a very bad idea. (If I know you, I might even point out how much you dislike {reason}.)"

you should only really do this If it's something that the person greatly dislikes. If it's something just YOU dislike there's no reason to blast the game. If the other person doesn't mind you shouldn't care either. Of course this is only if it's something they don't normally have anything against.

True.


But if you're someone who will dislike the game and doesn't want to waste their time, why attack it?

I just gave two examples of why someone would have a justified reason for attacking a system. The second example (which you quoted) is proper far, far less than the first example, and as I mentioned, you can probably do better without attacking most of the time anyway.

Worira
2009-08-27, 05:00 PM
Free stuff is often good. Someone gave me a 3.5 and 4th edition PHBs. I gave them to someone that would play. I just have no interest in them and the person got mad and said I should given them back to them. :smallconfused:

Well, yes, you should have.

shadzar
2009-08-28, 02:38 AM
Well, yes, you should have.

:smallconfused: So you give someone a gift and think they owe you something, or you still own that thing and can decide what happens to/with it? Um...no.

Giving something away means you are no longer entitled to claims of ownership of it, nor have any say in it's disposition anymore.

The person the books were given too joined the game, so it was a win-win for everyone. I didn't want to play and wasn't bothered with playing anymore, plus the group had gained a new player which is what they were interested in.

Again, if they for some reason couldn't play without me, then they might need some help in dealing with life in general.

When I give something to someone else, it no longer exists as far as I am concerned. That person can do whatever they want with it because it is theirs. So longer as it isn't used as a weapon towards me....

Quincunx
2009-08-28, 03:58 AM
Was it a gift. . .or a loan? I haven't yet had a trade of an instructional book (RPG book, how-to book, encyclopedia) bought for myself and handed to someone else be anything but a loan.

From another angle, given those books are a mite expensive, then the giver should have been asked for approval before you handed them on to a person unknown to the giver.

@V: Your word usage for what you want to convey is excellent (and I'm not seeing any spelling problems even if you own up to them :smallwink: ). What I was questioning was whether or not the giver saw it as a loan.

shadzar
2009-08-28, 04:14 AM
Was it a gift. . .or a loan? I haven't yet had a trade of an instructional book (RPG book, how-to book, encyclopedia) bought for myself and handed to someone else be anything but a loan.

From another angle, given those books are a mite expensive, then the giver should have been asked for approval before you handed them on to a person unknown to the giver.

It was a gift, and not the first one I was given by the person that was not happy with what I did with the gift. One of my rules is declare ownership before leaving a place with something. I don't take things home that belong to other people and borrow them only in there presence and return it before I leave somewhere else. So before getting an unwrapped item I would identify it to be a loaner or present.

If someone say a parent gives someone a car, then shouldn't sell it to buy another one without asking the parent first either because it was an expensive item? :smallconfused:

When you give something away you have no rights to it. If you wanted it you shouldn't have given it away. I have been asked several times about things I have given as gifts, and always confused why the person was asking me, and told them flat out like anything they bought, it belongs to them so they can do with it what they want. It falls under personal tangible property rights/rules. :smallconfused:

I surely would not have borrowed books for something I didn't want to play. Heck for third the d20srd.com works if I really needed to look something up from the PHB.

GIVE =/= loan. I use the correct words when posting even if I might misspell a bunch of them. :smalltongue:

Honeslty, I would laugh at then disassociate myself with anyone that gives someone something and in the future thinks they have any rights to that thing. That isn't how giving works. Dictionaries are your friend. :smallsmile:

*Correction, I take items I borrow from the library home, or something like a form or other thing that needs to be digitized or photocopied, then return it ASAP.

Had someone give me a miniature in a blister once, and I disliked it and traded it to someone for another that I did like and they got upset. Strange behavior really. The person gave me something and I didn't bite their head off for giving me something so pathetic, and just traded for something (of lesser monetary value) that had more use/value to me. Do people not understand what giving things means today?

[/derail]

Back to the topic at hand of people trying to force others to play something they don't want to....

pres_man
2009-08-28, 07:39 AM
If they were given something that you knew you were going to get rid of, and they themselves probably could have used, you should probably refused the item.

Umael
2009-08-28, 02:18 PM
If they were given something that you knew you were going to get rid of, and they themselves probably could have used, you should probably refused the item.

Why was he obligated to know they could have used it? They gave him a gift, he used it as he saw fit.

...

Umm... guys?

Could we quit making me agree with shadzar?

It makes me feel funny, and not in a good way.

BillyJimBoBob
2009-08-28, 03:56 PM
In D&D's case it wasn't that you were "not worthy" because you didn't play D&D. Olden times didn't care. Now you aren't worthy of D&D if you aren't paying for the horse droppings printed each month for it. Again, this comes from players and the company alike.Bah. I play 4e and I will never subscribe to their "bonus" content, nor have I ever picked up even the smallest hint that I was being judged poorly for sticking with the core book set. I may buy PHBII and III and IV at some point, or DMGII, II, IV, or MM...you get the point. But I'll buy what appears to add valuable content without morphing the game into something I do not care for. And that's been true no matter what version of D&D has been the most recently published. I've got copies of White Dwarf before it became a GM mouth organ, and I subscribed to Dragon Magazine for years. At that time the content was worth the price, and I could usually find something of value to my D&D game. Now though, paying for the Dragon online content isn't valuable to me at all, because it's not of the same quality as the old Dragon Magazine content.

To the OP: Play what you like. Ignore anyone who can't accept that you have the freedom of choice. Just make sure that you don't do the same to them over their adoption of a new game that they enjoy and it's all good.

BillyJimBoBob
2009-08-28, 04:49 PM
Why? Not everyone has to stick their finger in a light socket to not its not something they want to do. Likewise they don't need to play 4th edition if they didn't like what they read from it. Superhero powers are pretty dumb for a sword-and-sorcery genre game. So I don't need to play it to know I don't care to play a superheros game. Better yet, can you remove the entire powers system? If so, then I would try playing it.See, here's where you haven't tried it and so are coming to the wrong conclusions. There quite simply are no "superhero powers" in 4e. There is rather a mechanical framework called "powers", in which each of the character classes has their primary abilities defined within that framework. This impressed me in a number of ways, mostly because I've done enough amateur game design to know what works and what does not work, and also because I've been an avid board gamer for longer than I've been a role player, and I've long known that most/all role playing game designers could use a huge dose of board game rules layout to improve things as diverse as class balance, common use of terms, and ease of learning.

So if you simply read the 4e PHB and decided it was a superhero powers game, you read a huge amount into a simple word: "power", and arrived at a vary false conclusion.

Unless you consider any FRPG which includes spells to be a "superheros game."

Hung up on the word powers? Fine, call them abilities. Or call them by the various names the 4e PHB gives them under each specific character class: Exploits, Spells, etc. The word "power" is just a common term to help group things together which share a common framework. Or call them by any other name, if you simply can not read the word "power" and not have your mind led immediately to thoughts of Green Lantern and Spider Man. But don't let your misconception churn into a wellspring of abhorrence with no actual experience to back you up. That would be a bit extreme.

Or name a single thing a 1st level 4e Fighter can do that a 1st level 3.5 Fighter can't do. Or vise versa. They are fairly similar in play, so where do the superpowers come in to it? Hell, most people who hate 4e complain that it limits their ability to make broken characters fashion a character after the concept they desire to play.

I'm not going to say that 4e D&D is the RPG to play over any other, I just hate to see it get spat upon for both "limiting broken options" and for "being a superhero system." That's just a bit unfair.

I just find the concept that "you have to try it to know you won't like it" to be insulting.It doesn't apply to all cases, sure. And you've managed some nice hyperbole with your "finger in the light socket" lets-blow-it-all-out-of-proportions approach. But saying that you have to try a game, especially a game which shares a huge number of common elements to others you've played, to know that you won't like it is far, far more accurate than saying that you haven't tried the game and know you wouldn't care for it after playing it. So just who is insulting whom?

pres_man
2009-08-28, 07:25 PM
Why was he obligated to know they could have used it? They gave him a gift, he used it as he saw fit.

...

Umm... guys?

Could we quit making me agree with shadzar?

It makes me feel funny, and not in a good way.

If someone gave you a vase to "brighten up your home" and then you proceeded to smash it and stomp it into the ground right in front of them, would you not be acting like a jack-hole? What's the difference. You don't want it, tell them you are just going to give it away/sell it if they are fine with that cool, otherwise they may decide to hold on to it. You don't have to know they could use it, you just have to know that you aren't going to.

Of course the issue here is manners, and you know, gamers and manners don't always mix.

FoE
2009-08-28, 08:23 PM
Seinfeld called it "re-gifting." Giving gifts isn't simply an exchange of wealth; when a person gives a gift, they intended it as a gesture of friendship, appreciation or affection to the person receiving it. This is especially true of handmade gifts, but even purchasing a gift requires a special trip to a store or a search online.

As they say, it's "the thought that counts."

If the receiver simply gives the gift away to someone without the gift-giver's permission, that implies they have rejected the gift-giver's gesture and might even hold them in contempt.

It's also somewhat rude to return the gift to the giver, but it can be mitigated with an explanation of "I can't use this" or "I already have one." At least then the giver can get a refund on the present.

Umael
2009-08-28, 08:51 PM
If someone gave you a vase to "brighten up your home" and then you proceeded to smash it and stomp it into the ground right in front of them, would you not be acting like a jack-hole? What's the difference.

Bad example.

This is not smashing the gift, nor is it in front of them.

The gift has not been wasted. It has been given to someone else who will use it.



You don't want it, tell them you are just going to give it away/sell it if they are fine with that cool, otherwise they may decide to hold on to it.

I don't give anyone a gift with the idea that the gift gives me some rights over the person, nor that I have some kind of ownership of the gift. I don't give a gift unless I am willing to part with it. Once it leaves my hands, it is gone. If you wish, I have traded it to the other person in exchange for good will between the two of us.

If I give a gift, usually the only thing I expect is a simple "thanks" in reply. Being told "I'm just going to give this away/sell it" is rude. If you want to do that, do it later, do with it as you see fit, and if I ask about it later, THEN you can inform me of its fate.

All of this is what shadzar did, as far as I understand. His method is perfectly acceptable.

Raum
2009-08-28, 08:58 PM
Getting way off topic but I have to agree with Shadzar and Umael on this. If you tie expectations to a gift, it isn't a gift any longer. A gift is given without thought or need for reciprocation, use, or return. If it's reciprocation you want, your 'gift' is simply a bribe. If you're looking for use, you're paying for time. If you expect it to be returned, it's a loan. A gift doesn't have strings attached.

Kallisti
2009-08-28, 09:24 PM
Getting way off topic but I have to agree with Shadzar and Umael on this. If you tie expectations to a gift, it isn't a gift any longer. A gift is given without thought or need for reciprocation, use, or return. If it's reciprocation you want, your 'gift' is simply a bribe. If you're looking for use, you're paying for time. If you expect it to be returned, it's a loan. A gift doesn't have strings attached.

This. While I agree that, if you know a gift is not something you'll use, you should refuse it unless you know someone who will use it, hey! Look! Shadzar did know someone who could, would, and in fact did put it to good use! Everybody wins! Why are you bashing him for doing what was right for all parties involved?

Typewriter
2009-08-29, 01:06 AM
See, here's where you haven't tried it and so are coming to the wrong conclusions. There quite simply are no "superhero powers" in 4e. There is rather a mechanical framework called "powers", in which each of the character classes has their primary abilities defined within that framework. This impressed me in a number of ways, mostly because I've done enough amateur game design to know what works and what does not work, and also because I've been an avid board gamer for longer than I've been a role player, and I've long known that most/all role playing game designers could use a huge dose of board game rules layout to improve things as diverse as class balance, common use of terms, and ease of learning.

So if you simply read the 4e PHB and decided it was a superhero powers game, you read a huge amount into a simple word: "power", and arrived at a vary false conclusion.



I disagree with this, as it's a blanket statement saying tha anyone who feels this way hasn't tried it. Regardless of reason, intent, or anything else I'm going to go ahead and say that I have tried it, and that I felt very much like I was playing a superhero in a mideival setting.

I really wanted 4th edition to come out.
I bought the box set at release and started pouring over it immediately.
I felt that the book was not to my liking, and it struck me very much as fitting to a 'superhero' playstyle.
I tried it anyway.
I found my beliefs to be correct, and now I use my 4th edition books as a mat to lay my good books on.

I'm not saying that I'm 100% right, or even trying to say 4th edition is bad(it's not - I just don't like it), what I'm trying to say is that you're saying everyone who has this belief is wrong, and things don't work that way.

Regarldess of whether you tried it, or simply read over it - if you feel a certain way then that's how you feel, and being told that you're wrong and just don't understand it (or that you're misinterpreting words) is just kind of insulting in my opinion.

kpenguin
2009-08-29, 01:27 AM
You know, superpowers and a fantasy game don't necessarily go poorly together. I've tried playing an M&M game set in Eberron and it worked out well.

Typewriter
2009-08-29, 01:34 AM
You know, superpowers and a fantasy game don't necessarily go poorly together. I've tried playing an M&M game set in Eberron and it worked out well.

I can see that. I'd probably use a different system, but either way it seems like it would be an interesting game.

The problem I had wasn't with super powers in a fantasy setting, but instead that being told my interpretation of a fantasy game as 'super-heroish' was 'wrong' or 'misunderstood'.

AgentPaper
2009-08-29, 01:37 AM
Actually, 4E would be really bad at a super-powered game. 3.5 would probably handle it better, though other systems are probably leagues better than both. What 4E is more suited to is cinematic and "fun" gameplay, with built-in highs and lows to combat, and a heaping dose of strategy on that. It's not so good at realism, but it works pretty well if your players are willing to extend their suspension of disbelief just a little bit further than normally, instead of trying to tear apart the system. (which will make any system, 3.5 not even close to least of all, look like a mockery of reality)

Anyways, while I as always do recommend trying 4E, and more importantly not going into it expecting it to suck, there ARE people who genuinely enjoy 3.5 more than 4E, for whatever reasons, and you just have to accept that at some point. Of course, I also believe that there ARE people who would have more fun if they weren't as stubborn in switching editions, but you can't really force them to get over their stubbornness, so it's mostly a moot point.

shadzar
2009-08-29, 04:54 AM
Pretty much "gifts has no strings attached". That was eluding me until you said it.

Someone doesn't like the idea behind something, 4th edition, then the point remains no matter how much someone views another example of the same to be hyperbole. It is a black and white issue. Each person has a right to their opinion.

You have the right to your opinion to think I am wrong for not trying something before deciding if I like it. I also have the right to my opinion, that you have no right to your opinion! (paraphrased for this situation, from the great late George Carlin.)

:smalltongue:

Person B does not have the right to tell person A what/how to think.

pres_man
2009-08-29, 10:02 AM
Bad example.

This is not smashing the gift, nor is it in front of them.

The gift has not been wasted. It has been given to someone else who will use it.

Ah, but the claim is that once someone gives you something it is totally your property and they have absolutely no expectation about how you will treat that property. Are you saying that there are some reasonable expectations according to social contracts? As long as it is not destroyed/wasted, then it is ok to do whatever you want with it? Where exactly is the line? And why should it matter if you do it right in front of them instead of secretly later behind their back?

shadzar
2009-08-29, 10:21 AM
:smallconfused: Social contracts? Did I miss a memo to the human race, or was forced to sign something in my sleep?

:smallconfused:

Yahzi
2009-08-29, 11:12 AM
Ah, but the claim is that once someone gives you something it is totally your property and they have absolutely no expectation about how you will treat that property. Are you saying that there are some reasonable expectations according to social contracts? As long as it is not destroyed/wasted, then it is ok to do whatever you want with it? Where exactly is the line? And why should it matter if you do it right in front of them instead of secretly later behind their back?
I'm pretty sure there's some kind of time limit. I don't know what that time limit is, but I bet if you wait longer before disposing of the gift, people will be less hurt.

I can't add anything else to this conversation. The idea of having a choice of game-systems to play befuddles me. Obviously none of you have met my players. :smallbiggrin:

Tyndmyr
2009-08-29, 11:12 AM
Implied social contracts. You don't need to sign an actual form for basic social standards to apply to you.

He's right. He did show that even if it is a gift, you can do things with/to it that any reasonable person would see as quite rude. Smashing up a gift after someone gives it to you would *definitely* be rude. Throwing it away probably would be as well. Giving it away to someone else is probably a step better, but could still offend someone.

If someone gives you an item that you really don't want, it might be rude to say no thanks, it might be rude to regift it. It depends on the circumstances and the relationship, and sometimes, the best thing to do is just hang on to it for a while.

Yahzi
2009-08-29, 11:13 AM
Social contracts? Did I miss a memo to the human race, or was forced to sign something in my sleep?
Did anybody stab you to death last night in your sleep? No?

Then I guess you've kinda already agreed to the basic social contract. :smallbiggrin:

shadzar
2009-08-29, 11:32 AM
Did anybody stab you to death last night in your sleep? No?

Then I guess you've kinda already agreed to the basic social contract. :smallbiggrin:

<--------------- I haven't been alive for quite some time.

Wouldn't that gifting social contract also has some articles in it about harassing and nagging someone to do something they don't want to do like trying or playing a new version of a game?

Game store once had a secret santa kind of thing, where you could spend any amount on the gift, but had to be something you yourself wanted. about 8 people got involved and started with this one guy how did get something he REALLY wanted. He started with the gift and we passed it around in a circle and ended up back to him because nobody else bought anything.

He was confused and mad, but it was an excuse for him to spend money on himself where his GF wouldn't let him. Too him about 12 seconds to figure it out and not be mad others didn't buy or get any gifts, but the GF was furious as she couldn't argue with him buying the thing, but just us not buying anything as part of it. Not that we cared what she thought, but it was funny. :smallbiggrin:

I rather enjoy when people give away gifts I give them, because I give money. It is the magical gift that can turn into the thing you want/need most (within $X). :smallwink:

Umael
2009-08-29, 04:45 PM
Is it possible to offend someone by giving them a gift? Yes, depending on who is giving the gift, the manner of the presentation of the gift, and what the gift exactly is.

Is it possible to offend someone by receiving their gift? Yes, depending on your manner in doing so and what you do with the gift afterward.

But just because someone is offended doesn't mean they are justified in being offended.

Giving someone like shadzar a 4E book with the intent that he will read it and play it is not giving him a gift - it is a material bribe. Now he could be offended by the fact that this person tried to bribe him, but since it wasn't clear that it was a bribe, he is free to treat it as a gift and do with it as he pleases. And if he decides to give it away to someone who WILL use it, that is hardly despoiling it.

(Keeping this on-topic...)

I guess the whole "is it a gift" and "what do you do with it" matters to me because I am perceiving a potential social hole in the wall of opinion, and I want that hole plugged. If I do not want to play, say, FATAL, and you give me a copy of the rules, I am obligated to say thank you, but I should not be obligated to read it, much less play it. And if I cannot return it to you (maybe you gave it to me via mail), what then? Is it only socially acceptable to give the rules to someone else if I am unable to contact you and ask you for your permission? How come your gift which you gave to me, so it is now mine, is still something over which you have power?

You can no more dictate what I do with my things (whether you gave them to me or not) than you can tell me what games I should play or not play.