The Order of the Stick: Utterly Dwarfed
The Order of the Stick: Utterly Dwarfed - Coming in December and available for pre-order now
Page 16 of 16 FirstFirst ... 678910111213141516
Results 451 to 479 of 479
  1. - Top - End - #451
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by King of Nowhere
    I'd rather risk losing some money, thanks.
    I really, really, really agree.
    My Knowledge, Understanding, and Opinion on things can be changed
    No offense is intended by anything I post.
    *Limited Playtest Group - I'm mostly Stuck in the White Room.
    *I am learning valuable things, here. So thanks, everyone!

  2. - Top - End - #452
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    zinycor's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2013

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by Talakeal View Post
    What exactly do you mean by "treating the game as a game?"

    I assume you are thinking that min-maxxing somehow allows you to "win" but it really doesn't, all it does is allows you to trivialize parts of the game and be completely unable to interact with the rest of the game, which makes everyone frustrated and bored at times, and makes it far more likely that you will "lose" in the long run.
    Losing is also a part of the game, what's wrong with it? If someone wants to build a character in such a way that sacrifices some aspects in order to make himself better at others, as long as they are following the rules, What's wrong with that?
    Last son of the Lu-Ching dynasty

    thog is the champion, thog's friends! and thog keeps on fighting to the end!

    Thanks to zimmerwald for the amazing avatar

  3. - Top - End - #453
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by zinycor
    Losing is also a part of the game, what's wrong with it?
    This depends on if the person isn't throwing a fit when they lose, and aren't gloating when they "defeat" monsters and others aren't - due to them not also min/max-ing.

    If someone wants to build a character in such a way that sacrifices some aspects in order to make himself better at others, as long as they are following the rules, What's wrong with that?
    This depend on who else is at the table, and the Style of the Game.
    My Knowledge, Understanding, and Opinion on things can be changed
    No offense is intended by anything I post.
    *Limited Playtest Group - I'm mostly Stuck in the White Room.
    *I am learning valuable things, here. So thanks, everyone!

  4. - Top - End - #454
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Talakeal's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    A place near Boulder.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by zinycor View Post
    Losing is also a part of the game, what's wrong with it? If someone wants to build a character in such a way that sacrifices some aspects in order to make himself better at others, as long as they are following the rules, What's wrong with that?
    People get bored when they can't participate and get mad when they lose.
    Looking for feedback on Heart of Darkness, a character driven RPG of Gothic fantasy.

  5. - Top - End - #455
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    zinycor's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2013

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by Talakeal View Post
    People get bored when they can't participate and get mad when they lose.
    Not really.

    First, why would they not be able to participate? even if they didn't have any useful stats they can still plan and develope plans with the other players.

    And in my experience people don't get mad when they lose, unless they are *******s, in such case you shouldn't play with them. People do get mad when you tell them they can't do something or be something that makes sense for them. Which is entirely reasonable.
    Last son of the Lu-Ching dynasty

    thog is the champion, thog's friends! and thog keeps on fighting to the end!

    Thanks to zimmerwald for the amazing avatar

  6. - Top - End - #456
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Talakeal's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    A place near Boulder.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by zinycor View Post
    Not really.

    First, why would they not be able to participate? even if they didn't have any useful stats they can still plan and develope plans with the other players.

    And in my experience people don't get mad when they lose, unless they are *******s, in such case you shouldn't play with them.
    The world must be almost entirely *******s then.

    Its not just RPG games, people don't like to lose in any game; board games, sports, video games, etc.

    In virtually any team game / sport, if one guy is consistently and deliberately costing his team games, there are going to be hard feelings and he likely won't be on that team very long.

    Edit: Also

    Quote Originally Posted by zinycor View Post
    People do get mad when you tell them they can't do something or be something that makes sense for them. Which is entirely reasonable.
    This is also not my experience. People tend to get a lot less mad at a DM who tells everyone to be a compatible alignment than they do at a person who willingly makes a paladin in a party of assassins or vice versa.
    Last edited by Talakeal; 2019-08-15 at 07:29 PM.
    Looking for feedback on Heart of Darkness, a character driven RPG of Gothic fantasy.

  7. - Top - End - #457
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    zinycor's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2013

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by Talakeal View Post
    The world must be almost entirely *******s then.

    Its not just RPG games, people don't like to lose in any game; board games, sports, video games, etc.

    In virtually any team game / sport, if one guy is consistently and deliberately costing his team games, there are going to be hard feelings and he likely won't be on that team very long.

    Edit: Also



    This is also not my experience. People tend to get a lot less mad at a DM who tells everyone to be a compatible alignment than they do at a person who willingly makes a paladin in a party of assassins or vice versa.
    Wow, I guess we have had pretty different experiences then
    Last son of the Lu-Ching dynasty

    thog is the champion, thog's friends! and thog keeps on fighting to the end!

    Thanks to zimmerwald for the amazing avatar

  8. - Top - End - #458
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by zinycor View Post
    Never understood the hate on min maxing. Like treating the game as a game is somehow wrong....
    the problem is that "game" is normally considered as an activity with a competition for a specific goal where you win or lose.

    but that is a completely wrong concept for rpg. in d&d you don't "win" or "lose". it's not a competition between players and dm, or between different players - groups with those dinamics are highly disfunctional 99% of the times - the remaining 1% being the rare people who actually enjoy playing like that. it's... i wouldn't even know how to call it. there is some competition element, but the goal is never "winning" or "being strongest". the purpose is not to defeat the obstacles, but to do so in interesting and entertaining ways.

    So, the problem with a certain kind of minmaxing attitude is to approach rpg as if it was something where you "win" or "lose", where there is a direct competition between you and your fellow players. And that's the problem people associate with minmaxing.
    And it's not really a problem with minmaxing
    (we all know the stormwind fallacy) but with trying to overshadow the other players and bullying the DM. it is generally confused with minmaxing because people with that attitude always try to minmax, because they must "win". while people without that attitude may be skilled minmaxers, but won't put the rest of the party in the shadows, and the party won't notice they are minmaxers in the first place.

    d&d is a game a bit like mountain climbing. so there are some climbers that decide to reach the mountain top, and the good minmaxer find the best path for the difficulty they want and knows how to best use the climbing equipment, and the bad minmaxer takes an helicopter to reach the summit. And he says "oh, the objective was to reach the top, so i took the most efficient route. what are you complaining about?". he also uses his position on top to pee on his companion that's below him.
    so, what this guy did wrong is that while the objective of climbing was to reach the top, that was not the point of climbing.
    Likewise, defeating the big bad may be the objective of the game, but it's not the game's purpose. we don't sit down around a table because we want to defeat the bad guy.

    and that's also why talakeal's sporting metaphor about a team member regularly ccosting his team games is completely inappropriate for discussing rpg.
    Last edited by King of Nowhere; 2019-08-15 at 09:34 PM.
    In memory of Evisceratus: he dreamed of a better world, but he lacked the class levels to make the dream come true.

    Ridiculous monsters you won't take seriously even as they disembowel you

    my take on the highly skilled professional: the specialized expert

  9. - Top - End - #459
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Talakeal's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    A place near Boulder.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by zinycor View Post
    Wow, I guess we have had pretty different experiences then
    I guess so, its just so prevalent in every part of my life, and my friends and family members who are into sports and video games claim that it is even more prevalent for them.

    To give an example from my life, when I was 11 I was playing laser tag and was put on a different team than all of my friends, and so I decided to be a "double agent" and cost my team the game. Afterwards I, an 11 year old kid, was physically attacked by a full grown adult for costing him the game.

    Quote Originally Posted by King of Nowhere View Post
    and that's also why talakeal's sporting metaphor about a team member regularly ccosting his team games is completely inappropriate for discussing rpg.
    Some people do enjoy the tactical / challenging aspects of RPGs and like to overcome obstacles.

    Likewise, they generally like to see their characters succeed and meet their goals.

    Other people just get really deep into character, and wonder why their character is risking their goals and their life by putting up with someone who isn't a team player and is either unwilling to fulfill their role in the party or is actively a liability.
    Looking for feedback on Heart of Darkness, a character driven RPG of Gothic fantasy.

  10. - Top - End - #460
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    zinycor's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2013

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by Talakeal View Post
    I guess so, its just so prevalent in every part of my life, and my friends and family members who are into sports and video games claim that it is even more prevalent for them.

    To give an example from my life, when I was 11 I was playing laser tag and was put on a different team than all of my friends, and so I decided to be a "double agent" and cost my team the game. Afterwards I, an 11 year old kid, was physically attacked by a full grown adult for costing him the game.



    Some people do enjoy the tactical / challenging aspects of RPGs and like to overcome obstacles.

    Likewise, they generally like to see their characters succeed and meet their goals.

    Other people just get really deep into character, and wonder why their character is risking their goals and their life by putting up with someone who isn't a team player and is either unwilling to fulfill their role in the party or is actively a liability.
    Can't relate to any of those experiences.
    Last son of the Lu-Ching dynasty

    thog is the champion, thog's friends! and thog keeps on fighting to the end!

    Thanks to zimmerwald for the amazing avatar

  11. - Top - End - #461
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by Talakeal View Post
    I guess so, its just so prevalent in every part of my life, and my friends and family members who are into sports and video games claim that it is even more prevalent for them.

    To give an example from my life, when I was 11 I was playing laser tag and was put on a different team than all of my friends, and so I decided to be a "double agent" and cost my team the game. Afterwards I, an 11 year old kid, was physically attacked by a full grown adult for costing him the game.
    that's completely different, as that's an intentional betrayal of good faith and lack of sportsmanship. I wouldn't physically assault a kid over it, but i'd be pretty angry too. Seriously, I'd be insulting you through the monitor, if the whole experience happened when you were much younger and immature and a (hopefully) very different person than you are now (cue your answer: actually I'm 12)
    and do notice that the conflict is not "you who did not care for the result" vs "minmaxer". You actually were the most invested of all in the result, it's just that you intentionally wanted to sabotage your team. and the other guy likely cared not that you made him lose the game, but that you sabotaged it by accident.

    my experience here is in the middle; team sports can bring out the best and worst of people. but my experience is that most people care less about winning and losing, and more about fun. unless there are real stakes, or unless they want to be pro and be surrounded by like-minded individuals.
    And people always wanting to be in the winning team is actually a red flag for me; if they care more about winning than about having an engaging match when there are no stakes, then they are also likely to backstab me in real life for a chance to get ahead

    Some people do enjoy the tactical / challenging aspects of RPGs and like to overcome obstacles.

    Likewise, they generally like to see their characters succeed and meet their goals.

    Other people just get really deep into character, and wonder why their character is risking their goals and their life by putting up with someone who isn't a team player and is either unwilling to fulfill their role in the party or is actively a liability.
    the climber who wants to climb to the top wants to overcome an obstacle and to reach a goal.
    but he does want to face some specifical hardships along the path; otherwise, he'd take the helicopter.
    You seem to be confusing "has a goal to reach" with "the goal is the only thing that matters"
    Last edited by King of Nowhere; 2019-08-15 at 10:29 PM.
    In memory of Evisceratus: he dreamed of a better world, but he lacked the class levels to make the dream come true.

    Ridiculous monsters you won't take seriously even as they disembowel you

    my take on the highly skilled professional: the specialized expert

  12. - Top - End - #462
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Talakeal's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    A place near Boulder.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by King of Nowhere View Post
    You seem to be confusing "has a goal to reach" with "the goal is the only thing that matters"
    I'm not following at all.

    Ok, let me pose a hypothetical example for you:

    A group meets up, talks about their characters, and decide to make a standard fighter / rogue / cleric / mage party. Dave volunteers to play the cleric.

    The Game Master designs typical adventures, designed to be a tough but not overwhelming challenge for balanced party of four.

    The enjoy the game and play for a while, then Dave, without telling anyone, decides he is tired of healing people, and prepares only damaging spells.

    During the game, Sarah's fighter, whom she has been playing for over a year and is really attached to, is critically injured and needs healing. She asks Dave for help, and Dave shrugs his shoulders and says "I am not that kind of cleric anymore."

    Sarah's character dies. Does she have any right to be upset with Dave?
    Looking for feedback on Heart of Darkness, a character driven RPG of Gothic fantasy.

  13. - Top - End - #463
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by Talakeal View Post
    I'm not following at all.

    Ok, let me pose a hypothetical example for you:

    A group meets up, talks about their characters, and decide to make a standard fighter / rogue / cleric / mage party. Dave volunteers to play the cleric.

    The Game Master designs typical adventures, designed to be a tough but not overwhelming challenge for balanced party of four.

    The enjoy the game and play for a while, then Dave, without telling anyone, decides he is tired of healing people, and prepares only damaging spells.

    During the game, Sarah's fighter, whom she has been playing for over a year and is really attached to, is critically injured and needs healing. She asks Dave for help, and Dave shrugs his shoulders and says "I am not that kind of cleric anymore."

    Sarah's character dies. Does she have any right to be upset with Dave?
    yes,
    but that's a completely different case from "being a minmaxer" or "wanting to reach a goal".

    the problem player i talk about (let's call him Jim), the "climber that takes the helicopter", would be someone who minmaxes way above everyone else, trivializes all the encounters alone, and takes every chance to humiliate the other players for having weaker characters. and do notice that in Jim's party nobody would die, because jim would solve alone the whole plot. In fact, Jim would definitely lower their chances of death, by trivializing challenges. but they'd be angry at him anyway.

    the Dave from your example, on the other hand, is breaching a social contract he willingly subscribed early, with no warning or reason. He is infringing on the fun of others by breaking up group dynamics that worked well. He sabotaged the mission intentionally.
    That's the problem. Not that he changed his build to be less effective. Not even that he's less effective. But that he willingly betrayed his friend's trust. If Dave had retrained to be a CoDzilla cleric and have soloed the encounter, the party would have been angry with him anyway, even if Sarah had lived.

    We are talking of two completely different things.
    I am talking about holding back the power level to make the challenges more interesting, in a way that's agreed (more or less implicitly) from the beginning.
    You are talking of intentionally sabotaging your teammates. Do notice that Dave's behavior does not make the encounter any more interesting.
    In memory of Evisceratus: he dreamed of a better world, but he lacked the class levels to make the dream come true.

    Ridiculous monsters you won't take seriously even as they disembowel you

    my take on the highly skilled professional: the specialized expert

  14. - Top - End - #464
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BlackDragon

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Location
    Portland, Oregon
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by Talakeal
    Sarah's character dies. Does she have any right to be upset with Dave?
    Actually, yes.
    But, mostly because Dave isn't being a Group Member, here.

    Dave made a specific Character type that everyone got to know and had expectations about, and then suddenly, He decided, out of character, to change what the PC was going to be/do. Dave changed the focus of his character's powers IC, but doesn't inform the others either IC or OoC.

    Bad stuff happens, and when Sarah looks to Dave OoC for the aid that she expected, is told she's SoL.

    I'd be mad too; unless "Dave" had told me, at least OoC, that he was changing the focus/purpose of his PC. Sure, my PC still dies, but at least it wasn't a complete surprise.
    My Knowledge, Understanding, and Opinion on things can be changed
    No offense is intended by anything I post.
    *Limited Playtest Group - I'm mostly Stuck in the White Room.
    *I am learning valuable things, here. So thanks, everyone!

  15. - Top - End - #465
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    zinycor's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2013

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by Talakeal View Post
    I'm not following at all.

    Ok, let me pose a hypothetical example for you:

    A group meets up, talks about their characters, and decide to make a standard fighter / rogue / cleric / mage party. Dave volunteers to play the cleric.

    The Game Master designs typical adventures, designed to be a tough but not overwhelming challenge for balanced party of four.

    The enjoy the game and play for a while, then Dave, without telling anyone, decides he is tired of healing people, and prepares only damaging spells.

    During the game, Sarah's fighter, whom she has been playing for over a year and is really attached to, is critically injured and needs healing. She asks Dave for help, and Dave shrugs his shoulders and says "I am not that kind of cleric anymore."

    Sarah's character dies. Does she have any right to be upset with Dave?
    The whole problem would be that dave did this without telling anyone, he changing his build (or even character) would not be a real problem, the only problem is the unwillingness to talk to the other players in regards to this.
    Last edited by zinycor; 2019-08-16 at 12:23 AM.
    Last son of the Lu-Ching dynasty

    thog is the champion, thog's friends! and thog keeps on fighting to the end!

    Thanks to zimmerwald for the amazing avatar

  16. - Top - End - #466
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2010

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    I'd say while Sarah can of course be upset, a lot depends on the culture of that particular table. And I'd rather play in a group where this wouldn't come up as Dave's fault than one where it would be considered to be Dave's fault. That is to say, I'd prefer a group where the social contract would be that players have the right to choose how they contribute or don't contribute and that there are no expectations that someone has to play a given role or function if that's not what they like - and where that standard is held to be more important than the individual dynamics of particular scenes or events within the game. It's simply that I want more of a positive experience of being surprised to be able to contribute more than expected versus the neutral of business as usual, rather than having the neutral of business as usual versus a negative experience of finding that my contributions were insufficient. More moments of awesome, less moments of blaming each-other and deconstructing failures.

    This requires GM buy-in. It can involve designing the entire campaign or even the rule system to be appropriate to the players' tastes. It can mean running a less challenging campaign, fudging, or simply running a campaign that is challenging in specific ways that the players want to be challenged while avoiding challenges that they find unpleasant or boring. It may even involve having a better idea of what the players are capable of pulling off in a pinch and using carefully designed challenges to simultaneously make them belief for a time that they will fail, but ultimately enabling them to tap that part of their own abilities.

    For me, that's the optimal way to mediate that kind of tension between wanting to feel push-back while also wanting to achieve goals. Min-maxing can absolutely be a part of that, if people's idea of challenges they enjoy is finding obscure combos in a bunch of sourcebooks and making really ridiculous builds. But highly non-mechanical things or even fully de-emphasizing mechanical ability can also be a part of it, for players who don't want to engage in those aspects but do want to engage in social interactions, complex politics, figuring out the physics of the world, whatever.

  17. - Top - End - #467
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2011

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by zinycor View Post
    And in my experience people don't get mad when they lose, unless they are *******s, in such case you shouldn't play with them. People do get mad when you tell them they can't do something or be something that makes sense for them. Which is entirely reasonable.
    Quote Originally Posted by Talakeal View Post
    The world must be almost entirely *******s then.

    This is also not my experience. People tend to get a lot less mad at a DM who tells everyone to be a compatible alignment than they do at a person who willingly makes a paladin in a party of assassins or vice versa.
    Talakeal, you should know by now that you game with a different slice of the pie than most Playgrounders. Perhaps you should begin implementing "Bizarro World tests", to screen potential candidates.

    As to the "being told 'no' to what makes sense" - I think something was lost in translation here. Having a party with a Paladin, an Assassin, an Undead Hunter, and his dear childhood friend the Undead Master (and my character) doesn't make sense. So wanting compatible characters is not "denying something that makes sense". No, saying "you can't burn this Necromancer because it makes a better story if the Paladin gets the killing blow" is preventing things that make sense. Saying "you can't damage the Giant, because you can only reach his foot" is preventing things that make sense (to the players, and in the system). Saying that you cannot affect the chance of having your wealth stolen by swallowing gem(s) is preventing things that make sense (to the players).

    I've gamed with plenty of idiot GMs who claimed that things "don't make sense to them" about things that work IRL, and so don't allow them. Needless to say, things that work on fantasy logic or comic logic or whatever "logic" a given player is using to rationalize a given action should be even more likely to encounter GMs who feel that that "doesn't make sense to them".

    And this disconnect about just what game we're playing (plus lack of social/coping skills) is what causes ruffled feathers.

    Just like with min-maxing.

    Quote Originally Posted by NichG View Post
    I'd say while Sarah can of course be upset, a lot depends on the culture of that particular table. And I'd rather play in a group where this wouldn't come up as Dave's fault than one where it would be considered to be Dave's fault. That is to say, I'd prefer a group where the social contract would be that players have the right to choose how they contribute or don't contribute and that there are no expectations that someone has to play a given role or function if that's not what they like - and where that standard is held to be more important than the individual dynamics of particular scenes or events within the game. It's simply that I want more of a positive experience of being surprised to be able to contribute more than expected versus the neutral of business as usual, rather than having the neutral of business as usual versus a negative experience of finding that my contributions were insufficient. More moments of awesome, less moments of blaming each-other and deconstructing failures.

    This requires GM buy-in. It can involve designing the entire campaign or even the rule system to be appropriate to the players' tastes. It can mean running a less challenging campaign, fudging, or simply running a campaign that is challenging in specific ways that the players want to be challenged while avoiding challenges that they find unpleasant or boring. It may even involve having a better idea of what the players are capable of pulling off in a pinch and using carefully designed challenges to simultaneously make them belief for a time that they will fail, but ultimately enabling them to tap that part of their own abilities.

    For me, that's the optimal way to mediate that kind of tension between wanting to feel push-back while also wanting to achieve goals. Min-maxing can absolutely be a part of that, if people's idea of challenges they enjoy is finding obscure combos in a bunch of sourcebooks and making really ridiculous builds. But highly non-mechanical things or even fully de-emphasizing mechanical ability can also be a part of it, for players who don't want to engage in those aspects but do want to engage in social interactions, complex politics, figuring out the physics of the world, whatever.
    Thank you for expressing this better than I could have. While I agree with your divergent opinion / preference for groups that would not fault Dave, I have a different preferred implementation. Personally, I'd rather the GM know nothing about the characters, not fudge, and simply present a sandbox wherein any group of PCs can find something to do. Otherwise, yeah, I'm onboard with the preference for the "you do you" attitude.
    Last edited by Quertus; 2019-08-16 at 07:24 AM.

  18. - Top - End - #468
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Talakeal's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    A place near Boulder.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by Quertus View Post
    Talakeal, you should know by now that you game with a different slice of the pie than most Playgrounders. Perhaps you should begin implementing "Bizarro World tests", to screen potential candidates.
    At this point you guys are pinging on my Bizarro world sense.

    The idea that the GM is out of line trying to make sure the players make compatible characters or that the players should just emotionlessly accept whatever anti-social bunk their fellows bring to the table is really out of line.

    Now, I suppose I have been a bit more sensitive to it than most, having been physically and verbally abused for not playing games right my entire life; but seriously, look around:

    Watch sports brawls. Look at DOTA games where you can report your own team for playing the wrong character or not being good at the game. Look at MMO raiding videos where people rage after a wipe. Look at casino superstition where people blame their losses on people changing seats or making a mistake for "changing the flow of the table" or "taking their cards". Look at the sheer number of threads on this very forum or the vast number of gaming podcasts or youtube videos that deal with problem players or group templates or people who are "just doing what their character would do". Heck, look at the intent behind the tier system.

    To deny that people routinely get upset over games is to deny overwhelming mountains of evidence.


    Quote Originally Posted by Quertus View Post
    As to the "being told 'no' to what makes sense" - I think something was lost in translation here. Having a party with a Paladin, an Assassin, an Undead Hunter, and his dear childhood friend the Undead Master (and my character) doesn't make sense. So wanting compatible characters is not "denying something that makes sense". No, saying "you can't burn this Necromancer because it makes a better story if the Paladin gets the killing blow" is preventing things that make sense. Saying "you can't damage the Giant, because you can only reach his foot" is preventing things that make sense (to the players, and in the system). Saying that you cannot affect the chance of having your wealth stolen by swallowing gem(s) is preventing things that make sense (to the players).

    I've gamed with plenty of idiot GMs who claimed that things "don't make sense to them" about things that work IRL, and so don't allow them. Needless to say, things that work on fantasy logic or comic logic or whatever "logic" a given player is using to rationalize a given action should be even more likely to encounter GMs who feel that that "doesn't make sense to them".

    And this disconnect about just what game we're playing (plus lack of social/coping skills) is what causes ruffled feathers.

    Just like with min-maxing.
    A few posts up Zinycor was talking about "min-maxxing" in general or "any behavior that is not against the rules".

    Now we are talking about "reasonable" which is completely different can of worms. Of course if something is reasonable you shouldn't object to it, that's what reasonable means.

    I said months ago that I would have let him change his character to something reasonable, but all he was giving me was a one trick pony that would have been utterly useless outside of situations that can be solved by blasting and trivialize the rest of the party in situations where they could and whose ability scores were all outside of the range that was allowed by the form of point buy we were using to build character, and Zinycor specifically objected to that idea.
    Looking for feedback on Heart of Darkness, a character driven RPG of Gothic fantasy.

  19. - Top - End - #469
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    zinycor's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2013

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by Talakeal View Post
    A few posts up Zinycor was talking about "min-maxxing" in general or "any behavior that is not against the rules".

    Now we are talking about "reasonable" which is completely different can of worms. Of course if something is reasonable you shouldn't object to it, that's what reasonable means.

    I said months ago that I would have let him change his character to something reasonable, but all he was giving me was a one trick pony that would have been utterly useless outside of situations that can be solved by blasting and trivialize the rest of the party in situations where they could and whose ability scores were all outside of the range that was allowed by the form of point buy we were using to build character, and Zinycor specifically objected to that idea.
    Again, I don't see one trick pony as unreasonable, even if the character was completely useless in other scenarios.

    Now, if the player is being a jerk, I would kick him out regardless of the character he was playing as.
    Last edited by zinycor; 2019-08-16 at 09:53 AM.
    Last son of the Lu-Ching dynasty

    thog is the champion, thog's friends! and thog keeps on fighting to the end!

    Thanks to zimmerwald for the amazing avatar

  20. - Top - End - #470
    Ogre in the Playground
     
    WolfInSheepsClothing

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Italy
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by Talakeal View Post
    At this point you guys are pinging on my Bizarro world sense.

    The idea that the GM is out of line trying to make sure the players make compatible characters or that the players should just emotionlessly accept whatever anti-social bunk their fellows bring to the table is really out of line.

    Now, I suppose I have been a bit more sensitive to it than most, having been physically and verbally abused for not playing games right my entire life; but seriously, look around:

    Watch sports brawls. Look at DOTA games where you can report your own team for playing the wrong character or not being good at the game. Look at MMO raiding videos where people rage after a wipe. Look at casino superstition where people blame their losses on people changing seats or making a mistake for "changing the flow of the table" or "taking their cards". Look at the sheer number of threads on this very forum or the vast number of gaming podcasts or youtube videos that deal with problem players or group templates or people who are "just doing what their character would do". Heck, look at the intent behind the tier system.

    To deny that people routinely get upset over games is to deny overwhelming mountains of evidence.

    "the falling tree makes more noise than the fforest growing"

    Ok, there's 7 billion people in the world. there's got to be hundreds of millions of jackasses among them. put cameras everywhere and post on the internet whenever someone is being a jackass, and you get hundreds of millions of videos of people being jackasses that you can download. So you could spend your whole life watching people being jackasses and thinking everyone is like that.
    that doesn't detract that there's a significant percentage of those 7 billion people that are decent and caring.

    Also, people tend to attract similar people. decent people tend to shun jackasses. jackasses tend to take advanttage of decent people until they get shunned.
    So it seems now you're accidentally stuck with jackasses friends, and most of their friends are jackasses too, so whenever they introduce you to new people, hey, more jackasses. I have no idea what to tell you. Luckily, I was bullied in middle grade: that sucked at the time, but it prevented me from making jackass friends, and so I could latch on to good people a few years later.
    most of us managed to find good people, and by them we get introduced to more good people. and that's why we have different experiences.

    And good people rarely attract attention on the internet. you don't take notice of a DotA player for not flaming. you don't have news coverage for not-brawls among sport followers.

    I am a teacher and I have to deal with all kinds of kids. And it taught me a few things.
    the first is that I really managed to latch on to good people in my personal life. My first impact with a statistically average group was shocking.
    but the second, most important, is that humans tend to do their worst when in group. you take one kid aside, talk to him, you almost always find a decent and responsible human being.
    You put 30 such kids together, and you want to wipe out the human race and start back from amoebas hoping evolution will get it right the next time.
    all those instances of sport brawls, or dota players? group and anonimity.
    People left alone are good. People are jackasses if they see other people being jackasses around them, and if they think they won't be singled out.
    the human mind is really a crazy thing.
    In memory of Evisceratus: he dreamed of a better world, but he lacked the class levels to make the dream come true.

    Ridiculous monsters you won't take seriously even as they disembowel you

    my take on the highly skilled professional: the specialized expert

  21. - Top - End - #471
    Ettin in the Playground
    Join Date
    Dec 2010

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by Talakeal View Post
    At this point you guys are pinging on my Bizarro world sense.

    The idea that the GM is out of line trying to make sure the players make compatible characters or that the players should just emotionlessly accept whatever anti-social bunk their fellows bring to the table is really out of line.
    The way I see it is, if you are finding yourself in a voluntary social activity where determining or assigning blame or determining who is in the right is important, then perhaps something more fundamental has gone wrong. That's not to say that an incidence of hurt feelings means dissolving the group, but it means that if the activity is primarily a vehicle for generating opportunities for hurt feelings, I'd want to address that.

    If people are getting pissed off because someone is playing a item store merchant in an epic fantasy campaign, the easy thing is to say 'obviously that character is inappropriate, make a different one please'. And it's not out of line to say that. But at the same time, it can be better to ask 'why does this player want to do that, and how important is it that I run a game where that character would be inappropriate?' - that is, to understand the real purpose of the social activity.

    It can absolutely be the case that 'the purpose is for an intensely challenging team sport', but the fact that the player brought in a merchant implies that they don't understand that, or don't agree with it. Meaning, regardless of what is done about it, there needs to be a conversation about that fact. And that player leaving, or the group agreeing to a different game, or the player changing their approach are all legitimate outcomes.

  22. - Top - End - #472
    Orc in the Playground
     
    Daemon

    Join Date
    May 2011

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by zinycor View Post
    Can't relate to any of those experiences.
    Man, I would love to live in a world where your experiences are commonplace.
    l have a very specific preference when it comes to TTRPGs. If you have a different preference, that's fine, but I just want you to know you're having fun wrong.

  23. - Top - End - #473
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    zinycor's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2013

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by comk59 View Post
    Man, I would love to live in a world where your experiences are commonplace.
    In my opinion it comes from a place of understanding the game as a game, Respecting the people at the table as people, and willingness to solve problems as a group.
    Last son of the Lu-Ching dynasty

    thog is the champion, thog's friends! and thog keeps on fighting to the end!

    Thanks to zimmerwald for the amazing avatar

  24. - Top - End - #474
    Troll in the Playground
    Join Date
    Oct 2011

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by Talakeal View Post
    At this point you guys are pinging on my Bizarro world sense.

    The idea that the GM is out of line trying to make sure the players make compatible characters or that the players should just emotionlessly accept whatever anti-social bunk their fellows bring to the table is really out of line.

    Now, I suppose I have been a bit more sensitive to it than most, having been physically and verbally abused for not playing games right my entire life; but seriously, look around:

    Watch sports brawls. Look at DOTA games where you can report your own team for playing the wrong character or not being good at the game. Look at MMO raiding videos where people rage after a wipe. Look at casino superstition where people blame their losses on people changing seats or making a mistake for "changing the flow of the table" or "taking their cards". Look at the sheer number of threads on this very forum or the vast number of gaming podcasts or youtube videos that deal with problem players or group templates or people who are "just doing what their character would do". Heck, look at the intent behind the tier system.

    To deny that people routinely get upset over games is to deny overwhelming mountains of evidence.




    A few posts up Zinycor was talking about "min-maxxing" in general or "any behavior that is not against the rules".

    Now we are talking about "reasonable" which is completely different can of worms. Of course if something is reasonable you shouldn't object to it, that's what reasonable means.

    I said months ago that I would have let him change his character to something reasonable, but all he was giving me was a one trick pony that would have been utterly useless outside of situations that can be solved by blasting and trivialize the rest of the party in situations where they could and whose ability scores were all outside of the range that was allowed by the form of point buy we were using to build character, and Zinycor specifically objected to that idea.
    Quote Originally Posted by zinycor View Post
    Again, I don't see one trick pony as unreasonable, even if the character was completely useless in other scenarios.

    Now, if the player is being a jerk, I would kick him out regardless of the character he was playing as.
    Talakeal, I'm not sure if anything in your reply is actually related to anything i was trying to say.

    There are ****s in the world. How being a **** manifests among minmaxers causes plenty of idiots to throw the baby out with the bath water, and demonize the noble profession of optimizing.

    How being a **** manifests varies. But treating an RPG the way you describe people acting… OK, being a **** is a spectrum. Really, a lot of your stories about sports and whatnot were also ****s, but people acting that way about an RPG is higher on the **** scale. Kinda like someone punching you for stealing their spot is worse than someone punching you for killing their SO.

    Now, I'm not familiar with this DOTA practice, but people who break the social contract are ****s. But what the social contract is in DotA may well inherently more about "winning" (and formulaic teams) than RPGs are.

    Personally, I play MtG for fun. Those who claim that there is only one optimal set of decks for Emperor may be right, but I would have no interest in playing with those who not only insist that those are the only decks that can be played, but verbally attack anyone who does not play such decks. The parallels to RPGs should be obvious.

    "The idea that the GM is out of line trying to make sure the players make compatible characters… is really out of line." - um, what? Just who do you think said what? Me, I believe that it behooves everyone to try to make characters that get along (and that it's idiotic to bring alignment into that discussion).

    "or that the players should just emotionlessly accept whatever anti-social bunk their fellows bring to the table is really out of line." - um, what? Just who do you think said what?

  25. - Top - End - #475
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Talakeal's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    A place near Boulder.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by Quertus View Post
    "The idea that the GM is out of line trying to make sure the players make compatible characters… is really out of line." - um, what? Just who do you think said what? Me, I believe that it behooves everyone to try to make characters that get along (and that it's idiotic to bring alignment into that discussion).

    "or that the players should just emotionlessly accept whatever anti-social bunk their fellows bring to the table is really out of line." - um, what? Just who do you think said what?
    That is my take away from what Zinycor is saying, mostly in the following:

    Quote Originally Posted by zinycor View Post
    Not really.

    First, why would they not be able to participate? even if they didn't have any useful stats they can still plan and develope plans with the other players.

    And in my experience people don't get mad when they lose, unless they are *******s, in such case you shouldn't play with them. People do get mad when you tell them they can't do something or be something that makes sense for them. Which is entirely reasonable.
    Quote Originally Posted by zinycor View Post
    Losing is also a part of the game, what's wrong with it? If someone wants to build a character in such a way that sacrifices some aspects in order to make himself better at others, as long as they are following the rules, What's wrong with that?
    Looking for feedback on Heart of Darkness, a character driven RPG of Gothic fantasy.

  26. - Top - End - #476
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    zinycor's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2013

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by Talakeal View Post
    That is my take away from what Zinycor is saying, mostly in the following:
    Not seeing the connection there...
    Last son of the Lu-Ching dynasty

    thog is the champion, thog's friends! and thog keeps on fighting to the end!

    Thanks to zimmerwald for the amazing avatar

  27. - Top - End - #477
    Ettin in the Playground
     
    Talakeal's Avatar

    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    A place near Boulder.
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by zinycor View Post
    Not seeing the connection there...
    Ok, let me try and say it more succinctly.


    I said "The idea that the GM is out of line trying to make sure the players make compatible characters or that the players should just emotionlessly accept whatever anti-social bunk their fellows bring to the table."

    You said people shouldn't be upset that they are overshadowed because "even if they didn't have any useful stats they can still develop plans with the other players" and that they shouldn't get mad because "...in my experience people don't get mad when they lose, unless they are *******s, in such case you shouldn't play with them... losing is also a part of the game... if someone wants to build a character in such a way that sacrifices some aspects in order to make himself better at others, as long as they are following the rules, What's wrong with that?"

    This implies to me that anyone who gets upset because someone brought a character to the table that is off a drastically different power level than the rest of the group, either overshadowing the party or causing them to lose, is in the wrong, hence my "the players should just emotionlessly accept whatever anti-social bunk their fellows bring to the table".

    Likewise your "People do get mad when you tell them they can't do something or be something that makes sense for them. Which is entirely reasonable." implies to me that the GM is out of line trying to make sure the players make compatible characters.
    Looking for feedback on Heart of Darkness, a character driven RPG of Gothic fantasy.

  28. - Top - End - #478
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    zinycor's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2013

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    Quote Originally Posted by Talakeal View Post
    Ok, let me try and say it more succinctly.


    I said "The idea that the GM is out of line trying to make sure the players make compatible characters or that the players should just emotionlessly accept whatever anti-social bunk their fellows bring to the table."

    You said people shouldn't be upset that they are overshadowed because "even if they didn't have any useful stats they can still develop plans with the other players" and that they shouldn't get mad because "...in my experience people don't get mad when they lose, unless they are *******s, in such case you shouldn't play with them... losing is also a part of the game... if someone wants to build a character in such a way that sacrifices some aspects in order to make himself better at others, as long as they are following the rules, What's wrong with that?"

    This implies to me that anyone who gets upset because someone brought a character to the table that is off a drastically different power level than the rest of the group, either overshadowing the party or causing them to lose, is in the wrong, hence my "the players should just emotionlessly accept whatever anti-social bunk their fellows bring to the table".

    Likewise your "People do get mad when you tell them they can't do something or be something that makes sense for them. Which is entirely reasonable." implies to me that the GM is out of line trying to make sure the players make compatible characters.
    Oh, ok I guess you took my words too far... for some reason I don't get.

    First, how could someone create a drastically different power level character than the other players at the table and still be playing according to the rules? Either you are playing a deeply flawed game, some players need help making more effective characters, or the difference isn't actually that big as they would think. In any case, a Min-maxing player isn't the problem here.

    Second: Obviously players shouldn't feel overshadowed, afterall is a team game, your character is supposed to be weaker in some aspects, even completely useless is fine, since the hallenges will be solved by the team. So yeah, in a good party it wouldn't matter that your characters is min-maxed, since the other players would be able to cover for those flaws.

    Third: What is an "Anti-social bunk"? Never heard that before.

    Fourth: If a player creates a character that doesn't fit in the party, it doesn't make sense. For example, a paladin joining an assasin's cult. But, I don't see how a character being min maxed would be incompatible with any group just because is min-maxed... It just doesn't make any sense to me...
    Last son of the Lu-Ching dynasty

    thog is the champion, thog's friends! and thog keeps on fighting to the end!

    Thanks to zimmerwald for the amazing avatar

  29. - Top - End - #479
    Nerdomancer in the Playground Moderator
     
    DruidGuy

    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Colorado, USA
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Talakeal's Gaming Horror Stories Continued (not really)

    The Mod Life Crisis: Thread Necromancy, and fire. Both bad.
    Spoiler: Medals
    Show

    Quote Originally Posted by Nifft View Post
    More sources, more choices, more power. Welcome to D&D.
    The Mod Life Crisis If you need me to address a thread as a Moderator, please include a link

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •