General RPG DiscussionDiscussion of all RPGs and non-system-specific topics. DM/GM/player issues, settings, etc. Rules discussion belongs in one the forums below.
It's not only rude to the referee, it's also extremely rude to the other players.
And as a referee, I won't stand for that sort of selfish, self-absorbed, anti-social nonsense from a player. We are playing a game together, and that means giving as well as taking, entering the game with a generous spirit, and recognizing that if one thing doesn't suit your fancy, there will be many more things that do. If you have an issue with something in the game, please, talk with me and the other players about it, but don't just sulk like two-year-old who didn't get a prize in his ceral box.
If you can't handle the most basic responsibilities of participating in a social activity, then go inflict your behavior on someone who gives a crap, if you can find anyone.
Hang on a tick here. You're jumping the gun a touch here.
All I did was refuse to participate. I didn't whine, I didn't bitch, I just excused myself and went and did something else.
This is a "two year old" behaviour. Wow. Can I have your two year old?
If you know that a player at the table absolutely loathes something and you bring this to the table, don't bitch when the player refuses to join in.
Actually, to be honest, if the DM did do it to me a second time, yeah, it would be time to find a new group. But, again, I refuse to force myself to do something I absolutely hate, just because it makes the other four guys at the table feel all warm and fuzzy.
Now, if I pulled a temper tantrum, started complaining about how long things were taking, and generally being an ass, then I'd see your point. But, all I did was excuse myself from about forty minutes of the game. Not really seeing the reason for a huge reaction here.
__________________ Currently running: Sufficiently Advanced over Maptool. Soon to change. If you'd like to join in a short 3-8 session campaign for various systems, drop by our forums.
I double-dog-dare you to make your game sound super cool without comparing it to other editions. - paraphrased from Umbran.
Grim and Gritty, to me, suggests low level PCs, low magic (both in the setting and in terms of availability to PCs), 'realism' and a dark feel - cynicism, a lack of optimism. An urban setting, particularly with a focus on the seamier elements of urban life, such as crime, seems particular appropriate to GnG.
Default D&D isn't very GnG, imo. It's what I would call high magic - half the party are casters, everyone uses magic items. It deviates very greatly from real life. The setting is a bizarre underground realm filled with monsters and general weirdness. Otoh the default D&D PC's attitudes are very dark - he's a mercenary, a killer motivated by the desire for wealth and power. A D&D game that puts an emphasis on thieves, thieves' guilds and the like would be moving in a more GnG direction.
I see the 'grim' part of GnG as meaning dark, and the 'gritty' part as meaning realistic, down to earth, resembling the world we know. Supernatural horror is definitely grim, but the magical element makes it less gritty. If the Evil is just a human serial killer without magic powers, then that would be more gritty.
OK, so that's what I mean by 'Grim and Gritty'. Given that definition, I think Emirikol is right, in general. GMs have more of a preference for GnG than players do. The reasons are simple enough. Low power, low magic games are easier to manage. It's easier to plausibly challenge and threaten the wellbeing of PCs at 1st level than at 20th. What they can do is much more predictable. It's also easier to build a low magic world as one can make more use of history and real world knowledge.
There's also the ever present tendency in rpgs for the players to want more power for their characters, while the GM tries to thwart them from achieving that power. Or at least put obstacles in their way. Thus the players are, in a sense, constantly trying to make their PCs less GnG, while the GM is trying to keep them that way. One could see D&D as a game in which the PCs start out 'Grim and Gritty' and try to become 'High Fantasy'. Because of it's uniquely long level track, the huge gulf in power between low and high level, D&D is perhaps the only rpg where the players are trying to change the genre of the game. If the genre does change, that means they won.
Now ofc there is also, running in parallel, the matter of personal taste. As a lot of people have mentioned in this thread, some prefer a grimmer, grittier approach BOTH as player and as GM. BUT just because that preference exists does not mean that there aren't also other forces at work.
__________________ The female tiefling's horns are not 'handlebars'.
Last edited by Doug McCrae; 31st October 2009 at 09:56 PM..
Are we talking in some cases about players who think they want right now what they have not experienced? Who don't understand that it would soon be "game over" out of their own boredom?
On the other hand, there seems to be a notable demographic of D&Ders today who by their own protestations don't want the challenges and risks originally fundamental to the game. That's not what "D&D" is about to them; it's about an entertaining story on the way to regularly scheduled handouts of shiny stuff to which they are entitled just for showing up to be entertained (or not even showing up, per the 4e DMG).
No doubt someone will aver that "I have always been like that, since the Ford Administration; so it's perfectly 'old school'." It looks to me, though, as if this is a much more recent development.
Now, perhaps it is still the case that DMs tend on average to be older and more experienced D&Ders. If so, then it may be that they're not quite as hip to the new breed thing.
I rather doubt that there's a common mis-match. At worst, a minority of DMs get a majority of players.
On the other hand, there seems to be a notable demographic of D&Ders today who by their own protestations don't want the challenges and risks originally fundamental to the game. That's not what "D&D" is about to them; it's about an entertaining story on the way to regularly scheduled handouts of shiny stuff to which they are entitled just for showing up to be entertained (or not even showing up, per the 4e DMG).
Regardless of how some may want to think otherwise, D&D is a game. It is entertainment. And there is a lot of competition these days for people's free time. D&D these days have to compete with DVD movies, GTA4, Halo, MMO, Guitar Heroes, facebook etc. for people's entertainment time. If someone finds D&D to be boring or frustrating, they're going to find something else to do.
OK, so that's what I mean by 'Grim and Gritty'. Given that definition, I think Emirikol is right, in general. GMs have more of a preference for GnG than players do. The reasons are simple enough. Low power, low magic games are easier to manage. It's easier to plausibly challenge and threaten the wellbeing of PCs at 1st level than at 20th. What they can do is much more predictable. It's also easier to build a low magic world as one can make more use of history and real world knowledge.
There's also the ever present tendency in rpgs for the players to want more power for their characters, while the GM tries to thwart them from achieving that power. Or at least put obstacles in their way. Thus the players are, in a sense, constantly trying to make their PCs less GnG, while the GM is trying to keep them that way. One could see D&D as a game in which the PCs start out 'Grim and Gritty' and try to become 'High Fantasy'. Because of it's uniquely long level track, the huge gulf in power between low and high level, D&D is perhaps the only rpg where the players are trying to change the genre of the game. If the genre does change, that means they won.
Now ofc there is also, running in parallel, the matter of personal taste. As a lot of people have mentioned in this thread, some prefer a grimmer, grittier approach BOTH as player and as GM. BUT just because that preference exists does not mean that there aren't also other forces at work.
There are other, ostensibly more legitimate reasons. Most DMs know that they want to engage their players. Some DMs think the easiest way to accomplish this is through the setting. A dark, gritty world comes off as "edgy" and more engaging than another high-fantasy generica. In departing from stereotype, its easier to make an impression on the players. Under this logic, high fantasy is arguably the harder of the two modes to run.
__________________ Some easy tips for speeding up 4E combat:
1) All monsters have 1/2 max HP and deal double damage on attacks, except minions.
2) Subtract 2 from each defense of all monsters and increase all damage die sizes by one. If the die is already a d12, simply add +2 to their damage.
There are other, ostensibly more legitimate reasons. Most DMs know that they want to engage their players. Some DMs think the easiest way to accomplish this is through the setting. A dark, gritty world comes off as "edgy" and more engaging than another high-fantasy generica. In departing from stereotype, its easier to make an impression on the players. Under this logic, high fantasy is arguably the harder of the two modes to run.
I would argue that high fantasy is most definitely harder to run for a DM for many, many reasons. First off, high fantasy means world threatening plot lines (this being the primary distinction between high fantasy like Tolkien and Sword and Sorcery fantasy like Conan).
This in turn means you have to create plot lines where you have a world (or at least really, really big) threatening threat, someone behind that threat, all the way down to the local threats the low level party can deal with initially.
That right there is a bucket load of work for the DM.
High Fantasy also does not lend itself to episodic adventuring, nor does it lend itself to sandboxing. In episodic, you don't have a large overarching plot, thus, no world shattering threat, and in sandboxing, you again don't have overarching plotlines.
Let's also take the point that in high fantasy, most people equate that with high magic as well. Magic is powerful and fairly ubiquitous. All sorts of scenarios get nerfed when the wizard can just wave his hand (or the cleric for that matter) and solve the problem. Starving in the desert after your caravan has been attacked by raiders? Poof, create food and water. Poof, overland flight. Poof Teleport. End of grim and gritty problem.
Need to search the jungle infested by poisonous snakes, diseased creatures and whatnot? Poof, Find the Path and problem solved.
To me, it's totally not a shock that DM's would prefer a grim and gritty setting. Using Doug M's definition (which I feel is pretty common), it's much, much easier to DM that sort of setting.
__________________ Currently running: Sufficiently Advanced over Maptool. Soon to change. If you'd like to join in a short 3-8 session campaign for various systems, drop by our forums.
I double-dog-dare you to make your game sound super cool without comparing it to other editions. - paraphrased from Umbran.
It looks to me, though, as if this is a much more recent development.
Ariosto, I am hauling out the "nothing new under the sun" argument - you can't fend it off, people wanted boom instant awesomeness since early on. You do recall the term "Monty Haul" DM or Dungeon don't you? ... and how long ago did that term come up.... I think there were dm's and players both who bought in to what seemed like the "something for nothing" mindset it wasn't some rarity that has increased over time.
I think there was a reason ... and it wasn't insufficient guidelines about treasure placement. I recall one of the reasons I wanted characters to have a more toys at least early on being that characters started out as ultra fragile...making potions and or wands more prevalent is a way to make the wizard able to do magical things ... besides hiding behind the fighter ... and make characters better able to survive, heck some of them started as very close to minions in modern D&D terms... maybe people didn't want to roleplay... the minion that the movie hero knocks down in a single stroke... that didn't conform to the characters we wanted to emulate in the books or in the movies.
“A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.”
I think there were dm's and players both who bought in to what seemed like the "something for nothing" mindset it wasn't some rarity that has increased over time.
I agree with you wholeheartedly!
This is hardly new. What is new is that the DM is now encouraged to say "Yes" to this mindset, whereas previously the DM was encouraged to make the players work for what their PCs got.
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
And that hate pales before my utter and complete hatred of puzzles in game. Yeah, I know they might be a trope in fantasy. I know. I still absolutely hate them. Playing through the Shackled City AP a while back, we came to one of the puzzle problems with colored mirrors.
I tried for about thirty seconds, realized that I do not want to do that, and went and did something else while the party worked on it.
Was I being a dick as a player? Quite probably. But, I do not want to screw around with my very, very rare free time trying to do this. I don't like it and now, I just refuse.
Other people might like this, fine. But, me? Not a chance.
And really, it's because puzzles only challenge the player. There's nothing in my character at all trying to solve this puzzle. It yoinks me straight out of play worse than the grindiest combat slog. Instead of acting in character or trying to at least, I'm forced to focus on the game as myself, solely.
Sorry, not why I game.
I don't think that we have enough information to know how rude this was (apart from "Was I being a dick as a player? Quite probably.").
Imagine if you would that the puzzle scene comes up, Hussar tries for about thirty seconds, and then says (to the other players): "Sorry, guys, but I'm no good at this sort of thing. If Bob will control my character if something happens, I'll run out and get some more chips." I doubt that most of us would think that was rude.
It very much depends upon presentation. If Hussar left the table to send a message, then I would have a problem. Without the overtones of "sending a message" I would, generally, be okay with that on occasion.
However, if I had a player who consistently left every time X happened, then I would consider how much that player contributed to the game, and whether or not that player were a good fit. That has nothing to do with rudeness (which can be a "kick to the curb" offense very quickly), but rather to do with what sorts of games folks enjoy.
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
This is hardly new. What is new is that the DM is now encouraged to say "Yes" to this mindset, whereas previously the DM was encouraged to make the players work for what their PCs got.
RC
Actually the DM and player both are given very comprehensive guidlines about the toys and what level they are appropriate for... so no that isnt correct.
And say yes appears to not be what you think it is because it reallly is more improvisational maneuvering
“A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.”
Actually the DM and player both are given very comprehensive guidlines about the toys and what level they are appropriate for... so no that isnt correct.
And say yes appears to not be what you think it is because it reallly is more improvisational maneuvering
Sorry, but a limitation on how much you can get for nothing is not the same as not saying Yes to the "Something for Nothing" mentality. In 1e, if you earned nothing, you got nothing. If you fail to find the treasure, too bad. In 4e, it teleports after you until you find it. That is a very different philosophy of what "game rewards" represent.
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
In episodic, you don't have a large overarching plot, thus, no world shattering threat, and in sandboxing, you again don't have overarching plotlines.
Sorry, but I have to disagree with both premises here.
Episodic with overarching plotlines include the new Doctor Who, Torchwood, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Firefly, and Star Trek Enterprise.
Likewise, a sandbox can have many overarching plotlines.....it just should not force the players to follow them, and the results of not foiling them therefore should not destroy the campaign milieu.
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
Sorry, but a limitation on how much you can get for nothing is not the same as not saying Yes to the "Something for Nothing" mentality. In 1e, if you earned nothing, you got nothing. If you fail to find the treasure, too bad. In 4e, it teleports after you until you find it. That is a very different philosophy of what "game rewards" represent.
RC
Making a good die roll or not is an interesting idea of what "earning" is...
but putting that aside I as a dm put effort in to designing interesting magic items (now in 4e I use the players ideas along side mine) ... or interesting challenges ... it was very frequent that something I didnt use one occasion I would use it another. Was that something suggested by the other roleplaying game I was playing at the time? nope... I like having my players contributing to the game world anyway... so when they dont like a monster type (I down play that too or adjust the gameworld based on those opinions).
“A human being should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, conn a ship, design a building, write a sonnet, balance accounts, build a wall, set a bone, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, analyze a new problem, pitch manure, program a computer, cook a tasty meal, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.”
Sorry, but I have to disagree with both premises here.
Episodic with overarching plotlines include the new Doctor Who, Torchwood, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Firefly, and Star Trek Enterprise.
Likewise, a sandbox can have many overarching plotlines.....it just should not force the players to follow them, and the results of not foiling them therefore should not destroy the campaign milieu.
RC
I think that you have differing definitions of 'episodic' - by their nature both television and role playing games tend to be episodic. I think that he is referring to the 'reset to start' that many, mostly older, series have, including the original Star Trek - where very little carried over from one episode to the next. (I seem to recall The Simpsons even made that a gag in at least one episode.)
The Auld Grump, sorry guys, you ignored the main plotline, and the tarrasque just ate Waterdeep....
__________________ Oh, I am a cook, and a captain bold, and the mate of the Nancy brig,
The midship mite,
And the Bo'sun tight,
And the crew of the captain's gig...
I think that you have differing definitions of 'episodic' - by their nature both television and role playing games tend to be episodic. I think that he is referring to the 'reset to start' that many, mostly older, series have, including the original Star Trek - where very little carried over from one episode to the next. (I seem to recall The Simpsons even made that a gag in at least one episode.)
Unless he means that the PC XP reset to 0, this doesn't apply IMHO. In any event, I am not saying that one cannot do episode without overarching plots, but that one can do either. As the examples I gave demonstrates.
RC
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
Making a good die roll or not is an interesting idea of what "earning" is...
This is either a really, really transparent strawman, or you never played 1e. Pray tell, to which die roll are you referring?!?!
__________________ [A]ny good dungeon will have undiscovered treasures in areas that have been explored by the players, simply because it is impossible to expect that they will find every one of them.
RCFG - My free mostly-OGC OGL game! RCFG is intended to be a fusion between OS & NS playstyles, giving the advantages of SRD-based gaming coupled with quick character and adventure generation and an Old School feel.
Linear Mode
And yet another word from our sponsors
