D&D General Explain Bounded Accuracy to Me (As if I Was Five)

[Vaalingrade]

Instead of looking for possible justifications to excuse what might otherwise be poor behavior, why not accept that it's possible that others could rightfully be talking about players acting inexcusablly when describing inexcusable behavior?As someone who has been on call and among those professions I'm s bit insulted at the implication that being on call means that someone is incapable of balancing the possible call with polite consideration of others in a social setting. I think that you are confusing "on call" with "on the clock call center employee" or something.

And being on call, would you think it would be reasonable to be told you can't have your phone at the table unless it's for your character sheet, which is what started this whole discussion.

I don't know what you're on call for, but I've got people who have patient who might need them and an electric company whose software might run into an issue that only three people in the region can deal with.

Heck, I've got some elderly family for whom I'm the only point of contact.

But no, I guess those aren't as important as keeping our games of pretend 'pure' circa 1997.

The reaching for justification here was the whole 'darn kids and their phones' rant as if phones haven't been a necessary parts of a ton of people's professional and personal lives for more than two decades now and are still a passing fad to be shouted down.

 

[Lanefan]

So, let's use my example one above: someone wants to play but mentions he's subject to unpredictable emergency calls from his work. Now what?

Next question to that player: "Who are you assigning to play your character when you're not here?"

If the answer comes back as another player, or even the DM, all is good. But the answer "My character is not to be played when I'm not here" will mean there's no seat here for you. Characters don't temporarily vanish when their players miss a session, and we're not going to sink the session every time you can't make it.

 

[Lanefan]

And being on call, would you think it would be reasonable to be told you can't have your phone at the table unless it's for your character sheet, which is what started this whole discussion.

I don't know what you're on call for, but I've got people who have patient who might need them and an electric company whose software might run into an issue that only three people in the region can deal with.

Heck, I've got some elderly family for whom I'm the only point of contact.

Occasional emergencies are one thing; I don't think anyone has a problem with those, they happen.

Getting calls during every session - whether from a boss or friends or whatever - is another.

The reaching for justification here was the whole 'darn kids and their phones' rant as if phones haven't been a necessary parts of a ton of people's professional and personal lives for more than two decades now and are still a passing fad to be shouted down.

That we in theory can be in contact with the world 24/7 doesn't justify that we have to be.

There's been talk of introducing labour legislation here that would prevent employers from contacting employees during scheduled off hours except in cases of legitimate emergency; and I'd be all for it.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Getting calls during every session - whether from a boss or friends or whatever - is another.

No one's talking about getting calls, the post that kicked off this derail was about having your phone at the table.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

No one's talking about getting calls, the post that kicked off this derail was about having your phone at the table.

Everyone knows the proper place for a phone is under the table, so the player can google the answer to riddles.

 

[TwoSix]

we should do more than just checkmarking the most basic requirements of the design goal, we should try make the experience enjoyable for anyone who wants to use the simple caster 'you get a worse experience because you want simpler mechanics' is not a good principle to qualify the design on

But it’s not a “worse experience” if the goal is “image of a magic-user” combined with “champion fighter level simplicity in play”.

 

[ezo]

Like maybe we shouldn't assume a game is always going to take priority for people.

Always being the keyword. No one is assuming it always takes priority--over everything else.

Game time is game time. If you're there to play, play. Otherwise, you're welcome to hang out as long as you're not disruptive to the groups' enjoyment of the game. Pretty simple, really. Enjoyment being the keyword here. Cracking jokes and such can be amusing so isn't an issue generally.

That's not what people were talking about.

No, they aren't talking about that. Of course, they aren't talking about the initial point, either.

They are rampant, hyper-exaggerated posts, taking a simple concept and blowing it all out of any sense of logical and reasonable proportion.

And being on call, would you think it would be reasonable to be told you can't have your phone at the table unless it's for your character sheet, ...

No, of course not. But that isn't what I was talking about or said.

For my part, you are conflating "put them away" (which is what I said) and being "told you can't have your phone at the table". Not having them "at the table" implies you can't even have them on you (like, oh, maybe in your pocket?), which is not at all what I wrote.

What I wrote "put them away" says nothing at all about being at the table, on the table, or under the table (right @DEFCON 1 ?)-- in fact, the word "table" is never even used. Now, you might be referring to someone else's post concerning "at the table"? If that is the case, my apologies. If not...

You never asked for clarification (which would have been more productive to an actual conversation) about exactly what I meant when I wrote that. So, to clarify (for everyone) "put them away" means don't be on them, using them, when we are playing. I don't care if they are physically laying on the table, as long as players aren't using them for things other than the game, which as players, is their character. Not just "sheet", but also referencing a spell or feature. Many players have their characters on DND Beyond and use their phones or laptops at the table.

the post that kicked off this derail was about having your phone at the table.

Again, not "at the table" as you read for yourself, but "put them away". Big difference, which apparently you didn't realize? To be clear...

Acceptable phone use "at the table":

1. For your character (sheet, features, or whatever). It is a tool for helping you play, just like a laptop. Use it appropriately.
2. Emergencies. So, yes, expecting a call from work/boss, babysitter, etc. If you get a call, step away from the table to talk.
3. During a break, anything you want.

Unacceptable phone use:
Pretty much any other use. Ordering food is done at the start of the session, other non-emergencies can be handled during a break.

Sure, unexpected things happen, and you know what? We deal with them pretty easily. Everyone is happy with our phone rules and abides by them. If a player is abusing them, the group doesn't appreciate it, and it will lead to a discussion about it, and worst case scenario, their removal from the game.

Hopefully that will stop further derailment.

 

[Maxperson]

Being on call is... not all the uncommon for certain careers. Just from the people I play with, we've got doctors, and IT folks that sometimes NEED to be reachable or bad things happen, not just to them, but lost of other people as well.

Like maybe we shouldn't assume a game is always going to take priority for people.

Please! If I found out that my heart surgeon left his D&D game to come save my life, I'd give him a stern talking to.

 

[ezo]

Please! If I found out that my heart surgeon left his D&D game to come save my life, I'd give him a stern talking to.

I'd have to go so far as to find a more dedicated doctor -- to his D&D game, that is.

 

[tetrasodium]

And being on call, would you think it would be reasonable to be told you can't have your phone at the table unless it's for your character sheet, which is what started this whole discussion.

I don't know what you're on call for, but I've got people who have patient who might need them and an electric company whose software might run into an issue that only three people in the region can deal with.

Heck, I've got some elderly family for whom I'm the only point of contact.

But no, I guess those aren't as important as keeping our games of pretend 'pure' circa 1997.

You are posting as if you've never interacted with a cell phone. To answer your question... Yes it would be a total non-issue because it's a simple matter to remove my phone from my pocket and say that I need to step out or whatever as I've done before to tables that were already prepared on what to do in my absence because they had been previously told what to expect if I needed to take a call and discussed how to proceed before that happened.

The reaching for justification here was the whole 'darn kids and their phones' rant as if phones haven't been a necessary parts of a ton of people's professional and personal lives for more than two decades now and are still a passing fad to be shouted down.

Except that wasn't a rant, it was a completely reasonable call out of a regular disruption. I believe that there was even a clarification when someone rushed on trying to bring up edge case scenarios as if they were the norm.

People should play with people with similar mindsets. Personally to me a player who is angry at others because they do not play the elfgame optimally enough is a bigger red flag than someone who is forgetting rules occasionally.

How far into crit crab's coverage of rpghorrorstories does Bob need to venture before Alice can feel comfortable not red flagging herself by openly bringing up his behavior for discussion without needing to go around politicking a back stabbing in secret to ensure that she has a coalition of support? Does she need to hire an investigator to ensure that Bob didn't have a really good reason for it before either of those or can she just expect Bob to bring up his reasons for the group to discuss after she brings it up for open discussion?