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

[Thomas Shey]

People with such concerns rarely can commit to our schedule of weekly games, so it isn't an issue. We try, again and again, but ultimately they realize the constant interruptions and/or absences are interfering with the group's fun, so they bow out. If they are otherwise decent players, there is always an opening if their concerns change and they want to try again.

But there you say it yourself; they don't necessarily do so immediately, so the generalization that they're bad for dealing with their phones doesn't apply. Dealing with their phones is just the price of them being engaged. That price might be too high, but its not because they're inconsiderate, just that their lives are complicated in a way that mandates that.

Whew... I am so relieved!

I just like to be clear about things; if I follow someone 95% percent of the way on something, I don't want to tell them its 100%.

 

[Thomas Shey]

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.

Well, I've mentioned in another thread that I'm not super tolerant of "I and only I can play my character" as a posture, so I didn't even assume that as a factor.

 

[ezo]

But there you say it yourself; they don't necessarily do so immediately, so the generalization that they're bad for dealing with their phones doesn't apply. Dealing with their phones is just the price of them being engaged. That price might be too high, but its not because they're inconsiderate, just that their lives are complicated in a way that mandates that.

I'm not sure where you're getting that from given the post you quoted?

Nothing I was talking about had anything to do with the cell phone "derailment issue."

How is them dealing with their phone keeping them engaged in the game (unless the cell is used for D&D-related game use)?

I feel like I'm missing your point.

I just like to be clear about things; if I follow someone 95% percent of the way on something, I don't want to tell them its 100%.

My apologies for my tone. Civil conversation is always appreciated.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I'm not sure where you're getting that from given the post you quoted?

Nothing I was talking about had anything to do with the cell phone "derailment issue."

How is them dealing with their phone keeping them engaged in the game (unless the cell is used for D&D-related game use)?

Because otherwise they couldn't be there at all.

My apologies for my tone. Civil conversation is always appreciated.

I just wanted to clarify that the point in my response was not to be snarky, but clear. I actually endeavor to do that as much as possible, and avoid snark as much as I can--I'm sometimes overaggressive in responses, but when I am, I'm not subtle about it.

 

[ezo]

Because otherwise they couldn't be there at all.

For people whose more "constant" attention to their phone for non-game reasons is a regular part of their lives (I've never met one or had someone with that much demand on their phone play), any form of regular interruption to the game to the detriment of the groups' fun would result in them not playing, and likely not even attending the sessions if it is that disruptive.

If, somehow, they could manage their phone use without causing disruptions to the game (hard to imagine, but I won't deny the possibility), it would be fine. 90% of the time, players with cell phone in the game fall into the non-game use at some point or another, and need to be reminded of our table rules.

On a personal note, as I posted earlier, I despise cell phones--but that doesn't mean I despise people who use them. I'll spare you my "cell phone rant."

I just wanted to clarify that the point in my response was not to be snarky, but clear. I actually endeavor to do that as much as possible, and avoid snark as much as I can--I'm sometimes overaggressive in responses, but when I am, I'm not subtle about it.

Understood, and no snark detected. Well, maybe a little in some earlier resposnes. But nothing for you to concern yourself with at all.

I generally respond in kind, but when posters react without understanding, I can often become defensive, personally. And IME, people (including myself, although I try to avoid it), jump in with a lot of assumptions.

 

[Thomas Shey]

For people whose more "constant" attention to their phone for non-game reasons is a regular part of their lives (I've never met one or had someone with that much demand on their phone play), any form of regular interruption to the game to the detriment of the groups' fun would result in them not playing, and likely not even attending the sessions if it is that disruptive.

I think perhaps we're talking past each other.

The example I'm thinking of was a player who was a system admin at a small company, and kind of the old hand. It was a rare game that he didn't get a couple of calls that would take a few minutes each. Everyone knew this would happen, it was sometimes not ideal, but it wasn't so painful as to make it not worthwhile to have him there.

I wouldn't call that "constant" as such, but I think "regular" would describe.

Understood, and no snark detected. Well, maybe a little in some earlier resposnes. But nothing for you to concern yourself with at all.

I generally respond in kind, but when posters react without understanding, I can often become defensive, personally. And IME, people (including myself, although I try to avoid it), jump in with a lot of assumptions.

Sure. As I said, I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't say I can sometimes be over aggressive, but I try not to make a habit of it.

 

[ezo]

I think perhaps we're talking past each other.

Probably.

The example I'm thinking of was a player who was a system admin at a small company, and kind of the old hand. It was a rare game that he didn't get a couple of calls that would take a few minutes each. Everyone knew this would happen, it was sometimes not ideal, but it wasn't so painful as to make it not worthwhile to have him there.

Frankly, it would most likely be fine, no worse than someone who needs to use the bathroom from drinking too much while playing.

I couldn't say "sure, no problem", because a lot depends on how disruptive it was. It sounds like it really wasn't, which means he'd probably be fine in our group as well. It is like the guy I mentioned above who would sometimes be late or not even show. We had a workable contingency in place. For your example, he might say "Oh, I've gotta take this, if my turn comes up just have my PC to X or Y. Be right back!"

Brief, civil, respectiful "regular" interruptions generally aren't that: interruptions. Inconvient, certainly, but not so painful, as you say.

Such examples are vastly different than the one I spoke of earlier, who watched tiktok videos or something while game is in play, doesn't pay attention to what is going on, etc.

I wouldn't call that "constant" as such, but I think "regular" would describe.

Right. And "regular" can certainly be acceptable. "Constant" (like several times an hour) is more likely disruptive because it could interfer nearly every time that person's turn is up.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Probably.


Frankly, it would most likely be fine, no worse than someone who needs to use the bathroom from drinking too much while playing.

I couldn't say "sure, no problem", because a lot depends on how disruptive it was. It sounds like it really wasn't, which means he'd probably be fine in our group as well. It is like the guy I mentioned above who would sometimes be late or not even show. We had a workable contingency in place. For your example, he might say "Oh, I've gotta take this, if my turn comes up just have my PC to X or Y. Be right back!"

It was to some extent disruptive. But it was, as I said, the price of having him participate, so...

Brief, civil, respectiful "regular" interruptions generally aren't that: interruptions. Inconvient, certainly, but not so painful, as you say.

Such examples are vastly different than the one I spoke of earlier, who watched tiktok videos or something while game is in play, doesn't pay attention to what is going on, etc.

While I get the distinction, all kinds of things can cause someone's attention to wonder, and looking at their phone doesn't seem intrinsically worse than some others. You can legitimately question whether someone with a bad attention span is a problem--I would not be offended if someone told me I was unwelcome because of that, since I absolutely have issues with my attention span as a player--but it seems the person not the phone is the issue.

Right. And "regular" can certainly be acceptable. "Constant" (like several times an hour) is more likely disruptive because it could interfer nearly every time that person's turn is up.

Certainly I understand why that's much more severe.

 

[ezo]

It was to some extent disruptive. But it was, as I said, the price of having him participate, so...

Sure, but I hope we all know different groups will have different levels of what they are willing to tolerate. I do play with more "serious" players, so our level would probably appear lower to some others.

While I get the distinction, all kinds of things can cause someone's attention to wonder, and looking at their phone doesn't seem intrinsically worse than some others. You can legitimately question whether someone with a bad attention span is a problem--I would not be offended if someone told me I was unwelcome because of that, since I absolutely have issues with my attention span as a player--but it seems the person not the phone is the issue.

Oh, certainly, just about anything can be a distraction! Cell phones simply are the primary offenders IME, but I am probably biased.

 

[ECMO3]

I'm sorry. Not even the most extreme "give them what they want" edition phb supports this rude & extreme teen spirit interpretation.

Rude and extreme is telling someone in game they are not contributing enough or that they need to know the rules better.