MMO terms and tabletop, anyone completely ANNOYED by this?

[Evenglare]

So when introducing new players into a tabletop game (usually D&D, sometimes savage worlds, or L5R) they insist using the words "pull, tank, aggro, dps" . I understand the easiest way is to relate to a game you have played "in this case WOW/ guildwars". But even when I completely try to immerse them in the game using social scenes and other things they always seem to gravitate towards that. It especially annoys me when I put in other way of winning , or making an encounter easier but they just love attacking... over... and over and over.

 

[Jon_Dahl]

[sarcasm]
Actually I like the fact that people use MMO terms in tabletop games. It's a very convenient way to determine if the player (or DM) is ruined for life. In the past we had to give players a CN character in order to find this out. Now it's easier.
[/sarcasm]

Yes, I hate those terms too. I like the word "tank" because I think we have used that since the dawn of time. Ever since WOW and other MMORPGs came, my gaming has endured a lot of misfortune. You see, the MMO terminology is the smaller problem. The bigger problem is when your group stays home playing computer games and you're left alone with your books. I lost about three years of gaming because of MMORPGs and my bitterness is beyond measure.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Then create experiences that are vastly different from what they would find in an MMORPG. You don't need a tank to groom a young prince into a future king or DPS to build a giant wall or a heal bot to start a riot...

 

[Evenglare]

Yeah, that's the point, I DO this but they insist on railroading the game. The only way to NOT do this is simply not battle. They have party wiped before because they simply refuse to do something other than attack /repeat.

 

[Recidivism]

It sounds like your desires as a GM are not lining up with what your players want from the game. It's not wrong to want to run a game that's more RP focused, but it's also not wrong to want to play a game that focuses on overcoming tactical challenges.

 

[MarkB]

It sounds like your desires as a GM are not lining up with what your players want from the game. It's not wrong to want to run a game that's more RP focused, but it's also not wrong to want to play a game that focuses on overcoming tactical challenges.

Seconded. The terminology they're using is incidental here - the central issue is that the game you want to run isn't the game they want to play. Trying to move further away from their preferred playstyle is probably making them kick against the reins even harder, thus the party wipe. I wouldn't be surprised if they're using the MMO terminology you despise as a form of passive-aggressive protest too.

 

[Derren]

Don't play D&D with them then.
If they call it "tank, dps, healer" or "fighter, striker, leader" is just semantics. The structure and intent is the same.

So if you want your group to not use MMO terminology and do nothing other than to fight things (for loot I assume) then you maybe should play a gaming system which is not focused on killing things for loot with MMO inspired highly specialized combat classes like in D&D.
Try out a White Wolf game or whatever.

 

[Scrivener of Doom]

People use the terms that they are familiar with.

I know nothing about MMORPGs other than the bits and pieces I have gleaned from threads here but, if I did, I would use those same terms to teach D&D to newbies.

Use those terms and common ground, let them have their fight fun and then show them the other ways of playing.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Yeah, that's the point, I DO this but they insist on railroading the game. The only way to NOT do this is simply not battle. They have party wiped before because they simply refuse to do something other than attack /repeat.

I don't play MMOs but I still recognize the terms. Some of them (mainly "pull") are even an official game term. (And why not? Pull means exactly what it says.)

People in my group were talking about "drawing aggro" and "tanking" even before MMOs came out. (Incidentally, drawing aggro does not work the same way in an MMO than an tabletop game, because the DM has a brain but the computer doesn't.) I'm sure there's similar terms in other occupations ("draw fire" or something like that in the military). Geeks overlap in interests, and it's not surprising they might bring words from one genre to another. People do this in far more serious topics too (eg talking about a presidential election "horserace" or using sporting metaphors for military operations).

Sounds like the real problem are the players are unhappy or not willing to use proper tactics. That's not an MMO issue. There are tactical MMO players, and then there's Leeroy Jenkins (who was staged, but whatever) and those in between.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

So when introducing new players into a tabletop game (usually D&D, sometimes savage worlds, or L5R) they insist using the words "pull, tank, aggro, dps" . I understand the easiest way is to relate to a game you have played "in this case WOW/ guildwars". But even when I completely try to immerse them in the game using social scenes and other things they always seem to gravitate towards that. It especially annoys me when I put in other way of winning , or making an encounter easier but they just love attacking... over... and over and over.

It occurs to me, as I believe it should occur to you, that this last only indicates that you are starving them for the amount of combat that they want from the game. What YOU want your players to want is different from what they ACTUALLY want from the game. It's clear that you're not actually talking to them about it either. I would suggest that you do talk to them about it or else just accept the inevitability of your game breaking up in misery for all.