D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[robertsconley]

As an unrelated aside, I do not understand how loud guy dynamics becomes an issue with Apocalypse World style collaborative world building (where the GM still retains content authority) because the GM is meant to ask specific questions to specific players. It's never a free for all. Creative differences can absolutely be a thing (and you do need creative alignment in your group) but the loudest gets their way thing should be impossible under both declaring actions and answering questions based on the outlined procedures meant to be used in the games.

Likely because RPG campaigns, regardless of system, involve small groups, and research on small-group communication shows that social norms often override formal turn-taking, resulting in groups developing their own equilibrium of who talks when.

From a google search on the topic I found this.

System Matters, Explicit Mechanics Less So.

Way back in 1980, someone named Glenn Blacow submitted an article to Different Worlds magazine. The piece was entitled “Aspects of Adventure Gaming” and it was an attempt to address creative tensio…

tasker.land

And this is an interesting point that would apply to the loud guy dynamic.

This looks testable if the group has a loud guy dynamic and starts doing something else, and still has a loud guy dynamic, then it has to be addressed socially, and the RPG is not going to help resolve it, regardless of what procedures it contains.

 

[AlViking]

Right, I'd be more concerned, with an inexperienced MC, that they would fail to allocate bandwidth to everyone effectively. That they might softball less assertive or confident players, etc. Obviously you can, theoretically, have a player so loud and pushy that it derails play, but I seriously doubt that trad play process is going to fix that!

Sadly true. The point is that as much as the rules or guidance given for the game should contain the loudmouth there are times that they do not. It's up to the GM to control that and, in D&D, it's the DM that should deal with the problem character. I just don't see the loudmouth giving a hoot about how they're supposed to act.

 

[pemerton]

As in they don't trade with each other? Or they don't use money for anything? Or...what do you mean by this?

EDIT: Saw you already answered this in a later post.

They live in the middle of a forest and one can easily extrapolate from their write-ups that the whole lot of 'em (exception noted below) are hunter-gatherers. Hunter-gatherer settlements of 100 people aren't/weren't uncommon in reality, so what's the problem here?

The exception are the cultists at the end. I can't remember if it's written in the module or not, but even if it's not it would seem pretty obvious they're getting their supplies (maybe under the table) from some people at the keep.

As for their material goods, I'd think they were stolen over the long run from woodsmen, loggers, travellers, and any other commoner-types dumb enough or unlucky enough to cross their path.

As @Hussar said, the population size and density is not very plausible for hunter-gatherers. And they don't actually seem to do an hunting or gathering - they spend their time hanging out in caves.

And their material economy does not resemble that of hunger-gatherers either. I mean, how do they obtain the war equipment of a reasonably sized warband by collecting them from loggers? And for the goblins, are all those loggers halflings?

Trying to present this as remotely realistic is hopeless, in my view.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Right, I'd be more concerned, with an inexperienced MC, that they would fail to allocate bandwidth to everyone effectively. That they might softball less assertive or confident players, etc. Obviously you can, theoretically, have a player so loud and pushy that it derails play, but I seriously doubt that trad play process is going to fix that!

I don't think any mechanical process, trad or otherwise, can fix that. It's a social issue and needs IMO to be handled in a social way.

 

[Umbran]

if a GM's errors and resistance to fixing them is making a worse game experience for someone, I think referring to that as "harm" is perfectly legitimate

As opposed to, "I admit it isn't okay, but I'll do it anyway! Ha!"? Like, of course you feel it is legitimate, or you wouldn't have said it.

What you seem to miss is that, in communicating with others, your own feelings of legitimate use are typically less important than those of your audience.

If you feel this is legitimate, then by all means, before every session you ever play, announce to the GM, "If you make any error to lessen my game experience and do not fix it to my personal satisfaction, I will report to others (say, the people running the FLGS or con in which the game is taking place), that you harmed me in this game."

Let's see how that flies. If it is perfectly legitimate, you should use it to the face of every GM you work with, and organizers of any venue in which you play.

In using that word, you are having a mediocre play experience occupy the same rhetorical space as, say.. being sexually harassed at the table. No, I don't find that "legitimate". I find it a poorly justified overstatement of the issue.

 

[robertsconley]

Dealing with a Spotlight Hog from StackExchange

As a player, how do I deal with a spotlight hog?

I’m usually the GM but I’m not this time, and my usual methods of managing spotlight, and hogs thereof, aren’t available to me. I’m at a bit of a loss. We have a player who is very enthusiastic and

rpg.stackexchange.com

Nice to see a round robin approach offered as a solution. I use a version of that.

 

[santosud37]

Note: I DO NOT MEAN POLITICAL CONSERVATISM. This is not a thread about politics.

I mean "conservatism" as in resistance to change. You see it all the time -- people complaining about the new art or aesthetics, literally saying things like "if they used the old art I would be in." It is so mind boggling to me.

D&D is a living game. OF COURSE the new books etc are going to adapt to the new market. If you literally won't play a newer version because tieflings or whatever, then it isn't for you. Don't demand it regress to the era you discovered D&D because that is what makes you feel good; play the version you discovered.

I don't liek every artistic or design choice either, but it isn't up to me to demand D&D coddle my unchanging preferences. If I want to re-experience BECMI (the edition I grew up with) I can just play that. And so can you.

/rant

Well u made it a thread about politics when u wrote the first sentence about Conservatives:
I mean "conservatism" as in resistance to change. If that is NOT politics than I can say, "progressive ideolgy" in gameplay in D&D is individuals wanting to change the rules to anyway they want. To the point to include against the original imaginations of the game creators and the gods that rule over the PCs and NPCs. Heck, let's just make everyone gods at L0!

 

[Reynard]

Well u made it a thread about politics when u wrote the first sentence about Conservatives:
I mean "conservatism" as in resistance to change. If that is NOT politics than I can say, "progressive ideolgy" in gameplay in D&D is individuals wanting to change the rules to anyway they want. To the point to include against the original imaginations of the game creators and the gods that rule over the PCs and NPCs. Heck, let's just make everyone gods at L0!

This is a very strange line of argument, but please, do go on.

 

[Campbell]

This stuff is not hard you just have to be the Master of Ceremonies. If people are speaking up when it's not their turn to speak the MC simply needs to remind them. I've been running Apocalypse World this way since it came out. Your title is the Master of Ceremonies and you need to be so.

It's very strange line of argument to say a game isn't workable when you are only halfway following its procedures. This is the equivalent of seeing GM as referee does not work because players will argue with your rulings.

 

[robertsconley]

See previous post - I added an edit while you were typing this.

As for their material goods, I'd think they were stolen over the long run from woodsmen, loggers, travellers, and any other commoner-types dumb enough or unlucky enough to cross their path.

How does this work for you?

Report to the Keep

As ordered, I have scouted along the ravines west of the Keep. The site known locally as the “Caves of Chaos” is not a lair for creatures or monsters. It is, by all signs, a permanent encampment, fortified by natural terrain.

Here is what I have observed and concluded:

The caves house a patchwork of hostile factions: goblins, orcs, kobolds, bugbears, and worse. These are not wanderers. The structures within the caves indicate long-term occupation. Multiple watch patterns suggest regular shifts, not the erratic routines of nomads.

Internal conflict appears to be barely managed by what appears to be a unifying authority: a priest of unknown order, operating from a central shrine. All evidence points to the presence of a cult of chaos, likely coordinating supplies and exerting enough force to keep the factions from turning on one another.

They are not hunters or foragers, at least not primarily. Nor are they starving. Evidence points to the following sources of sustenance:

Raiding: Several recent attacks on nearby homesteads and logging camps match tracks leading to the caves. Survivors report livestock taken, tools stolen, and cartloads of grain missing.

Tribute and extortion: Some remote settlers, I suspect, pay for peace. The fact that certain cabins remain untouched suggests an arrangement.

Slaves and captives: I witnessed the hauling of bound prisoners, likely used for labor, ransom, or worse.

External support: Several supply drops were noted near the hollow pine on Crow Ridge. No caravan approaches, which implies clandestine deliveries, possibly from forces dwelling further east into the Borderlands.

Weapons and armor are well-maintained, standardized within groups, and often of human make. This is not the detritus of wild scavengers. Either they loot in quantity or someone is equipping them deliberately.

Leadership appears to be multiple humanoid captains who issue commands. Drills are occasionally observed. This is a warband, not a rabble.

I suspect the caves are not just a refuge, they are a staging ground. Possibly for a future incursion into the kingdom, they represent a threat.

This is my report, Sir!