D&D General Alternate thought - rule of cool is bad for gaming

[Thomas Shey]

* I * don't... which is why my posts usually top off after maybe 3, 6, 8, 12 replies or so. But to go on for page after page after page? Either the person's really bored, or they must think something special is happening.

Some people just get a bit in their teeth. It still doesn't mean they expect any serious result.

 

[W'rkncacnter]

Umbran literally said in his example "I'm your only option, you'll never find another DM to play with."

uh...no, he didn't (unless i missed a post). what he said was:

"It isn't a sure thing that you can get someone else, so you may be stuck and need to do as I say!"

that is not the same statement. i'm not arguing it isn't coercive - i'm arguing it's not gaslighting (by default, anyway - a roll20 dm saying something like that is almost definitely gaslighting).

and actually, looking back at Umbran's post, he actually does compare it to an actual gaslighting statement, which...i find a tad distasteful, since they're comparing two very different situations.

D&D is a social activity and like any social group is susceptible to manipulation, pressure and abuse. The Internet is littered with "nightmare DM" stories. And while you all may live in places where eager players rain from the sky, my experience is one where the RPG sphere is smaller, more connected, and insular. Quite frankly, "go ahead and leave, you're not going to find another DM" is and was a viable threat. Again, age and technology has defanged it somewhat, but as teen/young adult in a small town with limited travel opportunities, it often did result in a "no D&D" vs "bad D&D" decision to be made.

okay...but that's not gaslighting. which is my entire problem with what you said, that you're calling something gaslighting when it's not. in fact, with the situation you've detailed, it can't be gaslighting, because it's a factual statement. "you're not going to find another DM" is a viable threat in the situation you've described precisely because it is true.

 

[Umbran]

that is not the same statement. i'm not arguing it isn't coercive - i'm arguing it's not gaslighting (by default, anyway - a roll20 dm saying something like that is almost definitely gaslighting).

and actually, looking back at Umbran's post, he actually does compare it to an actual gaslighting statement, which...i find a tad distasteful, since they're comparing two very different situations.

You know, there's some very important differences in what various folks call "gaslighting", so I am not going to try to argue over that point. I am sorry what I said was distasteful.

Was my statement worded too strongly? Perhaps. Was I getting a bad enough vibe out of the discussion that the strong wording made sense at the time? Kinda, yeah. Sorry. The continued attempts to assert the GM's dominance using what I felt were coercive arguments did not sit well with me. At all.

So, now lots of people have had stuff not sit well with them. Maybe everyone can learn a bit from that, and move forward.

 

[Oofta]

Umbran literally said in his example "I'm your only option, you'll never find another DM to play with." Micah suggested the two aren't comparable, but I think it can be.

D&D is a social activity and like any social group is susceptible to manipulation, pressure and abuse. The Internet is littered with "nightmare DM" stories. And while you all may live in places where eager players rain from the sky, my experience is one where the RPG sphere is smaller, more connected, and insular. Quite frankly, "go ahead and leave, you're not going to find another DM" is and was a viable threat. Again, age and technology has defanged it somewhat, but as teen/young adult in a small town with limited travel opportunities, it often did result in a "no D&D" vs "bad D&D" decision to be made.

I'm not suggesting a DM should cater to their players every whim, but I am suggesting that DMs with a "my way or the highway" style of play often find themselves on the highway.

I'm of the firm belief that the DM makes the final call whether I'm running or playing. It's simple expediency, the DM needs to think about what the whole group wants, and yes the DM is more important than the rest of the group. Doesn't mean I don't listen to my players, I do. I'm running 3 games right now, have no problem finding players and have no doubt I could run more.

Bad DMs are bad DMs no matter what style of play. But yeah, I guess it's my way or the highway. I will never run a game for evil characters, if that's what you want I will never be the right DM for you. That's not only my preference, but the preference of at least one player at the table (my wife) and likely most of the players I've had over the years.

 

[Umbran]

* I * don't... which is why my posts usually top off after maybe 3, 6, 8, 12 replies or so. But to go on for page after page after page? Either the person's really bored, or they must think something special is happening.

Mod Note:
Wow. Blanket, broad stroke, personal commentary based on bothering to post?

Boot! You are done in this discussion. Next time, don't draw conclusions about the speakers. Stick to what's said.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I think these days people might conflate gaslighting with just the concept of abusive or toxic relationships in general, but there's other ways a relationship can be... let's just say 'not entirely okay', which includes types of manipulation that aren't gaslighting.

People also tend to assume that 'not entirely okay' relationships are limited to romantic ones.

But the truth is, any relationship can be... 'not entirely okay'... be it friendships, business relations, family ties, or casual acquaintances. And whatever a given DM/Other Player relationship is outside of the game, the assumed power dynamic is already something people should probably be mindful of to start, much less once leverage starts being applied to it.

 

[TiQuinn]

I'm not suggesting you should; it was just an example of why people sometime stay with games that may cause them problems.

It seems like you have an issue realizing that the person saying “no gaming is better than bad gaming” is speaking for themselves. It’s a suggestion for others but no one is under any obligation to listen to it. This is pretty self-evident unless you think that I’m some higher authority that you need to keep appealing your case to.

 

[pemerton]

If AW truly covered everything then there wouldn’t be so many flavors of it.

Huh?

First, I said that AW has a rule for everything - there is no action declaration whose resolution is not covered by the ruleset.

I don't know what you mean by "covers everything", but that's not a phrase I used.

Second, your claim is a non-sequitur. AW's rules - which provide for the resolution of any declared action - deliberately produce a certain sort of focus and play experience: the themes are scarcity, interpersonal conflict, and the ever-present threat of violence. (Baker talks about some aspects of it in this interesting blog: Powered by the Apocalypse, Part 3 – lumpley games)

Suppose someone wanted a RPG that produces a different sort of focus and play experience, than they would write a different RPG.

I mean, the reason people keep making movies isn't because the other ones are lacking a beginning, a middle or an end!

That dice are rolled (in absence of the illusory railroad) shows that the referees vision is not determinate.

This doesn't follow either. Dice can be rolled but the referee's vision prevail: for instance, the referee might decide what happens on failure and what happens on success.

 

[Remathilis]

and actually, looking back at Umbran's post, he actually does compare it to an actual gaslighting statement, which...i find a tad distasteful, since they're comparing two very different situations.

It was THAT statement I was referring to. That said, I'm dropping this line of conversation.

 

[Remathilis]

I'm of the firm belief that the DM makes the final call whether I'm running or playing. It's simple expediency, the DM needs to think about what the whole group wants, and yes the DM is more important than the rest of the group. Doesn't mean I don't listen to my players, I do. I'm running 3 games right now, have no problem finding players and have no doubt I could run more.

Bad DMs are bad DMs no matter what style of play. But yeah, I guess it's my way or the highway. I will never run a game for evil characters, if that's what you want I will never be the right DM for you. That's not only my preference, but the preference of at least one player at the table (my wife) and likely most of the players I've had over the years.

I think it's fine to have limits, but I thinkit'ss also good to be flexible. I'm pretty flexible with regards to species and classes, but I am very hard on theme. Don't make a butterfly-chasing pacifist for my Ravenloft game, for example. And that give and take works for me because my group are all friends that have been playing for 20+ years. If this group dissolved, I'm pretty sure that would be the end of my gaming days. So I balance my desires against those of my group, and we compromise.