Everything I learned in business school I already knew from gaming

[nedjer]

This may sound silly, but:

I can perhaps accept the emise that the skills associated with being a good DM might be the same or similar to skills associated with being good in business, but...

In order to get to, " Playing D&D makes you better at business, " you also have to prove that, " D&D has measurably improved your DMing skills, " . And while I am sure there is some improvement, I think it is still distinctly possible that you either, " Have it or you don't, " when it comes right down to it.

Feel free to prove my concerns are completely meaningless.

Not meaningless, but the connections between learning enterprise skills probably don't lie in a game so much as the hobby.

Taking account of other peoples' perspectives is quite a valuable business skill, which can be fostered through RPGs by in-game role-playing, collaborating during play, out-game f2f social interactions and by observing how the GM balances players' and NPCs' perspectives.

The skills/ models based on that might lead to taking account of publisher and audience expectations when freelancing, designing a game, . . . opening an online merchandising store . . . starting any store.

 

[SiderisAnon]

I would also add: Being able to convincingly play a variety of different characters.

As a project manager, I used to have to be able to adjust how I dealt with various people and departments. In a lot of ways, it was like playing a specific character. When I knew that my base personality wasn't the right way to deal with a situation, I'd find myself stringing all the ways I needed to deal with things into a sort of character framework. It meant that instead of having to stop and think about every response, I could go with the flow of the "character" I was using in my head.

I'd seen it in others for many years in my work history before I really quantified it for myself. Sales people and managers would affect a different persona or style when dealing with certain clients. They knew how to get along or make the other person feel like, "This is the guy I want to deal with." While I doubt that those sales people and managers would describe it as "playing the right NPC," it's how I've seen it for years.

 

[mkill]

In order to get to, " Playing D&D makes you better at business, " you also have to prove that, " D&D has measurably improved your DMing skills, " . And while I am sure there is some improvement, I think it is still distinctly possible that you either, " Have it or you don't, " when it comes right down to it.

* Quote the exact point in my post where I write that this is connected to Shadowrun or any other specific RPG
* DMing makes you better at DMing.

 

[Kaodi]

* Quote the exact point in my post where I write that this is connected to Shadowrun or any other specific RPG

Thank God, since if you pay close attention I do not think what I said really changes whether you say "D&D" or "gaming" more generally.

* DMing makes you better at DMing.

You would think so, but I was mindful of a thread once where someone had suggested that after like 30 years of DMing they felt they had gotten worse.

 

[mkill]

[MENTION=1231]Kaodi[/MENTION]: I ... er ... ah ... well ... ok, I simply don't get what your point is. All I can say is "yeah, so what".

 

[S'mon]

I would also add: Being able to convincingly play a variety of different characters.

As a project manager, I used to have to be able to adjust how I dealt with various people and departments. In a lot of ways, it was like playing a specific character. When I knew that my base personality wasn't the right way to deal with a situation, I'd find myself stringing all the ways I needed to deal with things into a sort of character framework. It meant that instead of having to stop and think about every response, I could go with the flow of the "character" I was using in my head.

I'd seen it in others for many years in my work history before I really quantified it for myself. Sales people and managers would affect a different persona or style when dealing with certain clients. They knew how to get along or make the other person feel like, "This is the guy I want to deal with." While I doubt that those sales people and managers would describe it as "playing the right NPC," it's how I've seen it for years.

Contrariwise, I've always been surprised by GMs who don't seem able to step into different personas: the ones who can't separate the monster's goals from their own goals, or who can't play Bob-the-player's romantic interest NPC because that would be 'icky', or who just can't RP NPCs at all as anything other than themselves. I guess I tend to see the ability to adopt different personas as fairly normal, and certainly a prerequisite for success in many careers. I know that as an academic, the rare occasion when the students see the 'real S'mon' - the person I am outside work - that's generally not a good thing.

 

[S'mon]

You would think so, but I was mindful of a thread once where someone had suggested that after like 30 years of DMing they felt they had gotten worse.

I've said similar things. At any rate I was a far far worse tabletop GM in the '90s than in the '80s. But it wasn't GMing per se that made me worse (I was GMing much less frequently, actually), I think it was more the railroading adventures and GMing advice published in that era, plus forgetting/never really having understood that it's player freedom that makes a good game. GMing again the past 12 years I have learned techniques that have improved my play, although I'm sure I've developed bad habits too.

 

[mkill]

... plus forgetting/never really having understood that it's player freedom that makes a good game ...

Amen to that.

I'm shocked how easily a lot of DMs advocate the ban-hammer, at least online. I always scratch my head when someone bans, say, the sorcerer, without even checking whether any of his players wanted to play one in the first place. And even if, not checking either whether the Sorcerer really breaks the game that hard as believed upon first reading. What's the point? It's just asserting control for control's sake. Micromanagement instead of mutual trust. Something shelves of business books were written about.

Too often, I end up asking myself "what difference does it make at the table" when I see yet another Internet discussion like that. Which leads to another lesson from gaming, learning to apply the YAGNI principle.

Of course, mostly learned the hard way, when the DM spends hours to prepare the amazing adventure in the Dungeon of Doom and the PCs decide they'd rather hitch an airship to the Elven City of Dweoemere today.

 

[S'mon]

Amen to that.

I'm shocked how easily a lot of DMs advocate the ban-hammer, at least online. I always scratch my head when someone bans, say, the sorcerer, without even checking whether any of his players wanted to play one in the first place. And even if, not checking either whether the Sorcerer really breaks the game that hard as believed upon first reading. What's the point? It's just asserting control for control's sake. Micromanagement instead of mutual trust. Something shelves of business books were written about.

Too often, I end up asking myself "what difference does it make at the table" when I see yet another Internet discussion like that. Which leads to another lesson from gaming, learning to apply the YAGNI principle.

Of course, mostly learned the hard way, when the DM spends hours to prepare the amazing adventure in the Dungeon of Doom and the PCs decide they'd rather hitch an airship to the Elven City of Dweoemere today.

Well, by player freedom I meant in-game, " hitch an airship to the Elven City of Dweoemere" type freedom, not metagame "freedom to create a Sorcerer PC" type freedom. I see nothing wrong with eg Water Bob's All-Cimmerian-Barbarian campaign, as long as the players/PCs have plenty of freedom of action in-game.