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

[EzekielRaiden]

Agreed; and those ignorant or inexperienced or struggling players will - often but not always with that constructive support from others - eventually either figure it out or they won't; and those who do figure it out will often go on to be the constructive support for the next wave.

And those who don't or won't (or can't) figure it out even with that constructive support? Well, at some point I think we have to simply accept that the game - just like any other pastime - isn't for everyone.

Okay. Does this actually add any knowledge we didn't know before? "Don't tolerate jerks" is hardly some fantastical revelation. "Avoid confusing mere weakness for wickedness," on the other hand, is an extremely important point that is easily forgotten, especially in this day and age of extremism, partisanship, finger-pointing, etc., etc. "Don't tolerate jerks" is a maxim as old as jerks--older than language, most certainly. "Avoid confusing mere weakness for wickedness" is quite a bit newer, and quite a bit more human (in the sense that it requires fairly high self-reflection, a rare trait in the animal kingdom.)

Of course, and agreed. But even then, underneath it all we knew (or learned) what to do, what dice to roll, how to roleplay, and so forth; and are willing and capable of doing so.

There's nothing wrong with not knowing how to roleplay etc.; my problem is with those who - over the medium-to-long term - refuse to learn.

Okay. We already know how to deal with them, and why. Many people do not know how to deal with the former, despite the fact that pretty much everyone has been in those shoes at some point. Well-known cognitive biases, such as the fundamental attribution error, or various self-serving biases, are a big problem that lots of people either aren't aware of or aren't sure how to forestall. Hence why the "gatekeeping is good" video (which is pretty clearly a clickbait title, since the youtuber immediately noted that some gatekeeping is bad and spent at least as much time talking about the bad kind as the "good" kind) spends a good minute or so just reminding DMs that communication and understanding can fix the vast majority of problems.

That sort of stuff--how to resolve merely unfortunate stumbles, rather than how to identify outright personality/character flaws in a player--is just more interesting, more productive, and more important. "Don't tolerate jerks" is something children and cubs learn in the nursery. "Help someone work through their complex issues so they can contribute productively" is a complex, difficult thing that most adults struggle with.

I have no issue if players can't role-play or aren't comfortable with it. I take issue more with players who refuse to learn how to play the game. As @Lanefan said, what dice to roll, but also what their features, spells, and other abilities can do. It is understandable if someone needs to look up a reference once in a while, but every time (or nearly so) after playing for months, is not acceptable IMO. It delays the game too often.

Not learning how to calculate attack bonus, what saving throws you are proficient in, having incomplete character sheets, etc. are also all things that show a disrespect for the game IMO that means a player really isn't committed to playing.

For me, these players are also toxic. I can only give players so much time and so many chances to "join in" and participate before I feel they are just wasting my time and the other players.

I have had multiple players who have some form of learning disability. For them, it is a struggle to remember...a lot of things. Not just game stuff. It takes them numerous repetitions to remember something that, for me, rarely takes more than being told once. This is exactly the sort of thing I mean: the rush to judgment that, because someone struggles to remember how the rules work, they must be lazy, harmful, even toxic players. The presumption that a difficulty that does not resolve on its own must mean that the player herself is difficult.

Now, the incomplete character sheet thing, I can generally grant that. Even if someone struggles to learn and remember--aka, anyone with some kind of learning disability, which accounts for about 1 in 7 people--at least finishing the sheet isn't that much of an ask, and if they're having trouble filling it out, the ball is in their court for getting help with that. A simple, "Hey, I'm not sure what to do" or "I know I need to fill it out, but I really struggle with remembering everything I need to do, can we work on it before or after session sometime?" would do wonders. And there certainly is a potential risk of folks doing something nefarious with allegedly "forgetting" to fill it out, namely, altering the sheet post-chargen so they have whatever background they need rather than what they chose in advance, or whatever.

But folks that are shy? Folks that struggle with getting into character? They're a dime a dozen. Driving them out of the hobby is not productive. Learning how to address concerns and work with them so everyone has a good time is rarely straightforward, usually a slow process, and frequently a unique challenge that requires patience and sensitivity. Y'know, things where it would be useful to discuss it.

Someone being a dick and being asked politely but firmly to leave is pretty much the exact opposite. It's usually quite straightforward, a pretty quick process, and as simple as being frank and direct with someone that their behavior isn't acceptable.

One of these things is actually interesting to discuss, and something lots of people would benefit from discussing. The other is exactly as simple as it seems: don't tolerate jerks.

 

[ezo]

I have had multiple players who have some form of learning disability. For them, it is a struggle to remember...a lot of things. Not just game stuff. It takes them numerous repetitions to remember something that, for me, rarely takes more than being told once. This is exactly the sort of thing I mean: the rush to judgment that, because someone struggles to remember how the rules work, they must be lazy, harmful, even toxic players. The presumption that a difficulty that does not resolve on its own must mean that the player herself is difficult.

Now who is jumping to assumptions?

Frankly, I'm offended. There's a BIG difference between a player who might have a disability or something and a player who is, IN FACT, a lazy player, who refuses to take the time to learn how the game is played and whose constant need to be reminded, etc. disrupts the game for everyone else.

So, I think you should look in the mirror, and stop rushing to judgements yourself.

I'm done with you.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Because calling people who are humans and don't perfectly memorize all the rules for a game they might be playing only once a month instead of living it religiously 'lazy' isn't rushing to judgement.

 

[Lanefan]

Okay. Does this actually add any knowledge we didn't know before? "Don't tolerate jerks" is hardly some fantastical revelation. "Avoid confusing mere weakness for wickedness," on the other hand, is an extremely important point that is easily forgotten, especially in this day and age of extremism, partisanship, finger-pointing, etc., etc. "Don't tolerate jerks" is a maxim as old as jerks--older than language, most certainly. "Avoid confusing mere weakness for wickedness" is quite a bit newer, and quite a bit more human (in the sense that it requires fairly high self-reflection, a rare trait in the animal kingdom.)

Okay. We already know how to deal with them, and why. Many people do not know how to deal with the former, despite the fact that pretty much everyone has been in those shoes at some point. Well-known cognitive biases, such as the fundamental attribution error, or various self-serving biases, are a big problem that lots of people either aren't aware of or aren't sure how to forestall. Hence why the "gatekeeping is good" video (which is pretty clearly a clickbait title, since the youtuber immediately noted that some gatekeeping is bad and spent at least as much time talking about the bad kind as the "good" kind) spends a good minute or so just reminding DMs that communication and understanding can fix the vast majority of problems.

That sort of stuff--how to resolve merely unfortunate stumbles, rather than how to identify outright personality/character flaws in a player--is just more interesting, more productive, and more important. "Don't tolerate jerks" is something children and cubs learn in the nursery. "Help someone work through their complex issues so they can contribute productively" is a complex, difficult thing that most adults struggle with.

Jerk-ness and the ability to roleplay well are not related.

I've known jerks who were great roleplayers. I've known non-jerks who, when it comes to proactive roleplaying, couldn't hit the ocean if they were standing on a wharf.

I have had multiple players who have some form of learning disability. For them, it is a struggle to remember...a lot of things. Not just game stuff. It takes them numerous repetitions to remember something that, for me, rarely takes more than being told once. This is exactly the sort of thing I mean: the rush to judgment that, because someone struggles to remember how the rules work, they must be lazy, harmful, even toxic players. The presumption that a difficulty that does not resolve on its own must mean that the player herself is difficult.

IME it's fairly easy to tell the difference between someone who is legitimately trying to learn (which is all I ask) and someone who is not.

But folks that are shy? Folks that struggle with getting into character? They're a dime a dozen. Driving them out of the hobby is not productive.

Ideally they learn over time how to be less shy and-or how to better get into character.

Learning how to address concerns and work with them so everyone has a good time is rarely straightforward, usually a slow process, and frequently a unique challenge that requires patience and sensitivity. Y'know, things where it would be useful to discuss it.

And when those discussions bear no fruit over time, then what?

 

[pemerton]

The playing of RPGs is, generally, a voluntary leisure activity. I don't think there are any general rules about who is obliged to spend their leisure time with whom. Generally, no one owns anyone else's time. But there are good reasons not to be rude or nasty.

I once led a "revolt" against a GM, in that I agreed with the other players that we would start a new game with me GMing. (We offered the former GM a slot as a player. He declined.) Another time, I left a game because it was no longer worth my time. I believe it didn't last long after that. I don't feel any guilt about either of these events.

When I GM a RPG, I expect the players to do more than just "turn up". I expect them to actively participate in the game. I don't think that's especially unreasonable.

 

[AnotherGuy]

Because calling people who are humans and don't perfectly memorize all the rules for a game they might be playing only once a month instead of living it religiously 'lazy' isn't rushing to judgement.

The argument is sometimes being presented in extremes (which is common for internet exchanges) which ofc is not helpful.

 

[EzekielRaiden]

And when those discussions bear no fruit over time, then what?

Given I already answered this question (twice now), why do you keep harping on it?

Why must we obsess over this?

Don't tolerate jerks. That's all that need be said in answer to that question. The conversation is a dead end. Nothing of value is added by discussing it further.

So why, in God's name, do you keep harping on it?

 

[ezo]

Because calling people who are humans and don't perfectly memorize all the rules for a game they might be playing only once a month instead of living it religiously 'lazy' isn't rushing to judgement.

Sure, welcome to the conversation, again...

No, it isn't rushing to judgement. These are people I've given months, several sessions, in some cases more than a year, to learn the BASIC systems of the game and the features of only their characters.

These are also people who I know outside of the game, and lazy (to one extent or another) describes most of them fairly well.

So, since you know NOTHING of the issue, maybe you should also stop "rushing to judge" without asking for particulars and gaining more information FIRST.

Finally, your over-exaggeration of "perfectly memorise all the rules" is quite disingenuous, especially once you know these are people who play weekly, not "only once a month".

 

[Thomas Shey]

I'll be really blunt here: even if people are being remarkably casual about learning the rules of the game, and thus offloading more work on everyone else than they should, that's extremely likely to be an indication of a style mismatch, not a moral failing.

 

[DEFCON 1]

...when it comes to proactive roleplaying, couldn't hit the ocean if they were standing on a wharf.

Well, to be fair... wharfs do have a lot of wood right behind you, so probably 1/6th of the 360 degrees of space around you won't have you hitting the ocean.