Forked Thread: Why the World Exists [GM-less Gaming]

[jmucchiello]

As for the term antiquated, what would you call a game system that plays fundamentally the same way, some 35 years after its inception.

Chess, Go, Poker.
Baseball, Soccer, Tennis, Golf.
Simon Says, Follow the Leader, Musical Chairs, Pin the Tail on the Donkey.
Jump Rope, Hopscotch, Cat's Cradle.

Now, granted professional versions of some of these activities may have changed in 35 years. But if you get 20 people together in a park today to have a game of baseball, it will be played basically the same way it was played 35 years ago. Similarly, the "cant" sung while jumping rope may vary widely, but the basics of jumping in and out have not changed.

 

[jim pinto]

I don't know why you brought up PCat's group it is an example of the kind of game you want everyone to experience but which doesn't use your solution to accomplish it. So either, they are unique (and the existence of Sepulgrave's (et. al.) story hours prove they aren't) or you have focused on a symptom, not the problem.

I brought it up, because the person I was talking to continued to tell me that world-destroying PCs are okay by him. And I recalled, very quickly, how PCat's stories always evoked a game environment that I would kill puppies to be a part of.

In all honesty, I would love to write all day long about great gaming experiences and never-ever have to bring up bad ones, but it's just a habit of my writing style to open with an example of something negative (like an infomercial that makes fun of people who can't find their keys) before bringing up my actual point.

Dirty, dirty habit.

 

[jmucchiello]

Your example is exactly the principle of D&D play that I'm talking about. What if my character doesn't care all that much about farmers, or worse, thinks that sort of task his beneath him… let other adventurers deal with it. D&D has the built in assumption that I want to stop the orcs. I'm never allowed to make a character who is pro-orc. Under the present methodology of adventure design, I never will.

You've never played in a game where you didn't need to save the village? For all your talk about expanding our horizons, your problem is you've never really been in a sandbox.

ENWorld is full of DMs who will run with the idea that you turn down the farmer's plea for help. Some of them even joyfully so. The DMs who wrote some notes about orcs troubling the village farmers have several world burning villains sitting waiting to finally burn the world and your party's refusal to stop them when their were small is just the kind of sandbox event that makes DMs cackle with glee. They will run home from that session to look over their campaign notes and figure out "what happens if no one stops Morak the Marrauder?" Have you seen the Rat Bastard DM threads?

But apparently, this is not what you want to talk about. You want to talk about adding "modern" role-playing paradigms to D&D. So explain, if you have a player who doesn't want to invest in making up the world, how does your system of GM-less play accommodate them?

 

[jim pinto]

You've never played in a game where you didn't need to save the village? For all your talk about expanding our horizons, your problem is you've never really been in a sandbox.

ENWorld is full of DMs who will run with the idea that you turn down the farmer's plea for help. Some of them even joyfully so. The DMs who wrote some notes about orcs troubling the village farmers have several world burning villains sitting waiting to finally burn the world and your party's refusal to stop them when their were small is just the kind of sandbox event that makes DMs cackle with glee. They will run home from that session to look over their campaign notes and figure out "what happens if no one stops Morak the Marrauder?" Have you seen the Rat Bastard DM threads?

But apparently, this is not what you want to talk about. You want to talk about adding "modern" role-playing paradigms to D&D. So explain, if you have a player who doesn't want to invest in making up the world, how does your system of GM-less play accommodate them?

This is a good post. An excellent point. I actually GM 95% of the time. And no. No one has ever run a sandbox game for me. Close. But no. I run them all the time. Been running them before the term was coined, because it's how my brain builds worlds and situations.

And no. Never seen the Rat Bastard DM threads. I really only post on enworld when I get a bug up my ass about something. I really should visit more often.

Now, to address your question… how adamant is this player? I've seen people leave games simply because they REFUSED to even try vampire for a few weeks. "Call me when D&D starts up again."

I can't address people that are outright opposed, but the obvious investment of helping to make the world and build is there as soon as it start happening. I can't imagine someone sitting there, arms crossed, watching 3-6 other players having a great time with it.

They'd eventually get involved.

That said, if they didn't, the players could come up with a reward system (hero points or something) for every NODE of information that someone creates for the world. And everyone has to get 10 and only 10 NODES of information into the game.

Just spitballing.

 

[jmucchiello]

I brought it up, because the person I was talking to continued to tell me that world-destroying PCs are okay by him. And I recalled, very quickly, how PCat's stories always evoked a game environment that I would kill puppies to be a part of.

And that is part of the disconnect you are encountering in this thread. What you call pissing on the DM only has meaning if the DM has a story to tell. If the DM just has a sandbox for you to play in, sand can absorb a lot of piss. Okay, that analogy is getting into non-grandma territory. But amazingly, the analogy is very accurate. Players have to engage in highly self-destructive behavior in order to destroy a sandbox game. Setting off a fireball in a tavern when you can't escape the town is willfully self-destructive IMO.

As for your second point, your cause would be better served by abandoning this thread and starting over with a less "I'm going to fix X with Y" and more "Hey, would you play D&D in Y style? I do and here's how" introduction. Because right now it seems like this thread is about X.

 

[jim pinto]

You've never played in a game where you didn't need to save the village? For all your talk about expanding our horizons, your problem is you've never really been in a sandbox.

ASIDE: Bear in mind that sandbox games are the least immune to the problematic player who wants to cast fireball in a crowded tavern.

 

[jim pinto]

Chess, Go, Poker.
Baseball, Soccer, Tennis, Golf.
Simon Says, Follow the Leader, Musical Chairs, Pin the Tail on the Donkey.
Jump Rope, Hopscotch, Cat's Cradle.

Now, granted professional versions of some of these activities may have changed in 35 years. But if you get 20 people together in a park today to have a game of baseball, it will be played basically the same way it was played 35 years ago. Similarly, the "cant" sung while jumping rope may vary widely, but the basics of jumping in and out have not changed.

With the exception of go, the rules to all the games and sports you mentioned has evolved to some degree. Baseball now has about 500 rules, something the original I'm sure didn't. Gold has well over 1,000.

All of the kid's games remain unchanged. And yes. I would call Pin the Tail on the Donkey, antiquated. And that doesn't mean it's bad. It's just old.

 

[jmucchiello]

And no. Never seen the Rat Bastard DM threads. I really only post on enworld when I get a bug up my ass about something. I really should visit more often.

I wish my Community Supporter hadn't lapsed as I'm a bit strapped to re-up it. But hopefully some of those RBDM fans with search capability will come along and post some links.

 

[jim pinto]

As for your second point, your cause would be better served by abandoning this thread and starting over with a less "I'm going to fix X with Y" and more "Hey, would you play D&D in Y style? I do and here's how" introduction. Because right now it seems like this thread is about X.

I am editing posts 1 and 2 as we speak.

 

[aurance]

ASIDE: Bear in mind that sandbox games are the least immune to the problematic player who wants to cast fireball in a crowded tavern.

1) How does your GM-less system deal with this any better than a GMed sandbox game?

2) If you are advocating a truly freeform storytelling, such as your above-mentioned pro-orc or anti-farmer game, how is the "fireball in a crowded tavern" playing any qualitatively worse or better than your examples? And by what measure?