Frustrating Gamers- slight rant

[EricNoah]

Ahem ... folks, announcing that you're ignoring someone is, I think, extremely rude. I deleted out that particular response. Drop me an e-mail if you think that's a problem.

 

[Belen]

I think that fear can play a part in it. In the case of the Theurge, my initial attitude was negative. However, I waited to express that opinion until the initial fear/anger died down. I would bet that those most opposed to the class were the same crowd that hate casters in general.

I'll admit that on the surface casters are more powerful than melee at high levels. However, that just means a GM needs to plan more regarding how to neutralize the caster advantage, which is easy if you think about the number of hit points they have. The player in my group who plays a mage starts devoting his spells to protect himself if he feels threatened....so I threaten.

In any event, I have started seeing more negative threads and responses in the last few months than I used on EnWorld. I really wish I could remember which thread set me off this morning.... <chuckles>

 

[EricNoah]

I'd agree that there does seem to be a bit more of a "griping" mood about the boards lately, but it comes and goes in waves. I think we're just in pre-3.5 jitters. People are seeing parts of the elephant but not able to see the whole critter, and that make 'em nervous.

 

[WizarDru]

It bugs me that a hobby known for imagination and freedom of expression will find so many that refuse to compromise or accept new ideas.

Don't take this the wrong way, but known among who? Other gamers? I've never run into someone who identified 'gamers' as rampant free-thinkers. Heck, considering RPGs come out of wargames, one might think the opposite would be true, given the emphasis on rules.

In a game, 3E, meant to provide options for characters, a great many GMs feel the need to nix this and nerf that. In many cases, the "nixing" breaks rules that were never broken.

Well, I understand what you're saying, but it sounds like more like you've had some bad experiences with DMs who didn't think their changes through. I agree some people are, by my standard, overzealous in such changes. However, that's their style, not mine. I've also met DMs who've implemented changes that improved hte game (though not so much in 3E). I only have about three house rules, give or take, but they work for my group.

The idea that I'm going to playtest each and every class out there is a little silly, to me. I don't have that kind of free time. If you do, then you have my envy. But between a fulltime career, a family, and other obligations, I really can't find the time to analyze every class other than a comaprison to existing material and some eyeballing it. However, I have seen many classes in action, and can attest that some people combine the two attitudes you dislike, and make some erroneous assumptions. But that's their right, even if I disagree.

For example, you seem to think Paladin's can't compete with other classes, while my experience under 3E has gone directly counter to your statement. As I sat and watched the 19th-level Paladin swing his blade for 82 points in one round, without the benefit of his normal buffs and realizing that had it been an evil outsider or had he chosen to smite, it would have been even more, I didn't sit and think "Wow, poor guy doesn't realize how weak he is." The bard isn't winning any fights, it's true...but his social interaction skills make even the rogue jealous, and saying that a class built around team interaction is a lousy soloist seems to be a tad off the mark, to me.

Heck, in my campaign, I rarely used monsters and usually have humanoid races face the party. I just do not like monsters and too many of my players know the MM by heart. It's much more fun when they have no idea what they're facing. This does not mean that I am biased against the MM, nor am I out to whine about meta-gaming. It's just a fact of life that experienced players know these things and usually have trouble separating PC and player knowledge.

A PC could easily max out their prime stats in my campaign (beginning PCs get 90 points to start).

I'm assuming you mean a total of 90 points for stats, right? Not 90 point buy? Because then I WOULD think you were a troll.

As for your gaming style, that's swell. And as long as we both agree that everyone has a right to their own style, we're golden. As for the unintenional meta-gaming...well, I think Piratecat Story Hour shows some great illustrations of how to keep things fresh for players, in that regard.

In the end, we want to encourage new people to pick up the hobby. More ideas, more players and better attitudes will only help the hobby!

Agreed 100%.

 

[mistergone]

I can see where Belen is coming from. I also detect a lot of snobbery on these boards. And not just game related. But I think that's people in general. There is a seterotype that reads and posts on messageboards that's very ture in many ways. I'm not above it. I get pissed and respond negatively to threads. (My hate of D&D Modern know no limit!) But it's really all on my end, not other people's, 'cause I choose how I react. I won't go off into my theories how people sometimes react because of basic common human instincts.

For me, it's a balance. I come to ENWorld to get some things out of it that I like, and try really hard to avoid the stuff that I know will annoy me.

I have noticed that some people are really thin-skinned. In fact, I'd describe the tone of the boards overall as "tread lightly". There's a lot more of a "play nice" vibe here than say, RPGnet, which is one of the only other boards I read. Not that there's anything wrong with that. I also notice here, "troll" or not, that a lot of people are really combative, and seem to be constantly defying people to challenge their views. Maybe these are just the sickos that like to argue.

And that brings to mind another thing. A LOT of people are really quick to cry "troll", but then they go on to get pulled into the thread later. It's funny to me how some people seem so smug at first then get pulled down into a crazy stupid argument because they just can't hold themselves above it. I thought this thread would be like that, every time I see that Eric Noah has posted to a thread, I check to see if the thread has been locked. Usually, there's a couple posts right after the first with folks being kinda smug about how cool they are for detecting a thread that's gonna be shut down. Nothing really wrong with that, but it seems to me that it just harbors more bad karma.

Overall, I can't really be outraged or shocked at any of the "elitist" behaviour. A lot of people that are the online community types are very clique-ish while at the same time holding their own self-interests above all others. And sometimes they're not. Just like real life, but with less social concequence. Go into a comic book store and listen to some comic fans talk about their favorite comics. The "Comic Book Guy" character from the Simpson's wasn't just pulled out of thin air. No, not all comic book fans are like that. I read comics, and I don't particularly see myself as that stereotype. (plus, I have tattoos! big ones! they make me cool, damnit!) But a lot of the time, and I won't of course mention names, I can TOTALLY hear Comic Book Guy's voice when I read certain people's posts.

ENWorld: The comedy is free.

 

[Gez]

To you.

No, not only. Of course, D&D pretend to be generic, and to let you play anything -- hence d20 Modern. But D&D is still biased toward flashy high fantasy. The CR system, for example, use this assumption. The balance between the classes also.

For low magic, I have other games -- which don't really interest me anymore for the moment. But D&D is the game where you can play non-humans. Dwarf, elf, gnome, you name it; they are core races. PC parties are expected to include several non-humans, often even a majority of them. D&D is also the game where you have half-dragon, half-celestial and half-fiend templates. It is the game where you may have 8 200+-page monster books and still be missing famous creatures the setting background refers to. The sheer diversity of spells, magic items, and creatures, both playable or not, are what makes it a high-magic game.

By using D&D for a low-fantasy, low-magic play, you are cutting what makes D&D's richness. It's castrating the game. Yes, it's exactly that.

Do you want to play Dungeon & Dragon, or do you want to play Cellar & Capon ?

 

[Belen]

Gez, that would only be true if using the standard DnD setting. A homebrew world can be low-magic and still use the d20 system.

I think that what really burns me are the people who run low-magic simplely because they hate casters. This is fine for groups where everyone hates casters, but is horrible in a group that really enjoys a balance.

Of course, then they stick their nose in the air at all of us who think that the game is balanced as is.....

 

[EricNoah]

No, not only. Of course, D&D pretend to be generic, and to let you play anything -- hence d20 Modern. But D&D is still biased toward flashy high fantasy. The CR system, for example, use this assumption. The balance between the classes also.

For low magic, I have other games -- which don't really interest me anymore for the moment. But D&D is the game where you can play non-humans. Dwarf, elf, gnome, you name it; they are core races. PC parties are expected to include several non-humans, often even a majority of them. D&D is also the game where you have half-dragon, half-celestial and half-fiend templates. It is the game where you may have 8 200+-page monster books and still be missing famous creatures the setting background refers to. The sheer diversity of spells, magic items, and creatures, both playable or not, are what makes it a high-magic game.

By using D&D for a low-fantasy, low-magic play, you are cutting what makes D&D's richness. It's castrating the game. Yes, it's exactly that.

Do you want to play Dungeon & Dragon, or do you want to play Cellar & Capon ?

You can say what you want, but you'll never convince me that D&D can only be played one way. You use different RPGs to accomplish different things; I will use the same RPG to accomplish different things.

I have played D&D since the 1970s -- and I have always made it bend to my will, to the way I want to play. That, to me, is its charm.

Fortunately for you, my way of playing has no impact on your way of playing since we're not in the same campaign together as fellow players. I'll be merrily castrating the game and you won't feel a thing.

 

[Henry]

Do you want to play Dungeon & Dragon, or do you want to play Cellar & Capon ?

That just struck me as a great name for a Dungeons and Dragons knock-off OGL game for ages 10 and under...

You have a point, Gez, but I think you're seeing the whole and assuming it should ALL be used to get enjoyment out of the game. The Default, Core Rules game is one as moderate-to-high powered as you suggest. However, the customizability is what makes it so popular, and the fact that it can fit so many people's visions of what they want out of a game by using just minor alterations to the game.

Two things hold true, In my opinion:

1) Just because a rule is no good to your personal game, does not mean it doesn't have a place in the general game;

2) Just because a rule is good for the general game, does not mean it has a place in your personal game.

In a sense, to me it is like an ISO Manual, or a Resource Planning Package. (Anyone in manufacturing may freely groan at me now.) A powerful resource planning software suite has MILLIONS of options that would help a business cradle to grave; it could run General Motors, or it could run Ma and Pa Kettle's bait and tackle shop. Ma and Pa Kettle could get by with something much simpler; but most businesses fall somewhere in between. They need something complex, but not as complex as a megacorporation. They take the modules they need, they learn how to plug their business info into them, and they don't buy the rest. An ISO or APICS manual defines process standards for companies in general, but doesn't define process standards for YOUR company.

So is gaming in this way. D&D fits MANY gamers, but not all. It fits even fewer gamers perfectly. But that's what house rules are for.

 

[EricNoah]

Of course, then they stick their nose in the air at all of us who think that the game is balanced as is.....

Gah, ok, now I really have to see what you consider "nose in the air" behavior.