Guilty Admissions...

[Wik]

This thread is for us gamers to clean out our closets, and to come clean about some of our gaming misdeeds. It's a time to come to grips with some of the more unsavoury elements of our collective character.

I'll start.

My name's Wik, and I...

* Don't really get why people love kobolds so friggin' much. I hate the buggers.
* Don't like Greyhawk one bit.
* Think H.P. Lovecraft in D&D is overrated.
* Will make fun of you if you start talking at length about your D&D campaign when in "mixed company" (a group of gamers and non-gamers).

Phew. Weight off my shoulders.

Your turn!

 

[Chris Knapp]

Hi, My name is Chris and I. . .

* have been playing the same 4E fighter for almost 2 years and still forget to mark, forget half my powers, yet will internally roll my eyes when other players forget their powers.

* always (ALWAYS!?) play human characters because elves & dwarves & gnomes, etc. are just silly.

* wish GURPS was more popular.

* hate Raistlin, yet think Drizzt is friggin' awesome!

The shame. . .

 

[The Shaman]

My name is The Shaman, and I started playing D&D to meet hot girls.


I was misinformed.

 

[Jon_Dahl]

* always (ALWAYS!?) play human characters because elves & dwarves & gnomes, etc. are just silly.

Yessss yessss, this is it! I agree 100%!

My name is Jon Dahl and...

* hate cuty nerdy humor, a lá Discworld. "Let's tell lot of cute funny jokes, yeah this is! Everybody loves constant joking and putting things backwards! There's a funny wizard and Death is a funny robed man and there's funny bunnies and lot of funny jokes!" AAAAAAAARGH! I HATE THIS RETARDED HUMOR! I thank all my lucky stars that I've been able to play with guys that have more matured and dark sense of humor and real life experience, and are generally more serious about the things they say.

* I don't like Lord of the Rings. I saw the movies and read the trilogy. Good Lord that was boring as hell! The bad poetry, the fake artistic style, most of the characters have no depth, the black 'n white world etc. is just too much for me.

* I love killing PC's.

I think that's enough for now.

 

[innerdude]

My name is Innerdude and I ....

1. have never played 1e, what a lot of people consider "the seminal version of D&D."

2. really don't get the general lovefest many gamers have with the Forgotten Realms.

3. think the whole concept of the character of Elminster is stupid.

4. subconsiously believe that players who actively WANT to play fighters are either A. power gamers who want to dual-wield monkey-grip bastard swords and "Pwn n00bs!" or B. they're too lazy to bother with mechanically more interesting classes.

5. complain about combat-heavy gaming sessions, even though I generally enjoy the tactical side of it.

6. still think the original 6 Dragonlance novels are compelling fiction (not well written fiction, mind you, just compelling).

7. create lengthy backstories for every PC I create, even though I think it's only come into play in exactly 1 campaign I've ever played, ever.

8. have never understood the need for every single version of D&D to have like, 5 different monster manuals apiece.

9. have a "vanity character" NPC that magically makes an appearance in every campaign.

10. think beholders and illithids are overrated as "iconic" D&D tropes.

 

[Ryltar]

My name is Ryltar, and I ...

1. started gaming only once 3E was out. Although I made the trip back to 2E for Planescape (and it was well worth it!), in every other case I simply don't understand this thing people have about earlier editions being "better" that 3E/3.5E. If anything, the prose is even more cheesy than more modern RPG books. And the rest is your imagination anyways, so why bother evangelizing about the good old days?

2. hate players who over-optimize in my campaigns, and yet I find myself subconsciously doing the same when designing a player character. Shame on me.

3. think that many best-selling book series are vastly overrated. Shannara, Wheel of Time, I'm looking at you.

4. tend to overprepare my campaigns with vast amounts of material that never sees any use (but still, just in case a player wants to know where the material the temple's window drapings are made of comes from!). This especially holds true for behind-the-scenes NPC interactions that totally create believable behaviour, but in most cases is not relevant to the story at all.

5. Also:

7. create lengthy backstories for every PC I create, even though I think it's only come into play in exactly 1 campaign I've ever played, ever.

This.

Well, I've learned to live with myself .

 

[Aus_Snow]

Admin here. No, no, no, no, no. This is not the thread for discussion! This is the thread for funny, guilty admissions! Snap to it, mister. Folks, thanks for not sending us on a sidetrack. Don't be surprised if OT posts summarily disappear. - Pcat

I simply don't understand this thing people have about earlier editions being "better" that 3E/3.5E. If anything, the prose is even more cheesy than more modern RPG books. And the rest is your imagination anyways, so why bother evangelizing about the good old days?

Well, you left out the rules, apart from anything else. They are different. They play differently. They are built upon different assumptions, and with different goals in mind.

Also, there are some people who prefer the writing style in, for example, the AD&D 1e corebooks to, for example, that found in 4e corebooks. Well, the first round of them, or whatever.

But sure, if you simply prefer modern takes on D&D, or "D&D" in some cases, I suspect you're in the majority here, if anything. So... wherefrom the guilt factor?

 

[Ryltar]

Well, I didn't intend to start an edition war there . Therefore, just a quick clarification:

I was, of course, talking about generalizations, especially with regard to setting fluff. I've met several gamers who, as one, declared that "the old setting fluff from (insert boxed set of your choice here) was way better that anything published in modern times", followed by some kind of justification: it's not that over the top, it's simpler, there aren't any novels that force setting canon on me (Hi, FR!), etc. Often, this line of thought is then transported over to newly released supplements that appeal to the old-school crowd - because it says it's old school, OF COURSE it has better stories than modern releases.

Which, to me, is both silly and kind of missing the point that each setting is only as good as you - as the DM - make it. Ignore what you don't like, pick what you like. No-one ever said you have to play anime RPGs just because you use a modern ruleset. Also, you don't have to play pure hack and slash just because you play OD&D. And so on ...

But since I don't really have any kind of in-depth knowledge about said RPG supplements (some of which I at least browsed), it is something that may as well be me being prejudiced. Thus, slightly guilty.

 

[Aus_Snow]

Well, I didn't intend to start an edition war there .

Not at all what I got from it. As in, I didn't think you were (intending to). Also, I didn't think you'd somehow managed it unintentionally. Just taking issue with a point that didn't seem right, or even very well founded.

But I see now what you were meaning to say, or meaning by what you said. Either way. Thanks for clarifying. Not that it was a big deal anyway, natch.

I now return you (the general "you") to your previously scheduled confession time.

 

[Dausuul]

My name's Dausuul, and I...

• Don't like kobolds either. I fail to see what purpose they serve that goblins do not fulfill just as well.
• Just told an innocent fighter/rogue player how to abuse high-level wizards in 3E.
• Have not memorized all the DMing advice in the 4E DMG2. In fact, there is much of it I have not even read.
• Despise wish lists, both at and away from the gaming table.
• Script out the plot for many sessions in advance and lead my players by the nose.
• Recently fell in love with beholders because of their ability to hideously abuse player characters.
• Intend to make my next campaign less accommodating of player desires rather than more so. Few or no nonhuman races, only a tiny handful of magic items, and I might start limiting what books they can use too. And if they don't like it, rather than finding a way to work in the elements they want, I will tell them to deal with it or run their own game.
• Am not actually named Dausuul.