Nekogamitai
First Post
Hello everyone,
I never thought that I will find something like that in Internet, especially that I'm the player who the OP is talking.
At the beginning, I didn't care a lot, especially after seeing that not everything what was happend have been written, but after so great discussion which occured here, I decided that you may want to see how it looks from other point of view.
Well at the beginning, I was pretty shocked that OP is talking more about Ayn Rand that I ever was... especially that I was mostly made fun of her 'didactical style' of lecture <my quotes like "But Ayn Rand says..!>. I'm an objectivism, indeed but not everything is correct about that idea... in fact it doesn't matter to this point, the talk wasn't about Ayn Rand after all but about the game mechanics itself and He tooks some things little... too serious.
Indeed, I called him a hedonist. I'm afraid a very busy person and have very little time for playing rpgs which I love. When I realised that fact, I decided to talk with him, because I wanted to explain my statetsman and problem. I decided that the best idea here, would be some kind of system which can give a possibility to try again. When He disagreed, I respected that and says that's fine, but I will not participate, because with my short of time, I don't want to spend it and after some time, ends suddenly without nothing. I just want to play for fun, relax. My job is enough stressful.
And here, the problem should ends. If two persons can't get over with themselves, or made a bussiness as you said - they just do not to this. The end, end of story.
But in fact, the rant just started here....
I will not quote anything here, but for me, one thing is true. If someone is trying to push on me his ideas which I do not accept for somes reasons <time for example> and can't understand that someone does not like that style of game and just don't want to participate in that kind of game... I don't know, something is wrong here... Isn't my right to just not participate in something which I do not want..? Why to bother about that? "You don't want to play, ok, cool." and that's it. This how the entire talk should ends. Of course, the game master can be curious what is wrong and talk about that, try to repair that but seeing that someone just do not want to play a game with that certainly style... He should just let it away and the entire rant should never happend. At the end of talk, I made a statesman that I can see an analogy between "Atlas Shrugged" and that situation <remember the authoritarian style of government, especially in the end?> and I think that this fragment have been taken little too serious by him...
and btw: What I've written here, sounds peaceful but it wasn't. We were ranting together each other, me and he, and it was hmm, like a flame war, especially that both of us are very hot tempered.
What is the funny fact: The story had happy end, we're still playing together after that. He also discovered that in Pathfinder, there is some sort of hero points system which can save the character in for example, bad rolls case what solved every problems which occured before. I got knocked out fifth times to this moment <sometimes it was my mistake like doing something stupid or have a bad roll, sometimes his like giving too powerfull monster to beat.> but still, we have fun playing togethers, even with our so different alignments and hot tempered nature.
He is a really great game master who is making great storyline. Maybe He is little too authoritary with I have a problem sometimes <I hate that honestly.>, but still, in this case we have found the peaceful resolution and game goes pretty well and we have fun what I think is the most important.
I never thought that I will find something like that in Internet, especially that I'm the player who the OP is talking.
At the beginning, I didn't care a lot, especially after seeing that not everything what was happend have been written, but after so great discussion which occured here, I decided that you may want to see how it looks from other point of view.
Well at the beginning, I was pretty shocked that OP is talking more about Ayn Rand that I ever was... especially that I was mostly made fun of her 'didactical style' of lecture <my quotes like "But Ayn Rand says..!>. I'm an objectivism, indeed but not everything is correct about that idea... in fact it doesn't matter to this point, the talk wasn't about Ayn Rand after all but about the game mechanics itself and He tooks some things little... too serious.
Indeed, I called him a hedonist. I'm afraid a very busy person and have very little time for playing rpgs which I love. When I realised that fact, I decided to talk with him, because I wanted to explain my statetsman and problem. I decided that the best idea here, would be some kind of system which can give a possibility to try again. When He disagreed, I respected that and says that's fine, but I will not participate, because with my short of time, I don't want to spend it and after some time, ends suddenly without nothing. I just want to play for fun, relax. My job is enough stressful.
And here, the problem should ends. If two persons can't get over with themselves, or made a bussiness as you said - they just do not to this. The end, end of story.
But in fact, the rant just started here....
I will not quote anything here, but for me, one thing is true. If someone is trying to push on me his ideas which I do not accept for somes reasons <time for example> and can't understand that someone does not like that style of game and just don't want to participate in that kind of game... I don't know, something is wrong here... Isn't my right to just not participate in something which I do not want..? Why to bother about that? "You don't want to play, ok, cool." and that's it. This how the entire talk should ends. Of course, the game master can be curious what is wrong and talk about that, try to repair that but seeing that someone just do not want to play a game with that certainly style... He should just let it away and the entire rant should never happend. At the end of talk, I made a statesman that I can see an analogy between "Atlas Shrugged" and that situation <remember the authoritarian style of government, especially in the end?> and I think that this fragment have been taken little too serious by him...
and btw: What I've written here, sounds peaceful but it wasn't. We were ranting together each other, me and he, and it was hmm, like a flame war, especially that both of us are very hot tempered.
What is the funny fact: The story had happy end, we're still playing together after that. He also discovered that in Pathfinder, there is some sort of hero points system which can save the character in for example, bad rolls case what solved every problems which occured before. I got knocked out fifth times to this moment <sometimes it was my mistake like doing something stupid or have a bad roll, sometimes his like giving too powerfull monster to beat.> but still, we have fun playing togethers, even with our so different alignments and hot tempered nature.
He is a really great game master who is making great storyline. Maybe He is little too authoritary with I have a problem sometimes <I hate that honestly.>, but still, in this case we have found the peaceful resolution and game goes pretty well and we have fun what I think is the most important.
Last edited:
