I don't know what just happend, but it seems that Ayn Rand corrupted my player!

[DoctorNick]

I find that the odds of this happening increase if you approach the initial meet n greet a bit more like a consumer and try to find folks who are likely to want to game with the same taste and preference pallette, more or less, as you.

I don't think this is a behavior exclusive to business transactions, though. I think this is just common sense. The problem with using it as an analogy is that it carries a lot of baggage with it. Baggage that I don't really think should be part of a (functional) social gathering.

There's nothing wrong with meeting new people to game with. I just don't think that making it out to be a cut and dry transaction is going to do anybody any favors.

What comes to mind for me is that interraction I have with a waiter or a bank teller. I would have a serious issue with my gaming group if dealing with the other players (including the DM) was like dealing with a waiter. I mean, you can like your waiter but the social interraction you have with him/her is going to be cordial and shallow and under the surface is the tension inherent in the fact that they serve me because it's in their best interest not because they like to hang out with me.

 

[Twichyboy]

Considering we're only hearing one side of the story, I'm not sure I'm willing to commit to a judgement on the OPs situation per se. His comment about Ayn Rand (while very amusing, I must say) clearly demonstrates that we're not hearing all the pertinent details. However, I'm curious about the level of contempt you seem to hold for people you've never met before. Care to comment on that?

To be honest, the lack of social skills many of you are hinting at is a little shocking. Do you guys really think of playing games as a business transaction?

I meant nothing in contempt, meant it more as sarcastic tone, I know other people have their own prefrences, however in my group a save reload system is regarded as a joke, and would be considered wussy, and until the OP posts the other players point of view or the player himself says anything, the only thing I can go by is the OPs post

But no I do not hate anyone, was only expressing my sarcastic opinion on a save reload system in dnd

 

[DoctorNick]

That's cool. I know that not everybody posting in this thread is being entirely serious. I was just noticing a thread through the conversation that sort of coalesced in my brain upon reading your post. Sorry for the misunderstanding!

 

[nedjer]

I'm guessing most of us are looking for a best fit round the table. So all DM or all player isn't really relevant. It's these players seeming refusal to look for a best fit that's the bluebottle in the gameplay ointment?

 

[SolitonMan]

All of this discussion has gotten me a bit excited to run my own Objectivist campaign. I'd invite you all to play, but as an independent individual, I'll be both DMing the game AND running the PCs.

I'd offer to share how it turns out, but I don't share.

 

[DoctorNick]

An objectivist D&D game wouldn't have priests or mus because gods and magic don't objectively exist. Also you're a dirt farmer. I'm sorry you don't have the ability to pull yourself up by the bootstraps maybe you should be more creative and independent minded like me. I wish I could help you, I really do, but it's not in my best interest so good luck with that.

I mean, there's a dungeon right over there. What's that, no armor? Well, you should have thought of that. No I can't buy you any.

 

[Harlekin]

Ask Kung Fu Monkey

I didn't read Atlas but I get the point a little bit about hedonism-bad, egoistic-good but this just confused me. Can someone translate what just happend because I still don't know what was their point.

I think the connection between Rand and Fantasy has been explained by Kung Fu Monkey http://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/2009/03/ephemera-2009-7.html

 

[nedjer]

Rand has nothing to do with it. This on the other hand

 

[JamesonCourage]

To be honest, the lack of social skills many of you are hinting at is a little shocking. Do you guys really think of playing games as a business transaction?

That's not how analogies work:

analogy
1.
a. Similarity in some respects between things that are otherwise dissimilar.
b. A comparison based on such similarity. See Synonyms at likeness.

You don't actually believe them to be literally true, it's just a comparison for convenience's sake (as amusing as that is, considering how things usually end up on the internet...). So, you either had a fundamental lacking of the basic concept of an analogy, or you were merely attacking people who disagreed with your viewpoint (ad hominem). Neither is particularly productive to a discussion.

For my part, I'm definitely going to hear input for a type of game, but I'm the one who's going to say, "and this is how we're going to play. If you don't like it, I'm sorry, but you don't have to play." (I hope this has neatly avoided all analogies and just addressed the discussion.) I've yet to have a player leave because of campaign disagreements, but maybe that's because I have tastes similar to that of my group. I suspect it has to do with the quality of the game, but that could just be me taking them at their word. As always, play what you like

 

[DoctorNick]

Don't get mad at me because a poor analogy is chosen. I don't go around comparing people to serail killers because they share the same anatomy (as an example).

So, you either had a fundamental lacking of the basic concept of an analogy, or you were merely attacking people who disagreed with your viewpoint (ad hominem).

First off, this is an internet discussion and not a formal debate. Secondly, this very sentence is a false choice coupled with an attempt at a passive-agressive jab. I completely understand what an analogy is. The way I see it: either you are attempting to discredit me because you don't like what I'm saying or you have trouble with remedial reading comprehension.