DragonLancer
Hero
I find most people on these boards are playing a different game to me, but thats the curse and blessing of D20.
"I don't think we are playing the same game"
- Thread starter alsih2o
- Start date
Kashell
First Post
I tend to skip over plane-hopping, epic levels, and monocultural nonhumans as well. It's just not as fun IMO when you can slay Tiamat and be lord of the universe, so to speak.
I don't play house rules simply because 3.5 has so much to offer in terms of splat books. Even running a really awkward campaign(like the one I'm running right now) is stuff all derived from 3.5.
I've never really met players OR DMs who actually enjoy splitting up though...Splitting up = Evil
Ranes
Adventurer
There are times when I think that the person I'm talking to, about a game we both play, is actually doing something completely different. I like to find people who can balance their enthusiasm for gaming with not taking it too seriously. I quickly tire of conversations about people's pet characters, character types, systems, peeves and campaign settings (unless the latter are home-brewed and carefully thought out). On the other forelimb, I thoroughly enjoy well-told gaming anecdotes. People who have them and can tell them in an entertaining way are people I want to game with.
That brings me to my influences. I love story telling and I like games to be the stories of the characters played. I have no desire to impose a super-sized, grandiose story-arc on a campaign though. I like to see those things emerge from the actions of players, occasionally nudged along here and there by me in the direction that seems the most promising. The other influence is wargaming. I like to play out the tactical situations that arise from combat and exploration. However, as it often gets said on these boards that wargamers have a DM vs Player mentality, I'd like to stress that I do not. I DM, as in referee; I am neutral.
I love fiction but not fantasy fiction. I picked up some good pointers from the reading list at the back of the first DMG but otherwise I avoid it. I suspect that puts me in a minority.
That brings me to my influences. I love story telling and I like games to be the stories of the characters played. I have no desire to impose a super-sized, grandiose story-arc on a campaign though. I like to see those things emerge from the actions of players, occasionally nudged along here and there by me in the direction that seems the most promising. The other influence is wargaming. I like to play out the tactical situations that arise from combat and exploration. However, as it often gets said on these boards that wargamers have a DM vs Player mentality, I'd like to stress that I do not. I DM, as in referee; I am neutral.
I love fiction but not fantasy fiction. I picked up some good pointers from the reading list at the back of the first DMG but otherwise I avoid it. I suspect that puts me in a minority.
Last edited:
Yep. What alienates me from the D&D players I talk to though is not how they play versus how I play, it's the fact that they spend all this time playing and don't ask themselves these questions at all.
I find that one of the problems this gives rise to is that people have this idea that metagaming is the experience I call gaming... you know: being conscious of all the levels that the play, the adventure, etc. is operating on. I can do a war gaming-focused play, acting-focused play, etc. and enjoy each of the experiences. What I cannot do is engage in those types of play with people who don't understand that this is what is happening -- or people who have only a dim, confused and self-contradictory understanding of this.
Common falacies of such people:
* the idea that knowing, as a player, comprehending things about what is taking place, separate from one's character is somehow metagaming; like someone reading a mystery novel and believing it was cheating to think about who the killer is
* the idea that D&D combat or experience, is designed with the exclusive purpose of trying to model real-world physics and taking a partisan position as to whether this is being done well or badly
* the idea that one particular style of play is the "intended" or "correct" way of playing D&D, as though there is a hierarchical system of preferable ways to enjoy the game
* a particularly annoying subset of the above -- people should be rewarded for "role playing" well but not for playing tactically well because "role playing" is a somehow an intellectually superior type of play
I find that one of the problems this gives rise to is that people have this idea that metagaming is the experience I call gaming... you know: being conscious of all the levels that the play, the adventure, etc. is operating on. I can do a war gaming-focused play, acting-focused play, etc. and enjoy each of the experiences. What I cannot do is engage in those types of play with people who don't understand that this is what is happening -- or people who have only a dim, confused and self-contradictory understanding of this.
Common falacies of such people:
* the idea that knowing, as a player, comprehending things about what is taking place, separate from one's character is somehow metagaming; like someone reading a mystery novel and believing it was cheating to think about who the killer is
* the idea that D&D combat or experience, is designed with the exclusive purpose of trying to model real-world physics and taking a partisan position as to whether this is being done well or badly
* the idea that one particular style of play is the "intended" or "correct" way of playing D&D, as though there is a hierarchical system of preferable ways to enjoy the game
* a particularly annoying subset of the above -- people should be rewarded for "role playing" well but not for playing tactically well because "role playing" is a somehow an intellectually superior type of play
Silver Moon
Adventurer
I've seen a variant of that with my players. A while back I wasn't sure what to run next so I gave them a listing of around ten module descriptions and asked them to rank their preferances on a 1 to 5 scale. The list covered a wide range of different types of stories. I found that around half the group 1's were the other half's 5's and vice versa, and we've been playing together for over 20 years! So it shows that even at the same table people are looking for very different things, so giving a mix tends to please everyone.
Similar Threads
