Of Mooks, Plot Armor, and ttRPGs

[Umbran]

I acknowledge that these games exist, and that many people have a lot of fun with them. And I'm happy for those people and wish them good gaming. Personally, however, I have very little interest in these sorts of games, and do not enjoy that style of gameplay.

That's fine. Like what you like. Play what you like, how you like it.

But your personal interest isn't material to the point I'm making.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That's fine. Like what you like. Play what you like, how you like it.

But your personal interest isn't material to the point I'm making.

What is your point then? That other games do things differently and that's still valid? Ok, agreed. Those games don't work for me, and I have a bit more investment in things I like than things I don't.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Problem is, if I engaged with them the way I'd really like to I'd get buried in a sea of red mod ink. So I'm showing some restraint for once...

Look, nobody here is AGAINST any style of play, but it is a bit tiresome to first here endless repetitions of how the way I play can't work, doesn't 'respect' something or other, is broken, unrealistic, etc. I know you will say you personally don't have all those points of view, but I am sure I could go back through this thread and find 100 posts that basically say to me "you are doing it wrong." It isn't even that this thread, in isolation, is so big a deal, but its a constant drumbeat in every topic any of us engages in. Yes, sometimes nice things get said too, so its not like the world is all against anyone, we often see eye-to-eye, do we not? Our approaches to RPGs simply do different things. And lets not kid ourselves, the way I play started out as the way you all play now (give or take), so I'd say my play is BASED ON what you all are doing. Plus you all may do things we didn't really do either.

Frankly, the only point in engaging with people here to learn something and maybe to be entertained. I'm not trying to 'win' any contest.

 

[Umbran]

That other games do things differently and that's still valid?

Incompletely, but simply, stated: The point of that post was that broad assertions of how RPGs "should be played" ought not be based on a narrow slice of RPGs.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Incompletely, but simply, stated: The point of that post was that broad assertions of how RPGs "should be played" ought not be based on a narrow slice of RPGs.

Agreed, but a complete lack of best practices does make it rather difficult to discuss RPGs in general, no?

 

[The Shadow]

Look, nobody here is AGAINST any style of play, but it is a bit tiresome to first here endless repetitions of how the way I play can't work, doesn't 'respect' something or other, is broken, unrealistic, etc. I know you will say you personally don't have all those points of view, but I am sure I could go back through this thread and find 100 posts that basically say to me "you are doing it wrong." It isn't even that this thread, in isolation, is so big a deal, but its a constant drumbeat in every topic any of us engages in. Yes, sometimes nice things get said too, so its not like the world is all against anyone, we often see eye-to-eye, do we not? Our approaches to RPGs simply do different things. And lets not kid ourselves, the way I play started out as the way you all play now (give or take), so I'd say my play is BASED ON what you all are doing. Plus you all may do things we didn't really do either.

Frankly, the only point in engaging with people here to learn something and maybe to be entertained. I'm not trying to 'win' any contest.

Yep. To be constantly told that my game must assuredly be a railroad when it is nothing of the sort, by people who won't even listen, gets really frustrating.

Everyone beyond a certain age knows what old-school D&D is like - it was the only option there was! I can see where people who love that style are coming from. Why is there so little attempt from the other side to understand anything different? I don't insist they like it, as you say this isn't a contest.

Agreed, but a complete lack of best practices does make it rather difficult to discuss RPGs in general, no?

Best practices for what, according to who? The entire problem is there are disagreements on what constitute best practices.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Yep. To be constantly told that my game must assuredly be a railroad when it is nothing of the sort, by people who won't even listen, gets really frustrating.

Everyone beyond a certain age knows what old-school D&D is like - it was the only option there was! I can see where people who love that style are coming from. Why is there so little attempt from the other side to understand anything different? I don't insist they like it, as you say this isn't a contest.

Best practices for what, according to who? The entire problem is there are disagreements on what constitute best practices.

Disagreements that are never going to resolved.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Agreed, but a complete lack of best practices does make it rather difficult to discuss RPGs in general, no?

I'm not actually sure trying to talk about RPGs in truly general terms is all that useful. Until you know what effect you're trying for, most discussion is going to be overly broad at best or actively counterproductive at worst.

I use the tools analogy a lot for a reason. About the only thing you can say about a wrench and a hammer in the same sentence is its desirable both are durable and both work well for their intended purposes. Other than that they have nothing much in common and acting like they do does no discussion any good, and most of the time even talking about them in the same discussion is not useful.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Yep. To be constantly told that my game must assuredly be a railroad when it is nothing of the sort, by people who won't even listen, gets really frustrating.

Everyone beyond a certain age knows what old-school D&D is like - it was the only option there was! I can see where people who love that style are coming from. Why is there so little attempt from the other side to understand anything different? I don't insist they like it, as you say this isn't a contest.

I'd suspect its because some of what you want is actively detrimental to what they want, and its hard for them to get around that and see its serving your purposes and those of similar interests quite well. As such its hard for them to frame it in non-negative ways.

Best practices for what, according to who? The entire problem is there are disagreements on what constitute best practices.

As I reference above, I think its worse than that; I don't think its possible to discuss "best practices" in any broad sense until you look at what a game is trying to do and for who.. Even things I think are, fundamentally, terrible practices serve some people quite well. The best you can do is make (at best flawed) estimates of how many people a given approach serves well and poorly.

 

[The Shadow]

I'm not actually sure trying to talk about RPGs in truly general terms is all that useful. Until you know what effect you're trying for, most discussion is going to be overly broad at best or actively counterproductive at worst.

You may well be right. Maybe we do need to draw lines between different types of gaming - even though there will inevitably be types that straddle the lines. (Types of gaming rather than types of game, because people can and do adapt games to their use that might not be ideal.)

Trying to come up with neutral non-snarky terms... "Sim gaming" or even "traditional gaming" as opposed to "story gaming"?

I use the tools analogy a lot for a reason. About the only thing you can say about a wrench and a hammer in the same sentence is its desirable both are durable and both work well for their intended purposes. Other than that they have nothing much in common and acting like they do does no discussion any good, and most of the time even talking about them in the same discussion is not useful.

I like this analogy. Though as I mention above, there are definitely people who pound in nails with a wrench and seem to have fun!

I'd suspect its because some of what you want is actively detrimental to what they want, and its hard for them to get around that and see its serving your purposes and those of similar interests quite well. As such its hard for them to frame it in non-negative ways.

The reverse is true as well - a lot of what they want is detrimental to what I want. I can get around it fine... though in fairness, that's partly because I (like everyone else in the early days) played that way because it was what was there.