Pineapple Express: Someone Is Wrong on the Internet?

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Finding enough people interested im roleplaying at all and with enough overlapping free time can be very very hard.

Yes, but that doesn't justify ruining that experience for everyone (including one's own self). If you'd rather be playing Settlers of Catan, being mad that D&D isn't Catan-like enough for your tastes isn't going to get you the experience you want and it's just going to ruin things for everyone else.

And it'll likely mean you have even fewer chances to play with these people in future.

Think of it like chipping in on a pizza. Maybe you really want anchovies on yours and no one else does. But everyone comes up with a choice that everyone can accept, even if it's not their personal favorite. Once the pizza arrives, telling everyone it sucks because it doesn't have anchovies on it doesn't make the pizza more enjoyable to anyone.

If someone really doesn't like the game the group has settled on, if they're not able to suck it up and just enjoy hanging out with their friends, they should not play that game. But going along with that game and being fun to have around will typically mean that, next time there's a vote on what to play, their voice will be listened to and their opinion valued, and maybe that next game will be more to their liking.

 

[prabe]

Yeah, some people in the "no gaming is better than bad gaming" can't understand people who want to game enough they'll deal with a lot of problems to try and get a game in, and sometimes that's what's required.

It's also possible to have real preferences and still be open to other things. I'm playing in at least one TRPG game I wouldn't normally, but they were a player short and I was at least curious--helps that the "they" here are friendly acquaintances, none of us are total strangers.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Yeah, some people in the "no gaming is better than bad gaming" can't understand people who want to game enough they'll deal with a lot of problems to try and get a game in, and sometimes that's what's required.

Dealing with a game you don't like is fine and normal and adult behavior.

But these boards are full of posters over the years who seem determined to poison the well any time the game isn't precisely what they want. That's an unreasonable response to what is ultimately a minor problem, especially in this day and age, when there are so many more ways to find a game that they do like.

 

[Thomas Shey]

It's also possible to have real preferences and still be open to other things. I'm playing in at least one TRPG game I wouldn't normally, but they were a player short and I was at least curious--helps that the "they" here are friendly acquaintances, none of us are total strangers.

Certainly. I'm just noting you can easily have one or more examples in a group of people who are working at cross-purposes because, in practice, its "the only game in town" and they want a particular mix of experience that's going to be hard to find no matter what they do, so they keep trying to see if they can iterate the game closer to what they want. If there's multiples of this, it may be a very frustrating experience, but they'll still probably keep trying, at least for a while.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Dealing with a game you don't like is fine and normal and adult behavior.

But these boards are full of posters over the years who seem determined to poison the well any time the game isn't precisely what they want. That's an unreasonable response to what is ultimately a minor problem, especially in this day and age, when there are so many more ways to find a game that they do like.

I think the problem is the latter is not actually true for a lot of people for various reasons. I've seen a number of people who flat out won't play online (as in, playing face to face trumps any other concern) and at that point they're going to keep chasing whatever face to face game they can get. This can be even be true of people who aren't hostile to VTT play, if their interests are fairly specific and relatively uncommon (if you want an old-school heavily simulation focused fantasy campaign, the number of campaigns you can find that are A) Not already full, B) Using a VTT you have access to, and C) In time zones and days you can participate in could end up approaching nil). After all, the people raving about this sort of thing usually aren't people who have a bunch of common and easily found desires.

And unfortunately, if you have more than one person like that in a group, if they're not prone to giving up, its going to turn into a tug of war to get the game as close to what they want with other people doing the same, but in different directions.

 

[The Soloist]

My wife is officially retired now, which makes two of us. Great times ahead with our games and the pooch, who doesn't understand yet that 'mama' is going to be home all the time now.

 

[overgeeked]

If someone really doesn't like the game the group has settled on, if they're not able to suck it up and just enjoy hanging out with their friends, they should not play that game. But going along with that game and being fun to have around will typically mean that, next time there's a vote on what to play, their voice will be listened to and their opinion valued, and maybe that next game will be more to their liking.

Dealing with a game you don't like is fine and normal and adult behavior.

But these boards are full of posters over the years who seem determined to poison the well any time the game isn't precisely what they want. That's an unreasonable response to what is ultimately a minor problem, especially in this day and age, when there are so many more ways to find a game that they do like.

Exactly. It's not the grin-and-bear-it people that are the problem. If any gaming is better than no gaming for someone, then they'll not endlessly complain about how the game sucks at the table or in text, etc. If, however, they're the type to endlessly complain about how the game sucks while they're at the table...then they are the problem.

I'm talking about those people.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

I think the problem is the latter is not actually true for a lot of people for various reasons. I've seen a number of people who flat out won't play online (as in, playing face to face trumps any other concern) and at that point they're going to keep chasing whatever face to face game they can get.

None of which justifies spending all their time trying to ruin the game they're actually playing.

That behavior doesn't fly when those involved are toddlers. It certainly doesn't fly when the people involved are old enough to have grandchildren.

And unfortunately, if you have more than one person like that in a group, if they're not prone to giving up, its going to turn into a tug of war to get the game as close to what they want with other people doing the same, but in different directions.

If you have more than one person like that in a group, you've got more than one tough conversation telling people to knock it off or not come back.

 

[overgeeked]

There's a whole lot of which comes first: the group or the game.

For some people the group comes first. It doesn't matter what they play as long as it's the people they want to play with.

For some people the game comes first. It doesn't matter who they play with as long as it's the game they want to play.

 

[The Soloist]

Starter Set: seems like he tried to play badminton with a tennis racket. 'Why is the net so high?'