Semi-Rant: Maturity and dumbing down a game

[Captain Tagon]

Weapon shift
Transmutation
Bard 2, sor/wiz 1
?

I want that. Totally catch someone off guard. Swing a pen knife at them from like three feet away and they laugh. Then you laugh as your transmutated great sword cuts them in half.

 

[fafhrd]

I want that. Totally catch someone off guard. Swing a pen knife at them from like three feet away and they laugh. Then you laugh as your transmutated great sword cuts them in half.

It's in the new Spell Compendium. Shame that it's not a swift action to cast. Might make a nice variant.

 

[twofalls]

Maturity

The word covers a lot of ground and implications.

I think one commonly held belief about the concept is that a person who is "mature" has gained the experience and level of insight to allow them to differentiate between what is and isn't important enough to risk offending others over.

If you agree with this statement, then I would further suggest that most ideas that label large groups of people based on a subjective opinion are likely to be flawed in some major ways. An extreme example is racism.

That having been said, there are some obvious problems with your definition of mature players that I'd suggest deserve some additional thought. Said with all due respect you understand.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

All I want to know is how did Player 1 go from gripping his battle axe to swinging a hammer.

Florid, verbose descriptions = good roleplaying
continuity = childish and immature?

 

[Dremmen]

Here's the article I usually trot out for discussions like this. Kinda sums up my attitude on it completely. (No I'm not a Monte fan-boy, and in fact don't own any of his stuff, unless you count the DMG.)

Here's the link: http://www.montecook.com/arch_anrant3.html

And here's the most relevant quote from it IMO. (Emphasis is mine)

"Gamer evolution isn't a line. It's a circle -- sort of. You see, if you make your way down either path long enough, you eventually get to the point where you realize that some of that abstract, monster-hackin', stat-focused gaming that you enjoyed back in the old days is still sort of fun. Sure, it's not exactly as it was then, but somewhere between nostalgia and freeing oneself from utter pretentiousness, you learn that it's all fun. Hacking and slashing, true and powerful roleplaying, and even a deadly (and satisfying) critical hit now and again." end of quote

If you feel your way is better than mine, fine, but don't tell me my way is less mature. It is a most arrogant and pretentious assumption, and it is also wrong.
Trev

Nice choice to quote from Monte's article. And indeed in another ten years, or heck, maybe another year I'll have changed my mind on the subject due to experience or comments like the above, or the one by the Auld Grump (good to see you take some time off from the WorldWerks boards ). However at this time I am still biased towards narrative style play as the style necessary to play an RPG to its fullest possible potential. Again, not saying one needs to play this way to have a good time, and cerrtainly not if they don't enjoy it. But I feel that RPGs played in a mechanical, munchkin format have untapped potential and it saddens me that some players will never experience that because they are surrounded by folks that don't like to or have never been exposed to that style. Granted its much easier to play mechanically and it takes effort to play narrative style consistently, effort as much from the DM as the players. And there are plenty of players out there that are not looking to put that kind of commitment into it. If its just a game and a toss up between say Axis & Allies or Warcraft (both excellent games) and M&M or D&D or whatever flavor, then let the dice fly fast and furious. But I do think some of the RPG community indulges into the game to a deeper level just like there are folks that play Magic TG with whatever, and there are the guys with the notebooks with all cards in sleeves and collections worth more than their car. And I believe that difference in play style marks the difference between simply playing an RPG game and Role Playing. Granted, a random friday afternoon I get home from work at 8 at night, have to put the baby back in the crib four or five times, and then I have a session scheduled for 9 that night, by all means bring on the dice rolling and munchkin away. But if I have..narrative-style players ( since the word mature seems to have struck a bitter cord with so many) and a good long saturday afternoon then the quality of the game is well worth the effort.

And to being an elitist; Well, I guess it depends how you see it. If my sticking to my opinion despite its being unpopular makes me so, then I can hardly refute the charge. As for poo-pooing on all those players out there that disagree with narrative style play or at least its importance - this is all IMO of how the game should be played. Since noone around here is subject to living in my head, rejoice in your own opinion. If we are around the same gaming table I will be playing in a narrative style and encouraging others to do the same up until the DM dictates otherwise since after all its his or her game. Gamers playing RPGs in a non narrative style and having all the fun in the world certainly don't need to take issue with this - they are having fun playing a game they like so who cares about the rantings of a bitter old gamer. I encourage those reading this to ignore me. But to the DMs that see even a little of what I'm talking about, or players who finish a die rolling session and wish there was more, I encourage you to develop that narrative style and find those out there that share the love of the game. And for DMs, don't give up on your players and try to encourage them into it. Words maybe I should follow but not for being so dam jaded. I do think the narrative style is rare to find and getting more so and part of the reason for this was to test the waters and see how the masses felt. Seeing how many folks really disagreed with me shows that it really is rare to find folks that stress that in an RPG. Since its the only thing separating it from online MMRPGs and your World of Warcrafts and Ultimas and KOTOR, I am of the firm belief that without narrative style, pen and paper will dissolve before the pretty colors and easy accesability of the video game.

And on the battle axe turning into a hammer trick - it was actually a maul with an axe head on one side, a hammer head on the other. Yeah. That's it.

 

[Flyspeck23]

All I want to know is how did Player 1 go from gripping his battle axe to swinging a hammer.

Story reason.

 

[Flyspeck23]

However at this time I am still biased towards narrative style play as the style necessary to play an RPG to its fullest possible potential. Again, not saying one needs to play this way to have a good time, and cerrtainly not if they don't enjoy it. But I feel that RPGs played in a mechanical, munchkin format have untapped potential and it saddens me that some players will never experience that because they are surrounded by folks that don't like to or have never been exposed to that style. Granted its much easier to play mechanically and it takes effort to play narrative style consistently, effort as much from the DM as the players.

Translations:
"RPG to its fullest possible potential" > "your way of playing is inferior to mine"
"I feel that RPGs played in a mechanical, munchkin format have untapped potential" > "not playing my way is being a munchkin"
"its much easier to play mechanically" > "I'm clever, and you're not"

Really, that's how I read it. And I know (or at least I hope) that this wasn't your intent, but phrasing your opinion that way will offend people.
Nobody - or at best a vocal minority - would tell you that your style is the wrong way to play a RPG. Then again, if people feel attacked, they tend to get... well, defensive, resulting in comments like: "Your style belongs in novels, not in games - go write one, but stop playing".

I've had my share of RPG purists (for lack of a better word), munchkins, hack'n'slasher, storyteller, and whatnot.
My POV (based on 22 years of experience ): anyone announcing that their way to roleplay is the only way are downright wrong. The only way to play is whatever works best for your group.

 

[Shadowslayer]

However at this time I am still biased towards narrative style play as the style necessary to play an RPG to its fullest possible potential.

OK So what in blazes exactly do you mean by this? What is an RPG game's fullest potential? And I guess my other question would be, what do you base this opinion on?

A hamburger is made up of a bun, and some ground beef. And it sounds to me like you're telling me that a hamburger, if it would live up to its fullest potential, would be nothing but a tarted up gourmet bun...and no meat.

 

[Breakdaddy]

Oh look. Another "my way of playing is better" thread. Perhaps we should keep an archive of these somewhere so that no one feels compelled to post any new ones.

Oh, look. Another snarky "your opinion is only valid if it's in line with mine" post. Perhaps we should keep an archive of these as well, so we can just cut and paste them whenever someone is disinvited from intelligent expression in the forum.

 

[Dremmen]

OK So what in blazes exactly do you mean by this? What is an RPG game's fullest potential? And I guess my other question would be, what do you base this opinion on?

A hamburger is made up of a bun, and some ground beef. And it sounds to me like you're telling me that a hamburger, if it would live up to its fullest potential, would be nothing but a tarted up gourmet bun...and no meat.

Point taken Shadowslayer. Fullest was not the right word since there are no absolutes and it can't really be quantified. I just meant you can get a heck of a lot more out of that core book if you look and play beyond the mechanics. I've had my share - heck, most of the games I've been a part of I'd call RP-lite to downright munchkin. And don't get me wrong - most of those I had a blast in and remember fondly. But it was those precious rare times where I was in it with a couple of other colorful narrative players and we hit that sync where we were all in character interacting in a narrative style that lead to immersion and all of the sudden we were all there, each seeing the same surroundings as the others, in the game world behind that fourth wall instead of watching from the audience. And no Grump, no cloves involved. Those two, maybe three times are where I set my bar now, what I want to shoot for with my games. Does that make me a purist? Beats me, I've only seen the word tossed around a handful of times. But if this theoretical purist is about aiming for an entirely narrative run, Amber-eske diceless game, then yeah, maybe I am.

An analogy hit me in the middle of this post, when I had to walk the baby around a bit to get her back to sleep - it SO sucks when you have a cold but are not yet old enough to coordinate your finger up your nose so you can get the snot out youself. Poor girl
No, that wasn't the analogy. I was thinking of miniatures painting. I'm multifaceted in my geekness so I paint minis. I got a huge big stash of the old fashioned unpainted pewters waiting my attention. Old fashioned when looking at the snazzy new prepainted stuff. I enjoy painting them but still, I take no more than one night to clean and prime the mini, one night to slap a coat of paint, and then on the third seal it. And I'm fine with the outcome. On the other hand I've read all the Games Workshop articles and skimmed the How To webpages where the hardcore miniature painters go over layering the paints with darks and lights and shadowing and etc etc. And they come out with a mini that looks ready to step off its base. When talking about miniature painting I'd say my skill level could mature further, that I'm not reaching the potential of what I could do with the mini. Those other guys put much more time and work into their minis, and theirs are BETTER than mine. And I'm perfectly fine with that becaue I don't want to invest any more time into minis and I am very satisfied with doing it the way I do and the outcomes. I also wouldn't find it fun to spend so much time on them. And if one of those hardcore mini painters said I could be doing better and he felt I should do more, I would understand where he was coming from and respect what he was trying to do. But then I'd ignore him and do it my way. Or if I decided to get into painting minis more seriously, then try his advice.

Better than the fishing pole analogy? The fishing pole sparring illustrated a point very clearly. When I figure out what that point was, I'll post it.