Suspension of Disbelief

[sniffles]

Good question, Joshua. Like most people, I'm better at complaining than finding solutions.

I know one thing I've thought a lot about that would make the game a more enjoyable experience for me (I think) and would support my suspension of disbelief. It's what I call "taking the 'game' out of the game". That is, trying not to refer to game rules and game terminology all the time. Instead of saying, "I rolled a 20", saying "My sword slices right through his armor like it was made of paper". Instead of "I'm casting Magic Missile", describing it as "Four tiny balls of bright blue energy shoot out of my fingers and fly unerringly toward the orc".

The problem with this concept is, it takes away some of the common language that players use to communicate. Especially in reference to spells. The other players and GM can probably figure out that it's Magic Missile when I say the energy flies unerringly toward my target, but it could be something else. Saying it's Magic Missile lets everyone know exactly what it is. It's verbal shorthand, too. Describing the action in more colorful, less rules-oriented terminology takes longer. Some people just aren't good at that kind of descriptive phrasing.

The same thing holds true for things like avoiding deus ex machina resolutions, or avoiding "railroading" to progress the plot. If you need to bail the party out of a bad spot suddenly you may not have time to come up with a really effective solution other than having a high-powered NPC show up and save the PCs butts. If you want the party to get from point A to point B so they can find the neat treasure or the MacGuffin that your plot hinges on, you may have to throw them on the GM express train to get them there.

(And yes, I realize this also applies to one of my own complaints regarding NPC behavior - playing a particular race in a stereotypical way is easy and helps communicate to the players that this NPC is a dwarf and that one is a halfling or whatever).

 

[barsoomcore]

My point was that many of the complaints sounded like someone complaining that chase scenes, attractive leading women, double-crossed plots, and automatic weapons ruins the enjoyment of a movie.

See this statement really has exactly the same problem as the original. It works for ACTION movies, sure, but that's a small subset of movies, right?

I mean, I knew what you meant, but it's clear you misspoke rather drastically. But I agree that it's clear that many of the people posting in this thread do NOT enjoy straight-up D&D. But then that's hardly surprising, is it?

 

[Quasqueton]

But I'll also say (so no one is confused), I think some of the items listed are just bad DMing.

Quasqueton

 

[painandgreed]

My point was that many of the complaints sounded like someone complaining that chase scenes, attractive leading women, double-crossed plots, and automatic weapons ruins the enjoyment of a movie.

It does when the script is written on a tenth grade level. You can't throw all the bits together without thought and expect it to carry the movie.

 

[Quasqueton]

See this statement really has exactly the same problem as the original. It works for ACTION movies, sure, but that's a small subset of movies, right?

I mean, I knew what you meant, but it's clear you misspoke rather drastically. But I agree that it's clear that many of the people posting in this thread do NOT enjoy straight-up D&D. But then that's hardly surprising, is it?

Well, we're on a board mostly dedicated to D&D. The opening post was about a D&D game. The complaints were referencing D&D specifics. Maybe y'all can understand why I was also talking about D&D, rather than Vampire or HERO? <shrug> Eh, it's not the first time there was a disconnect between what I was typing and what others were reading.

Quasqueton

 

[Desdichado]

I mean, really, if dungeons, or the mention of a "+3 sword", or enemies fighting to the death, or ancient evils, or stereotypical demi-humans ruins someone's SoD, I wonder why they play the game at all.

See, you meant more what I had in mind by giving you the benefit of the doubt after all.

And that's a good lesson to me; I should give people the benefit of the doubt more often. It'd probably contribute to making conversations with me much more pleasant.

 

[Arnwyn]

It's pretty near impossible for me to break my suspension of disbelief in any RPG that I've played (which isn't a whole lot).

The only thing that would bug me would be a medieval/fantasy setting that has any anachronistic references to modern pop-culture people/places/things.

 

[barsoomcore]

/me heaves on thread to get it back on topic...

I find very detailed word puzzles a problem, but something like a secret message concealed in the first letter of each line doesn't bug me -- I assume the translation into English captures the puzzle in a reasonable fashion and leave it at that.

I don't mind being rewarding for doing some research and work and stuff, but a puzzle that demanded intense study of On War would get solved through massive application of violence. I provide my players with plenty of not exactly puzzles but in-game texts and so on that are always in English -- the assumption being that they are translations (an assumption that lets me get away with saying "This is the greatest poem in the WORLD!!! In Naridic." without having to actually write the greatest poem in the world, and blaming the lame-ass translation.

 

[Desdichado]

I provide my players with plenty of not exactly puzzles but in-game texts and so on that are always in English -- the assumption being that they are translations (an assumption that lets me get away with saying "This is the greatest poem in the WORLD!!! In Naridic." without having to actually write the greatest poem in the world, and blaming the lame-ass translation.

Nice. And I agree. While I do think that the puzzles presented were a bit (and by a bit, I mean a freaking ton) on the unreasonable side, the concept in and of itself doesn't break my suspension of disbelief. I dislike it for other reasons; like I said, using puzzles as little more than a meta-game construct (i.e., this game needs a puzzle now! Here's one!) rather than as something that actually makes some internal sense is more troubling to me.

 

[VirgilCaine]

I hate that too. I also wish there were some way to refer to spells by something other than their names from the PHB. Why would a wizard from one country necessarily use the same spell name as a wizard from a completely different culture? Why would a wizard and a cleric use the same name? But I overlook that one because it's too complicated to come up with alternate spell names or descriptions and then expect the GM and possibly the other players to recognize them all.
...
I particularly despise using relatively ordinary English personal names (i.e. Jason, Harold, Frederick) for characters in a non-Earth fantasy setting. It's okay in a one-shot or humorous game, but in a long-term serious campaign it just becomes a constant irritation to me like a blister in my brain.
...
I really dislike having all NPC representatives of any race behave in a stereotypical manner. Halflings do not all have to be obsessed with food. Dwarves do not all have to be humorless gold-grubbers. Certainly there are racial traits, but members of a particular race don't have to be clones of each other.

The first, I have a campaign reason for--all wizards use the same name because they are all connected--distantly, but connected.

Ordinary names are out--except Bible names that noone ever hears of. Those are okay.

All halflings are not immigrant capitalist businessmen. Not all gnomes are pseudo-scientific inventors and explorers. Not all dwarves are pseudo-communist work/alco/smith-aholics.

Just most of them.

What kills suspension of disbelief for me:

Having a town with a name like Tol Al-Ghol and then mentioning the town of...Northport. "Sorry guys, that's what I came up with." When the DM uses laptop + software while running the game. Riiight.