Taking a Break

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

There are computer games that present a sandbox that I'm yet to see a DM come close to - as in, you go across town or halfway around the world, and there are quests, developed NPCs and adventure there. A DM might let you go there in theory, but it's clear when you've gone beyond their notes and they're improvising. The game goes a bit grey or wacky, in a lot of cases.

This is why pbp is the way to go.

You have hours or even days to prepare for whatever random direction players want to run in, and there's always time to run to ENWorld and say "help, my players want to create an elephant-riding cavalry to storm the city walls!" and people here happy to help the DM with it.

 

[Crothian]

There are computer games that present a sandbox that I'm yet to see a DM come close to - as in, you go across town or halfway around the world, and there are quests, developed NPCs and adventure there. A DM might let you go there in theory, but it's clear when you've gone beyond their notes and they're improvising. The game goes a bit grey or wacky, in a lot of cases.

Just like there are some computer games that allow this, there are those DMs that it is near impossible to tell when they are improvising or when they have left their notes. But still, even an average DM should realize that if the PCs choose to travel across the east ocean or whatever all he needs to do is have that session be able the journey.

A simple DM tactic for dealing with things that you are not prepared for is to have a few generic things prepared so you can still run the game and let the players explore the new place after you've had a chance to prepare for it. Even ending the session early and let the players know it is because they choose something they didn't give the DM time enough to prepare for is okay. DM's have more options open to them then a computer game.

 

[That One Guy]

"Rel's GMing Skillz: Amazing or Just Plain Awesome?"

If I say Amazing Geniusness do I get something rad?

In regards to Jay, I recognize you. I've been away from these forums lately (for pretty much your reasons) but -hey - I'm back! Cool, huh? (I still like that word.) Point being, I'm glad that it seems like you're still hanging in there and coming back once in a while... which is good. Yeah, I pretty much joined for 4e info since ENW was the best place for info and humane discussion at the time. But, I've been playing 4e and digging it. A lot.

(Although I could really go for some SR with how much it gets dropped)

Soap, I'm hoping that everyone's chilled out. I noticed a few threads where the bashing was actually quite civil and that made me hopeful.

For my closing opinion (and it is entirely such) I think the merit of table top games are the stories. For me and my friends our table top games have become a form of modern mythology. I think it's pretty important to all of us... and I think that's why people get upset about a game. If they're as invested in the game and stories as we are, I can totally see someone being miffed about... thinking that their game&stories are being invalidated in some fashion.

2 coppers and all that. (Rolls to slide someone of influence a plat under the table)

 

[rounser]

This is why pbp is the way to go.

You have hours or even days to prepare for whatever random direction players want to run in, and there's always time to run to ENWorld and say "help, my players want to create an elephant-riding cavalry to storm the city walls!" and people here happy to help the DM with it.

No, you don't have hours or days. You're in the middle of running the game.

there are those DMs that it is near impossible to tell when they are improvising or when they have left their notes.

That may be because the quality of the game run by them with the notes isn't much cop either. I take your point, mind you, it's just that in this arena, you must concede that computer games have the DM beat the vast majority of the time, unless he's an incredible improvisor, and they're so rare as to be considered an anomaly.

A simple DM tactic for dealing with things that you are not prepared for is to have a few generic things prepared so you can still run the game and let the players explore the new place after you've had a chance to prepare for it. Even ending the session early and let the players know it is because they choose something they didn't give the DM time enough to prepare for is okay. DM's have more options open to them then a computer game.

Only that's cheating. I'll assume you're conceding the point here - I'm not giving you a week to prepare between sessions, nor am I giving you a guarantee that we're still going to Lolrusland on the day. We might change our minds and head off for the Caverns of Ceilingcat. A computer will let you do that, and the Caverns of Ceilingcat will be fully detailed - whereas the vast majority of the time a DM would be severely compromised by such a situation.

I know the tactics you're referring to - if they want to go somewhere you're unprepared for, slow them down with combat until end of session, so you can prepare between sessions. That's the kind of cop-out I'm referring to which a computer doesn't need to do.

You also haven't covered the personal cost to the DM in having to prepare all this material for players on a whim. There's a reason why railroading is the default for published adventures. Preparation for this kind of gameplay simply takes too much time unless the PCs broadcast exactly what they're intending well beforehand (which is, as I've said, cheating when compared with a CRPG), and pretending that computer games don't have DMs beat in this area isn't going to help.

 

[Varianor Abroad]

I know the tactics you're referring to - if they want to go somewhere you're unprepared for, slow them down with combat until end of session, so you can prepare between sessions. That's the kind of cop-out I'm referring to which a computer doesn't need to do.

I think this is becoming it's own thread topic isn't it?

However, on the topic at hand, you seem to be saying "computer play provides a seamless experience that lets you go anywhere within the game world because it's already programmed in and that's better". I think that there's a lot that computers don't do, not the least of which is allow you to have detailed conversational interactions and take actions beyond the scope of the programming. At the RPG table, players can come up with ideas not accounted for in the game and the DM can let them happen.

Put differently, why use the negatively charged word "cop-out" to refer to an incomplete analysis of two different play systems (computer and table-top).

 

[Crothian]

Only that's cheating. I'll assume you're conceding the point here - I'm not giving you a week to prepare between sessions, nor am I giving you a guarantee that we're still going to Lolrusland on the day. We might change our minds and head off for the Caverns of Ceilingcat. A computer will let you do that, and the Caverns of Ceilingcat will be fully detailed - whereas the vast majority of the time a DM would be severely compromised by such a situation.

If you are specifically choosing to do something in the game that the DM is not ready for it is the same as doing something in the computer game that was not programed. The difference is a person can make it happen, a computer game can not. Taking a week to do it is not cheating. Travel takes time, and players should not expect DMs to hand wave it just because. It is an option the DM has that a computer game does not. And as a player if you are purposely changing your mind to force the DM to do things he is not ready to do your being an ass.

I know the tactics you're referring to - if they want to go somewhere you're unprepared for, slow them down with combat until end of session, so you can prepare between sessions. That's the kind of cop-out I'm referring to which a computer doesn't need to do.

Can't do. Not doesn't need to do. There is no computer game that allows for total freedom that I've seen. Sure you might be able to go anywhere in the world but what about inside the world? What about to the moon or other planets? What about travel in time? What about different planes of existence or different dimensions? A DM can take you to all those places. Computer games are limited by their programing and what the programmer expects people playing the game to do.

You also haven't covered the personal cost to the DM in having to prepare all this material for players on a whim.

Games have a cost too. And it takes a lot of time to program a game. You are just paying someone to do it. So, if you want the DM; expect a DM to also be able to do as well or better then a computer game I sure hope you are also paying him for his time.

 

[Raven Crowking]

The point remains, though.

It is not prefering or disliking System X that causes edition wars. Rather, it is the unwillingness to allow others to express their preference/dislike without challenging it.

There is little doubt in my mind that, for many, the announcement of 4e opened up discussions about game design and game theory that were truly valuable.

But I question whether arguing about what terminology is permissable to use is valuable to anyone (barring, of course, those who belieive that controlling terminology will control the conversation).


RC

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

No, you don't have hours or days. You're in the middle of running the game.

I specified pbp.

 

[Hussar]

The point remains, though.

It is not prefering or disliking System X that causes edition wars. Rather, it is the unwillingness to allow others to express their preference/dislike without challenging it.

There is little doubt in my mind that, for many, the announcement of 4e opened up discussions about game design and game theory that were truly valuable.

But I question whether arguing about what terminology is permissable to use is valuable to anyone (barring, of course, those who belieive that controlling terminology will control the conversation).


RC

Nice.

If you know that certain terms will cause people to react negatively, and those terms are vague enough that you will have to define them before you can use them, is that not definitively trolling? What's the difference?

Hey, I have no problem with people not liking something. That's groovy. My problem comes when people try claiming some sort of criticism using terminology that is so vague that it can mean anything.

I cannot for the life of me understand why anyone would actually defend this. You're defending the use of inflammatory language that purposefully discourages conversation. Never minding, of course, that 99% of these terms have been dropped on 3e at one time or another, all to the same effect - nothing.

People have gone on at length about how 3e destroyed role play because it uses the battle map. Most people, I think disagree. Yet, now we have people claiming that using the battle map in 4e destroys role play and we're supposed to nod and agree?

Stop me if you're heard these:

• Plays like Magic the Gathering
• Made for munchkins
• Totally videogamey
• Completely ignores the themes of traditional fantasy
• It's not D&D, it's d20 fantasy
• on and on and on

Which edition am I talking about? Anyone who has posted on these boards for any length of time has to know that waving these flags in a thread is going to provoke strong negative reactions.

Again, how is that not trolling?

 

[Hussar]

How's this for a timely and absolutely textbook example of what I'm talking about:

From This thread

I was reading through my PHB and DMG last night when I came to the conclusion that 4E is basically Diablo 2 in paper form. I noticed that most magic items don't grant new abilities but instead improve upon abilities that the PCs already have. This reminded me of Diablo 2 in that the magic items all increase abilities that you already have in your skill tree.

Personally I kind of like that since I never liked that a character was more defined by their magic items than their own abilities in the earlier editions.

Has anybody else come to this conclusion?