Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 4329629" data-attributes="member: 3192">I still suggest giving dictionary definition.&nbsp; Unnecessary jargon is just going to hurt your ability to convince others.Okay, puzzle blocking back together what I said to you about rule hierarchy it sounds like you agree with me.&nbsp; You're just saying that the way we do things at our table is the way we should do things first.&nbsp; And when things aren't that way, try and stick to that way as best as possible.The thing that makes no sense is that you define such behavior in terms of rules and behaving out of character as behaving &quot;normally&quot;, yet it's still the only thing you call &quot;decide through appropriate social interaction&quot;.&nbsp; Isn't the default way to behave both in and out of game &quot;appropriate social interaction&quot;?&nbsp; I certainly don't need rules on how to act in character.This is where you have 34 years of RPGs proving you wrong.&nbsp; Saying all GMs are dictators at one level or another is just radical hogwash meant to cause normal RPG players to hate in response.&nbsp; You're not presenting an argument here, you're presenting an opinion that's meant to disrupt everything that represents basic, normal roleplaying and paint it as &quot;bad play&quot; and &quot;dictatorial&quot;.&nbsp; You should definitely make this clear to everyone reading the thread before attempting to define a theory of &quot;What roleplaying is&quot;.&nbsp; You've start off with your conclusion and one meant to turn 99% of roleplayers into having badwrongfun.&nbsp; So you're doing this in the name of &quot;good management&quot;.&nbsp; I can't help but doubt you.&nbsp; It seems like your misunderstanding of how RPGs actually function and are fun is causing you to want to revolutionize everything that came before and call it &quot;bad&quot;.&nbsp; Making everyone a &quot;dictator&quot; regading who gets what &quot;authority&quot; is the least fun-oriented game theory I've ever heard.Most people just call these things social niceties and get on their way.&nbsp; Again, I'm not forcing you to read my mind or am trying to read my players'.&nbsp; I said everything you posted after that point could be summed up as &quot;What do the people playing really want?&quot;&nbsp; And that the question could be very easily answered by simply asking the individuals involved. If you're so concerned about asking an inappropriate question, try asking in private.&nbsp; I stick with my assertion that psychoanalyzing your friends due to fear of bringing up certain topics isn't cool.&nbsp; What is appropriate and inappropriate is something most adults already know in given social situations.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="howandwhy99, post: 4329629, member: 3192"] I still suggest giving dictionary definition. Unnecessary jargon is just going to hurt your ability to convince others. Okay, puzzle blocking back together what I said to you about rule hierarchy it sounds like you agree with me. You're just saying that the way we do things at our table is the way we should do things first. And when things aren't that way, try and stick to that way as best as possible. The thing that makes no sense is that you define such behavior in terms of rules and behaving out of character as behaving "normally", yet it's still the only thing you call "decide through appropriate social interaction". Isn't the default way to behave both in and out of game "appropriate social interaction"? I certainly don't need rules on how to act in character. This is where you have 34 years of RPGs proving you wrong. Saying all GMs are dictators at one level or another is just radical hogwash meant to cause normal RPG players to hate in response. You're not presenting an argument here, you're presenting an opinion that's meant to disrupt everything that represents basic, normal roleplaying and paint it as "bad play" and "dictatorial". You should definitely make this clear to everyone reading the thread before attempting to define a theory of "What roleplaying is". You've start off with your conclusion and one meant to turn 99% of roleplayers into having badwrongfun. So you're doing this in the name of "good management". I can't help but doubt you. It seems like your misunderstanding of how RPGs actually function and are fun is causing you to want to revolutionize everything that came before and call it "bad". Making everyone a "dictator" regading who gets what "authority" is the least fun-oriented game theory I've ever heard. Most people just call these things social niceties and get on their way. Again, I'm not forcing you to read my mind or am trying to read my players'. I said everything you posted after that point could be summed up as "What do the people playing really want?" And that the question could be very easily answered by simply asking the individuals involved. If you're so concerned about asking an inappropriate question, try asking in private. I stick with my assertion that psychoanalyzing your friends due to fear of bringing up certain topics isn't cool. What is appropriate and inappropriate is something most adults already know in given social situations. [/QUOTE]

Verification