Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Emerikol" data-source="post: 8231855" data-attributes="member: 6698278">Hey we come here to talk.  I admit I get triggered sometimes and I do my fair share of triggering.  It's a game though and when we talk past each other we are just giving our experience and our preferences.  I do believe people want different things out of roleplaying.  Roleplaying is too big to be just one thing.  It's kind of like sports.  At the beginning there was just sports and everyone played the same way.  Now we have a big variety and people who play basketball think playing football is not that fun.   Whereas some think otherwise.   My only opposition and I admit a trigger is when people say "we have a new better way".   The reality is you have a "new better way for you".   And it may be true for many others but not for everyone.  We all come to the game for different reasons.   Ultimately the goal is fun but there are different payoffs in the search for fun.I have read dozens if not hundreds of similar stories.  Again as I said above.  The game started out in my style and was taught that way.  So all of the movement is to other styles.  It doesn't invalidate my style.  It is inevitable that my style wasn't fulfilling what some wanted out of roleplaying.   I have tried on occasion to speculate but often when you do you get a lot of backlash because no one wants to admit that every choice gains something and gives something up.I will admit that while I never liked 4e, I was tired of 3e/PF myself at some point.  I like some character built choices but I'm probably one of those who likes a bit less.  That means I like some character building but not too much.   I am probably one of those that is happy with four basic classes.   For me, prep is work but it is a labor of love.  I feel great pleasure in providing something that my players enjoy and remember.The reality is that there are a variety of things that makes up a gamer preference set.  For example, I would say I'm a sandbox, skilled play, in-character always roleplayer.   This set of preferences kind of precludes many of the new approaches.  So even people like me in some ways are not like me in every way.  You could be sandbox but not skilled play.  You could be fine with dissociative mechanics and still have a sandbox.  (4e proved that).  It would be fascinating to try and build a list of gamer preferences because I don't have a list for people in your style.Well, there are sports, soccer for example, that don't do anything for me.  They just aren't interesting to me.   But thousands, no millions, no billions love that game.  I'm not against their loving it either.  Enjoy!  That is the beauty of entertainment.  We can do what we like and others can too.  Then you were obviously playing a game originally that wasn't your ideal fit.  I guess I was lucky to find mine early on.   Now we also know that there are those gamers, I can them beer and pretzel gamers, who are just happy to be there.  Those types would likely play in your game and in mine and be happy either way.  There are also those who have varied preferences so they view our styles as different games.  Sometimes they play one game and sometimes they play another.  So there is that too.   Often times for example a D&D style game system fights against your style to some degree.   Playing dungeonworld or savage worlds is better.  I would agree 100% that there are risks and pitfalls.  That some of the worst DMs have acted in bad faith as representatives of my style.  That doesn't really invalidate my style.  I've seen some pretty bad ones using other styles too.  But....I do realize that there is a value choice in how you interact with the content.  If the DM just decides that going left instead of right would be more fun and to hell with the underlying content that is a decision and it works for some people.  It won't work for those who really embrace my style.   In my style, failure and setbacks are more common.  It feels a bit more like real life in that sense.   The party knows the DM is not going to bail them out or twist things around to make it all work out.  Here is an example from years ago.  Now in those days I was not nearly the world builder I am today so keep that in mind.  This example is laser focused on one point.   I had a group going through the Giants.  There is a room where the King lives, I believe it is the frost giant G2 module, that has a secret escape door that the King would use if threatened.   The party had foolishly alerted and attracted pretty much every giant in the place and they were being hunted in force.  They had managed to dispatch the King though.  They realized though they were going to die almost certainly but they decided to search the room to see if there was any place they could hide.   They found the kings secret door and used it to escape the dungeon.Now, if I had handwaved that escape route to enable the players to survive, I would have broke faith.  They would not have enjoyed it nor would it have been a story.  Now is it theoretically possible I could lie to them and try to keep it a secret?  I guess so but that is a lousy way to live life.   The fact they were saved by chance but chance that was real in the world made a difference.  I think people like me are at heart explorers.  They want to learn about a new world and explore it.  It's a big motivation.  They also want to achieve something by dint of their skill as players.  So they feel they "earned" their PC's greatness.Gygax speaks to this a lot in the 1e DMG.  He of course is unaware of other styles and thus states it in absolute terms.  Still his assertions are true for people who are seeking the payoff my style provides.</blockquote>

Verification