Why D&D is like pr0n

[jmucchiello]

Actually that's a myth. For most things you might have a predisposition to be a little better or worse at something but innate talent is basically a myth. Chess players have to learn, practice, and develop their games to get good. Nobody is born a good chess player.

I think you underrate that "predisposition". If anyone could be good at, say, writing, there wouldn't so many crappy fanfics. There is a wide gaping hole between a talented person practicing his talent and an enthusiast practicing to gain a talent. Some things do come easier to some people than others. Talent will not make you a chess champion the first time you play. But a person with talent for chess will get farther, faster, with less effort than the person with less innate talent.

ON TOPIC: The funny thing about rp vs opt players is I find the games to still be similar. In a game with optimizers, the DM puts them in impossible situations and they manage to fight their way through. In rp games, the DM is usually so "in favor" of the player's survival that he will make game changing decisions that give players ridiculous powers in order to save the party. The players see these deus-ex machina as great role-playing opportunities and go with the flow and knowing better than to abuse their new powers. That's my anecdotal evidence anyway.

Original Analogy: The OP got the analogy topic correct, but missed the meme. "If you find out someone has a Playboy magazine, they tell you they only buy it for the articles. Likewise, people say they play RPGs for the RP but mostly, they like the action." That I think is where the OP was really headed. I could be wrong.

 

[Desdichado]

Oh, indeed. Which is why I only came close to saying that rather than actually said it. That said, his antics were threatening my character almost as directly if not as explicitely. What would your call have been?

I don't know; not enough information. My characters have been directly threatened by actions of other characters frequently; mostly I find that that makes it fun. Our characters often get themselves into trouble, and we love it.

But if he was threatening our character and just being annoying as opposed to entertaining, I'd probably not enjoy that. But for a different reason than I think you might not.

EDIT: To add to that, it isn't the fact that the character is a "roleplayer" that makes him annoying, it's the fact that he's annoying. The "roleplaying" angle seems more like an excuse than anything else.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I don't know; not enough information. My characters have been directly threatened by actions of other characters frequently; mostly I find that that makes it fun. Our characters often get themselves into trouble, and we love it.

But if he was threatening our character and just being annoying as opposed to entertaining, I'd probably not enjoy that. But for a different reason than I think you might not.

EDIT: To add to that, it isn't the fact that the character is a "roleplayer" that makes him annoying, it's the fact that he's annoying. The "roleplaying" angle seems more like an excuse than anything else.

Oh, it was. But "ROLE-player not ROLL-player" and deliberately emphasising the difference is a sign of a specific sort of obnoxious player. It's almost as much of a danger statement to me as "I'm just playing my character" and normally appears preemptively.

 

[nai_cha]

Awesome Topic!

1. Both are a social faux pas to admit to liking in public. "My favorite hobbies include..."

2. Being a big fan of either is a bad idea to bring up on a first date. "What do I do in my free time?"

3. There is a good chance you'll find both stashed in a military footlocker. "Hands off! Meatface!"

4. Both primarily cater to a male audience. "I'm more hardcore than you!"

5. A certain segment of customers are well known to have beards. "The two of us have been together a long time."

6. Everyone remembers the first time they purchased. "I wrapped it in plastic and keep it in my closet. It was falling apart due to overuse."

7. The size of one's collection often brings out a perverse sense of pride. "I'm not saying its' big now, but I've dumped a lot of stuff in the past."

8. Several times a year purveyors often find themselves in crummy hotel rooms. "Shake, Rattle, and Roll!"

9. You can get a whole lot more of it online. "I just found my new favorite website. <hidden link>"

10. Both are vastly improved with other people. "I just snorted Mountain Dew through my nose!"

11. All you really need to get started is an active imagination and plenty of lead in your pencil, but that doesn't stop people from splashing out on loads of gadgets and literature to enhance the experience.

12. Trying out any "interesting" moves in real life generally doesn't go over too well. "Uh, how did this happen? Well, doc, it went like this..."

 

[ourchair]

Heavy traffic in one area suggests only that the people who are posting on that topic are interested in discussing the matter. It doesn't suggest that everyone else (or anyone else) is also interested, but denying it.

Exactly. The intensity of behaviors exhibited does not in itself represent a demographic conclusion.

That would be like saying that if 90% of household cooks who post on message boards make posts discussing the minutiae of bread preparation, suggest that 90% of bread made is min-maxed.

(God, that's a weird analogy)

In any case, a psych major who has completed the necessary requirements in Statistical Psychology and Research Psychology can tell you that advertising an interest in rules lite, story-driven games does lead to the conclusion that DMs and players are not opposed to mechanics-heavy play, let alone mechanically-centered discussion threads.

 

[Nifft]

Exactly. The intensity of behaviors exhibited does not in itself represent a demographic conclusion.

That would be like saying that if 90% of household cooks who post on message boards make posts discussing the minutiae of bread preparation, suggest that 90% of bread made is min-maxed.

BUN-BUN, NOOOOOOOOOO!

Me can't sig-linking so visit at My Girlfriend is a DM

I was about to visit, but then I realized you didn't type "mygirlfriendsadism".

Cheers, -- N

 

[TarionzCousin]

I consider myself a "rules light" player and have never had a problem in games where the rules aren't adhered to strictly... until now.

My 4E group rotates DM's, and the guy running the game now will let a player get away with almost anything--one guy used "Intimidate" to dodge falling rocks.

The thing I don't like is that the players don't have rules to protect them from DM "fun." Currently, 4/6 of the characters are under the effects of a nasty curse that can be almost completely debilitating. It is no fun (for the players--the DM thinks it's hilarious) to just be told "You're hit by the curse. Roll the Cthulhu dice to see how you're affected." No to-hit roll, no defense--just DM fiat.

Two of the players have suddenly become too busy to play--and secretly told me they'll come back when I start DM'ing in a month or so. For the first time in my life I want more rules.

 

[ExploderWizard]

I consider myself a "rules light" player and have never had a problem in games where the rules aren't adhered to strictly... until now.

My 4E group rotates DM's, and the guy running the game now will let a player get away with almost anything--one guy used "Intimidate" to dodge falling rocks.

The thing I don't like is that the players don't have rules to protect them from DM "fun." Currently, 4/6 of the characters are under the effects of a nasty curse that can be almost completely debilitating. It is no fun (for the players--the DM thinks it's hilarious) to just be told "You're hit by the curse. Roll the Cthulhu dice to see how you're affected." No to-hit roll, no defense--just DM fiat.

Two of the players have suddenly become too busy to play--and secretly told me they'll come back when I start DM'ing in a month or so. For the first time in my life I want more rules.

More rules won't solve anything. Voting a jerk out of the DM seat by not playing in his/her game will give you more bang for the buck. An awful DM who enjoys sucking the fun out of the game for players will not suddenly become tolerable due to the introduction of "more rules". A poor attitude needs to be adjusted. Rules complexity doesn't provide this.

 

[Edvamp]

There is never a point where I would think people play games for the reason I do. Certainly not. Neither do I think that folks covertly enjoy something that they profess not to.

My point (clearly obscured, sorry about that) was that anecdotally I have observed that some folks like to point out that one way to play is better than another, and the way that they play is the "true" method.

However, when I see their method in action, in this case specifically were talking about role playing, there is little substance at all to the actual role playing.

Again, this is just from my experience.

There was a Dragonsfoot thread recently about dungeon crawls that got so nasty it had to get locked. It got derailed when some posters were asking about the character motivation in going into particular dungeon crawls beyond just XP and loot. The argument quickly became the division between pure dungeon crawl and the need for an overall story to explain character actions.

What is interesting was the need of some of the people to justify their position with what Gygax would have thought (in reference to your comment about how a player plays is the "true" way). In a way it reminded me of some political debates over what the Founding Fathers were actually thinking when they wrote particular parts of the Consitution.

Link: Dragonsfoot • View topic - Your Thoughts on Epic Dungeon Crawls!

 

[Edvamp]

No, but see... thats my point.

Nobody is good at tactics (as an example) because they want to be. If they aren't good at tactics, it's usually because, well, they aren't. Nobody decides to be good at chess. You either have a penchant for it or you don't. That sounds kinda harsh, but it's reality. It would be great if we could just say "oh, I'd like to be a good trombone player" and BAM, your Christian Lindberg. Well, it doesn't work that way unfortunately.

I was probably a bit confusing before with my post. Sorry about that. I was trying to point out exactly what you mention Hobo. Folks seem to think they aren't good at those things (the basics of RPG's) because they don't like them, but it's really because they aren't very talented at them.

Go to any karoake bar and you will find tons of people enjoying something they are not good at.