Why do DM's like Dark, gritty worlds and players the opposite?

[Andor]

You do recall the term "Monty Haul" DM or Dungeon don't you?

I wonder how many people who use that term now actually remember Monty Hall?

 

[Raven Crowking]

I think there were dm's and players both who bought in to what seemed like the "something for nothing" mindset it wasn't some rarity that has increased over time.

I agree with you wholeheartedly!

This is hardly new. What is new is that the DM is now encouraged to say "Yes" to this mindset, whereas previously the DM was encouraged to make the players work for what their PCs got.


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

And that hate pales before my utter and complete hatred of puzzles in game. Yeah, I know they might be a trope in fantasy. I know. I still absolutely hate them. Playing through the Shackled City AP a while back, we came to one of the puzzle problems with colored mirrors.

I tried for about thirty seconds, realized that I do not want to do that, and went and did something else while the party worked on it.

Was I being a dick as a player? Quite probably. But, I do not want to screw around with my very, very rare free time trying to do this. I don't like it and now, I just refuse.

Other people might like this, fine. But, me? Not a chance.

And really, it's because puzzles only challenge the player. There's nothing in my character at all trying to solve this puzzle. It yoinks me straight out of play worse than the grindiest combat slog. Instead of acting in character or trying to at least, I'm forced to focus on the game as myself, solely.

Sorry, not why I game.

I don't think that we have enough information to know how rude this was (apart from "Was I being a dick as a player? Quite probably.").

Imagine if you would that the puzzle scene comes up, Hussar tries for about thirty seconds, and then says (to the other players): "Sorry, guys, but I'm no good at this sort of thing. If Bob will control my character if something happens, I'll run out and get some more chips." I doubt that most of us would think that was rude.

It very much depends upon presentation. If Hussar left the table to send a message, then I would have a problem. Without the overtones of "sending a message" I would, generally, be okay with that on occasion.

However, if I had a player who consistently left every time X happened, then I would consider how much that player contributed to the game, and whether or not that player were a good fit. That has nothing to do with rudeness (which can be a "kick to the curb" offense very quickly), but rather to do with what sorts of games folks enjoy.


RC

 

[Garthanos]

I agree with you wholeheartedly!

This is hardly new. What is new is that the DM is now encouraged to say "Yes" to this mindset, whereas previously the DM was encouraged to make the players work for what their PCs got.


RC

Actually the DM and player both are given very comprehensive guidlines about the toys and what level they are appropriate for... so no that isnt correct.

And say yes appears to not be what you think it is because it reallly is more improvisational maneuvering

 

[Raven Crowking]

Actually the DM and player both are given very comprehensive guidlines about the toys and what level they are appropriate for... so no that isnt correct.

And say yes appears to not be what you think it is because it reallly is more improvisational maneuvering

Sorry, but a limitation on how much you can get for nothing is not the same as not saying Yes to the "Something for Nothing" mentality. In 1e, if you earned nothing, you got nothing. If you fail to find the treasure, too bad. In 4e, it teleports after you until you find it. That is a very different philosophy of what "game rewards" represent.


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

In episodic, you don't have a large overarching plot, thus, no world shattering threat, and in sandboxing, you again don't have overarching plotlines.

Sorry, but I have to disagree with both premises here.

Episodic with overarching plotlines include the new Doctor Who, Torchwood, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Firefly, and Star Trek Enterprise.

Likewise, a sandbox can have many overarching plotlines.....it just should not force the players to follow them, and the results of not foiling them therefore should not destroy the campaign milieu.


RC

 

[Garthanos]

Sorry, but a limitation on how much you can get for nothing is not the same as not saying Yes to the "Something for Nothing" mentality. In 1e, if you earned nothing, you got nothing. If you fail to find the treasure, too bad. In 4e, it teleports after you until you find it. That is a very different philosophy of what "game rewards" represent.
RC

Making a good die roll or not is an interesting idea of what "earning" is...
but putting that aside I as a dm put effort in to designing interesting magic items (now in 4e I use the players ideas along side mine) ... or interesting challenges ... it was very frequent that something I didnt use one occasion I would use it another. Was that something suggested by the other roleplaying game I was playing at the time? nope... I like having my players contributing to the game world anyway... so when they dont like a monster type (I down play that too or adjust the gameworld based on those opinions).

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Sorry, but I have to disagree with both premises here.

Episodic with overarching plotlines include the new Doctor Who, Torchwood, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Firefly, and Star Trek Enterprise.

Likewise, a sandbox can have many overarching plotlines.....it just should not force the players to follow them, and the results of not foiling them therefore should not destroy the campaign milieu.


RC

I think that you have differing definitions of 'episodic' - by their nature both television and role playing games tend to be episodic. I think that he is referring to the 'reset to start' that many, mostly older, series have, including the original Star Trek - where very little carried over from one episode to the next. (I seem to recall The Simpsons even made that a gag in at least one episode.)

The Auld Grump, sorry guys, you ignored the main plotline, and the tarrasque just ate Waterdeep....

 

[Raven Crowking]

I think that you have differing definitions of 'episodic' - by their nature both television and role playing games tend to be episodic. I think that he is referring to the 'reset to start' that many, mostly older, series have, including the original Star Trek - where very little carried over from one episode to the next. (I seem to recall The Simpsons even made that a gag in at least one episode.)

Unless he means that the PC XP reset to 0, this doesn't apply IMHO. In any event, I am not saying that one cannot do episode without overarching plots, but that one can do either. As the examples I gave demonstrates.


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

Making a good die roll or not is an interesting idea of what "earning" is...

This is either a really, really transparent strawman, or you never played 1e. Pray tell, to which die roll are you referring?!?!