Post/Author/DateTime	Post
beat_takeshi 03-05-06, 05:30 AM	This is going to be a rather vague thread, because I want everyone's divergent views on the subject. But please don't flame, it's annoying and no one will take the post seriously anyway. I like d'n'd, I'm not trying to trash it or you. I'm not saying that I'm better than you or don't start arguements. Why is it d'n'd seems to start so many arguements. People who can normally exist harmonously with others, seem to suddenly become more aggressive when d'n'd is involved. Arguements round the table, and off but started at the table. And arguements in the community, on these boards, at clubs with people getting off on assumed superiority over others. Those who think dramatic games are good, and those who think anyone who chooses a gnome etc is trying to ba a drama sink, etc etc. Player mentions his hitpoints so the dm has him killed instantaneously?! Come on! Hows he supposed to roleplay if he cant believe his character cant have any effect on the game? Is it the swords? The 18 charisma? The beards? Is it because society thinks gaming sucks? I'm sure you get the idea and have encountered the same. Again its a given I'm as guilty as anyone else Any ideas? :confused:
Seeker95 03-05-06, 07:05 AM	People are drawn to conflict almsot as strongly as they are drawn to the like-minded. Within any group of people, folks will look for similarities and differences. After finding common ground demarcations by which to segregate, they will then begin establishing the pecking order within each otherwise like-minded groups. RPG groups are no different. Once everyone establishes that the entire group is into RPG (roleplay gaming), they look for the criteria of separation again. And the RPG "world" is large enough and diverse enough to find many lines of demarcation. Storytelling vs. Non-Storytelling Roleplay vs. Roll-Play (although the definitions of each of these are not mutually agred upon) White Wolf vs. TSR/WotC VtM (etc) vs. D&D 3.5 vs. 3.0 3e vs. older editions d20 versus not-d20 Core vs. Non-Core WotC vs. 3rd Party Elf Fans vs. Elf Haters The primary reason for all the internecine conflict is simple: we have too much in common!
Lina_Inverse 03-05-06, 09:00 AM	Human beings hate diffrences, hate them. If you disagree with someone, generally they will consider you wrong or even evil. Human beings most of all hate diffrences within there social groups. Everyone here loves gameing that much we all agree on. and so, every one here trys to control the attitudes and beliefs of others to force there own upon them. I believe a balanceing of the mechanical/wargameing side and roleplaying side is a nessisity. Others believe we should abadon wargaming altogther(in which case they should all play amber or nobilis HAH!). Others believe that we should ignoreing the role playing aspect altogether. Everyone has there own play style, and untill a threat to roleplaying as a whole emerges the community will fight its own internal shcisms. Thats the way humans work. Brothers will bicker endlessly, but unite instantly to an outside threat.
KJW 03-05-06, 10:11 AM	I have not had a serious argument around my gaming table for many years now, the reason is that we don't have anyone who is disruptive and we have systems for dealing with most disputes. That is the reason you have so many arguments around your gaming table, there is someone who revels in them or there is no system for dealing with disputes. As for these boards, most of the debates and arguments are very predictable. Seeker95's list is pretty good, if anyone starts a thread on those topics then they are looking to start an argument. People cherish their beliefs that is human nature, no matter how wrong their beliefs are. ') You could add to that list: miniatures v. no miniatures NPC v. DMPC Those are the two that get be going for some reason. Still you have to realize that there are many more threads that never have any arguments, it all depends on what you are trying to accomplish. Trust me trying to provide help to people doing solo campaigns for example is not going to explode into serious arguments.
LCD2YOU 03-05-06, 10:25 AM	As soon as you all realize that my way is better and play by my rules, you'll experience troo enlightenment. Nations will stop warring, news services will publish just the facts, people will live to ripe old ages in perfect health and happiness, teenagers will respect their elders and much more. But alas, nobody listens to me and you wonder why the whole world, not just this board, is in terrible shape. Vote LCD2YOU World Despot 2008. I promise to keep the deaths of those who refuse to heel to my whims to a minimum. You can take that to the re-education line.
Frida 03-05-06, 10:55 AM	I donīt think that D&D makes people argue any more, than any other thing that people are really exited about.
SKOLJACK 03-05-06, 11:20 AM	I donīt think that D&D makes people argue any more, than any other thing that people are really exited about. I aggree! D&D is no different than school or work on a daily level. In my experiences, you have something in common with fellow students or co-workers whether it be a simple class assignment or a life long career choice. The people you surround yourself with will always try to "push your buttons" or figure out a weakness just to have an upper hand or a slight advantage over you. I believe it's called survival of the fittest!!! Remember to keep your friends close, but your enemies closer! :plotting: (Don't let anybody in :shifty: )
WizO_Cat 03-05-06, 12:08 PM	I can answer this question in the mindset of a WizO. We really don't have problems with people arguing about the subject matter of a thread because this is the baseline for discussion. Think out it; it would be pretty boring if every thread was "this is my view of a subject" with the following threas saying "I agree." Where it crosses the line and becomes Baiting (which is against the Code of Conduct) is when the threads become personal like saying, "Since you believe in this you're a jerk/lousy player/lousy DM." One can make the point without the insults. If you see such posts on the board, report them to us and we'll address them accordingly. Hope that helps explain things.
Tyler Do'Urden 03-05-06, 01:37 PM	It's a lawful personality type thing (bear with me). When the lawful person believes someone to be making a mistake, and believes it to be within her power to correct or prevent said mistake, the lawful person feels compelled to try. On some level, you believe that if you frame your point of view correctly, they will see something they have not seen before and go, "...oh." Fact is most people's opinions aren't that easily swayed. A lot of people are offended, consciously or otherwise, by the notion of being wrong. I mean, nobody likes to be wrong, but a lot of people take being corrected as a personal attack. They become deliberately obtuse, ignoring any amount of evidence that negates their viewpoint in an effort to deflect this feeling of being wrong. And a lot of people jump on bandwagons such as these because, for lack of a better way to put it, they get offended that people get offended. They essentially respond to hostility with hostility just to do it, even if they have nothing to add to the argument beyond "I'm with that guy." And, as always, some people are just bored out of their skulls and play this game way too much.
beat_takeshi 03-06-06, 11:13 AM	Hmmmm Alright I guess everything has arguements in it (children can be cruel etc), but playing d'n'd can be as risky as discussing politics and religion. Perhaps it is specific disruptive players I guess we'll never know Thanks for posts anyway
DeadKeepWalking 03-06-06, 11:54 AM	Your first post says it all. Some people believe they are superior to others. They think they know everything, what is best, etc. In truth, no one person is better than any other. You could be more skilled at one thing, and the other person is more skilled at something else. No one is perfect, despite belief otherwise. Conflicting points of view. Become a sociologist or a psychologist, and you will understand that no two people see anything the same.
Bruunwald 03-06-06, 12:15 PM	Your question doesn't really concern the game, it concerns human nature. The game ends up just being a tool or an outlet for various bad habits of the humans it plays. The game is highly detailed and filled with minutia and sometimes open to interpretation. Anytime you have something like that, be it a law, a philosophy or a holy scripture, you're going to come across a wide variety of interpretation, and more importantly, of values people apply to their interpretations. I've seen the same sorts of passion and anger in church groups over social matters, or in high school history classes. D&D incites no more or less than any other interpretive, rules-filled milieu. Now, the matter of flame wars on internet sites is another thing entirely. The Internet grants anonymity, and that anonymity - unfortunately - seems to grant some people (in their minds) leave to say anything and to direct whatever ludicrous, angry or awful comment they feel towards others. For example, I could go down to the local gaming shop (I do practically every weekend) and start up a conversation over the Great Cleave feat and get various interpretations on it from any number of strangers. Some might argue with me. But however heated an argument develops, probably nobody is going to call the other an idiot or start question the other person's intelligence or sanity. I could start the same conversation on the Internet, and the likelihood that I will be called an idiot or something worse increases exponentially.
Tyler Do'Urden 03-06-06, 03:34 PM	In truth, no one person is better than any other.Well, that's not really true. Mother Theresa was a better person than Adolf Hitler. That's the extreme example, but finer distinctions exist. Some people are really godawful.
Bruunwald 03-06-06, 04:05 PM	Well, that's not really true. Mother Theresa was a better person than Adolf Hitler. That's the extreme example, but finer distinctions exist. Some people are really godawful. I think his statement was a general notion towards mutual respect for normal folk. In other words, that we are born more or less equal and not entitled to judge one another on minute points of trivia to supposedly determine our right to exist. It's a general statement, and it's a truth. Your argument should really be that Hitler's behavior was not of merit (obviously) compared to that of Mother Theresa. Yours was a specific example, based on facts. Those are two very different themes, citing examples that seem to be at odds, but are not. Because they are not the same discussion. See, if I say that I think a feat does one thing, but you argue that it does another, neither of us is a bad person. If one of us turns out to be correct, it still doesn't give him the right to put a value on the worth of the other person or censure them. That's what DeadKeepWalking's point was. A general statement as applies to most of us (normal) non-murdering, non-despot folk on the boards. On the other hand, if you or I decided that the other guy being right was cause to run through the streets with a gun, that would start to touch on your argument: specific proven behavior from a specific individual that gives cause to determine their (beyond-normal) nature.
Arrowhen 03-06-06, 05:02 PM	Heh. Mother Theresa wasn't all that great either. Obviously she's still better than Hitler, but she's still no saint. Her BTHI (Better Than Hitler Index) was around the same level as your average shifty politician or shady corporate executive. She just had really good marketing.
Sikyanakotik 03-06-06, 06:23 PM	Heh. Mother Theresa wasn't all that great either. Obviously she's still better than Hitler, but she's still no saint. Uh, isn't she due to be canonized? :angel: As to the subject at hand, I'm a pretty naive guy myself. However, even I understand that the "unity" part of "community" is one heck of a misnomer. :bored:
graysider 03-06-06, 09:50 PM	Most people have an aversion to conflict, at least from a face to face perspective. However, many people have a fair amount of built up aggression simply from day to day life. An anonymous message board is the ideal place for some to vent that aggression and/or anger. Perhaps try sports, or go to the gym instead. Just a shrink's view.
Mitchell 03-06-06, 09:53 PM	Now see what you started!?!? We have an argument brewing over whether Mother Theresa was a better person than Hitler, and it's all your fault!!! ;)
Tyler Do'Urden 03-06-06, 09:54 PM	She just had really good marketing. Excuse me... Hitler had amazing marketing. If it wasn't for the whole killing millions of people thing, we'd probably be speaking German (which isn't really all that different from English except for the random Capitalization). Now see what you started!?!? We have an argument brewing over whether Mother Theresa was a better person than Hitler, and it's all your fault!!! ;) Muahahahah! I win!
Good Agnostic 03-06-06, 11:28 PM	Most people have an aversion to conflict, at least from a face to face perspective. However, many people have a fair amount of built up aggression simply from day to day life. An anonymous message board is the ideal place for some to vent that aggression and/or anger. Perhaps try sports, or go to the gym instead. Just a shrink's view. I agree here, and it's not just this messageboard. Any anonymous board is a safe place for someone to be aggressive, rude, thoughtless, tactless, etc. By safe, I mean there are really no consequences. You can be booted off, but you can sign right back up under a different email account. So, it's not this community in particular, just the dynamics created by the forum.
beat_takeshi 03-07-06, 05:39 AM	Ok, I don't need the gym, and I dont need therapy. :) But it is interesting that I don't see many arguements in the gym or in wrestling classes. In fact kickboxing has lots of arguements, wrestling very few. Although I'm talking from a very limited pool of info here In the same way d'n'd has more arguements than games workshop. Alot of these threads have lots of good info but its all masked by the insults that are attached, in the same way, when issues are discussed at the table the point is often lost. But anyway some good points. But as of yet no solutions This might not actually have a conclusion
Seeker95 03-07-06, 07:42 AM	But anyway some good points. But as of yet no solutionsYou didn't ask for a solution, you asked for an explanation. :P
jaelis 03-07-06, 09:13 AM	Arguing about things is how you learn. I certainly have learned a whole lot about the rules by reading and participating in debates on the boards. It is also good for the game... there are several points that are somewhat ambiguous in the rules, but over the course of a few debates the cleanest and most obviously correct interpretation has emerged. When people ask questions about it later, we have a widely accepted answer at hand. Besides that, it is fun. So what is there to "solve"? Of course, there are threads that aren't really debates, just people expressing their opinions about things they like or not, or more often about how they think things similar to dnd work in real life. I find such threads easy to ignore.