I’ve noticed that other RPG aficionados have very resolute ways of describing interactions with others. It’s not uncommon for someone who’s DM-ing a game to ask for advice on dealing with a player, who may or may not be disruptive to the game, and without fail the boards will respond with two very business-like answers; “fire him” or “give him a stern talking to.”
I’ve spent my entire life trying to understand people, and my entire adult life trying to explain people. I know, without a shadow of a doubt in my mind, that nobody, on these boards or elsewhere, has ever been anything but guilty of being problematic. I also know that on every thread about what to do with a problematic character or player there are ten responses from people that have a basic understanding of what actually happens in a real social environment for every one from a thoughtful and empathic person speaking from advice and wisdom.
We’re all, among other things, role-players. Some of us are even actors, and put a lot of thought into making our characters realistic. Others are psychologists, and they may think a great deal about the reasoning behind a character’s choices. However, all of our characters are 2-Dimensional fakes; a micro-chasm of a human being, no where close to the complexity of an actual living being. The real fun of the game is those people sitting across the table; you and I, the fellow dreamer, making mistakes, irritating each other with our/their nasally voice and unpleasant demeanor.
I think there is a portion of the gamer community that may be very business acclimated. They’re probably very good at managing schedules or complicated notes, keeping everyone focused, and insuring that the group proceeds to what’s on the agenda. They seem to categorize people into personality archetypes and view those archetypes as commodities; “Jaymi is a war-gamer, and enjoys playing a wizard, but she’s somewhat uncreative,” “Allen likes to talk a lot, and has a strong sense of self-preservation, he can probably play a rogue even though he hasn’t played before and says he’d rather be a fighter,” “Jessica is a little bit of a chatter-box, and not very smart, so she might have to go,” “Ross has a lot of free time on his hands, and he enjoys reading these books, so expect min-max characters from him.” This Business-Like DM might be a good fit for a group that wants to get down to business as quickly as possible, but you simply don’t make friends that way. If you view other players as archetypes or commodities, you may not experience the richness of a human being who’s sitting across the table rolling dice with you. Some people don’t mind spending great heaps of time with people while thinking of them as nothing but coworkers or employees to be “fired if they’re distracting the group.” I’m suggesting, however, that these business-like social dynamics are quite limiting, and that if you maintain this mindset of ‘getting down to the nitty-gritty’ you’re going to miss out on the social aspect of this social game.
In a hypothetical post, the Original Poster gives a brief description of the group he DMs. It’s possibly biased, as the poster may have a personal grudge and sense of dislike for some of the players. He describes some of the players in a better light, and a few very despairingly. The subsequent responses all seem to allow his opinion to be canonized, without prying deeper into the reasoning for the post. A DM who feels the need to post something like this is probably not receiving the validation of his fears from the group itself. Even though he grumbles loudly to the group in a special whisper meant to be overheard, the group remains silent; possibly because they don’t agree and possibly because they’re too busy enjoying themselves to notice a nay-say’r. If the DM is venting his frustration in an anonymous masturbatory thread, there’s really no harm done. However, the willingness to describe his fellow dorkkin in such concrete ways, and the readiness and volume of the posters that follow to use the information, though extraneous, to validate and encourage his emotionally stunted understanding of his ‘friends’ indicates a certain trend.
Is it possible that by dealing with 2-dimensional characters and thinking in their shallow adjective-defined mindsets for hours at a time has begun to stunt our understanding of our fellow human-beings? Is it possible that our ‘stoic but gentle’ character we pretend to be has trained us to look at people as simple “character concepts?”
I know some of my most satisfying non-romantic relationships happen in role-playing games. I’ve felt love for other characters, as well as envy and hatred. It can be very rewarding, and like the dog trained with treats I fear I may be more inclined to seek immediate reward by dealing with the world in a more concrete interpretation to reap that satisfaction. The sad truth is that outside of D&D you don’t gain that satisfaction by thinking of your friends as players getting down into the thick of the game, or as easily defined micro-chasms performing a role. Is it possible that some players of D&D and other RPG games have confused the experience of socially interacting with people quartering off and show-casing parts of their personality in the guise of make-believe characters with actually relating to fellow complicated men and women? I doubt anyone can disagree that a number of posts on these boards dealing with social settings are simplistic. These simplistic responses may indicate a trend toward emotional stiltedness!
Lol sorry, I had to
There really isn't a reason role-players are socially inept, the very basis of our hobby is dealing with other people to solve problems and tell a story together; too many people fall into the stereotype that D&Ders all have the cheeto-orange fingers, ponytails, and live in our parents basement. We deal with people the same way any one else would deal with people, you talk to them; and if they're wearing a ten-gallon ass-hat, you tell them so, weather you are polite about it or not is personal, but every group of people will have a "Karen", and every group of people has a way of dealing with it. If a role-player isn't social, that's their business, not a product of the game (although one could possibly argue that the social stigma of playing D&D has a negative effect on a person's ability to act social outside of a group of friends).
That was very insightful ToastedAmphibean....wait, dude change your avatar.
Lol sorry, I had to
There really isn't a reason role-players are socially inept, the very basis of our hobby is dealing with other people to solve problems and tell a story together; too many people fall into the stereotype that D&Ders all have the cheeto-orange fingers, ponytails, and live in our parents basement. We deal with people the same way any one else would deal with people, you talk to them; and if they're wearing a ten-gallon ass-hat, you tell them so, weather you are polite about it or not is personal, but every group of people will have a "Karen", and every group of people has a way of dealing with it. If a role-player isn't social, that's their business, not a product of the game (although one could possibly argue that the social stigma of playing D&D has a negative effect on a person's ability to act social outside of a group of friends).
I've had this Avatar since before ToastedAmphibean joined the forums.
That's what we tell ourselves, but there's evidence to show there's a massive amount of emotionally insipid hobbiest on these boards.
That's what we tell ourselves, but there's evidence to show there's a massive amount of emotionally insipid hobbiest on these boards.
Answer 1
If the X percentage of the population at large are emotionally insipid people then X percentage of hobbiests will also be emotionally insipid people.
Answer 2
It is a forum people come across as insipid because written language is less expressive than talking so someone face to face.
Answer 3
The reason you see so many red cars on the highway is because you are looking for red cars. The reason you see so many insipid people on the forums is because you are looking for them.
Answer 4
42.
Answer 1
If the X percentage of the population at large are emotionally insipid people then X percentage of hobbiests will also be emotionally insipid people.
Answer 2
It is a forum people come across as insipid because written language is less expressive than talking so someone face to face.
Answer 3
The reason you see so many red cars on the highway is because you are looking for red cars. The reason you see so many insipid people on the forums is because you are looking for them.
Answer 4
42.
This is another concrete answer that doesn't lend itself toward personal understanding. At best we can empirically debate it. It could be all of these, or it could be one of these, or it could be that there are more emotionally stunted role-players than there are emotionally stunted model-airplane builders because the hobby lends itself to rewarding emotional smallness. Who knows, maybe even you are in denial.
I was going to admit I was in denial but then my psychological defense mechanism kicked in and I thought why should I admit to having that problem.
The good ol' PDM. That's the only reason I never married.
Of course, my current group includes a non-profit liason to the Mayor and an opera singer, so it's may be non-typical in this.
Of course, my current group includes a non-profit liason to the Mayor and an opera singer, so it's may be non-typical in this.
My group also, one is an IT administrator who is going for his Doctorate of Divinity, and is a leader of his churches youth group, another's job involves teaching people to use Razorfish and other databases for fundraising, the third was a Mortgage broker who is now back in school to become a marriage counselor, I think I am the outlier as a stay at home graphic designer.
All of them are very social with good people skills.
Hurray for anecdotal evidence.
That said, the basis of your question is coming from an extremely limited and focused sample. When people post about a social problem in their gaming group and ask for a solution it's a specific person, with a specific problem and not at all representative of the hobby. Either the problem is fixable and is resolved in a handful of posts and the thread goes away - or the problem is intractable and lingers. Generally in the later case, leaving the situation is a good option (or if it's a single problem person and the group is otherwise fine, getting that person to leave).
Gaming is supposed to be fun, period. Don't hang around with people you like just because you want to game. Don't linger in social situations that are abusive or awkward. Gamers have a tendancy to linger in unpleasant situations because they feel that leaving the situation will deprive them of their hobby - sometimes that will be true (temporarily at least) but sometimes it's worth the tradeoff. It's always better to take the time to find (or build) a good group then invest time and energy in a bad one.
To be honest, I don't feel the responses on these boards are stilted. On the whole, they're reasonable advice for the situation as presented - and while that may be a biased position, what else are you supposed to base advice on?
I may not be as well schooled as some folks on these boards. I went to a public school in what you could call a ghetto. I went to college and studied Criminal Justice before dropping out for personal reasons. But I was on the Dean's List while I was there.
I found later I was more comfortable working in a factory running a machine than I ever was in a classroom. That machine was never going to do something I didn't want it to.
Then I found the world of rpg's. It appealed to me because in that game I can be whatever I want within the loose confines of black and white rules. However, not that I have played many times, the times I did play I found I was in the minority. I found the people I played with to be pretty well put together emotionally. They had dealt with any lingering feelings they had toward their childhoods and had moved on. Even the people I have talked with here seem to have one up on me.
But that makes me feel great because it tells me that I am not some lost cause. It tells me that I can grow. It tells me that through the counseling I pay for maybe I can put the logical knowledge I have of my problems into understanding the emotions that I have long since put in opaque bottles.
Gaming has been the gateway to understanding myself better and I hope a better understanding of the people around me.
I apologize if I misunderstood the OP but that is what I took from it and so those were my thoughts on the matter.
Im a gamer chick, and I have lots of friends. I think that, as long as you are friendly, people will like you regardless
People only like you because you're a gamer CHICK. If you had a wang, you'd be in the same boat as the rest of us.
People only like you because you're a gamer CHICK. If you had a wang, you'd be in the same boat as the rest of us.
I'm going to have to refer you to rule eight of emotional maturity; "You can think it, but wait until somebody else says it." While it may be true that a bizare type of nearly-offensive women-adoration runs rampant in this hobby, I think anyone can agree that what you just said made you sound like a sexist jerk. However, despite the lack of tact, I agree.
I guess I can say I am emotionally stunted but I have spent the last ten years trying to improve that. Emotionally stunted does not mean I am not a deep thinker. I feel one has to have a deep understanding of one's self before they can understand someone else. I know logically what has caused the problems but as a self defense mechanism cut off the emotional side because emotions hurt. I tend to see things in black and white because it makes life simpler that way.
I relate. I study psychology so that I can have scientific evidence for my emotions. If I go simply off "how I feel" I'm lost. I don't really feel anything. However, if I can experience a situation, compare notes, look for signs of distress or happiness, and then, at a later point, verify my findings, I'm much more capable of being emotionally empathic and valid.
Then I found the world of rpg's. It appealed to me because in that game I can be whatever I want within the loose confines of black and white rules. However, not that I have played many times, the times I did play I found I was in the minority. I found the people I played with to be pretty well put together emotionally. They had dealt with any lingering feelings they had toward their childhoods and had moved on. Even the people I have talked with here seem to have one up on me.
There seems to be a lot of people with emotional reasons for playing RPGs. Is this game a crutch, an opiate, or a tool for building a new, more emotionally valid "I?"
But that makes me feel great because it tells me that I am not some lost cause. It tells me that I can grow. It tells me that through the counseling I pay for maybe I can put the logical knowledge I have of my problems into understanding the emotions that I have long since put in opaque bottles.
Gaming has been the gateway to understanding myself better and I hope a better understanding of the people around me.
Life is, despite the suffering we endure, quite an interesting thing. Even the bad things we have to crawl ourselves through have their bittersweet merrits.
I apologize if I misunderstood the OP but that is what I took from it and so those were my thoughts on the matter.
You understood perfectly. Thank you very much for sharing.
There seems to be a lot of people with emotional reasons for playing RPGs. Is this game a crutch, an opiate, or a tool for building a new, more emotionally valid "I.
I will go with the third, because I think a lot of people don't really understand who they are under the superficial.
Still, I've noticed that the portion of Reading's gaming community that I spend most of my hobby time with are also all generally the same people who go to the rock clubs. Two of the players in my Dark Heresy group are DJs part of the time, and civil servants for a living...
To be honest, I think the "socially inept" stereotype, like so many other unpleasant stereotypes, comes from school rather than anything else. The kind of kids who're into gaming (as opposed to sports) aren't generally the popular kids. They're the ones who get picked on; this might be either because of their non-mainstream interests, or they might indulge in those interests as a form of respite from the 'attention' of their peers... or both. Certainly, that's my experience, and that of many people I know, plus a good part of the stereotype as well. Obviously, this doesn't apply to everyone, but I imagine it applies in enough cases to be a worthwhile consideration. It's not necessarily social ineptitude so much as an inability or unwillingness to fit in with the 'mainstream'.
But the thing about those school stereotypes is that they rarely stick around once school is in the past... everyone moves on. In the case of the persecuted teenage gamer, all the ones I know have grown up into intelligent, imaginative, well-adjusted people who couldn't care less what the braindead masses think of our hobbies.
its extremely noticeable that players tend to repeat themselves knowingly and unknowingly in the characters they make. they tend to stay within a personalty threshold.
everyone wears masks d&D players masks are a lot more visible
this isnt a bad persay as long as you have the moral and mentally boundries to seperate the two. some people cant and we all hear esults of when a persons imagined view of the world erodes actual reality
i find it best to always create characters unlike what i have done before play a role, gain some insight and move on
socially inept is a ******** stereotype like all stereotypes humans are hell of lot more complicated than that
for all the reasons they might play d&D non stereotypes can fit into the same category
socially inept is a ******** stereotype like all stereotypes humans are hell of lot more complicated than that
for all the reasons they might play d&D non stereotypes can fit into the same category
It's not a stereotype, it's a quality that some people have and others don't. Just like snoring or a nice smile.
Now i find it abhorrent that people seem to need to group people into stereotypes, would i refer to anyone i know as socially inept D&D players even if they may or may not quailfy, i really wouldnt people are more complicated then that and dont deserve to be labled.
Social inept as a quailty yeah okay, however would you really want to use that to describe someone. The stereotype of D&D is a socially inept overweight guy living at home or alone. doesnt have a "life" (god i really hate that statement) and once a week his other friends in similar living circumstances spend 5 hours living through a proxy and eating pizza.
Now i find it abhorrent that people seem to need to group people into stereotypes, would i refer to anyone i know as socially inept D&D players even if they may or may not quailfy, i really wouldnt people are more complicated then that and dont deserve to be labled.
I do describe people that way. Some people are socially anemic, and I help them, or at least I'd like to. It's not a stereotype, it's a quality which some people have, and when they have it it can cause them to be unhappy. Sometimes people will try to better themselves by gaining or losing qualities. The statement "It's just the way I am," is singularly lazy and stupid. I have to ask "why are you that way?" and "would you like to be any other way?"
You can change who you are, by personal introspection and striving to grow. If you simply say, "Well, I'm dumb, so there's no point in reading," you're creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. We're really not anything other than what we are, and we are nothing and everything. Those who have no self-awareness are sculpted by others. Those with the ability to see themselves, truly, in the mirror sculp themselves.