Conclusion: Maybe my style just isn't for you.

Post/Author/DateTimePost
#1

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek

Aug 15, 2014 9:19:03

This is a conclusion thread from my other themed based one. There are many different styles when it comes to DMing and being a player. Generally, of course with a few exceptions, there is no wrong way to DM or play no matter what someone else may think. I have implemented my style for 29 years now so no matter how many people tell me I am doing it wrong, I will continue to do it that way. 

 

Now no matter how much you may disagree, I think we should all agree that sometimes a certain group's style may not be for you and trying to get them to change, is sometimes not the answer. If I get involved with group and I don't like the way they do things, I have no problem admitting to myself that maybe this group just isn't for me and I think it's fair of me to try and get them to change if they don't want too: I would rather just go and find a group that fits my style better. Now if there are no other groups then beggars can't be choosers. 

#2

Marandahir

Aug 15, 2014 9:33:05

I can agree with that.  But if I am starting a new game, I want it to be as inclusive as possible.  I think there almost ALWAYS is a way to satisfy everyone in the group, including the DM.

#3

bawylie

Aug 15, 2014 10:20:00

 

 

Gaming has evolved considerably over the centuries. Iterations in design, advances in technology, new ways to tell old stories, different levels of immersion, different kinds of fun, different kinds of sport. The board and video game industry changes in the last 30 years are astounding!

 

Yet if I DM-ed today as I did even 20 years ago, my games wouldn't be as good as they are. 

 

And if I never change again, or never learn or grow from where I am now, I will eventually fail. 

 

Self-examination is important. Even if the result is "Yeah, I'm good as-is." Evolution and change are likewise important. How else would we know that the direction of 3rd and 4th ed was mistaken. They were great games! But they weren't quite right for THIS game. 

 

Either way, self-examination, iteration, refinement are critically important. 

#4

Marandahir

Aug 15, 2014 10:53:00

I'm pretty sure the topic of THIS PARTICULAR thread is supposed to be that people have different DMing and gaming tastes. 

 

#5

Chakravant

Aug 15, 2014 11:19:26

I think most group's styles are for most people.  I find a big difference between the "white room" forum experience and the actual gameplay.  I've gamed with people who would disagree with most of my opinions regarding game theory, but at the table we're cool with each other.  Aspects of gameplay are often artificially enhanced in play test and on the forums for purposes of analysis.  At the table, those same aspects may be invisible.

We're not as different as we think.  The crucible we choose to communicate in/with simply makes those differences seem larger than they are.

#6

JohnLynch

Aug 15, 2014 11:49:00

Trying to tell someone on the forum that they're "doing it badly" or "not following the rules of 5th edition" are argumentative and a fool's errand. If a table is enjoying the experience then there's no reason to change. Whether it's playstyle or edition.

 

There's be a lot less arguments if people stopped saying "you should do X" and instead said "my table finds it more enjoyable when we do Y."

#7

TiaNadiezja

Aug 15, 2014 12:06:40

... Couldn't this have gone into one of the other five or so threads people (including the OP) have started on this topic?

#8

TiaNadiezja

Aug 15, 2014 12:52:23

Now if there are no other groups then beggars can't be choosers. 
#9

ORC_Animus

Aug 15, 2014 13:04:24

I’ve removed content from this thread because trolling/baiting and personal attacks are a violation of the Code of Conduct.

You can review the Code of Conduct here: http://company.wizards.com/conduct

Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks. You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.

If you wish to report a post for Code of Conduct violation, click on the “Report Post” button above the post and this will submit your report to the moderators on duty.

#10

Fantasyfilmsman

Aug 15, 2014 13:11:40

I've played in a groups game that didn't mesh with my style as a player.  It wasn't that it wasn't fun it was but I could not see myself hampered creatively with the DM. The group was cool but I also knew it was somewhat me too as a player because I was hijacking the play sessions. It got the group really going and having fun but the DM was out to get me.  Realizing by my fourth session with the group I scaled back and just didn't like it. So I never came back to the table.  It can happen. You get used to a certain way of playing and when you have to hold back it's hard to change.  I mostly DM and not play due to me being able to Roleplay my style with the NPC's and the only person I affect is me.  I allow my players full sandbox freedom even if I'm running a module.  So a constricting DM will not go well with me and I'm ok with that. 

#11

Nautilus

Aug 15, 2014 13:13:05

"You're doing it wrong" and "Could you be doing it better?"

 

Are those statements one and the same?

#12

TiaNadiezja

Aug 15, 2014 13:21:04

Nautilus wrote:
#13

Shirebrok

Aug 15, 2014 13:29:54

TiaNadiezja wrote:
#14

sailoroswald

Aug 15, 2014 13:32:36

Tia, what you said was perfect - soapbox or no soapbox.

 

Everyone here - players or DMs, old or new, should strive to do our best to make our hobby as inviting as possible.

To show the curious how wonderful this game can be if you give it a chance.

 

I started playing D&D in my freshman year of high school.

The memories of staying up past daybreak are still some of the best I have.

 

I want potential newbies to become players that look back at their first experiences fondly.

I don't want them to become people who had the door shut on them and never looked back.

#15

Marandahir

Aug 15, 2014 13:40:16

TiaNadiezja wrote:
#16

TiaNadiezja

Aug 15, 2014 13:43:27

Thanks, y'all.

 

One of the more awkward things about being someone who believes that self-examination and growth are inherently good things is that I'm pretty sure that, if I still have access to these posts in ten years, I'm going to look back on at least a few things I've written and think, "Why did I even think that?" I know I've had that response to stuff I did, and advocated doing, ten years ago.

 

On the other hand, I can also be fairly certain that in ten years I'll be a better GM than I am right now, so I'll take it.

#17

Beldak_Serpenthelm

Aug 15, 2014 13:45:22

TiaNadiezja wrote:
#18

Uchawi

Aug 15, 2014 13:57:12

The experience and enjoyment of the game will be the driving factors. If you like the experience and enjoy the group you are with then most likely you will come back for another game and some of the bias or pre-concieved notions about the game may change.

#19

Jvance420

Aug 15, 2014 14:11:11

TiaNadiezja wrote:
#20

Orethalion

Aug 15, 2014 14:48:46

TiaNadiezja wrote:
(Reply to #8)

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek

TiaNadiezja wrote:
(Reply to #20)

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek

Orethalion wrote:
(Reply to #14)

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek

sailoroswald wrote:
#24

TiaNadiezja

Aug 15, 2014 16:56:56

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek wrote:
#25

Jvance420

Aug 15, 2014 17:06:09

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek wrote:
#26

silentdante

Aug 15, 2014 17:06:52

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek wrote:
(Reply to #25)

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek

Jvance420 wrote:
#28

TiaNadiezja

Aug 15, 2014 17:22:40

Um... I love AC/DC, but honestly?

 

They're creatively dead. Their work is good, but... they're creatively dead.

#29

Noon

Aug 15, 2014 17:22:51

Just seems too simplistic.

 

If you sat down and wrote a list, you could have two columns - 1. Things you wont budge on, 2. Things you could compromise to some degree (or even three columns: 3. Things you can compromise on a lot!)

 

I think if you're all column #1 and nothing in the other columns, then you're incredibly rigid and no one is good enough unless they fit your exact personal standards. It's trying to play as dad, when pretty much no one wants to treat you as some sort of parental figure that they must follow (and like!) every single thing you do.

 

Note: This goes for players as well! Not just GM's. If you're a 'You can't say no!' player, then you're just all column #1. To be willing to compromise is to be willing to hear the word 'no' and not explode.

 

A spread across the columns is the more socially functional setup.

#30

silentdante

Aug 15, 2014 19:02:21

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek wrote:
(Reply to #27)

Jvance420

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek wrote:
#32

Noon

Aug 15, 2014 17:50:41

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek wrote:
#33

MechaPilot

Aug 15, 2014 18:26:30

Jvance420 wrote:
#34

grendel111111

Aug 15, 2014 18:44:36 		I think there is a big difference between the ideas of growing and improving vs. Style of play. You can change and improve within a style. If someones style is different it does not mean they are not learning, improving and getting better. Experiencing other styles and including and incorporating what works for you into your style will grow your game.
(Reply to #29)

Azzy1974

Noon wrote:
#36

DLfan

Aug 15, 2014 22:40:49

TiaNadiezja wrote:
(Reply to #33)

Jvance420

MechaPilot wrote:
(Reply to #28)

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek

TiaNadiezja wrote:
(Reply to #30)

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek

silentdante wrote:
#40

Emirikol

Aug 16, 2014 8:26:41

Great topic.  Sure, sometimes a group isn't a great fit for a person.

 

It can be difficult for some people because they are not familiar with how to approach or start a new group with just the people they like.

 

My most recent example:

My regular group, having evolved over the past decade (and a half) didn't want to play Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay 3rd edition and had two players that simply aren't a good fit for a game system that isn't all hack-slay-bling-bling and the other players had busier lives than me.

 

So, I hopped on meetup.com and offered to run WFRP3 and start up a new group.  I also advertised here on wizards, paizo, rpg.net, enworld.org, pen and paper games, and left tear-off flyers at all the local game stores.  It took about 2 days for me to get my first response and about 6 months to finalize a group of people with whom I have found that fit my style. The most common rule I have about this though is that you usually need to offer to run the first couple games, and inquire with the new potential players if they would offer to GM once in a while.

 

Now I have two groups:

1.  My traditional d20 style rpg group.  We've got the munchkin, the rules lawyer, the roleplayer, the silent calculator, and the dufus.

2. A roleplaying/story style rpg group.  There is the dufus, the uptight halfling, the adhd roleplayer, the musician, and the teacher.

 

 

Since each group plays 2x/month on average, it works out great.  I swap tuesdays with my wife, who gets her own time away from the kids as well (book club, bunco, get out and shop night).

 

It took some work though, and we had some turnover with people trying to join the RPG group thinking we were playing a d20-style game - no harm in player turn-over until you find the group you like.

 

 

jh

(Reply to #40)

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek

Emirikol wrote:
#42

MechaPilot

Aug 16, 2014 10:18:01

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek wrote:
#43

Marandahir

Aug 16, 2014 10:36:45

I think the fundamental tension here is caused by differing focuses on two separate, but interrelated ideas: one, where all players are consumers in a market of D&D games; the other, where new players are getting their very first impression of a game when they join a group.

I gather that many posters here, most predominantly Tia, are concerned that when there the supply of D&D games is extremely low, a new player's wants and needs out of the game may be screwed in favour of the wants and needs of the DM and the rest of the group – in essence, the group might not be very welcoming, and that could turn the new player off D&D entirely.  In this mindset, as a gatekeepers of D&D knowledge and gameplay, it is our duty as DMs to help that new player feel welcome in the game, since he or she doesn't really have another real life group to turn to; the local market for D&D games is just too small.  This is a very social justice mindset to look at it through, and at the risk of getting a bit political, I would suggest it's the crux of the current liberal mindset. 

I also gather that there are plenty of posters here, most predominantly the OP, XunValDorl, that are concerned about other people telling them how to run their games, and would find such a new player as potentially needy, demanding, and detrimental to the group.  These DMs are looking after the group they know, and in that sense, they are doing the a good thing as well, because the DM has a leadership role and looks after the group as it is.  Again, at the risk of getting a bit political, I would suggest this is a more libertarian mindset. 

I do not think either mindsets are wrong ways to go about it, since different groups have different needs and desires.  But I do tend to side in my PERSONAL GAMES a bit more with Tia's stance, in that, if I can do someone the service of bringing that person into a game, than I am wont to do it, of course, with the caveat that my group can accomodate a new player.  I know very well the healing and empowering aspects of Dungeons & Dragons, and if it can touch a new person, I want to help it do so. 

Nevertheless, I also understand that I do NOT KNOW XunValDorl's circumstances, the history of his games and experiences, and by that very point, I have no empirical way of judging.  I think there's a lot of moral character judgements going on here, based on very little tangible evidence or reason for accusation. 

You many not agree with someone on these boards, you may not like the same things.  You may not have the same play style, or even want to play in that game.  But there's clearly a demand for that XunValDorl's game.  He has players.  He's not trying to win you over to play the same way as he is.  So why not let him play the way he plays and go about playing the way you play?  There's been a lot of needless animosity on these boards, even coming from people whose words and thoughts are inspiring and just, from my point of view.  I've engaged in it too.  I think it's important that we all step back and realise that D&D is broad enough for ALL of our games.

 

(Reply to #42)

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek

MechaPilot wrote:
#45

Emirikol

Aug 16, 2014 10:42:54

If people really want to bring people into the game, they should be running games at conventions as well as starting new and abandoning said established groups frequently.  

 

Gaming groups keep people playing, not "the game system."

 

 

 

jh

(Reply to #43)

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek

Marandahir wrote:
#47

Brock_Landers

Aug 16, 2014 11:13:41

Jvance420 wrote:
(Reply to #43)

Jvance420

Marandahir wrote:
(Reply to #47)

Jvance420

Brock_Landers wrote:
#50

ankiyavon

Aug 16, 2014 12:40:00

Noon wrote:
(Reply to #49)

Brock_Landers

Jvance420 wrote:
(Reply to #51)

Jvance420

Brock_Landers wrote:
#53

Brock_Landers

Aug 16, 2014 13:31:30

Jvance420 wrote:
#54

Marandahir

Aug 16, 2014 13:48:56

There are two legitimate ways of spelling the bill when you want to start the work with ch. 

You see?  This is the sort of conflict I'm talking about.  Why are we wasting our effort arguing about these sort of things? 


That said, I think there is a real issue here as well that was very legitimately raised by Tia and others, and I think it's been dismissed a bit by some people here: the issue is that the idea that "you don't have to play with anyone that you don't want to" is at times quite untrue. 

That doesn't mean a different playstyle should be forced on anyone, but… sometimes there aren't other options.  And that can make D&D a miserable experience.  :/

(Reply to #53)

Jvance420

Brock_Landers wrote:
(Reply to #55)

Nautilus

Jvance420 wrote:
#57

Marandahir

Aug 16, 2014 14:04:56

There are two legitimate ways of spelling the bill when you want to start the work with ch. 

You see?  This is the sort of conflict I'm talking about.  Why are we wasting our effort arguing about these sort of things? 


That said, I think there is a real issue here as well that was very legitimately raised by Tia and others, and I think it's been dismissed a bit by some people here: the issue is that the idea that "you don't have to play with anyone that you don't want to" is at times quite untrue. 

That doesn't mean a different playstyle should be forced on anyone, but… sometimes there aren't other options.  And that can make D&D a miserable experience.  :/

#58

Brock_Landers

Aug 16, 2014 14:13:19

Nautilus wrote:
(Reply to #57)

Jvance420

Marandahir wrote:
(Reply to #58)

Jvance420

Brock_Landers wrote:
#61

Emirikol

Aug 16, 2014 16:51:43

Marandahir wrote:
(Reply to #44)

Azzy1974

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek wrote:
#63

MechaPilot

Aug 16, 2014 21:10:40

Jvance420 wrote:
#64

MechaPilot

Aug 16, 2014 21:18:04

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek wrote:
#65

TiaNadiezja

Aug 16, 2014 21:20:43

MechaPilot wrote:
(Reply to #65)

Azzy1974

TiaNadiezja wrote:
#67

Noon

Aug 16, 2014 21:54:25

XunValDorl_of_HouseKilsek wrote:
#68

Noon

Aug 16, 2014 21:55:14

TiaNadiezja wrote:
#69

Noon

Aug 16, 2014 21:56:35

Jvance420 wrote: