This needs to end.

102 posts / 0 new
Last post
The boards have been a warzone lately. This needs to stop. I'm not trying to absolve myself, or anyone else, of guilt, but no one can be productive or helpful while they're fighting a battle with every post. New people come on the boards for help, and their threads are turned into battlefields that have nothing to do with them. I'm proposing a deal:


Point 1.
Anyone can suggest any different style of play, or changes in their game setup, to someone posting for help with a problem, as long as the proposal is relevant.      


Point 2.       
The person suggesting a change in  playstyle, etc, may not attack or insult other playstyles. You're free to explain  why  the change would help in this and similar problems, and why it may be a good style or change to use general, but don't try to say that other playstyles are bad.

Point 3.
No one may attack the proposer of a change, or the proposed playstyle. You're free to explain why it wouldn't help, but don't attack it. No saying other styles "lack meaningful choice", or "coddle players".



Agreed?
"The real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development." -Albert Einstein Resident Left Hand of Stalin and Banana Stand Grandstander Half of the Ambiguously Gay Duo House of Trolls, looking for a partner Wondering what happened to the Star Wars forums?
Show
Star Wars Minis has a home here http://www.bloomilk.com/ and Star Wars Saga Edition RPG has a home here http://thesagacontinues.createaforum.com/index.php
Show
141722973 wrote:
And it wasn't ****. It was subjectively concensual sex.
57036828 wrote:
Marketing and design are two different things. For instance the snuggy was designed for people in wheel chairs and marketed to people that are too incompetent to operate a blanket.
75239035 wrote:
I personally don't want him decapitated.
141722973 wrote:
And do not call me a Yank. I am a Québecois, basically your better.
And the greatest post moderation of all time...
58115148 wrote:
I gave that (Content Removed) a to-scale Lego replica. (Content Removed) love to-scale Lego replicas. (ORC_Cerberus: Edited - Vulgarity is against the Code of Conduct)
I think these are well intentioned, but unrealistic, ideas. It's the sad nature of the Internet that we don't conduct ourselves with the respect for others that we do in face to face conversations.

I'm not saying we shouldn't aspire to these, but I am saying it's not likely we'll always meet these goals.
I think these are well intentioned, but unrealistic, ideas. It's the sad nature of the Internet that we don't conduct ourselves with the respect for others that we do in face to face conversations.

I'm not saying we shouldn't aspire to these, but I am saying it's not likely we'll always meet these goals.



I can safely say some of my accusations would have been a lot harsher to iserith in a face to face. The WotC CoC is what keeps my words civil.
My username should actually read: Lunar Savage (damn you WotC!) *Tips top hat, adjusts monocle, and walks away with cane* and yes, that IS Mr. Peanut laying unconscious on the curb. http://asylumjournals.tumblr.com/
Despite what the board has been like recently, as late as one month ago it was a peaceful place. Obviously there will be passer-by that don't try to respect these, or even know about this, but I'm talking to the prolific posters.
"The real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development." -Albert Einstein Resident Left Hand of Stalin and Banana Stand Grandstander Half of the Ambiguously Gay Duo House of Trolls, looking for a partner Wondering what happened to the Star Wars forums?
Show
Star Wars Minis has a home here http://www.bloomilk.com/ and Star Wars Saga Edition RPG has a home here http://thesagacontinues.createaforum.com/index.php
Show
141722973 wrote:
And it wasn't ****. It was subjectively concensual sex.
57036828 wrote:
Marketing and design are two different things. For instance the snuggy was designed for people in wheel chairs and marketed to people that are too incompetent to operate a blanket.
75239035 wrote:
I personally don't want him decapitated.
141722973 wrote:
And do not call me a Yank. I am a Québecois, basically your better.
And the greatest post moderation of all time...
58115148 wrote:
I gave that (Content Removed) a to-scale Lego replica. (Content Removed) love to-scale Lego replicas. (ORC_Cerberus: Edited - Vulgarity is against the Code of Conduct)
Yeah, I definitely need to work on aspiring to these goals.


I'm not going to point the finger at anyone but myself, but I will work to do so.
Yeah, I definitely need to work on aspiring to these goals.


I'm not going to point the finger at anyone but myself, but I will work to do so.

Same here.

[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy

Yeah, I definitely need to work on aspiring to these goals.


I'm not going to point the finger at anyone but myself, but I will work to do so.



I didn't mean you are uncivil, etc. Just that you are a prolific poster. My apoogies if that was implied. I can honestly say I didn't have you in mind when I created this thread, but I won't name names.
"The real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development." -Albert Einstein Resident Left Hand of Stalin and Banana Stand Grandstander Half of the Ambiguously Gay Duo House of Trolls, looking for a partner Wondering what happened to the Star Wars forums?
Show
Star Wars Minis has a home here http://www.bloomilk.com/ and Star Wars Saga Edition RPG has a home here http://thesagacontinues.createaforum.com/index.php
Show
141722973 wrote:
And it wasn't ****. It was subjectively concensual sex.
57036828 wrote:
Marketing and design are two different things. For instance the snuggy was designed for people in wheel chairs and marketed to people that are too incompetent to operate a blanket.
75239035 wrote:
I personally don't want him decapitated.
141722973 wrote:
And do not call me a Yank. I am a Québecois, basically your better.
And the greatest post moderation of all time...
58115148 wrote:
I gave that (Content Removed) a to-scale Lego replica. (Content Removed) love to-scale Lego replicas. (ORC_Cerberus: Edited - Vulgarity is against the Code of Conduct)
While I concur we should be trying to help other posters, I just disagree in how we go about it. One of my main issues with this is the consistent urge there seems to be to get everyone to play in a new way instead of working with the content and style proposed (though, usually to get more info about style of game follow up questions are needed as not all new posters volunteer the information for whatever reason).

What happened to just having general threads up about different styles and letting people discover them on their own? There's nothing wrong with pointing out new styles from time to time, but does it need to be thrown in the face of every poster who comes here? That was basically my first experience when I returned to the boards seeking help.
My username should actually read: Lunar Savage (damn you WotC!) *Tips top hat, adjusts monocle, and walks away with cane* and yes, that IS Mr. Peanut laying unconscious on the curb. http://asylumjournals.tumblr.com/
The way we percieve it is that these changes in style would help the problems discussed, and in fairness they would. I do see where you are coming from, that's why it's your job to present other solutions. The problem with having general threads (I tried that, and it didn't get stickied, for one thing) is that most people won't actually check them out before posting. I'm a bit ashamed to admit that I probably  wouldn't.

Smiley was not sarcastic haha.
"The real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development." -Albert Einstein Resident Left Hand of Stalin and Banana Stand Grandstander Half of the Ambiguously Gay Duo House of Trolls, looking for a partner Wondering what happened to the Star Wars forums?
Show
Star Wars Minis has a home here http://www.bloomilk.com/ and Star Wars Saga Edition RPG has a home here http://thesagacontinues.createaforum.com/index.php
Show
141722973 wrote:
And it wasn't ****. It was subjectively concensual sex.
57036828 wrote:
Marketing and design are two different things. For instance the snuggy was designed for people in wheel chairs and marketed to people that are too incompetent to operate a blanket.
75239035 wrote:
I personally don't want him decapitated.
141722973 wrote:
And do not call me a Yank. I am a Québecois, basically your better.
And the greatest post moderation of all time...
58115148 wrote:
I gave that (Content Removed) a to-scale Lego replica. (Content Removed) love to-scale Lego replicas. (ORC_Cerberus: Edited - Vulgarity is against the Code of Conduct)
The way we percieve it is that these changes in style would help the problems discussed, and in fairness they would. I do see where you are coming from, that's why it's your job to present other solutions. The problem with having general threads (I tried that, and it didn't get stickied, for one thing) is that most people won't actually check them out before posting. I'm a bit ashamed to admit that I probably  wouldn't.

Smiley was not sarcastic haha.



Hm, I get that issue. Especially the sticky part...some things need stickying.

I can safely say that I personally wouldn't switch styles unless it just wasn't working. Usually, when a DM comes to the board, they've been playing with a style that's working so far, unless they make a post stating otherwise. Is it really necessary to tell everyone that because they can't figure out what X character or Y city would say/do that they need to ask the players or do something outside of what they normally wouldn't? Or other minor problems really.

I guess what I'm saying is that style changes are usually a massive undertaking, and they shouldn't be prescribed to every single problem. As when you change style, you're not only asking a single person to change their mode of gaming, but you're asking an entire table to do so. And sometimes, that massive of a solution isn't necessary for every problem under the sun.
My username should actually read: Lunar Savage (damn you WotC!) *Tips top hat, adjusts monocle, and walks away with cane* and yes, that IS Mr. Peanut laying unconscious on the curb. http://asylumjournals.tumblr.com/
While I concur we should be trying to help other posters, I just disagree in how we go about it. One of my main issues with this is the consistent urge there seems to be to get everyone to play in a new way instead of working with the content and style proposed (though, usually to get more info about style of game follow up questions are needed as not all new posters volunteer the information for whatever reason).

I have noticed a tendency in myself to try to shoehorn in newer concepts, even when not really called for. I'm looking out for that now.

However, having personally gone through some of the issues that DMs come here about, I see no reason not to advise them to use something like the approaches I currently advocate. I don't see it as all that helpful for me to advise people to keep doing things I myself have repudiated to one degree or another, though sometimes I will provide the standard advice as a reasonably viable alternative.

[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy

The way we percieve it is that these changes in style would help the problems discussed, and in fairness they would. I do see where you are coming from, that's why it's your job to present other solutions. The problem with having general threads (I tried that, and it didn't get stickied, for one thing) is that most people won't actually check them out before posting. I'm a bit ashamed to admit that I probably  wouldn't.

Smiley was not sarcastic haha.



Hm, I get that issue. Especially the sticky part...some things need stickying.

I can safely say that I personally wouldn't switch styles unless it just wasn't working. Usually, when a DM comes to the board, they've been playing with a style that's working so far, unless they make a post stating otherwise. Is it really necessary to tell everyone that because they can't figure out what X character or Y city would say/do that they need to ask the players or do something outside of what they normally wouldn't? Or other minor problems really.

I guess what I'm saying is that style changes are usually a massive undertaking, and they shouldn't be prescribed to every single problem. As when you change style, you're not only asking a single person to change their mode of gaming, but you're asking an entire table to do so. And sometimes, that massive of a solution isn't necessary for every problem under the sun.



That's a fair point, but the problems do tend to be fairly large, like players  fighting IC, etc, and the bottom line is that they don't need to change their style unless they think it's warranted.
"The real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development." -Albert Einstein Resident Left Hand of Stalin and Banana Stand Grandstander Half of the Ambiguously Gay Duo House of Trolls, looking for a partner Wondering what happened to the Star Wars forums?
Show
Star Wars Minis has a home here http://www.bloomilk.com/ and Star Wars Saga Edition RPG has a home here http://thesagacontinues.createaforum.com/index.php
Show
141722973 wrote:
And it wasn't ****. It was subjectively concensual sex.
57036828 wrote:
Marketing and design are two different things. For instance the snuggy was designed for people in wheel chairs and marketed to people that are too incompetent to operate a blanket.
75239035 wrote:
I personally don't want him decapitated.
141722973 wrote:
And do not call me a Yank. I am a Québecois, basically your better.
And the greatest post moderation of all time...
58115148 wrote:
I gave that (Content Removed) a to-scale Lego replica. (Content Removed) love to-scale Lego replicas. (ORC_Cerberus: Edited - Vulgarity is against the Code of Conduct)
I can safely say that I personally wouldn't switch styles unless it just wasn't working. Usually, when a DM comes to the board, they've been playing with a style that's working so far, unless they make a post stating otherwise.

Almost every post that brings up a problem, instead of just an idea that needs tweaking, is at least implicitly stating that their "style" is not working for some reason.

I guess what I'm saying is that style changes are usually a massive undertaking, and they shouldn't be prescribed to every single problem. As when you change style, you're not only asking a single person to change their mode of gaming, but you're asking an entire table to do so. And sometimes, that massive of a solution isn't necessary for every problem under the sun.

Not all style changes that get proposed here are that massive or disruptive. Even "Location in Motion" does not, ultimately change the player experience. Alternate goals, asking questions, handling death differently, are all quite minor, or can at least be used to a lesser or greater degree to deal with lesser or greater in-game issues. There's no need to entirely change one's style, just to adjust the parts of it that are not working as well as one likes.

[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy

I can safely say that I personally wouldn't switch styles unless it just wasn't working. Usually, when a DM comes to the board, they've been playing with a style that's working so far, unless they make a post stating otherwise.

Almost every post that brings up a problem, instead of just an idea that needs tweaking, is at least implicitly stating that their "style" is not working for some reason.

I guess what I'm saying is that style changes are usually a massive undertaking, and they shouldn't be prescribed to every single problem. As when you change style, you're not only asking a single person to change their mode of gaming, but you're asking an entire table to do so. And sometimes, that massive of a solution isn't necessary for every problem under the sun.

Not all style changes that get proposed here are that massive or disruptive. Even "Location in Motion" does not, ultimately change the player experience. Alternate goals, asking questions, handling death differently, are all quite minor, or can at least be used to a lesser or greater degree to deal with lesser or greater in-game issues. There's no need to entirely change one's style, just to adjust the parts of it that are not working as well as one likes.



I guess it depends on how you look at it. I personally would not say changing the rules on death to be a minor undertaking. In fact, I think that's pretty huge as you now have to get a table of players all willing to play under a brand new rule that alters an ages old core rule. But something like alternate goals would certainly be a minor (but effective) undertaking. As that is mostly on the DM's side of things and can easily be conveyed to players in-game. Objectives are much easier to deal with than changing how the game proceeds when something drastic happens.
My username should actually read: Lunar Savage (damn you WotC!) *Tips top hat, adjusts monocle, and walks away with cane* and yes, that IS Mr. Peanut laying unconscious on the curb. http://asylumjournals.tumblr.com/
Objectives are much easier to deal with than changing how the game proceeds when something drastic happens.

You might think so, but there's nothing that requires that to be the case, especially considering how common it seems to be for DMs to fudge or handwave parts of the game that cause them problems.

If you with to discuss that specific example further, however, please make another thread.

[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy

I can safely say that I personally wouldn't switch styles unless it just wasn't working. Usually, when a DM comes to the board, they've been playing with a style that's working so far, unless they make a post stating otherwise.

Almost every post that brings up a problem, instead of just an idea that needs tweaking, is at least implicitly stating that their "style" is not working for some reason.

I guess what I'm saying is that style changes are usually a massive undertaking, and they shouldn't be prescribed to every single problem. As when you change style, you're not only asking a single person to change their mode of gaming, but you're asking an entire table to do so. And sometimes, that massive of a solution isn't necessary for every problem under the sun.

Not all style changes that get proposed here are that massive or disruptive. Even "Location in Motion" does not, ultimately change the player experience. Alternate goals, asking questions, handling death differently, are all quite minor, or can at least be used to a lesser or greater degree to deal with lesser or greater in-game issues. There's no need to entirely change one's style, just to adjust the parts of it that are not working as well as one likes.



I guess it depends on how you look at it. I personally would not say changing the rules on death to be a minor undertaking. In fact, I think that's pretty huge as you now have to get a table of players all willing to play under a brand new rule that alters an ages old core rule. But something like alternate goals would certainly be a minor (but effective) undertaking. As that is mostly on the DM's side of things and can easily be conveyed to players in-game. Objectives are much easier to deal with than changing how the game proceeds when something drastic happens.



Yeah, alternate goals and having players filling in some of the details are very easy to slip into an adventure, but pretty damn effective and fun. Let's not go into the character death issue here, if you don't mind haha.
"The real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development." -Albert Einstein Resident Left Hand of Stalin and Banana Stand Grandstander Half of the Ambiguously Gay Duo House of Trolls, looking for a partner Wondering what happened to the Star Wars forums?
Show
Star Wars Minis has a home here http://www.bloomilk.com/ and Star Wars Saga Edition RPG has a home here http://thesagacontinues.createaforum.com/index.php
Show
141722973 wrote:
And it wasn't ****. It was subjectively concensual sex.
57036828 wrote:
Marketing and design are two different things. For instance the snuggy was designed for people in wheel chairs and marketed to people that are too incompetent to operate a blanket.
75239035 wrote:
I personally don't want him decapitated.
141722973 wrote:
And do not call me a Yank. I am a Québecois, basically your better.
And the greatest post moderation of all time...
58115148 wrote:
I gave that (Content Removed) a to-scale Lego replica. (Content Removed) love to-scale Lego replicas. (ORC_Cerberus: Edited - Vulgarity is against the Code of Conduct)
Objectives are much easier to deal with than changing how the game proceeds when something drastic happens.

You might think so, but there's nothing that requires that to be the case, especially considering how common it seems to be for DMs to fudge or handwave parts of the game that cause them problems.

If you with to discuss that specific example further, however, please make another thread.



I won't go into detail on it, at least not here, but suffice it to say that in my experience, it has been as I stated earlier. Objectives minor and game procedure major.
My username should actually read: Lunar Savage (damn you WotC!) *Tips top hat, adjusts monocle, and walks away with cane* and yes, that IS Mr. Peanut laying unconscious on the curb. http://asylumjournals.tumblr.com/
I can safely say that I personally wouldn't switch styles unless it just wasn't working. Usually, when a DM comes to the board, they've been playing with a style that's working so far, unless they make a post stating otherwise.

Almost every post that brings up a problem, instead of just an idea that needs tweaking, is at least implicitly stating that their "style" is not working for some reason.

I guess what I'm saying is that style changes are usually a massive undertaking, and they shouldn't be prescribed to every single problem. As when you change style, you're not only asking a single person to change their mode of gaming, but you're asking an entire table to do so. And sometimes, that massive of a solution isn't necessary for every problem under the sun.

Not all style changes that get proposed here are that massive or disruptive. Even "Location in Motion" does not, ultimately change the player experience. Alternate goals, asking questions, handling death differently, are all quite minor, or can at least be used to a lesser or greater degree to deal with lesser or greater in-game issues. There's no need to entirely change one's style, just to adjust the parts of it that are not working as well as one likes.



I guess it depends on how you look at it. I personally would not say changing the rules on death to be a minor undertaking. In fact, I think that's pretty huge as you now have to get a table of players all willing to play under a brand new rule that alters an ages old core rule. But something like alternate goals would certainly be a minor (but effective) undertaking. As that is mostly on the DM's side of things and can easily be conveyed to players in-game. Objectives are much easier to deal with than changing how the game proceeds when something drastic happens.



Yeah, alternate goals and having players filling in some of the details are very easy to slip into an adventure, but pretty damn effective and fun. Let's not go into the character death issue here, if you don't mind haha.



...I won't be having them filling in details about the world, but I will most certainly give ideas of alternate goals to my precious NPCs and beautiful monsters...my poor, poor, doomed monsters.
My username should actually read: Lunar Savage (damn you WotC!) *Tips top hat, adjusts monocle, and walks away with cane* and yes, that IS Mr. Peanut laying unconscious on the curb. http://asylumjournals.tumblr.com/
I won't go into detail on it, at least not here, but suffice it to say that in my experience, it has been as I stated earlier. Objectives minor and game procedure major.

I believe that (edit: has been the case for you), but there's nothing that requires that to be the case. Just calling something "game procedure" doesn't mean that adjusting how it's handled will be a major issue, especially if lots of people already adjust it. People blithely remove aspects of "game procedure" to make the game more punishing, why not thoughtfully make other changes to bring about other results?

[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy

I can safely say that I personally wouldn't switch styles unless it just wasn't working. Usually, when a DM comes to the board, they've been playing with a style that's working so far, unless they make a post stating otherwise.

Almost every post that brings up a problem, instead of just an idea that needs tweaking, is at least implicitly stating that their "style" is not working for some reason.

I guess what I'm saying is that style changes are usually a massive undertaking, and they shouldn't be prescribed to every single problem. As when you change style, you're not only asking a single person to change their mode of gaming, but you're asking an entire table to do so. And sometimes, that massive of a solution isn't necessary for every problem under the sun.

Not all style changes that get proposed here are that massive or disruptive. Even "Location in Motion" does not, ultimately change the player experience. Alternate goals, asking questions, handling death differently, are all quite minor, or can at least be used to a lesser or greater degree to deal with lesser or greater in-game issues. There's no need to entirely change one's style, just to adjust the parts of it that are not working as well as one likes.



I guess it depends on how you look at it. I personally would not say changing the rules on death to be a minor undertaking. In fact, I think that's pretty huge as you now have to get a table of players all willing to play under a brand new rule that alters an ages old core rule. But something like alternate goals would certainly be a minor (but effective) undertaking. As that is mostly on the DM's side of things and can easily be conveyed to players in-game. Objectives are much easier to deal with than changing how the game proceeds when something drastic happens.



Yeah, alternate goals and having players filling in some of the details are very easy to slip into an adventure, but pretty damn effective and fun. Let's not go into the character death issue here, if you don't mind haha.



...I won't be having them filling in details about the world, but I will most certainly give ideas of alternate goals to my precious NPCs and beautiful monsters...my poor, poor, doomed monsters.



No, but they fill in details about character backgtrounds, relationships to NPCs, no?
"The real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development." -Albert Einstein Resident Left Hand of Stalin and Banana Stand Grandstander Half of the Ambiguously Gay Duo House of Trolls, looking for a partner Wondering what happened to the Star Wars forums?
Show
Star Wars Minis has a home here http://www.bloomilk.com/ and Star Wars Saga Edition RPG has a home here http://thesagacontinues.createaforum.com/index.php
Show
141722973 wrote:
And it wasn't ****. It was subjectively concensual sex.
57036828 wrote:
Marketing and design are two different things. For instance the snuggy was designed for people in wheel chairs and marketed to people that are too incompetent to operate a blanket.
75239035 wrote:
I personally don't want him decapitated.
141722973 wrote:
And do not call me a Yank. I am a Québecois, basically your better.
And the greatest post moderation of all time...
58115148 wrote:
I gave that (Content Removed) a to-scale Lego replica. (Content Removed) love to-scale Lego replicas. (ORC_Cerberus: Edited - Vulgarity is against the Code of Conduct)
No, but they fill in details about character backgtrounds, relationships to NPCs, no?

"What Details Should Players Fill In?" might make a very interesting (and if the rules here are at least kept in mind, not too divisive) thread.

[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy

I can safely say that I personally wouldn't switch styles unless it just wasn't working. Usually, when a DM comes to the board, they've been playing with a style that's working so far, unless they make a post stating otherwise.

Almost every post that brings up a problem, instead of just an idea that needs tweaking, is at least implicitly stating that their "style" is not working for some reason.

I guess what I'm saying is that style changes are usually a massive undertaking, and they shouldn't be prescribed to every single problem. As when you change style, you're not only asking a single person to change their mode of gaming, but you're asking an entire table to do so. And sometimes, that massive of a solution isn't necessary for every problem under the sun.

Not all style changes that get proposed here are that massive or disruptive. Even "Location in Motion" does not, ultimately change the player experience. Alternate goals, asking questions, handling death differently, are all quite minor, or can at least be used to a lesser or greater degree to deal with lesser or greater in-game issues. There's no need to entirely change one's style, just to adjust the parts of it that are not working as well as one likes.



I guess it depends on how you look at it. I personally would not say changing the rules on death to be a minor undertaking. In fact, I think that's pretty huge as you now have to get a table of players all willing to play under a brand new rule that alters an ages old core rule. But something like alternate goals would certainly be a minor (but effective) undertaking. As that is mostly on the DM's side of things and can easily be conveyed to players in-game. Objectives are much easier to deal with than changing how the game proceeds when something drastic happens.



Yeah, alternate goals and having players filling in some of the details are very easy to slip into an adventure, but pretty damn effective and fun. Let's not go into the character death issue here, if you don't mind haha.



...I won't be having them filling in details about the world, but I will most certainly give ideas of alternate goals to my precious NPCs and beautiful monsters...my poor, poor, doomed monsters.



No, but they fill in details about character backgtrounds, relationships to NPCs, no?



Where appropriate, yes. They do get to control their character backgrounds and relationships to NPCs, provided I give them knowledge of important NPCs up front. Though they can make their own NPCs as necessary before the campaign begins. After it begins, different story. I guess I'm a bit of a hard ass on world creation. I just feel it's up to the DM and the players shouldn't have that level of control. But that's a dead horse by now, so...back to the topic at hand. Civility, I can attempt it.
My username should actually read: Lunar Savage (damn you WotC!) *Tips top hat, adjusts monocle, and walks away with cane* and yes, that IS Mr. Peanut laying unconscious on the curb. http://asylumjournals.tumblr.com/
A little extra civility never hurts. It is especially helpful to keep an open mind when exchanging ideas. After all, the end goal is fun, and if whatever the DM is doing leads to fun it's hard to argue they are "doing it wrong".

Great idea CorranHorn  
]I can safely say that I personally wouldn't switch styles unless it just wasn't working. Usually, when a DM comes to the board, they've been playing with a style that's working so far, unless they make a post stating otherwise.

Almost every post that brings up a problem, instead of just an idea that needs tweaking, is at least implicitly stating that their "style" is not working for some reason.

I guess what I'm saying is that style changes are usually a massive undertaking, and they shouldn't be prescribed to every single problem. As when you change style, you're not only asking a single person to change their mode of gaming, but you're asking an entire table to do so. And sometimes, that massive of a solution isn't necessary for every problem under the sun.

Not all style changes that get proposed here are that massive or disruptive. Even "Location in Motion" does not, ultimately change the player experience. Alternate goals, asking questions, handling death differently, are all quite minor, or can at least be used to a lesser or greater degree to deal with lesser or greater in-game issues. There's no need to entirely change one's style, just to adjust the parts of it that are not working as well as one likes.



I guess it depends on how you look at it. I personally would not say changing the rules on death to be a minor undertaking. In fact, I think that's pretty huge as you now have to get a table of players all willing to play under a brand new rule that alters an ages old core rule. But something like alternate goals would certainly be a minor (but effective) undertaking. As that is mostly on the DM's side of things and can easily be conveyed to players in-game. Objectives are much easier to deal with than changing how the game proceeds when something drastic happens.



Yeah, alternate goals and having players filling in some of the details are very easy to slip into an adventure, but pretty damn effective and fun. Let's not go into the character death issue here, if you don't mind haha.



...I won't be having them filling in details about the world, but I will most certainly give ideas of alternate goals to my precious NPCs and beautiful monsters...my poor, poor, doomed monsters.



No, but they fill in details about character backgtrounds, relationships to NPCs, no?



Where appropriate, yes. They do get to control their character backgrounds and relationships to NPCs, provided I give them knowledge of important NPCs up front. Though they can make their own NPCs as necessary before the campaign begins. After it begins, different story. I guess I'm a bit of a hard ass on world creation. I just feel it's up to the DM and the players shouldn't have that level of control. But that's a dead horse by now, so...back to the topic at hand. Civility, I can attempt it.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After a while, it's possible you might find yourself letting (and liking) the players fill in more  and more details. It's possible you won't of course, but that's the route I took. On campaign worlds I agree gfor the most part. If you want to draw up a map of the world, it's usually best in my esperience if the DM does ost (perhaps not all) of the drawing. Otherwise you may end up with a mysterious island rumored to have a monster made of smoke, or a mountain range known as The Weaver Mountains haha.

To be honest, it's not even so much civility as it is just accepting that other viewpoints and styles are as legitimate as your own. (Not you specifically, just in general. I'vebroken that enough times myself).\

Kerapalli, thanks.  You managed to put it very succinctly and well, and get my point across. I might  have to put you on 10% for all future posts!
"The real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development." -Albert Einstein Resident Left Hand of Stalin and Banana Stand Grandstander Half of the Ambiguously Gay Duo House of Trolls, looking for a partner Wondering what happened to the Star Wars forums?
Show
Star Wars Minis has a home here http://www.bloomilk.com/ and Star Wars Saga Edition RPG has a home here http://thesagacontinues.createaforum.com/index.php
Show
141722973 wrote:
And it wasn't ****. It was subjectively concensual sex.
57036828 wrote:
Marketing and design are two different things. For instance the snuggy was designed for people in wheel chairs and marketed to people that are too incompetent to operate a blanket.
75239035 wrote:
I personally don't want him decapitated.
141722973 wrote:
And do not call me a Yank. I am a Québecois, basically your better.
And the greatest post moderation of all time...
58115148 wrote:
I gave that (Content Removed) a to-scale Lego replica. (Content Removed) love to-scale Lego replicas. (ORC_Cerberus: Edited - Vulgarity is against the Code of Conduct)
I think the best time to suggest major style adjustments is when someone is either new to the game or designing a new campaign. If they're in the middle of an existing one and following the suggestions would essentially mean dropping the whole thing and starting over...well, that's not a very useful solution to their immediate problem.

Edit: Case in point, I'm currenly designing a campaign, and have already considered some significant changes to how I run it based on stuff I've seen since joining this board. I'm even thinking about converting a major subplot into an LIM adventure, as an experiment.
I think the best time to suggest major style adjustments is when someone is either new to the game or designing a new campaign. If they're in the middle of an existing one and following the suggestions would essentially mean dropping the whole thing and starting over...well, that's not a very useful solution to their immediate problem.

Sure, but in a fantasy setting, it's possible for there to be a major departure from any and all aspects of the current adventure in favor of something else. I'm given to understand that this is a fairly common method of shaking things up in one's game, if necessary.

[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy

Sure, but in a fantasy setting, it's possible for there to be a major departure from any and all aspects of the current adventure in favor of something else. I'm given to understand that this is a fairly common method of shaking things up in one's game, if necessary.



I guess I haven't encountered it. It sounds like more work than any DM's from my group would be willing to go through mid-campaign, lol. But if you were having severe enough issues, it could make sense. 
Sure, but in a fantasy setting, it's possible for there to be a major departure from any and all aspects of the current adventure in favor of something else. I'm given to understand that this is a fairly common method of shaking things up in one's game, if necessary.



I guess I haven't encountered it. It sounds like more work than any DM's from my group would be willing to go through mid-campaign, lol. But if you were having severe enough issues, it could make sense. 



Pretty much this. If I suddenly have to make the deities of the game world come to an emergency meeting or some other bizarre event that sets in motion reality altering events, it just comes off as far-fetched and unnatural.
My username should actually read: Lunar Savage (damn you WotC!) *Tips top hat, adjusts monocle, and walks away with cane* and yes, that IS Mr. Peanut laying unconscious on the curb. http://asylumjournals.tumblr.com/
If I suddenly have to make the deities of the game world come to an emergency meeting



That, um, might actually happen in the natural course of events in the campaign I'm currently planning. 
If I suddenly have to make the deities of the game world come to an emergency meeting



That, um, might actually happen in the natural course of events in the campaign I'm currently planning. 



So...every single deity in the game world will be at this meeting and all agree to use their powers to alter the reality of the universe/world, despite the fact they fight one another or have opposing alignments, goals, etc. etc. etc....?

Ha, kinda cool. If far-fetched as Hell. 
My username should actually read: Lunar Savage (damn you WotC!) *Tips top hat, adjusts monocle, and walks away with cane* and yes, that IS Mr. Peanut laying unconscious on the curb. http://asylumjournals.tumblr.com/
So...every single deity in the game world will be at this meeting and all agree to use their powers to alter the reality of the universe/world, despite the fact they fight one another or have opposing alignments, goals, etc. etc. etc....?



Well, they did it once before when banding together to fight off the Primordials. 
Pretty much this. If I suddenly have to make the deities of the game world come to an emergency meeting or some other bizarre event that sets in motion reality altering events, it just comes off as far-fetched and unnatural.

It's difficult to discuss things with you when you do things like this. You take what someone suggests and carry it to some very specific conclusion that reflects the way you can imagine it going down. Sure, what you're stipulating might sound far-fetched and unnatural, but you're the one stipulating it. What I said was very generic and did not make any assumptions about how it might be accomplished, and you're knocking it with a very specific situation of your own making. Of course it's going to come off as far-fetched and unnatural if you do it like that so don't do it like that. Or, since you're not going to do it at all (which is a good idea, since you don't appear to follow what I'm suggesting), please try not to assume anyone else is going to handle it in some bizarre, ridiculous way.

It will make you much easier and more pleasant to discuss things with.

[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy

It's difficult to discuss things with you when you do things like this. You take what someone suggests and carry it to some very specific conclusion that reflects the way you can imagine it going down. Sure, what you're stipulating might sound far-fetched and unnatural, but you're the one stipulating it. What I said was very generic and did not make any assumptions about how it might be accomplished, and you're knocking it with a very specific situation of your own making. Of course it's going to come off as far-fetched and unnatural if you do it like that so don't do it like that. Or, since you're not going to do it at all (which is a good idea, since you don't appear to follow what I'm suggesting), please try not to assume anyone else is going to handle it in some bizarre, ridiculous way.

It will make you much easier and more pleasant to discuss things with.



Not to pile on a specific poster, but since I've been called out by name in Post #3 in this otherwise well-meaning thread, I think I'm due this one pass. Some of us are trying to find common ground with you wherever we can, LunarSavage, only to face rebuke. It's exactly this thing Centauri points out which leads you to find fault with our ideas and then to take those arguments to every thread on these forums. I'm sure we can have fruitful discussions if you'd consider Centauri's words and stop leaping to the erroneous conclusion that any new ideas or style as an attack on your ideas or styles. They're not.

No amount of tips, tricks, or gimmicks will ever be better than simply talking directly to your fellow players to resolve your issues.
DMs: Don't Prep the Plot | Structure First, Story Last | Prep Tips | Spoilers Don't Spoil Anything | No Myth Roleplaying
Players: 11 Ways to Be a Better Roleplayer | You Are Not Your Character     Hilarious D&D Actual Play Podcast: Crit Juice!

Here, Have Some Free Material From Me: Encounters With Alternate Goals  |  Dark Sun Full-Contact Futbol   |   Pre-Generated D&D 5e PCs

Follow me on Twitter: @is3rith

Pretty much this. If I suddenly have to make the deities of the game world come to an emergency meeting or some other bizarre event that sets in motion reality altering events, it just comes off as far-fetched and unnatural.

It's difficult to discuss things with you when you do things like this. You take what someone suggests and carry it to some very specific conclusion that reflects the way you can imagine it going down. Sure, what you're stipulating might sound far-fetched and unnatural, but you're the one stipulating it. What I said was very generic and did not make any assumptions about how it might be accomplished, and you're knocking it with a very specific situation of your own making. Of course it's going to come off as far-fetched and unnatural if you do it like that so don't do it like that. Or, since you're not going to do it at all (which is a good idea, since you don't appear to follow what I'm suggesting), please try not to assume anyone else is going to handle it in some bizarre, ridiculous way.

It will make you much easier and more pleasant to discuss things with.



Mmm...I see your point.

Fair enough.

But I'd just like to add: no matter how many of your own stipulations you use or how not bizarre you make it sound, players and DMs alike have this uncanny ability to unravel a tightly wound story and make the core concept sound ridiculous, so I try to tend towards core concepts that aren't so ridiculous. And any in-game event that would change the rules/reality of the game, is something that comes off as ridiculous at it's core. 
My username should actually read: Lunar Savage (damn you WotC!) *Tips top hat, adjusts monocle, and walks away with cane* and yes, that IS Mr. Peanut laying unconscious on the curb. http://asylumjournals.tumblr.com/
It's difficult to discuss things with you when you do things like this. You take what someone suggests and carry it to some very specific conclusion that reflects the way you can imagine it going down. Sure, what you're stipulating might sound far-fetched and unnatural, but you're the one stipulating it. What I said was very generic and did not make any assumptions about how it might be accomplished, and you're knocking it with a very specific situation of your own making. Of course it's going to come off as far-fetched and unnatural if you do it like that so don't do it like that. Or, since you're not going to do it at all (which is a good idea, since you don't appear to follow what I'm suggesting), please try not to assume anyone else is going to handle it in some bizarre, ridiculous way.

It will make you much easier and more pleasant to discuss things with.



Not to pile on a specific poster, but since I've been called out by name in Post #3 in this otherwise well-meaning thread, I think I'm due this one pass. Some of us are trying to find common ground with you wherever we can, LunarSavage, only to face rebuke. It's exactly this thing Centauri points out which leads you to find fault with our ideas and then to take those arguments to every thread on these forums. I'm sure we can have fruitful discussions if you'd consider Centauri's words and stop leaping to the erroneous conclusion that any new ideas or style as an attack on your ideas or styles. They're not.



Perhaps if you'd agree to work on the tone of your posts a little more, it might be more apparent. But particularly in the thread on death, you consistently and arbitrarily dismissed many many many valid discussion points, answers, and rationalizations because you could not wrap your head around them. Which reeks of attacking others with this "you must see the light and I'm not interested in your side of the debate" no matter how many times you say that you want people to invalidate your style. Because simply put, each style can not be invalidated. And the manner in which you often phrase your questions, reeks of implications that another human has emotional and mental issues that does not allow them to think rationally or gives them any right to have a preference of their own.
My username should actually read: Lunar Savage (damn you WotC!) *Tips top hat, adjusts monocle, and walks away with cane* and yes, that IS Mr. Peanut laying unconscious on the curb. http://asylumjournals.tumblr.com/
And any in-game event that would change the rules/reality of the game, is something that comes off as ridiculous at it's core. 

Changes to rules are transparent. You can play the same campaign in any edition, or with any number of non-D&D rulesets.

And no one is suggesting a change to the reality of anyone's game. You're doing it again: taking things to an uncharitable and "ridiculous" extreme in an attempt to discount it.

[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy

And any in-game event that would change the rules/reality of the game, is something that comes off as ridiculous at it's core. 

Changes to rules are transparent. You can play the same campaign in any edition, or with any number of non-D&D rulesets.

And no one is suggesting a change to the reality of anyone's game. You're doing it again: taking things to an uncharitable and "ridiculous" extreme in an attempt to discount it.



I'm not really trying to take it to an extreme, but what you said:

"Sure, but in a fantasy setting, it's possible for there to be a major departure from any and all aspects of the current adventure in favor of something else. I'm given to understand that this is a fairly common method of shaking things up in one's game, if necessary.."

My issue with that statement, is that you imply since it's a fantasy setting, things can change on a whim. Which just isn't true. Every setting needs a consistency. Even a setting like Alice in Wonderland had consistency. To suddenly change the consistency of that setting takes a monumental event.

And I disagree. Rules aren't transparent. They're a very big reason many players did not transition between various editions.
My username should actually read: Lunar Savage (damn you WotC!) *Tips top hat, adjusts monocle, and walks away with cane* and yes, that IS Mr. Peanut laying unconscious on the curb. http://asylumjournals.tumblr.com/
And no one is suggesting a change to the reality of anyone's game.



I kind of thought that's what was being suggested, with the idea of completely shaking things up and going in a new direction, in a way that would only be possible in the fantasy genre.
Perhaps if you'd agree to work on the tone of your posts a little more, it might be more apparent. But particularly in the thread on death, you consistently and arbitrarily dismissed many many many valid discussion points, answers, and rationalizations because you could not wrap your head around them. Which reeks of attacking others with this "you must see the light and I'm not interested in your side of the debate" no matter how many times you say that you want people to invalidate your style. Because simply put, each style can not be invalidated. And the manner in which you often phrase your questions, reeks of implications that another human has emotional and mental issues that does not allow them to think rationally or gives them any right to have a preference of their own.



Tone? That I can't do because it's in your head. If even our good friend The Smiley can't properly convey tone, what hope do I have? Incidentally, if the tone of that comes off wrong to you, pretend there's a smiley at the end of it and see if it helps.

What I can do is not dismiss emotional arguments out of hand. Know that I will probably never be able to view them as an equal or better argument than something someone puts out that does explain something other than with "but... my feelings." But I don't need to go out of my way to point that out, certainly.

Corran: Please change the name of this thread to "The Airing of Grievances." Also, mods: Please change the name of every other thread recently to... "The Airing of Grievances."

No amount of tips, tricks, or gimmicks will ever be better than simply talking directly to your fellow players to resolve your issues.
DMs: Don't Prep the Plot | Structure First, Story Last | Prep Tips | Spoilers Don't Spoil Anything | No Myth Roleplaying
Players: 11 Ways to Be a Better Roleplayer | You Are Not Your Character     Hilarious D&D Actual Play Podcast: Crit Juice!

Here, Have Some Free Material From Me: Encounters With Alternate Goals  |  Dark Sun Full-Contact Futbol   |   Pre-Generated D&D 5e PCs

Follow me on Twitter: @is3rith

My issue with that statement, is that you imply since it's a fantasy setting, things can change on a whim.

I make no mention of how the departure might occur. That's your assumption.

And I disagree. Rules aren't transparent. They're a very big reason many players did not transition between various editions.

If I tell you that my character is a fighter and he attacks monsters with a sword in order to obtain their treasure, I have told you nothing about the rules I'm using. It could be any version of D&D or any of a dozen other rule sets. That's what "transparent" means, in this case, than the rules can change, even very significantly, but that the overlying fiction changes little or not at all. And so, with quite a few of the suggestions here, one's current campaign need not change significantly.

This is what has to stop: this niggling and uncharitable misinterpretation of peoples' words. I don't have time to break down and simplify every one of my sentences so that these kinds of things don't happen. I have to rely in large part of being given some benefit of the doubt. I guess I've already earned that from a lot of the people who post here, and therefore they trust that if they don't quite follow what I'm saying then it's not because I'm making some utterly hairbrained suggestion. If they're really confused, they ask, instead of trying to short circuit the discussion with assumptions based on misunderstanding. Try not doing that. Try reading those statements as if they weren't written by some radical, but by someone who loves this game, has played under a lot of the baseline assumptions and is trying new things. Can you do that? Is that a fair request?

[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy

I will always try to make my contribution to the community respectful and meaningful. I'd love to see the D&D forum as welcoming as the Star Wars forums, but I also realize this will take time. There are codes of conduct, people just need to remember them. I will not be back to this thread as it's already getting heated. But I can assure people I'm hear to help when I am able.