Gamers need to stop being so judgmental

[thegreyelf]

Some thoughts on how as gamers, we can all be really awful to each other and truly arrogant in our One True Wayism.

This honestly doesn't apply to 99% of the folks here. This may be the single coolest community on the Internet. But in the broader arena of social media, the way gamers treat each other can be just awful.

elflairgames.blogspot.com/2022/07/we-need-to-stop-judging-how-others-play.html

[Finarvyn]

I think we've all fallen into that trap at one time or another. K&KA tries to solve this a little by having "by the book" and "homebrew" sections for both OD&D and AD&D. Their intent is to have one section where one looks at the letter of the law and another section where one can go off the rails and say, "in my game we..."

Maybe we should have that sort of thing here.

Certainly, there are a lot of gamers who like to be "the authority" on gaming. I try to couch things as "back in the day we..." without being preachy, but a lot of folks are very much black-and-white "this is good, other interpretations are bad" and that's a hard thing to combat. I know what I like and what I don't like, and I try to engage in what I like and avoid what I don't like. Sometimes that's hard.

Anyway, nice essay and (as usual) some good things to ponder.

[jeffb]

Jul 7, 2022 16:31:49 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

I know what I like and what I don't like, and I try to engage in what I like and avoid what I don't like. Sometimes that's hard.

100%.

[Deleted]

Jul 7, 2022 16:31:49 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

Maybe we should have that sort of thing here.

I think we kind of already do. It's more implicit but all the OD&D sub sections are filled with general threads on things that fall under the purview of the booklet names and scope without necessarily being about things that are actually in them. Since the original rules themselves mention penciling things in I think it's all very much in the spirit of this forum. 

[djeryv]

I am new here to these particular boards...but I think the structure is already too structured so I think what you have here is fine as it is.

I think if someone wants to ask a question like "what does this rule mean written this way" to "how do you handle encumbrance in your game" convey whether it is a rules as written...or a house rule discussion. The fact that some people are highly passionate on how they do things is just something that will always exist...and sometimes they will turn into "your way is dumb cuz..." directions. These types of people are just very argumentative by nature...and probably apply those behaviors in all aspects of their lives. Some are more mellow where it is, "whatever works for you". As long as a forum/board sticks to the subject matter in which it was created, I think they can stay on track pretty well.

[robertsconley]

Jul 7, 2022 15:36:51 GMT -6 thegreyelf said:

This honestly doesn't apply to 99% of the folks here. This may be the single coolest community on the Internet. But in the broader arena of social media, the way gamers treat each other can be just awful.

I have gotten a lot of mileage from saying "Here what I do, why I do it, what happened in actual play when I used it. Hope you find this or part of this useful." And not focus on judging other folks approaches. When I am negative it is from the standpoint of I tried X, Y happened, and the result wasn't suitable for what I was going for.

And those of you who interacted with me here and on other forums know my opinions about gaming. That I often hold strong opinions about various topics. But when it comes to other folks playing or referee, I am well aware you have to do whatever makes it work for you as a fun hobby within the time you have for a hobby.

[robertsconley]

Jul 7, 2022 16:31:49 GMT -6 Finarvyn said:

Maybe we should have that sort of thing here.

Well we are talking about OD&D here. I think at this point we are all in agreement that given how the 3 LBBs and supplements were written, you have to decide how to interpret several sections right off the bat. Unlike 3.X or 5e, OD&D doesn't have a pure board/wargame mode where you resolve everything via the mechanics.

However, outlining and detailing the most common interpretations would be useful.

[Starbeard]

Did anyone else laugh in 2008-10ish when people started wearing t-shirts that said stuff like "Gamers make better people"?

robertsconley hit the nail on the head, I think. The thing about fantasy games in particular is that, because of their conceptual nature and the lack of needing material components to participate, people invariably spend more time thinking about them than playing them. Whole books and even entire game systems have become best sellers and won awards despite having never been playtested, and/or written by someone who actually has little or no regular experience running games at all. The "big fish story" nature of RPG gaming and the private nature of playing games at home doesn't help either, because everyone can talk from a position of authority without having to worry about others peeking into their real gaming life for corroboration. Idealized play styles and factionalism just naturally come next.

It isn't always insidious: I also went through a long phase years ago where I talked about my projects and games, even exaggerating claims here and there, and just generally spoke as a self-assured expert at this whole thing, before forcing myself to sit down and take stock of the fact that I hadn't actually run or played in a session for years; it was all just an idealized hypothetical activity in my head at that point, irrelevant to anything but my own solo games. That's when I stopped checking out forums and started finding new gaming friends, groups to play in, and didn't come back to the internet until I could talk about things that I was actually doing.

The short of my whole rant is: the most polite way to talk about RPGs, and really the only truly constructive way, is to talk the way Rob tries to, "This is what happened in my game, this is how I resolved it, hopefully someone will find that helpful." These days I hardly ever read blogs or even most forum threads, because there's unfortunately very little of that to go around; if I read two blog posts where the author never mentions something that actually happened in an actual game, I don't feel like I need to keep reading.

[tkdco2]

I've had those experiences in real life, and they're extremely unpleasant. I think people need to realize that everyone has a different style and respect it. If they can't or won't, then they need to find a different group.

[Flintlock]

I agree, but cautiously.

The badwrongfun people definitely exist. But so do the people who take any disagreement or difference as some kind of personal attack on their moral character.

My most controversial opinion is probably that Western Gunfight was the first RPG. I'm always happy to have a friendly back and forth with anyone that enjoys debating RPG history on the topic. But my experience is that some people don't just think I'm incorrect, they think I'm an evil heretic for so much as mentioning my view. And frankly life is too short for me to humour those people by peppering my arguments with "it's just my opinion" and "you might think differently" to try and soothe them.

Generally (and I'm not wanting to brush aside the fact it sounds like tkdco has had different experiences) I've found this is almost exclusively an online thing. At my old club before I moved one of my best mates was largely a storygame GM. Apart from a bit of banter, it made no difference at all. We certainly didn't scream the kind of abuse at each other you see in Internet discourse. We just didn't play in each other's games much.

[Starbeard]

Flintlock, I agree, but cautiously.

I would argue that the overly defensive player you describe is just another side of the BWF mentality. One's idealized concept of the perfect game becomes a matter of personal identity (how can it not when it lives churning in your head 24/7?), and so when it comes in contact with incompatible statements they are perceived as attacks against the person's intelligence or integrity or authenticity, and against all that is right and true.

Some BWFers wage an offensive strategy, while others are primarily reactionary or act in defensive herds.

edit: and I completely agree about real life vs the internet. Even by hobby gaming's low social standards, face to face interactions around these issues are ten thousand percent more civil and hardly anyone cares enough to make a big deal out of it.

[tkdco2]

While I've experienced stuff like that online, most of these types of arguments I've had were face to face, with more than one gaming group. These ranged from beginning of the edition wars, 1e vs. 2e; to a certain player trying to control everything even when he wasn't the DM.

[doublejig2]

Jul 8, 2022 19:23:36 GMT -6 tkdco2 said:

While I've experienced stuff like that online, most of these types of arguments I've had were face to face, with more than one gaming group. These ranged from beginning of the edition wars, 1e vs. 2e; to a certain player trying to control everything even when he wasn't the DM.

At some point that's got to get old! In response, one devious GM’s “purporting” might counter curtly with a posited wight tick, which slowly drains experience points. Let the indicted player wonder why his afflicted adventurer never levels up, while concurrently on AD&D’s posited Negative Plane, a bloated undead tick writhes in cadaverous ecstasy. Then see if he's still controlling things!

[tkdco2]

Jul 8, 2022 20:00:09 GMT -6 doublejig2 said:

Jul 8, 2022 19:23:36 GMT -6 tkdco2 said:

While I've experienced stuff like that online, most of these types of arguments I've had were face to face, with more than one gaming group. These ranged from beginning of the edition wars, 1e vs. 2e; to a certain player trying to control everything even when he wasn't the DM.

At some point that's got to get old! In response, one devious GM’s “purporting” might counter curtly with a posited wight tick, which slowly drains experience points. Let the indicted player wonder why his afflicted adventurer never levels up, while concurrently on AD&D’s posited Negative Plane, a bloated undead tick writhes in cadaverous ecstasy. Then see if he's still controlling things!

I had several discussions with him about his attitude. Basically, I put my foot down and told him it was my game, and I'll run it how I see fit. As the DM, I have the final say.

I probably will never run another game for said person. If I do, the first thing I'll do is read him the riot act. If he doesn't like it, bye bye!

As for the other group, I just left. Getting crap every week for liking a different edition wasn't worth it.

[Deleted]

Jul 8, 2022 19:23:36 GMT -6 tkdco2 said:

While I've experienced stuff like that online, most of these types of arguments I've had were face to face, with more than one gaming group. These ranged from beginning of the edition wars, 1e vs. 2e; to a certain player trying to control everything even when he wasn't the DM.

I had a guy like that a few years ago.  The guy who really thought the game should go a specific way, that is. My solution was to say "Hey, you have a lot of really strong opinions and ideas about how a campaign should function. When are you going to run one?" 

He actually did start running one and I think it fixed his perspective on things quite a bit, seeing the work and decisions that go into that sort of thing. 

[Starbeard]

I can think of maybe one or two I've met like that, who really just used the game as an excuse to be combative at the table. One was oddly pretty reasonable and open as a DM, so I think he had frustration over not being in control of his own game. The other was a sour player who challenged everything and compared every other rule unfavorably to another game he liked better, and at the head of the table he was a smug DM—you know the kind, who will just sit there smirking with arms folded instead of giving the players any meaningful prompts to get the game moving, and then criticize them for not figuring out the right decision. He didn't last too long.

[dicebro]

Somebody who is attached to their badass character with lots of feats and powers isn’t really gonna feel at home in my world. Especially if they insist on fighting every monster to the death while bulldozing their way through the wilderness and underworld. Heh!

[tkdco2]

Jul 9, 2022 7:05:03 GMT -6 @ampleframework said:

Jul 8, 2022 19:23:36 GMT -6 tkdco2 said:

He actually did start running one and I think it fixed his perspective on things quite a bit, seeing the work and decisions that go into that sort of thing. 

Said player was also a DM, so he had his own ideas about the game. I'm okay with that; it was his trying to force his ideas on me that I didn't like.

[Flintlock]

Jul 9, 2022 10:53:11 GMT -6 Starbeard said:

The other was a sour player who challenged everything and compared every other rule unfavorably to another game he liked better, and at the head of the table he was a smug DM—you know the kind, who will just sit there smirking with arms folded instead of giving the players any meaningful prompts to get the game moving, and then criticize them for not figuring out the right decision. He didn't last too long.

If I get DM's like that my character will insist on trying to launch an opera career.

Well, if you're not going to give me any meaningful game direction I have to make a guess. It's not my fault if opera was the wrong one.

[rsdean]

Jul 9, 2022 17:35:30 GMT -6 Flintlock said:

If I get DM's like that my character will insist on trying to launch an opera career.

[/div]

That would be quite the game in my D&D world, since I have spent zero time considering whether there is theater of any sort*, or what the common musical genres are. I’d suspect that you’d need to head for the biggest city there is to find the potential audience, and since that’s off in a part of the map no player has previously visited, I don’t know anything about their culture or guild regulations either…

(I also think I’d suggest porting in some alternative set of rules with more of a mechanical safety net for non-combat interactions…)

*Just for the record, I’ve done some reading on the history of theater in the real world, but it didn’t extend to cover the development of opera.

[tkdco2]

I once created a Giff (hippopotamus-headed humanoid) character who was an opera singer and Sumo wrestler. Too bad he was killed so early in his career.

[DungeonDevil]

I will agree to sit at your table as you Referee. Your table, your rules.
If you do a good job, I will come back.
If you are an arse about it, I will not likely return.

If it's my table, you ought respect my rules.
If you object, there's a door with a sign that reads EGRESS. Use it.

No need for arguments.

[tkdco2]

That's pretty much my position. Respect between the DM and players is a must, and it goes both ways.

[Malcadon]

I remember the Edition Wars. While this community was always largely chill about things, I remember the old-school D&D community at large got rather smug. I cant remember when that stopped, I am glad the broader old-school community moved past that years ago. While I did suffer that smugness, it was more about picking-up all the historical knowledge of the early years of D&D being "the Game Historian" in other groups. It was like I looked into a mirror and noticed a handlebar mustache a fedora and asked myself: "Am I a Hipster?" (mind you, I never spotted such things -- its a metaphor)

While the "Old Guard" like to complain about new rules and players, we were all young and stupid when we got started, and we have to recognize that a lot of the newer players have not the experience we have and assume that you play a game as published. Also, there is the way people from different generations were influenced by entertainment. Older fans have the luxury of reading more books and seeing more movies, but at the same time, we had our own childhood influences, while younger players have their own influences and yet to have broaden their horizon.

There are dynamics of gaming, old and new, that everyone can benefit from. While I like the ability to do raw role-playing with some overly simple "roll this to do/avoid" rolls with the old rules, and the use of gaming currency (Hero Points, Luck Points, etc.) to encourage better role-playing or cool actions with newer games, I know that is not everyone's cup of tea. Likewise, I never liked THAC0/to-hit charts of the old games, nor do I like game balance that newer games like to do, as that is not my cup of tea and that is also OK. The best part about the OSR movement is that we can make our own rulebooks, with our own tweaks while also taking old and new ideas in a DIY way, and old-school players are so piecemeal that there is something for everyone.

All and all, the hobby should be enjoyed by everyone and not ruined by some smug gatekeepers with only one way of looking at things, nor those bad actors (I'm not naming names, but we all know that guy who ruins the game forever for new players) who like to poison the water for everyone and for really awful reasons.

To be honest, when I saw the title, I assumed that it was about the broader problem of how toxic and anti-social the internet made a lot of people on a societal level. You know, the reason why more people hate family reunions.