Mah harblls.

I remember this one chick had the nicest

Quote from: Seanchai...Again, what poll are you refering to? The discussion is about whether or not play styles exist. There hasn't been a poll that I'm aware of, just people reporting their behavior in this thread and pointing to the reports of behavior elsewhere...

Seanchai

The poll/survey/study whatever you wish to call it that WotC conducted to find out what people liked and wanted in RPGs.  Specifically with the goal of giving it to them in D&D 3rd edition.

It may be a simple different use of terms when I say playstyle and you say playstyle.  

Simply put, I have met people who do not like to role-play as that term is described in the cited threads, that is interacting with the setting in character and/or ways that are other than just kill it an take its stuff.  I've met others who despise combat and prefer to talk to the barkeep about the harvest.  

I'm not saying that I've found these extremes (to me) to be common but they exist.  And I would say these two people prefer different styles of play, and hence that there are different playstyles as I would define it.  They are not misreporting what they like or have failed to be exposed to the other (nor have others not tried to mellow or convert them) it's just what they like.  I really don't see how you can argue with that.

I'll go to another extreme, which again I'm not saying is common, but folks certainly exist in each camp.   Compare the element of chance vs. diceless no element of chance games.   Some would prefer that there be no dice, that the system is about bidding and spending points.  Others will hate this lack of an element of chance.  Sure they may want to be able to influence the odds, but they still want to roll dice and hope for a greater success and avoidance of failure.  I would call these preferences also differences in playstyle.  Again pure preference, how can you tell one of these people that how they like to play (dice or non-dice) is basically the same as the other?

Look, it's really very simple. No need to argue with Seanchai, but since a few of you are still taking him seriously, here's the way to put it.

Do people exaggerate their differences on the Internet? Is it possible that when I say I'm a grognardist and you say you're a narrationist, we'll find that we really play the same way when we sit down at a table together? Yes. Just like when I think of an expensive car and Richard Branson thinks of a cheap car, we might both be thinking of a Mercedes-Benz E-class.

But, is it possible that I can go from one game+group that I enjoy, to another game+group that I don't enjoy--even though the people in the second group are enjoying themselves? Absolutely, even if I otherwise like the people in the second group. It doesn't matter if "playstyles" are well-defined, fixed categories or not: fact is that not everyone enjoys the same style of gaming.

Quote from: Elliot WilenLook, it's really very simple. No need to argue with Seanchai, but since a few of you are still taking him seriously, here's the way to put it.

Do people exaggerate their differences on the Internet? Is it possible that when I say I'm a grognardist and you say you're a narrationist, we'll find that we really play the same way when we sit down at a table together? Yes. Just like when I think of an expensive car and Richard Branson thinks of a cheap car, we might both be thinking of a Mercedes-Benz E-class.

But, is it possible that I can go from one game+group that I enjoy, to another game+group that I don't enjoy--even though the people in the second group are enjoying themselves? Absolutely, even if I otherwise like the people in the second group. It doesn't matter if "playstyles" are well-defined, fixed categories or not: fact is that not everyone enjoys the same style of gaming.

I look at it this way.  I cut my teeth gaming in the Vampire years, and listened to, and played with, a lot of people who went on about "roleplaying over rollplaying" and so on and so on.  I was even one of them.

And you know what?  In all frankness we were still pretty much just getting together to kill shit for fun.  Fuck, I even played quite a few of what were, in retrospect, nothing more than dungeon crawls with different flavor text and the occasional maudlin playacting.

In fact, the vast majority of my games and groups throughout the years have largely played out pretty much the same way.  The flavor text changes, but it's still pretty much "Gang of motley characters gets together for filmsily explained reasons to go out into the wilds of Mirkwood/Altair 6/Brooklyn after dark to engage in mindless to-the-death combat with various nasties in the name of gaining ever more power/loot/saving the world."  

People talk a lot of shit about liking this or that, especially on message boards, but of all the groups I've played with, I've yet to find one that played so different that I couldn't sit down, and provided there were no social issues involved with the other players, be reasonably assured to have a good time.

Of course, I'm actually looking for fun, as opposed to validating my own imagined ideological stances too, so that probably helps a lot.  I'll try anything so long as I have fun doing it, and there's little connecting the ones I have or have not had fun at.

Quote from: J ArcanePeople talk a lot of shit about liking this or that, especially on message boards, but of all the groups I've played with, I've yet to find one that played so different that I couldn't sit down, and provided there were no social issues involved with the other players, be reasonably assured to have a good time.

It's not that hard to find examples of people talking about not having fun or having an argument over what essentially boils down to a style clash.  You can find an interesting discussion of a particular style clash incident that seemed to lead to quite a bit of animosity between two people here:

http://groups.google.com/group/rec.games.frp.advocacy/msg/a15baa6c0e33b031?dmode=source

You'll also find examples in the complaints about railroaded games (some people actually like or even expect them, and Ken Rolston once described his adventure writing philosophy to me as the "greased rail adventure").

Quote from: J ArcaneIn fact, the vast majority of my games and groups throughout the years have largely played out pretty much the same way.  The flavor text changes, but it's still pretty much "Gang of motley characters gets together for filmsily explained reasons to go out into the wilds of Mirkwood/Altair 6/Brooklyn after dark to engage in mindless to-the-death combat with various nasties in the name of gaining ever more power/loot/saving the world."

J, believe it or not, given this you'd have hated playing in my longest running group. Our PCs needed a plausible IC reason merely to get out of bed. This may be to do with the fact that we all started gaming at the late age of 17 or 18.

Quote from: Pierce InverarityJ, believe it or not, given this you'd have hated playing in my longest running group. Our PCs needed a plausible IC reason merely to get out of bed. This may be to do with the fact that we all started gaming at the late age of 17 or 18.

Yes.  For some groups, "It's what my character would do," is the expected ideal.  For other groups, they hate that style of play because it leads to sub-optimal character choices or ruins the story that someone expects or is trying to tell.

Quote from: John MorrowYes.  For some groups, "It's what my character would do," is the expected ideal.  For other groups, they hate that style of play because it leads to sub-optimal character choices or ruins the story that someone expects or is trying to tell.

There's that ideology I was talking about.

Quote from: J ArcaneThere's that ideology I was talking about.

One man's ideology is another man's play style...

Quote from: John Morrowthe "greased rail adventure".

Oh, you dated her too?

Quote from: James McMurrayIf that's not saying that people are either a) not telling the truth, or b) delusional, what is it saying?

"Not telling the truth" implies it's a conscious decision on their part. That's usually not the case. "Delusional" implies that there is something wrong with the people doing this and, again, that's usually not the case.

These are labels you've attached to a very real, normal behavior so can avoid having to deal with it.

Quote from: James McMurraySorry, your need to use the word "paranormal" pretty much negates any claims of "the real world."

So you believe these paranormal investigators were investigating in Oz?

Quote from: James McMurrayNo. That's your strawman.

No, it's the foundation of your argument: "Look at the reports I have. We can't all be wrong."

Seanchai

Quote from: XantherIt may be a simple different use of terms when I say playstyle and you say playstyle.

Shrug. Attempts to clarify the use of the term have resulted in circular definitions and the idea that a play style is anything that affects play. Neither are useful, and, if pressed, would no doubt result in proponents rapidly withdrawing from them.

Seanchai

Quote from: James McMurrayWe're not talking about inaccurate self image, we're talking about "what did I do last Friday?" Most gamers can be trusted to know whether they played 20th level epic badasses or 1st level "make 8 characters and hope one survives". Likewise they'll know if their last character's death was permanent or just need a resurrection band-aid. Or any of the other playstyle differences that have been pointed to in this thread.

And if you ask a paranormal investigator what he did last Friday night, he'll tell you he saw a ghost.

Quote from: James McMurraySaying "every first person report is useless because we can't trust gamers to know what they did last weekend" smacks of having gotten over your head in an internet debate and being too afraid to admit it. Well, that or just being a retard.

No more so than saying, "Any activity we remember is real if enough of us believe we remember it clearly," then chickening out when it comes to other activities that many folks claim to remember clearly but that you don't personally believe in.

Seanchai

Quote from: James J SkachOne man's ideology is another man's play style...

Now the term includes ideologies as well? In all seriousness, maybe we'd get further by talking about what a play style isn't...

Seanchai

Quote from: James J SkachOne man's ideology is another man's play style...

Dude, read closer.  Look at the dichotomy he set up there.  His whole post is nothing more than the old "roleplaying vs. rollplaying" bollocks with a nicer coat of paint and less bad punning.