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."  

I'm sorry. Is there anything I can do to help?

Unless of course you're having fun, then by all means enjoy your playstyle.

Quote from: Seanchai"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.

You've done a good job of explaining what your statement didn't mean. Mind telling us what it does mean?

QuoteSo you believe these paranormal investigators were investigating in Oz?

Nope. I believe there is more objectively verifiable (i.e. my eyeballs) proof for different playstyles than there are for ghosts.

QuoteNo, it's the foundation of your argument: "Look at the reports I have. We can't all be wrong."

As opposed to "look at all those playstyles, at least half of them have to be wrong." Interesting choice of debate styles. Or do you not believe those exist either?

Quote from: SeanchaiShrug. 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.

Several people have given you several very clear cut examples of subsets that fall under "different play style." That you constantly ignore them is both telling and amusing.

Quote from: SeanchaiAnd if you ask a paranormal investigator what he did last Friday night, he'll tell you he saw a ghost.

And I'll ask for the proof. The difference here is that is that in hundreds of years no concrete evidence of ghosts has been found. I can point to GM Screens and Epic Level Handbooks, just as easily as I can sit and watch a game that involves 0 combat, then stroll 3 feet in the convention hall and see a straight up no-talking dungeon crawl..

QuoteNo 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.

Who said that?

QuoteI'm sorry. Is there anything I can do to help?

I appreciate your response, because it's general egostroking, condescending fuckwittedness does a marvelous job of illustrating the kinds of ulterior motives people have in overstating the "playstyle thing" in online discourse, much like John Morrow's previous and equally fuckwitted statement about "RvR".

People like to go on about "playstyles" on message boards largely because for some reason, it gives them some kind of fucked up ego boost.  How the fuck the way you play a game makes you better than anyone else I'll never understand, and think it's a pretty pathetic source to look to for self-validation, but once it starts, the difference have a tendency to get mroe and more dramatically stated, until eventualyl you end up with loony cockwits like Settembrini.

Also, the fact that it's illustrative of the kind of bullshit nonsense that's passed for your side of the argument for this whole thread really, but I guess when you're on the "right" side of the TBP-style dogpile, no one cares to call you on blatant fallacies, deliberate mischaracterization, self-aggrandizement, and a whole lot of other mean words for things that people do in message board arguments that are stupid.

Quote from: J ArcaneDude, 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.

Dude, I did.  It's actually a trichotomy:

Quote from: John MorrowYes.  For some groups, "It's what my character would do," is the expected ideal.

Immersion

Quote from: John MorrowFor other groups, they hate that style of play because it leads to sub-optimal character choices

Gamers

Quote from: John Morrowor ruins the story that someone expects or is trying to tell.

Story Builders.

There are people who roll- and role- play in all of those, to a greater or lesser extent, for sure. But they are there if you know where to look.

So really, if we combine John's Three with your Two, we're up to, what, 6 permutations, yes?

Can someone look at those six (for discussion purposes) and say "Ya know, really they are all playing the same way," and be right?  Sure, I'd say you could certainly look at it from 50,000 feet and say that. If you're at 500 feet, it might not be so easy to do. Altitude makes a difference in the observation and, therefore, conclusion.

I'm fine with a disagreement on that level (no pun intended).

Still missing the point.  The fallacy was in setting them up as opposed at all.  They aren't, which is why "RvR" is bollocks, and why his post is bollocks.

Quote from: J ArcanePeople like to go on about "playstyles" on message boards largely because for some reason, it gives them some kind of fucked up ego boost.  How the fuck the way you play a game makes you better than anyone else I'll never understand, and think it's a pretty pathetic source to look to for self-validation, but once it starts, the difference have a tendency to get mroe and more dramatically stated, until eventualyl you end up with loony cockwits like Settembrini.

Wait, are you saying that people who claim there are different play styles are either implying or explicitly saying that one is better/best?  I've yet to see that in this 400 post trollstraviganza.  Can you point it out? I certainly will admit to being wrong and absolutely agree that if the intent is to somehow prove One True Way - those people are..well..I don't agree with them.

I think, perhaps, you're misinterpreting something, or inferring motives that are not present. Again, if you can point it out, I'll admit to missing it...

Quote from: J ArcaneStill missing the point.  The fallacy was in setting them up as opposed at all.  They aren't, which is why "RvR" is bollocks, and why his post is bollocks.

Can you please, really, explain why?  You see no difference in play styles between people who loose themselves in character and make decision as if they were that character, and, say, people who are intent on creating a great story and so make decisions based on what would achieve that goal?

EDIT: and to be clear, I'm not trying to be argumentative about it, though I can see how this post might come off that way. I'm really curious as to why would wouldn't see those as different play styles.

Quote from: James J SkachSure, I'd say you could certainly look at it from 50,000 feet and say that. If you're at 500 feet, it might not be so easy to do. Altitude makes a difference in the observation and, therefore, conclusion.

Where it matters is around the table (1" above the ground as it were).

Quote from: James J SkachWait, are you saying that people who claim there are different play styles are either implying or explicitly saying that one is better/best?  I've yet to see that in this 400 post trollstraviganza.  Can you point it out? I certainly will admit to being wrong and absolutely agree that if the intent is to somehow prove One True Way - those people are..well..I don't agree with them.

I think, perhaps, you're misinterpreting something, or inferring motives that are not present. Again, if you can point it out, I'll admit to missing it...

I'm speaking mostly in generalities, as it's a common effect in such discussion, but come on, someone just "apologized" to me for daring play the way I and a rather substantial majority of the gaming population plays.  If that's not condescending shittery then I don't know what is.  

QuoteCan you please, really, explain why? You see no difference in play styles between people who loose themselves in character and make decision as if they were that character, and, say, people who are intent on creating a great story and so make decisions based on what would achieve that goal?

EDIT: and to be clear, I'm not trying to be argumentative about it, though I can see how this post might come off that way. I'm really curious as to why would wouldn't see those as different play styles.

Because the situations described can, and more often than not do, take place within the same game, andeven the same player.  This is why RvR is bollocks, why Forge/TBM is bollocks, and why Morrow's post is bollocks because it's nothing more than a restatement of the same general attitude.

Real play is a lot more fluid than that, which is why so little online discourse has any bearing on reality or the way gamers actualyl play, and why the Forge is such a useless bunch of shit to anyone but the idiots on it's boards who've managed to convince themselves of it's truth despite evidence to the contrary, largely to let them feel like they're part of some great movement.

You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake.

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

You can call it whatever you want but it happens in actual groups and games, causes games to be not fun for people, and causes groups to implode.  Maybe you've never experienced it, but that doesn't mean that nobody has.

Quote from: Elliot WilenWhere it matters is around the table (1" above the ground as it were).

I'd agree, depending on what it is that you're discussing. In fact, ironically, I could see where things would all look the same from the 1" (as it were) altitude  as well. If you're in a group, and you fall into a comfortable set of (often unwritten, unspoken) accommodations wherein different play styles are melded into one, it might seem silly to think of some kind of distinct style or approach...

Just because I'm overdue this week:

Housecats. Say it with me.

House.

Cats.


Oh, and Wolf Wrestling. Yeah. That too.



Focus, people.

Quote from: J ArcaneDude, 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.

There is a reason why that dichotomy appears again and again, even among people who have never been deeply involved in a theory discussion before.  At a very basic level, it's because it's a dichotomy that people actually experience.  In fact, it's a dichotomy found in the very name of the hobby which is "role-playing" + "game".  And that you can do one without the other or one at the expense o the other represents the core of the problem that some people and groups have.

Quote from: J ArcaneI'm speaking mostly in generalities, as it's a common effect in such discussion, but come on, someone just "apologized" to me for daring play the way I and a rather substantial majority of the gaming population plays.  If that's not condescending shittery then I don't know what is.

Yeah - I can see that.  Except that he does, in the next line, say unless you're having fun - then go to it. You're probably right that a substantial majority plays the way you describe.  However, the fact is that by saying that, you essentially admit there are other play styles. I haven't said anything about the size of those groups. And while Jimmy might think his way is best (it isn't) and believe he's in the majority (I doubt it), that does not negate the fact that he plays in a manner different than yours.

Quote from: J ArcaneBecause the situations described can, and more often than not do, take place within the same game, andeven the same player.  This is why RvR is bollocks, why Forge/TBM is bollocks, and why Morrow's post is bollocks because it's nothing more than a restatement of the same general attitude.

The first two I'll agree with.  I think you're reading the influence of those into Mr. Morrow's post and it's incorrect to do so. We'll have to agree to disagree on that.

Quote from: J ArcaneReal play is a lot more fluid than that, which is why so little online discourse has any bearing on reality or the way gamers actualyl play, and why the Forge is such a useless bunch of shit to anyone but the idiots on it's boards who've managed to convince themselves of it's truth despite evidence to the contrary, largely to let them feel like they're part of some great movement.

The idea that there are different play styles is separate from the discussion of the stupid, inane, borderline-fraudulent ways in which that fact is used by some folks to sell games.

Quote from: J ArcanePeople like to go on about "playstyles" on message boards largely because for some reason, it gives them some kind of fucked up ego boost.  How the fuck the way you play a game makes you better than anyone else I'll never understand, and think it's a pretty pathetic source to look to for self-validation, but once it starts, the difference have a tendency to get mroe and more dramatically stated, until eventualyl you end up with loony cockwits like Settembrini.

Yet people who go on about the underlying psychological motivations of people that they've never do that because it gives them some kind of ego boost?  And delving these imagined underlying psychological motivations isn't use to put people down?

That's a mighty nasty case of projection you've got going there.  If I'm the one with ego problems, why are you the one ranting up a storm like someone just insulted your favorite stuffed animal?

Quote from: J ArcaneAlso, the fact that it's illustrative of the kind of bullshit nonsense that's passed for your side of the argument for this whole thread really, but I guess when you're on the "right" side of the TBP-style dogpile, no one cares to call you on blatant fallacies, deliberate mischaracterization, self-aggrandizement, and a whole lot of other mean words for things that people do in message board arguments that are stupid.

Just calling something a "blatant fallacy", a "deliberate mischaracterization", "self-aggrandizement", or "stupid" doesn't mean it is.  Anyone can assert anything that they want but that doesn't make it so.  

Do you really believe that all of the people who report having bad experiences because their priorities or focus differed from one or more of the other people at the table are simply making it all up?

Quote from: J ArcaneI'm speaking mostly in generalities, as it's a common effect in such discussion, but come on, someone just "apologized" to me for daring play the way I and a rather substantial majority of the gaming population plays.  If that's not condescending shittery then I don't know what is.

So is your problem the idea that there are different styles of play or the subjective and judgmental way in which play style differences are often discussed?  

Quote from: J ArcaneBecause the situations described can, and more often than not do, take place within the same game, andeven the same player.  This is why RvR is bollocks, why Forge/TBM is bollocks, and why Morrow's post is bollocks because it's nothing more than a restatement of the same general attitude.

Yes, they can often take place in the game game and with the same players.  But they also often don't and that can produce unpleasant experiences for both sides, especially if they think their tastes make sense and the tastes that are spoiling their fun don't.  Then we get into the nickel psychiatric analysis of "real" motives that you seem so fond of.  Telling other people why they think the way they do always helps keep a discussion civil. :rolleyes:

And if you haven't noticed, I'm the one advocating moderation of style and compromise in other threads here rather than the idea that games should be designed to cater to one pure style at the expense of others.  And I've had more than a few people criticize me for suggestion compromise as a solution to style clash problems.

Quote from: J ArcaneReal play is a lot more fluid than that, which is why so little online discourse has any bearing on reality or the way gamers actualyl play, and why the Forge is such a useless bunch of shit to anyone but the idiots on it's boards who've managed to convince themselves of it's truth despite evidence to the contrary, largely to let them feel like they're part of some great movement.

Real play, based on the real problems that people actually report having experienced, is not so fluid and flexible that it can automatically absorb all style differences.  And those real world problems that people have that cause them to throw players out, leave groups, or abandon the hobby all together happen, too, even if you personally don't have that problem.

In the debates over healthcare, people talk about how awful the American healthcare system is, but do you know what?  I don't have a problem with it, nor does anyone I know, including a friend who had no insurance through a heart attack, kidney failure, and diabetes.  Does that mean that there aren't any problems with the American healthcare system or that people who report experiencing problems are just making it up or that their problems are all their own fault?

Quote from: J ArcaneYou are not a beautiful and unique snowflake.

Nor is every person interchangeable with every other person.  Now that we've gotten the extremes out of the way, can we stop ignoring the middle?