While a part of me says threat displays are threat displays, another part does detect a foul air around these that would be more appropriate to waste.

Additionally, salutations, fellow lower primate. That reminds me, I really should change up his gaming book. I just can't decide to what...the thing I'm really interested in doesn't have a cover (as I'm hacking out a barbarian style fantasy setting in an incredibly slow and haphazard style).

And an Edit: Well played, OHT. Well played.

And Ian again: Daaaamn. You know where that would have been perfect? Back in the Pistols commentary, where Settembrini's going on about "Storygames Swinewatch!". That would have been so good...I just....aw man. I can't believe I missed that. Fucking migraine.

Ok, well, my only quip here is:

"If you tell everyone your'e going to game X, don't try to trick everyone and secretly run game Y."

For all values X or Y.

Quote from: Abyssal Maw"If you tell everyone your'e going to game X, don't try to trick everyone and secretly run game Y."

For all values X or Y.

Too true, no matter which side of the Swineyard fence you sit on.  It's the classic "GM's Dilemma":

GM: "Guys, I bought this new game last weekend.  Can we take a break from our current campaign to play it?"

Guys: "Uh, no.  We like the game we're currently playing."

GM: "But I'm the one running it for you guys.  Don't I get a say in what game we play?"

Guys: "Sure, but if you want to play a game that we don't want to play, that doesn't mean we have to play it."

GM: "Dag-nabbit, guys!  C'mon...!"

Guys: "Whatever, dude.  I roll to hit."

!i!

What the fuck's an "empowered player" anyway? How does a player become "dis-empowered"? What more power does a player need than the power to say "Yeah, that game sounds fun, I'm in" or "Naw, sounds like your game would just make me wanna vomit on your shoes." Also, what the fuck use is a relationship chart in gaming?

Quote from: Abyssal MawOk, well, my only quip here is:

"If you tell everyone your'e going to game X, don't try to trick everyone and secretly run game Y."

For all values X or Y.

What if I want to set up a game with a start like Top Secret, where the players think they're engaging in "standard" espionage type activites, but then slowly reveal that we're actually playing Dark Matter?

Quote from: Ian Absentia3) Christmas Ape posts soemthing he thinks is clever, everyone humors him because they think is avatar is cute

Can you blame us?  It is a very cute avatar.

Quote from: SigmundWhat if I want to set up a game with a start like Top Secret, where the players think they're engaging in "standard" espionage type activites, but then slowly reveal that we're actually playing Dark Matter?

Years ago, I used to hang out with a group of people who thought this sort of thing was really really cool.

It's totally not. Because people are constantly budgeting their lives and time and they have expectations about what their activities are, when they agree to participate. Playing tricks or duping people is just not respectful of that.

Quote from: SigmundWhat the fuck's an "empowered player" anyway? How does a player become "dis-empowered"? What more power does a player need than the power to say "Yeah, that game sounds fun, I'm in" or "Naw, sounds like your game would just make me wanna vomit on your shoes."

Follows the law of supply and demand, I suppose.  Sometimes, it's the only game in town, so to speak, and you either have to knuckle down and keep your mouth shut, or walk.  And that applies to players and GMs alike.  Truth be told, it makes for some pretty poisonous RPG when the players (and by "players" I'm including the GM) feel stuck playing a game that they don't all like, or playing in a manner that they don't all enjoy.

QuoteAlso, what the fuck use is a relationship chart in gaming?

It's a GM's tool, and it's purely optional.  I've used it before to help me work out some complex relationships in heavily contingent scenarios ("If the players do A to Jim, then Jim will respond with B, which will in turn force Jack to do C; if the players do X, though, then Jim and Jack both will do Y, prompting Jane to do Z").  It's become rather in vogue, though, and as a fad I think it makes people who get along fine without it to think that they're missing out on something.

!i!

Quote from: Jeffrey StraszheimCan you blame us?  It is a very cute avatar.

No, I don't blame anyone at all.  It is a seriously fucking cute avatar.

!i!

Quote from: Abyssal MawYears ago, I used to hang out with a group of people who thought this sort of thing was really really cool.

It's totally not. Because people are constantly budgeting their lives and time and they have expectations about what their activities are, when they agree to participate. Playing tricks or duping people is just not respectful of that.

I'm totally with Maw on this one.  If you want the campaign to shade out of one genre and into another then you need to make sure players have buy-in upfront with that approach.

Quote from: Abyssal MawYears ago, I used to hang out with a group of people who thought this sort of thing was really really cool.

It's totally not. Because people are constantly budgeting their lives and time and they have expectations about what their activities are, when they agree to participate. Playing tricks or duping people is just not respectful of that.

Leaving aside the intentional or not insinuation that it's immature, it's my understanding that one of the methods of introducing a horror-style feeling is to use this "dawning realization" that the world is a darker and scarier place than was previously realized, and that the characters have stumbled onto something terrifying and completely unexpected. Plus, just because it's "not cool" to you doesn't mean it's "not cool" period. I would like to think I know my fellow player better than any of ya'all. "Playing tricks" might not be fun for some (and I'd probably call those people "uptight", "anal", or just plain "boring"), but for some, who derive enjoyment from the feeling of surprise, "playing tricks" can be ass-kickin fun (shut up, I live in TN )

Quote from: jrientsI'm totally with Maw on this one.  If you want the campaign to shade out of one genre and into another then you need to make sure players have buy-in upfront with that approach.

Takes the surprise right out of it for the players then, don't it. Course the characters can always have all the fun of the unexpected, while the player just sit around and roll the dice for em and yawn.

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaIt's a GM's tool, and it's purely optional.  I've used it before to help me work out some complex relationships in heavily contingent scenarios ("If the players do A to Jim, then Jim will respond with B, which will in turn force Jack to do C; if the players do X, though, then Jim and Jack both will do Y, prompting Jane to do Z").  It's become rather in vogue, though, and as a fad I think it makes people who get along fine without it to think that they're missing out on something.

!i!

So apparently it's not the same Relationship Chart used by people to track genealogies.

Quote from: SigmundTakes the surprise right out of it for the players then, don't it. Course the characters can always have all the fun of the unexpected, while the player just sit around and roll the dice for em and yawn.

Are you being a dick, or do you really think there's no room to surprise a player if they know what genre you're working in?

Quote from: jrientsAre you being a dick, or do you really think there's no room to surprise a player if they know what genre you're working in?

Maybe I am, but you definitely are. I never said there'd be no room for any surprise for a player, just no room for that surprise for a player. Why are you so put out by not knowing exactly what genre you're playing in? Do you not trust that the people you game with would want to share an enjoyable time with everyone in the group enough for you to just go with the game without that knowledge up front? Do you think I don't know whether my group would enjoy something like that or not?