Quote from: Rincewind1;650686I like when players know the basics of the rules, but I also favour the notion of rule 0. The most important thing to me is when the GM is consistent with the rulings. And I do believe that house rules should be announced - I never bother hiding them from my players, unless they are a surprise house rule (such as Chaos points in Warhammer, for example).

.

This is pretty much my opinion as well, to a "T".

Quote from: Rincewind1;650686Let's get this over with and just say that everyone who does not play like you has a kid's imagination, you miser.

Fuck that. Kids have some of the best imaginations on the planet. I would say that someone incapable of pretending to be an elf without gridded combat falls short of that by a mile.

Quote from: Rincewind1;650686Let's get this over with and just say that everyone who does not play like you has a kid's imagination,

I can get behind this message. I'd quite like to lose a few years.

Quote from: Benoist;650677Then why are you insisting that people like me are "not playing D&D" and "do not use any rules"? What is it in you that makes you interpret these sorts of things as complete absolutes, all-or-nothing kind of deals, when your own experience apparently should tell you otherwise?

Because you are night compared to the day of those people. Once they laid down a house rule (always before play of the game)- it was followed, consistently and to the letter. They played with sandtables (or a grid) and minis, not with wishful thoughts in their heads to keep track of where everything was.

In short, they were *gamers* and *role-players*. You at least are nothing of the former. And you yourself have actually stated that.

:popcorn:

I guess the only real people who play real D&D are those that play by rules that were there before D&D was a game, and not by the actual published D&D rules.

Interesting.

Quote from: gleichman;650698Because you are night compared to the day of those people. Once they laid down a house rule (always before play of the game)- it was followed, consistently and to the letter. They played with sandtables (or a grid) and minis, not with wishful thoughts in their heads to keep track of where everything was.

In short, they were *gamers* and *role-players*. You at least are nothing of the former. And you yourself have actually stated that.

OK. See, that's where your train is leaving the station in la-la-land, as far as I'm concerned.

I've talked about the importance of communication and how I would communicate house rules to the players right off the bat at the beginning of this thread (last sentence; for years now, I've also been talking about how I have session zeros at the beginning of my games pointing these kinds of things out).

I've been talking about consistency well, consistently, as soon as we are talking about the qualities making a good DM, the importance of communication and so on. I have mentioned it on this very thread as well, as I always do, as a matter of fact.

I actually do use miniatures and terrain in some games (as shown here on this blog). I just don't think it's a requirement to play a role playing game, and actually do play role playing game sessions without miniatures and physical representations as well.

So as far as your imagined picture of me exists in your mind, and how hard you want to get at it and rip it apart or whatnot well, that's really just your fantasy-land version of me you're attacking. Good luck with that, I guess. I certainly think you are a gamer and are entitled to your way to run your games RAW, with grids and whatnot, and enjoy them.

Quote from: Benoist;650708I've talked about the importance of communication and how I would communicate house rules to the players right off the bat



I've been talking about consistency well, consistently, as soon as are talking about the qualities making a good DM, the importance of communication and so on. I have mentioned it on this very thread too.


So as far as your imagined picture of me is in your mind

And yet, you're the some person who made this post. Either that post or this one is a lie, they can't both be true.

And given how quickly you insult someone who always uses a grid, and how many times you're hurl OCD and other such comments at me- I know which one to believe.

Why in the world are you trying to back out of it now?

Quote from: gleichman;650709And yet, you're the some person who made this post. Either that post or this one is a lie, they can't both be true.

Actually they can be both true, and are, at the same time.

Quote from: gleichman;650709And given how quickly you insult someone who always uses a grid, and how many times you're hurl OCD and other such comments at me- I know which one to believe.

Nah, I don't think using a grid is bad or obsessive-compulsive. I do think that people who keep ranting about how you SHOULD have a grid otherwise you're not a gamer, as you just did call me "not a gamer" a moment ago, that you CANNOT (as in, it's physically impossible to) possibly play a game without visual representations otherwise you are either DELUDED or LYING, are being extremely narrow-minded and stubborn about their own way to game. Yes, absolutely.

That said, you're obviously a gamer. I wouldn't say otherwise.

Quote from: The Traveller;650614100% agreed. A minimal understanding of how things work is important to most players (I once had a guy try to sink a war galley with a magic missile spell. No Colm, it's not that kind of missile). Again though the complexity of the rulesets are a factor.

Let's say there are thirty combat skills in a game beyond use weapon, one player has leg sweep, salmon leap, vital strike, tai chi, chink, backstab and suckerpunch. Each of the other players has their own set of skills. All of the monsters also have combat skills, and each skill has different effects depending on how you roll.

It's much easier for the GM to let the players look after their corners so the GM can get on with running the game world using a system as sophisticated as that, as opposed to 'one attack roll'. It doesn't affect immersion in my experience.

Oh absolutely. I make a point that everyone needs to understand their PCs skills and/or powers/spells/whatever.

Quote from: estar;650622It also illustrate that for novices the more your game is an emulation of reality the easier it is for them to follow as the assumptions built up by their real life experiences remain valid.

Sure, Rob. Actually, my wife was more familiar with RQ than with 7th Sea, but after a year of playing the second, old habits die hard

Quote from: RandallS;650623If I were running this game, I'd just mod the stupid rule on the spot. 15% to hit with your fist? Nope, way too low. Unless the roll is actually "to cause noticeable damage", in which case I'd just narrate things differently, a roll of 1-3 would be an effective hit but a roll up to 10 or 11 would hit but not do anything damage or mechanical effects wise.

Yes, that is what I did, but my point was that the player could have argued that he would not have decided on that course of action because his PC probably would not do that based on how much he sucked, the same way I would not try to pilot an F-18 because I know I don't have any piloting skill.

Quote from: KenHR;650625Player: "I charge at the guards menacing the helpless old lady!"

GM: "One sec, Nate, remember when I was talking about this game when we made characters?  Even though that was something your fighter in D&D could do without breaking a sweat, in this game it's a bit harder to take on six armored guards at once with a rapier.  You still want to do it?"

Player: "Hmm, thanks.  I draw my sword, but hang back."

Of course, most of my players usually reply with something like "I KNOW" and charge in anyway, just to see for themselves how the system works out.

Same here.

Quote from: Benoist;650632The players will catch up in no time. It's part of the tuning process which allows players and GM to play the same game and share the same world of their imaginations together.

Hence my initial answer:

Don't disagree on that. Just pointing out that some games make this easier than others.

Quote from: Imperator;650711Don't disagree on that. Just pointing out that some games make this easier than others.

OK, yes. I agree with that.

I'm a real gamer if I'm playing Squad Leader or OCS or something, but not when I'm playing an RPG, apparently.

What the fuck ever. Anyone who talks about being a "REAL gamer" as if it defines their entire being deserves to be shat on in any and every way possible.

Quote from: Benoist;650710Actually they can be both true, and are, at the same time.

Sorry, you can't reserve the right to change or add things upon a whim, to be able to ignore rules, and then claim that you're always *consistent* and have always communicated the house rules.

This are two opposed behaviors. That you would claim both is the reason why I don't trust or believe you in anything.


As to maps and minis, not using them (for a game that needs their use) doesn't mean you're not a gamer. It just means you're not much of one.

Quote from: Benoist;650710That said, you're obviously a gamer. I wouldn't say otherwise.

I don't recall you ever saying otherwise. What you have done is say that I'm not a role-player.

Okay. It's great that you have the time to burn to go about fighting Fantasy-Land Ben and stuff, but I honestly don't have the time, nor the inclination really, to go about another round of a ten-page back-and-forth between you and I.

I wish you good luck against the windmills, though. You're gonna need it.

The problem with lacking a basic sense of the rules is that in an RPG, anything and everything is a possibility.

Take a classic tavern fight.  

Some options off the top of my head

1) Leap to grab the chandelier and swing across the room kicking the bard that insulted the queen's mother in the chest.

2) Flip the table that the three out-of-town foreigners are standing on brawling.

3) Throw the bowl of steaming stew into the face of my nearest antagonist.

4) Wait for the skinny farmer with the broken bottle to get close, then drop to my knees and roll into him, letting him fall over me in the confusion.

5) Take two steps foward and slide on the spilled ale across the floor through the clear space between the tables to quickly close the distance without walking into any of the increasingly random melees.

6) Slash the rope suspending the chandelier, sending it crashing on top of several of the most belligerent brawlers.

7) Draw a weapon and attack someone.  

Now, even in a game when the rules are pretty well-established; and despite how well the GM and player might communicate, running through all of these options and figuring out which ones are possible and which ones are impossible; and further, which ones are likely to be successful and which are only remotely possible would take a long, long, time.  

Option Paralysis.  

Another thing that you tend to see from new players is trying to do too many things.

Example - I leap to grab the chandelier swinging over to the bard that insulted my mother.  I draw my weapon as I swing, holding on with only a single hand.  I drop down and as the chandelier swings away I slash at the rope, sending it carreening into the crowd behind me and preventing the ugly crowd from following me.  I put my sword against the bard's neck and ask him, "What did you call my mother?"  

That'd be cool if it happened in the game, but that's a lot of action by the rules (even in a 1 minute round!!!) so usually it's going to be impossible.  By the time you break the action down into manageable chunks, the likelihood of wanting to continue the initially stated action as the situation develops is pretty small.  

Most players are going to stick to number 7 because the rules on how to resolve that are very easy and very clear.  Anything else gets increasingly complex - and usually in the process of evaluating the options with the GM, the game gets bogged down.

Now, not every game requires effective action from the PCs.  If nobody minds the game playing more like a Three Stooges short, just trying crazy stunts might work - but for most games I've participated in, players focus on the actions that they understand how the resolution will work.

Quote from: deadDMwalkingThat'd be cool if it happened in the game, but that's a lot of action by the rules (even in a 1 minute round!!!) so usually it's going to be impossible

Not so if the system is a more narrative one, or based on conflict-resolution. (Wushu, Risus, Over the Edge, Heroquest, Apocalypse/Dungeon World, etc)

On more simulaionist games though, yes, that would be a problem.