When someone says they've been playing or GMing RPGs for 30+ years, what does that really say to you? You see how they play now, and you're not impressed. Do three decades make any difference in their play-style quality?
It says they must be another old fart like me.
Play style/quality can be heavily influenced by who you are playing with. Play with hack'n'slashers and that will likely be your style. Play with dramaturges that will be your style. GM nothing but Call of Cthulhu and you will be excellent (hopefully) at Lovecraftian horror, but may not be at fantasy dungeon crawling.
Just time playing doesn't really tell me a lot. I think favourite games actually tells me more.
It matters mildly to me. Anyone that's played RPG's for 30+ years is coming from a set of experiences that I can generally relate to. It doesn't mean I agree with everything they're gonna serve out of their cakehole, but it *generally* means we've experienced the same gaming issues (probably time and time again) and have probably come up with varying solutions that probably have a lot of overlap.
This doesn't mean I discount gamers that haven't pursued TTRPG's as long, but there is something that comes with experience that has some form of intrinsic value providing you don't become institutionalized. Conversely, I look to younger eyes that have interesting ideas on mechanics or settings that might be novel. Of course... I take this on a case by case basis.
Anecdotally, I find myself fairly alienated by all the new-blood coming into D&D since 3.x. I find they care less about whatever perspectives I have have to offer in discussion. In play - that's a different matter.
/shrug
Quote from: DavetheLost;892545It says they must be another old fart like me.
Play style/quality can be heavily influenced by who you are playing with. Play with hack'n'slashers and that will likely be your style. Play with dramaturges that will be your style. GM nothing but Call of Cthulhu and you will be excellent (hopefully) at Lovecraftian horror, but may not be at fantasy dungeon crawling.
Just time playing doesn't really tell me a lot. I think favourite games actually tells me more.
But isn't it your experience when you've talked to those that have played this long - you find they've played with pretty much every kind of gamer under the sun?
Seriously, I haven't been shocked at my table by a player doing something "new" in literally decades. I had a young dude that turned out to be really concerned about the lack of social justice for the slaves in my Calimport campaign last year. That was a pleasant change. He didn't last long in the campaign, it turned out to be too anxiety inducing for him, alas. But aside from that... nothing new has been found under this sun. I keep my eyes out though!
It says to me that they've been playing or GMing RPGs for 30+ years. It means we've probably played some games in common.
But knowing how long they've gamed won't tell me whether we like the same games or whether we have compatible play styles.
This is just me projecting, but it probably means "I played/GM'd games on and off starting 30 years ago."
He or She likely told the truth on the 'how old are your dice?' poll, though!
Quote from: tenbones;892548I had a young dude that turned out to be really concerned about the lack of social justice for the slaves in my Calimport campaign last year. That was a pleasant change. He didn't last long in the campaign, it turned out to be too anxiety inducing for him, alas.
:popcorn:
You must obviously be a monster, adhering to setting and its suggested context.
:teehee:
Miss Manners would suggest you bring a candy dish of Xanax to your table. It's only proper.
:pundit:
I think Shawn's asking 2-3 different questions here. Let's break them down:
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544When someone says they've been playing or GMing RPGs for 30+ years, what does that really say to you?
The only facts I can gleam from that statement is they are around my age and started gaming around the same time.
However, I could make assumptions that they played AD&D and maybe OD&D via B/X, and perhaps other old school games. Thus, I would ask them about what they played past and present.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544You see how they play now, and you're not impressed.
I am unsure what YOU mean by "not impressed."
My definition of "not impressed" varies. I am often confused by gamers who never tried games published after they left high school, but there is no reason the 30+ gamer couldn't be an awesome AD&Der who (for whatever reason) never branched out.
If we are talking about table behavior, or playing skill or DMing skill, I do not believe time alone improves these things.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544Do three decades make any difference in their play-style quality?
Depends on what they've been playing for 30+ years.
I don't think they're going to be much play style variation for players who have played the same game with the same people. I believe that depends on playing different types of RPGs with different groups of people.
The advantage of 3 decades is they could have played various RPGs as they were published and ebbed and flowed through the years. However, there is no reason somebody who has "only" gamed for 10 years to not also have a wide range of experience.
Quote from: Spinachcat;892564I am unsure what YOU mean by "not impressed."
This is Shawn Driscoll. It means that, like everyone who roleplays (except him, I presume), they're shit roleplayers who aren't really roleplaying and what they do sucks.
That could mean, never played anything past Expert D&D and it could mean played absolutely everything they got their hands on. It could mean that they're open to new experiences and ideas or as close minded as it comes.
In my own experience, myself included, long term gamers tend towards older systems and styles of play and aren't much more likely to look into things other than D&D than new players are.
That said, experience, system familiarity, and clarity as to their ends are all good things.
It can mean a lot of different things, but generally it just means that they are older and have enjoyed the hobby for a long time.
The quality of playing skill has to do with a lot more factors than merely age. Consider an old fart gamer who has played old school D&D exclusively for 40 years. Even better, the old codger has pretty much played with the same group of people that whole time.
40 years of play experience but only with a single system at a single table. Now consider a player of a mere 20 years of experience (what we call whippersnappers) but this player has lived in several different areas, gamed with many groups in that time, and played dozens of systems, genres, etc.
That extra 20 years of experience isn't worth a whole lot if it is too narrow.
That is also just general experience. Playing skill can still vary wildly from game to game. Different games require different skill sets. I have seen younger players who are really good with modern WOTC D&D be completely lost in an old school game, but I have also seen young kids brand new to rpgs completely do really well in an old school D&D game. Youth or age alone it seems determines very little about the quality of play.
The only thing I can say as player who has been at this for almost 36 years is that if someone has been playing that long then either they REALLY enjoy the hobby or they are seriously dedicated to wasting their own time. :)
Quote from: Exploderwizard;892576The only thing I can say as player who has been at this for almost 36 years is that if someone has been playing that long then either they REALLY enjoy the hobby or they are seriously dedicated to wasting their own time. :)
Would that be an exclusive or an inclusive "or"?
Quote from: Sable Wyvern;892568This is Shawn Driscoll. It means that, like everyone who roleplays (except him, I presume), they're shit roleplayers who aren't really roleplaying and what they do sucks.
Pretty much, it's a dig at everybody (and probably me in particular lol!).
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544When someone says they've been playing or GMing RPGs for 30+ years, what does that really say to you? You see how they play now, and you're not impressed. Do three decades make any difference in their play-style quality?
Since "play-style quality" is very subjective, I don't see whether you are impressed on not matters. Someone with 30+ years of playing in a optimizer/rules-lawyer type style (e.g. D&D 3.x) would probably not impress me at all, for example -- but while they don't impress me, they might provide great games for other who like that play style.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544When someone says they've been playing or GMing RPGs for 30+ years, what does that really say to you?
It depends on the individual and their circumstance. I met folks who played and refereed for 30+ years but basically are isolated to their immediate circle of friends. Which slowly changes over the years. I suspect most of the referees in the rural towns that surround my hometown are in that situation. Which is understandable as all these guys don't have the luxury of having people just walk in and game with them given the low population of the area.
Others are quite involved with the wider community of gamers in western PA, eastern Ohio and Western NY.
Some are involved in the social scene around a game store.
Other are involved in the internet either blogging, discussing, or producing RPG material.
In short there are as many stories as there are individuals. This include the willingness to adapt, change, and incorporate new ideas and new techniques for playing and refereeing.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544Do three decades make any difference in their play-style quality?
Made a lot of difference for me. I ran a game-club in college, participated in convention and convention events, ran a boffer LARP chapter and boffer LARP event and so on. But perhaps the most important in recent years was the ability to use VTTs like Roll20 to play with a variety of people from across the nation and around the world. That more than anything exposed to how different people played. Allowed me to hone my referee style to accommodate a wider variety of interest among players.
Anyone under the age of 40 won't like to hear this, but to me it means I'm gaming with someone who I'm pretty sure has some muscle memory left over from an era when most people understood how to play in the style I like — really proactive players; free-wheeling, flexible adventures; sandboxy settings; real danger and unpredictability at every turn (meaning dead PC's, not lovely wonders). I feel like 90+% of the stuff I've pulled off the gaming store shelf in the last 20+ years has been over-written, rail-roady pre-programed crap that I don't even recognize as useful gaming material. I can't really play with people who relate to that stuff.
"Play style quality?" What in the name of Sarku's rotting anus is that?
The only question is "are they still having fun?" If you're trying to put forth some sort of thing that they "should" be doing...
:forge::forge::forge::forge::forge:
Tells me Jack fucking shit, and Jack? He just left town.
Why? Because my gaming experiences don't inform my choice of the type of people I want to play with. The fact that I am their friend, or they're willing to be mine, is more important. Because even if our gaming experiences differ, good friends talk shit out. Communication is the name of the game here.
I don't have time to for self-important asshats. The only reason I point out that I have been playing for thirty years, is to provide context, nothing more.
I would rather give someone more information than they need, than give someone not enough information, and them needing more.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544When someone says they've been playing or GMing RPGs for 30+ years, what does that really say to you?
You see how they play now, and you're not impressed.
Do three decades make any difference in their play-style quality?
1: It means theyve been playing for 30 years. That in and of itself is meaningless. They could have been playing in the worst possible killer GM gaming environ, or they could have been in some monty haul glamour, or they could have been in alot of different games. So it doesnt say anything to me other than that they have been playing 30 years.
2:
QuoteYou see how Shawn Driscoll plays now, and you're not impressed.
Fixed that for you. :cool:
3: Note answer 1 above. Depending on the environ they gamed in. Yes. No. Maybee. Some players play exactly the same now as when they started. Others have adapted to new games as they desire but did their style change or evolve? Others play the same game and over time come up with new ways to play and new avenues to explore.
Also. WHAT games? What if all they ever played was Gurps? "the investigator recoiled in horror..."
I don't broadcast it, but I'm happy to confirm it.
I say that today is the greatest time to be a roleplayer, so much variety in games, gaming styles, players (age ranges, diversity), technology, etc.
I happily admit that after thirty plus years....I'm still just beginning to learn what's truly possible with this amazing hobby
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544When someone says they've been playing or GMing RPGs for 30+ years, what does that really say to you? You see how they play now, and you're not impressed. Do three decades make any difference in their play-style quality?
Part of my work responsibilities include hiring and interviewing candidates. If a person keeps referring to their years of experience, that's a major red flag to me. If your # of years of experience are more impressive than your ability to articulate and distill the hard-earned wisdom of your vast experience, it's a serious problem. Taken at face value, it indicates an abysmal learning curve. Digging a little deeper, it can indicate all sorts of nasty things about that person's character.
Quote from: Omega;892599Also. WHAT games? What if all they ever played was Gurps? "the investigator recoiled in horror..."
... and what's wrong with that?
Anyway ... when
I say I've been gaming since the 70s, I mean to convey one or more of the following:
* I've been around the block, and have seen and tried a fair number of things;
* I've been at this long enough to be pretty dern secure about the styles/systems I like, the styles/systems I don't like, and my certitude that at this point I'm extremely unlikely to change; and
* that while I've never been sold on "old school/new school" divides, I don't worship at the altar of RAW, and strongly believe in the right of the GM to houserule or otherwise decide what he wants, how he wants, as often as he wants.
As far as anything else goes? No doubt I wouldn't be impressed by how a number of you play. I expect a number of you wouldn't much be impressed by me.
But that's a moronic sentiment. For Chrissake, apply it to any other hobby. You've been a hockey fan for 30+ years? Does that mean I get to be "unimpressed" with the teams you prefer to support? You've been a Rolling Stones fan for 30+ years? Does that mean I get to be "unimpressed" with the number of concerts you've attended or the albums you believe to be your favorites? You've been a model railroad hobbyist for 30+ years? What do you mean you don't have a dedicated basement layout, what's wrong with you?
We play this game for fun, and if you're going around measuring an amorphous "skill" level against time-in-service to the point of making forum posts about it, you definitely need a hobby. Possibly not this one.
Quote from: Lunamancer;892625Part of my work responsibilities include hiring and interviewing candidates. If a person keeps referring to their years of experience, that's a major red flag to me. If your # of years of experience are more impressive than your ability to articulate and distill the hard-earned wisdom of your vast experience, it's a serious problem. Taken at face value, it indicates an abysmal learning curve. Digging a little deeper, it can indicate all sorts of nasty things about that person's character.
The guy that says he's been doing computers for 30+ years, yet comes to me with his computer problems, makes me wonder.
in my experience it is usually followed by "... so I know the RIGHT way to play RPGs, and YOU are playing wrong!"
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892636The guy that says he's been doing computers for 30+ years, yet comes to me with his computer problems, makes me wonder.
Context.
Using vs coding, coding vs repairing, repairing vs building. Again. Doing A for 30 years doesnt mean doing B for 30 years.
I've been playing arcade and console games for about 40 years. I havent a single clue how to code, build or repair one.
Context.
Quote from: Omega;892638Context.
Yes, and we are talking about hobbies here, playing RPG's specifically. Exposition doesn't equal knowledge, in fact Einstein said the opposite:
"If you can't explain it simply, you don't understand it well enough."
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544When someone says they've been playing or GMing RPGs for 30+ years, what does that really say to you? You see how they play now, and you're not impressed. Do three decades make any difference in their play-style quality?
tbh, as far as I'm concerned, it's one of those vague expressions that I might (with no provided context whatsoever) interpret in too many ways to perceive it as any important. So I don't.
By the way, I happened to encounter plenty of people who claim they have been playing
this or
that for God knows how long & stuff, who expressed so dense, B&W, unoriginal,
no out-of-box-thinking for me, thank you very much opinions regarding stuff, that it made their "background" highly dubious. Precisely no forum, no site, no group dealing with the RPG is void of such armchair theorists, so it's not that I'd be willing to take said "years" at face value.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544When someone says they've been playing or GMing RPGs for 30+ years, what does that really say to you?
It says they started playing RPGs around or before 1986.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544You see how they play now, and you're not impressed. Do three decades make any difference in their play-style quality?
Is it a competition?
Do you always have to "improve" your roleplaying skills?
What they probably have is experience. They might have done a lot, seen a lot, tried a lot and rejected a lot.
Does that make them "better" roleplayers? Maybe, maybe not.
Quote from: Omega;892599Also. WHAT games? What if all they ever played was Gurps? "the investigator recoiled in horror..."
Then they would probably know GURPS really well.
I have no problems with people who have played one game for 30 years. I have no problem with people who only play a game for a couple of sessions and move on to the next game.
If people can take part in a hobby and still gain enjoyment after 30 years then they must be doing something right.
Quote from: soltakss;892678Then they would probably know GURPS really well.
I have no problems with people who have played one game for 30 years. I have no problem with people who only play a game for a couple of sessions and move on to the next game.
If people can take part in a hobby and still gain enjoyment after 30 years then they must be doing something right.
1: But which edition? The good edition or the bad one? :D
2: I've known a few who bounce from one system to another. Often I got the impression that they just had not found the game and/or GM yet that "clicked" to them. Others were just really fickle. And others just like to try new things, but have one or more favorites that they gravitate back to.
3: Verily. Moreso if they have stuck to one system more or less over that span.
Quote from: Sable Wyvern;892568This is Shawn Driscoll. It means that, like everyone who roleplays (except him, I presume), they're shit roleplayers who aren't really roleplaying and what they do sucks.
That's alright, I've been doing it for 33 years and I'm still crap.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544When someone says they've been playing or GMing RPGs for 30+ years, what does that really say to you? You see how they play now, and you're not impressed. Do three decades make any difference in their play-style quality?
It means they probably know the ropes at least of one playstyle and system, and definitely means they're older than me:). Whether I'm interested in either the playstyle or the system, is something to be decided ad hoc.
The answer being kinda ambiguous is due to the fact that I've certainly managed to find someone who boasted that much experience, and putting it mildly, had quite a bit of room for future improvements;).
It means I can legally serve them a beer.
Quote from: Larsdangly;892591Anyone under the age of 40 won't like to hear this, but to me it means I'm gaming with someone who I'm pretty sure has some muscle memory left over from an era when most people understood how to play in the style I like — really proactive players; free-wheeling, flexible adventures; sandboxy settings; real danger and unpredictability at every turn (meaning dead PC's, not lovely wonders). I feel like 90+% of the stuff I've pulled off the gaming store shelf in the last 20+ years has been over-written, rail-roady pre-programed crap that I don't even recognize as useful gaming material. I can't really play with people who relate to that stuff.
Yup.
...
But well, that's just my first hope, which is probably a counterpoint to the annoying experience of running into newer gamers who are used to game styles I have averse reactions to.
Really though, even when I was younger, I liked what I liked, and looked down my nose at what I didn't like, and with the decades, my tastes have gotten more picky and rarified. I also have learned that even players I like and respect and who I've played and enjoyed the same games with, often have very different tastes and sensibilities and may or may not like the same things I do.
When it comes to players who have played so much that I consider them "subject matter experts," I always listen to their observations, if only to gain better understanding of their areas of expertise. If said player was "present at the beginning," I listen to gain a greater sense of what it was like, from their perspective.
That said, I have near 40 years of experience, but don't consider anything I have to say the be-all and end-all of gaming. I hop systems like crazy, so I never became a real "expert." What I HAVE found out, after all these years, is that I have finally settled on what works for me. But I'll use any system that seems to speak to that (lately, I've been thinking Dungeon World).:-)
Like most of the others, it doesn't mean much to me except that the person is close to my age and hopefully knows a couple things about rule books and maintaining a schedule.
I've been playing since 1980 but I spent over a decade not playing anything. I've had good GMs and bad GMs. Sometimes I've played one game for years other times I've tried four games in a year. I've been to conventions big and small and seen good and bad too. GMs who were excited to play and GMs who needed more coffee. Players who made me laugh often and players who sat there like a log. I've seen players with years of experience make noobie mistakes:
Me: "We shoot the Hellhounds in the pit with arrows, staying out of range of their attacks."
Dumbass: "No. I cast Levitate and bring the Hellhounds up out of the pit to us so we can hit them with our swords."
Me: "WTF?????" /Facepalm.
(Yes, that actually happened at a convention. The dumbass made so many idiot moves his own brother abandoned him and joined my side.)
I have hopes that a 30 year veteran of games knows a lot and is a good player, hopes bordering on expectations. But I don't absolutely know it and assume it.
Quote from: Doughdee222;892739I've seen players with years of experience make noobie mistakes:
Me: "We shoot the Hellhounds in the pit with arrows, staying out of range of their attacks."
Dumbass: "No. I cast Levitate and bring the Hellhounds up out of the pit to us so we can hit them with our swords."
Me: "WTF?????" /Facepalm.
(Yes, that actually happened at a convention. The dumbass made so many idiot moves his own brother abandoned him and joined my side.)
:rotfl:
"I just have this spell slot burning a hole in my memory. If I don't cast it I'll just die!
"Why are you trying to hit me, guys, you'll interrupt my spell... Geez."
Quote from: Bren;892712It means I can legally serve them a beer.
Or in your case, it means he can legally buy you two beers;).
Here's a question for you all:
Would you rather play with an rpg with a guy who has played one rpg for 30+ years, or a guy who has played 30+ rpg's in one year?
Quote from: Cave Bear;892854Here's a question for you all:
Would you rather play with an rpg with a guy who has played one rpg for 30+ years, or a guy who has played 30+ rpg's in one year?
Guy number 2. Because he's more likely to be open-minded. Or maybe I'm just projecting.
Quote from: Cave Bear;892854Here's a question for you all:
Would you rather play with an rpg with a guy who has played one rpg for 30+ years, or a guy who has played 30+ rpg's in one year?
Well, the guy who has played 30+ rpgs in one year might have problems with focus---SQUIRREL!!
Quote from: Cave Bear;892854Here's a question for you all:
Would you rather play with an rpg with a guy who has played one rpg for 30+ years, or a guy who has played 30+ rpg's in one year?
Funny thing is. The one who played one game 30 years could end up more open minded than the one who has played 30 in a year.
The one thats played for 30 might know of other systems and be interested. But never had a chance. The one thats played 30 may be fickle and shallow, or badmouths every game they have played and then ragequits when someone calls them out on it.
Such is gaming.
Quote from: Cave Bear;892854Here's a question for you all:
Would you rather play with an rpg with a guy who has played one rpg for 30+ years, or a guy who has played 30+ rpg's in one year?
Either. Until they prove they're a dick
Quote from: Cave Bear;892854Here's a question for you all:
Would you rather play with an rpg with a guy who has played one rpg for 30+ years, or a guy who has played 30+ rpg's in one year?
1) It makes a difference whether I am playing the game with this guy or running the game for this guy.
2) For the first guy, it's important how much I like the one game he's played, because he's going to want to play that game.
3) For the second guy, I like long duration campaigns so I'm concerned about why he has played 30 different RPGs in the same year. He sounds like someone who initially appears open but who is actually very difficult to please. The sort of person who will try anything once, but seldom wants to play the same thing 3 times in a row.
That or someone who joins games and then gets asked not to return. A lot.
Frequently, when I hear this it's in response to an ad posting looking for gamers.
Unfortunately, as others have mentioned, it frequently comes with some nonsense superiority complex (not always, occasionally it's what others have mentioned, simply a place holder for folks of a certain age). Unless there is something else compelling in their response, I don't even bother. Without context, it's meaningless to me.
Quote from: Cave Bear;892854Here's a question for you all:
Would you rather play with an rpg with a guy who has played one rpg for 30+ years, or a guy who has played 30+ rpg's in one year?
I'll take the decision on an ad hoc basis. Bren actually had good points on both, especially concerning the guy who's played 1 game for 30 years.
Then again, maybe the 30 rpgs in a year guy was trying to make a point, trying to broaden his perspective on different games, or just likes the kind of indie games which are best for one-shots.
Quote from: Angry_Douchebag;892885Frequently, when I hear this it's in response to an ad posting looking for gamers.
Didn't think about this, but now that you mention it, this is where I see it, as well. There's a game near here advertised as a campaign that is 37-years running (2E, with add ons). On the one hand, I'm like "day-am," they must have all sorts of interesting stuff in that thing." On the other hand, I'm like, "Dude, how do you not get bored with that?" (okay, I'm too old to say dude, but, you get my point).:-)
Maybe that would be my actual concern with the 30+ in one system. A silly voice deep within me whispers "MONOMANIA!" So, skeptical am I, to a point, about that person.
Quote from: cranebump;893028Didn't think about this, but now that you mention it, this is where I see it, as well. There's a game near here advertised as a campaign that is 37-years running (2E, with add ons). On the one hand, I'm like "day-am," they must have all sorts of interesting stuff in that thing." On the other hand, I'm like, "Dude, how do you not get bored with that?" (okay, I'm too old to say dude, but, you get my point).:-)
Maybe that would be my actual concern with the 30+ in one system. A silly voice deep within me whispers "MONOMANIA!" So, skeptical am I, to a point, about that person.
That's why I've stopped putting numbers to the campaign, age of players, etc. I just say Experienced GM looking to fill in a spot with a group of veteran players. I only ask they come wanting to play a game with a little more detail than your average module-crawling group. It's a sandbox - come play.
But I tend to do lunch/dinner with potential new players too for a face-to-face sniff-test (which goes both ways).
I fully admit there are pros and cons to 30+ year experienced players vs. noobs. In my experience I have to treat everyone slightly differently until I can understand what they can "handle" or more specifically where their tastes run vs. where my style of GMing works best with them. Veteran players tend to have more "capacity" to deal with the complexities I deal with in my games. Noobs tend to struggle, but those that stick it out tend to never go back to module-grinding (or more accurately - they tend to just keep playing with me for years.)
Quote from: tenbones;893066That's why I've stopped putting numbers to the campaign, age of players, etc. I just say Experienced GM looking to fill in a spot with a group of veteran players. I only ask they come wanting to play a game with a little more detail than your average module-crawling group. It's a sandbox - come play.
But I tend to do lunch/dinner with potential new players too for a face-to-face sniff-test (which goes both ways).
I fully admit there are pros and cons to 30+ year experienced players vs. noobs. In my experience I have to treat everyone slightly differently until I can understand what they can "handle" or more specifically where their tastes run vs. where my style of GMing works best with them. Veteran players tend to have more "capacity" to deal with the complexities I deal with in my games. Noobs tend to struggle, but those that stick it out tend to never go back to module-grinding (or more accurately - they tend to just keep playing with me for years.)
Funny how that works the same way for me. I even include the dinner in my routine.
It helped me outing more than one guy that would have been a poor fit for the group.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544When someone says they've been playing or GMing RPGs for 30+ years, what does that really say to you?
Well it says to me he started in roughly 1986.
That's about it, to me that is late to the RPG game. I've found those who started in the mid-80's have a greater chance at proclaiming with certainty "how the game was played," which they trot out over the younger ones; well and the older ones as well.
Now I wasn't there from day 1, but close to it where I lived (remember pre-internet fads took time to travel) and started in 1977-78. Now I'll listen to folks who started in the '70s because they have valid and interesting beginning times experiences and are rarely so dogmatic about how it was done. It was done any which way.
QuoteYou see how they play now, and you're not impressed. Do three decades make any difference in their play-style quality?
Didn't know how one played an RPG could impress or not. I only care if it looks fun or not. For me three decades makes a hell of a difference, just tried so many games, played with many people, tried so many ways, and have a pretty good idea what works for me and those I play with and what does not.
I'm wise enough to realize in my age that watching others play an RPG is far duller than playing it.
I'm sure some people may still struggle with the same things in their games they did 30 years ago but I suspect most do not; rather they may just be boring.
Never liked the idea of "play-style quality," besides the extremes quality is really in the eye of the beholder but I guess some people need to import concepts of status and seeing who is bigger even into RPGs. It's been going on since the beginning (by that I mean I first recalling seeing it in 1978) so why stop now.
Quote from: AsenRG;893396Funny how that works the same way for me. I even include the dinner in my routine. It helped me outing more than one guy that would have been a poor fit for the group.
Yeah, me too. In my current main group, the player with the
least amount of experience in my campaign is 13 years, and she and I were LARP partners for six years before that. (The longest standing player started with me in 1985.) I'm not, to put it mildly, interested in casual drop ins.
And it works both ways. In seeking to get into games, I want to meet up at a local eatery myself. A couple of those times, I recognized that
I'd be a poor fit. And given that ...
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544You see how they play now, and you're not impressed. Do three decades make any difference in their play-style quality?
I've thought a bit more about this question, and really, time-in-service doesn't have much to do with whether I'm "impressed" or not.
I've always been a picky gamer, and the older I get, the more set in my ways I get. I doubt I'd be "impressed" with more than a handful of the gamers on this board, and that has nothing to do with how well you execute your games. Play a system I hate? Unimpressed. Into dungeon fantasy? Unimpressed. No rigid sandbox? Unimpressed. Much more hack-n-slash than RP? Unimpressed. Verisimilitude not your thing? Unimpressed.
Doesn't mean you suck at it. Just means it's not my cup of tea.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544When someone says they've been playing or GMing RPGs for 30+ years, what does that really say to you?
They are old enough to get my jokes.
QuoteYou see how they play now, and you're not impressed. Do three decades make any difference in their play-style quality?
Apparently not, if I'm "not impressed". But for me that really doesn't extend any further than "this person wouldn't be a good fit for my gaming group". Beyond that, I could care less how other people have fun with RPGs.
I do get the impression though that you are talking about some very specific example in your experience. I'll have to see if you elaborate on that in the course of this thread so far to try and surmise what the point of these questions were...
It tells me this is a person who has some great gaming stories to share.
Anyone who has been practicing any hobby for decades has something I can learn/steal to improve myself.
Quote from: Ravenswing;893808Doesn't mean you suck at it. Just means it's not my cup of tea.
No, it means the things they're in, are things you consider to suck;).
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544When someone says they've been playing or GMing RPGs for 30+ years, what does that really say to you?
Nothing except maybe "This person has a hobby they enjoy." I'm certainly not granting them any special authority on the subject or anything. For all I know, the person's just good at finding desperate dipshits who put up him and his crappy game. /shrug
Well, speaking as somebody who has 30+ years of roleplaying experience, one of the things I've learned is that holding judgement about others around the table, who are simply trying to have fun, is entirely counterproductive.
I like gaming with new players. They either have a fresh outlook. Or are in dire need of weaning off whatever negative habits they picked up previously.
And that is the more important factor. New or old. Are they going to be fun to play with? Be a minour hassle from past habits? Or a be a flat out problem?
If I'm not impressed, it probably means they've been playing the same crap over and over again for 30+ years instead of learning to do something new, and they're likely to stay that way.
Quote from: TrippyHippy;894167Well, speaking as somebody who has 30+ years of roleplaying experience, one of the things I've learned is that holding judgement about others around the table, who are simply trying to have fun, is entirely counterproductive.
This is true. Well said.
I kind of like newbs better than those with decades of play. Some of the most fun I've had as a GM was running a Rifts campaign that involved 3 players that we're completely new and a couple with less than six months of playing time. Newbs just want to have fun and do interesting stuff, they're not concerned with creating the uber-character or performing exactly the right combination of actions to achieve "Player-Character wins! Flawless victory! Fatality!" Yeah, they come with frustrations such as explaining which dice to use, or why you can't use a certain spell or ability to achieve a really cool, off the wall effect ("A stone golem? I cast Stone to Mud and Dig!").
I try to judge each individual gamer based on their attitude, personality, and performance at the table. I'm not perfect, so sometimes I've misjudged (thought a newb would be clueless and/or cause trouble, or an experienced player would be an asset to the group), but I do make an attempt, and I think I do pretty good.
It tells me that their perception of games/gameplay that existed in the 80s is likely shaped by actual experience, not by rants and internet wars. So knowing nothing else, it gives me a clue on how deep their expertise and opinions of those game runs.
Doesn't mean that that less experienced folks can't be enjoyable to game with or have good opinions on gaming in general. Indeed, I just read an excellent article on adventure design by a GM with less than a decade of play experience. But I do give you a little more credit when you talk about older games when you have actually experienced them.
It means exactly the same as what anything else that is posted on the internet means.
Quote from: dragoner;894455It means exactly the same as what anything else that is posted on the internet means.
...it must be true?
Quote from: AaronBrown99;894459...it must be true?
Exactly. IIRC it was Vonnegut who said "Be careful of who you pretend to be."
I don't think roleplaying or GMing skills necessarily improve over time. Off hand, I'd say my two favourite roleplayers are a guy around 55 who started 40 years ago, and a girl of 22 who started last year. They both make great characters, have a reasonable grasp of the rules, play dynamically and add a lot to the richness of whatever game they play in.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544When someone says they've been playing or GMing RPGs for 30+ years, what does that really say to you? You see how they play now, and you're not impressed. Do three decades make any difference in their play-style quality?
It really says to me that they've been playing for 30+ years. I'd wonder why it was relevant, though, since no amount of time playing means anything. It's up there with "I played with Gary" in the I Don't Give A Shit department.
Quote from: Matt;894854It really says to me that they've been playing for 30+ years. I'd wonder why it was relevant, though, since no amount of time playing means anything. It's up there with "I played with Gary" in the I Don't Give A Shit department.
Ah, but you should give a shit, because it means they'll never shut up about it, and claim that 'back in their day it was done X' in a passive aggressive attempt to One True Wayism. And you should care enough to know when to tune them out.
On the Give a Shit Meter, it ranks at a 0.5 out of 10.
Personally I prefer "I've been doing this since BEFORE YOU WERE BORN..."
I've actually used that line on a few new people who come in and start telling everyone how to do this and this and this BETTER!!! Except that what they are describing is inefficient compared to whats being done allready, has failed (repeatedly,) or proven to just not work, (repeatedly.)
And usually I only say something like that when after patiently listening to the grand new idea, that turns out isnt grand and isnt new, and patiently explaining in detail why it wont work and then being told I dont know what Im talking about. THEN its more likely to happen. I do not dismiss someones ideas just because they are new or old at the biz. Does it work? Is it easier or more enjoyable than whats currently in use? Has it been tried before? If it was and failed then why did it fail?
And that can apply to RPGs too.
I started a new 5e campaign with my friend whom I've played 1e with since 86. I set the game in Sigil and when he found out where he was he kept raving about finally getting to try Planescape after 20 years of the boxed set sitting on the shelf. I like playing with both vets and noobies as well as everyone in the middle. The only real limitation with the older gamers is they are usually hesitant to try something new that is far removed from D&D.
Quote from: Krimson;894894The only real limitation with the older gamers is they are usually hesitant to try something new that is far removed from D&D.
I think that depends on individual tastes far more than the number of years spent playing. I have enjoyed D&D and many other games and still enjoy trying new ones. The amount of bullshit I'm willing to go through just to try a new game has decreased significantly over the years.
If I can just sit at the table and try a new game, I'm happy to do so. If the new game requires plowing through several hundred pages of rules to be able to play then forget it.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;894937If I can just sit at the table and try a new game, I'm happy to do so. If the new game requires plowing through several hundred pages of rules to be able to play then forget it.
Precisely.
Being "impressed" by somebody's gaming, whatever the hell THAT means, will depend not on "how many years they have been gaming," but what kind of person they are.
I don't game with assholes, and new gamers are every bit as likely to be assholes as old gamers.
Quote from: Omega;894878Personally I prefer "I've been doing this since BEFORE YOU WERE BORN..."
I've actually used that line on a few new people who come in and start telling everyone how to do this and this and this BETTER!!! Except that what they are describing is inefficient compared to whats being done allready, has failed (repeatedly,) or proven to just not work, (repeatedly.)
And usually I only say something like that when after patiently listening to the grand new idea, that turns out isnt grand and isnt new, and patiently explaining in detail why it wont work and then being told I dont know what Im talking about. THEN its more likely to happen. I do not dismiss someones ideas just because they are new or old at the biz. Does it work? Is it easier or more enjoyable than whats currently in use? Has it been tried before? If it was and failed then why did it fail?
And that can apply to RPGs too.
I've used that line too. Sometimes, oftentimes, when playing World of Warcraft players would start talking shit about how they are God's Gift to gaming and could do everything in the game better than anyone else. There's only so much I could take before I had to blurt out something like "I've been gaming since before your parents screwed in the Toyota! So STFU!!!!"
I prefer the line, "I have dice older than you." :P Not that it means anything, but I'm amused.
Quote from: Krimson;895073I prefer the line, "I have dice older than you." :P Not that it means anything, but I'm amused.
So you bought those dice made from dinosaur bones? :cool:
Quote from: Omega;895124So you bought those dice made from dinosaur bones? :cool:
Bought?
That was back in the days way before we had invented barter. Back then we had to run down the dinosaur by ourself, choke it to death with our bare hands, chew the meat off with our teeth, and gnaw the bones into the shape of dice.
And we liked it that way.
Quote from: Omega;895124So you bought those dice made from dinosaur bones?
Whoa. Were some actually on sale? And I was impressed enough the first time one of my players showed up with casino dice.
Quote from: Ravenswing;895156Whoa. Were some actually on sale? And I was impressed enough the first time one of my players showed up with casino dice.
Crystal Caste had them and ones made from Meteors too. Absurdly expensive.
Quote from: Omega;894878Personally I prefer "I've been doing this since BEFORE YOU WERE BORN..."
A friend of mine told his manager that he had "socks that are older than you", which is the same thing, I suppose.
Quote from: soltakss;895210A friend of mine told his manager that he had "socks that are older than you", which is the same thing, I suppose.
One hopes they were well laundered old socks.
If someone feels the need to start telling me how long they've been doing something, as a measure of knowledge/experience, one of us is probably being an asshole.
If they're just telling me a story from 'the old days', that's different.
I am generally impressed with experience though, if there is obvious capability on display.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544When someone says they've been playing or GMing RPGs for 30+ years, what does that really say to you? You see how they play now, and you're not impressed. Do three decades make any difference in their play-style quality?
I think I view it like anything where someone was alive and present at relevant historical period, event, etc. I think a certain level of 'respect your elders' kicks in for me, where I am interested in hearing their take on how things were back in the day (doesn't matter if it is a gamer, boxer, veteran, musician, activist, etc...it is just always interesting to get a first hand accounts from someone who was there). That doesn't mean the person's opinions and tastes will all be right, but I do think it means they are worth listening to.
I don't think it is a matter of being impressed or not due to the time they put in. When you meet guitarists who have been doing it since the mid-60s, there is often a huge disparity of style. So an old timer who plays a bunch of blues riffs isn't necessarily doing stuff that is going to impress someone with my pallette, but they did pay their dues and they do know things about the history that I don't. Just because I my preferences are a little newer doesn't mean I should dismiss their experience. And like anything else, you can have bad guitar players/GMS/etc who have been at it for a really long time. Time spent doing something doesn't necessarily translate into skill and talent (though I do think there is usually a connection).
That said, I think I may just technically have hit the 'gaming for thirty years mark' myself, but I tend to think of 30+ years of gaming referring to people who really started in the 70s when the hobby was in its infancy (I started young in about 86 I believe).
If someone tells you that you are doing it wrong, they aren't impressed, and generally you suck, a reply of "FU I've been doing this for 30+ years" isn't unexpected or unreasonable.
Quote from: soltakss;895210A friend of mine told his manager that he had "socks that are older than you", which is the same thing, I suppose.
I've got shirts older than
me. (circa 1912)
Quote from: Omega;895329I've got shirts older than me. (circa 1912)
Wow. That's older than my coat (circa 1943).
I'm of the opinion the average 6 year old inherently knows how to roleplay better than most thirty-somethings I've met.
Quote from: Omega;895329I've got shirts older than me. (circa 1912)
Huh, trumped me; I've got a cashmere topcoat of my grandfather's, but that's late 40s at the earliest.
Quote from: Omega;895329I've got shirts older than me. (circa 1912)
I don't own any clothing that old but I do have fully functioning mauser rifle manufactured in 1898.
Quote from: Exploderwizard;895463I don't own any clothing that old but I do have fully functioning mauser rifle manufactured in 1898.
While that is undoubtedly nice, wood and metal last far longer than cloth. You're going to have to do better if you want to be admitted to the club.
Quote from: Bren;895465While that is undoubtedly nice, wood and metal last far longer than cloth. You're going to have to do better if you want to be admitted to the club.
Hmm. I have to see if I still have that napkin I used at that fancy dinner party I attended in 1706. :p
Quote from: Exploderwizard;895476Hmm. I have to see if I still have that napkin I used at that fancy dinner party I attended in 1706. :p
Napkin...one of the funny differences between British and American English.
Quote from: Bren;895513Napkin...one of the funny differences between British and American English.
Wait, what? I lived in the US for several years, and "napkin" seemed in common use. What do you call them?
I'm assuming the Queen's English "serviette," if that's still in parlance in UK.
We have quite a few old things in my home, so I'd rather not bother anyone here. But I do love telling the chirrin' at the LFGS that I've got Crayola Crayons older than them. (And I do, several sets from even grade school in immaculate condition. I fear I shall be hording things like a dragon if I don't keep the impulse in check.)
Quote from: TristramEvans;895522Wait, what? I lived in the US for several years, and "napkin" seemed in common use. What do you call them?
Apologies, I seem to have confused you about who uses which words for what. I shall endeavor to clarify.
In the US: Napkins are those paper things (provided at restaurants of the non fancy sort) and sold in stores for use at home for use at meals for wiping one's mouth are called "napkins" or if you are perhaps talking to your rural and aged great-grandmother you might say, "paper napkins" so she knew you didn't mean the cloth kind used for fancy occasions. That's not quite as old style as referring to food items as "store bought" to distinguish the chicken you bought at the market from the one you chased down in the backyard to strangle or decapitate your own self.
In the UK: Traditionally "napkin" refers to a feminine hygiene product, i.e. a sanitary napkin, which is often called a pad in the US. The traditional British term for the restaurant thing is "serviette." It's one of the few French words the Brits seem able to pronounce properly.
In the US: "Pants" mean trousers.
In the UK: "Pants" means underpants. Which is why the savvy American should probably refrain from offering to show a colleague the new pants one has just purchased at Harrods.
"Goddamn* it! I just spilled the HP Sauce. Hey Chancey, had me a napkin so I can clean my pants."
Quote from: Opaopajr;895527I'm assuming the Queen's English "serviette," if that's still in parlance in UK.
Right you are. Serviette was still in parlance when I was there in 2011. That and saying "pants" seemed to provoke unfailing amusement from my UK colleagues.
Opaopajr, I'm oddly jealous of your crayons.
* "Goddamn" is another joke. The stereotype American character on British television at some point will say "Goddamn!" in a very loud voice. My wife now wait for it while watching British TV shows.
Quote from: Bren;895612In the UK: Traditionally "napkin" refers to a feminine hygiene product, i.e. a sanitary napkin, which is often called a pad in the US. The traditional British term for the restaurant thing is "serviette." It's one of the few French words the Brits seem able to pronounce properly.
I have never heard of napkin being used in this way. For me, napkin is the equivalent of a serviette. We have Sanitary Towels or Pads.
Quote from: soltakss;895613I have never heard of napkin being used in this way. For me, napkin is the equivalent of a serviette. We have Sanitary Towels or Pads.
Could always have been my friends having me on. Or maybe Oxonians are more formal or something. Though Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napkin) seems to agree though it thinks napkin is U and serviette is non-U which kind of shoots the Oxonian notion in the head. Maybe it was all a plot of the East End Londoner in our midst.
My experience of living there, and having been married to a Brit, is that they are very particular about their accents and vocabularies, as it signifies both where they are from and other social aspects. Even though they retain a high degree of mutual intelligibility, which is quite an accomplishment considering German, and Schwabisch or Baorisch, which can be unintelligible to each other.
Quote from: dragoner;895622My experience of living there, and having been married to a Brit, is that they are very particular about their accents and vocabularies, as it signifies both where they are from and other social aspects. Even though they retain a high degree of mutual intelligibility, which is quite an accomplishment considering German, and Schwabisch or Baorisch, which can be unintelligible to each other.
Mostly mutually intelligible, though I could tell you about the Welsh IP Lawyer that nobody on our team could understand at all. Talk about money for nothing.
I've been playing for 25 so I am almost at true grognard status. Playing and GMing for thirty years is a lot of experiences. However, good and bad players and GMs can play and run for thirty years alike. Its a lot like sports or esports. Some people are just going to be more talented and better at the skills and talents needed to be a good athlete whether speed or strength, the twitch mechanics/clicks per second and command quality of a StarCraft or LoL player, or the acting and improv ability of a good player + the prep work of a good GM. Some players and GMs are also better at rules and mechanics over other abilities. Some players and GMs never make it out of the minors but some make it to the majors and become stars. Just like sports, playing is not enough. You also have to train to be a better player or GM which is made even easier these days with the number of pdfs, vlogs, podcasts, and other tools available to give advice on how to get better at the game on either side of the screen. So a person may have played or GMed for 30 years, but it doesn't necessarily make them better than a person like me who has been around the table for 25 years as player or mostly game master because of all the time I spend during the week trying to make my craft better by listening to casts while playing video games or reading how tos to make my game better and better.
Furthermore, play style really is a based on the games you have played. I started with D&D First, moved on to Earthdawn, and now Savage Worlds (I've played many more games but this is the most of the time I have spent in these three systems). All of them are tactical games with Savage Worlds the lightest of the three by quite a bit. But it means that we have a lot more combats than a group of players and GMs that focused more on narrative style games. Savage Worlds tends to have a lot of good tool boxes for noncombat but my players want to chew up scenery and smash things in this super villain game that is Necessary Evil. Switch us to the other style of game and I might be okay because of my improv skills, but even I would have a problem keeping up likely because the other narrative players have more honed skills. Most of my players would be hideously lost without their dice except perhaps Ted due to his vast Vampire The Masquerade/GM improv experience. Conversely, the narrative style players might be bored with the tactical combat that we enjoy. They'd also have less of a grasp on the tactical mechanics.
What it comes down to is that in your life, your mileage may vary, since the sum of all our experiences really makes us who we are, whether its as players or GMs.
Quote from: Bren;895612Opaopajr, I'm oddly jealous of your crayons.
It must be the dragon blood in you.
/nestles amid my clutch of agéd Crayola crayons.
/waits now for the obligatory Skyrim reference to Dovakin.
Quote from: Shawn Driscoll;892544When someone says they've been playing or GMing RPGs for 30+ years, what does that really say to you? You see how they play now, and you're not impressed. Do three decades make any difference in their play-style quality?
If you're not impressed, then obviously no; it would make no difference.