Started by Filip Luszczyk, October 25, 2011, 10:00:00 PM
Quote from: Callan S. on October 30, 2011, 07:24:50 PMDoesn't the RAW contain the (dumb ass) golden rule? So technically by chopping and changing, doing whatever the hell, the GM is playing by the RAW? And indeed, as much as I don't want to advocate this, the person pushing to play by RAW is actually pushing not to play the rules as written. To skip the hallowed golden rule. Really you've got TWO people who 'just wanna have fun' in that regard, not one person. Except one of them actually has a rule behind him, even if it's a stupid rule like the golden one.
QuoteTons of materials with this sort of shitty golden loop hole, which, I hypothesize, actively encourages this non serious stuff you and Ron mention.
QuoteDo you honestly think you feed these people wreckage and your going to see anything other than wreckage?
QuoteBut do we work off simply thinking it the case, or running some sort of scientific test, actually exposing them to such rules and checking the results?
QuoteAnyway, given where I've placed my bet, my problem seems to be the lack of cultural connection to latch onto, taking fiction to be a largely cultural thing. Very much indeed "what fiction?" - it's all kept hidden, because the activity is so shit at handling it they sensibly keep their fiction hidden (perhaps a sort of defence against brain damage, eh?). So what fiction do they find electric and hot? Not 'Vampires and/or zombies and/or steampunk' - if you take moving fiction as the cusp of cutural change, where is the movement they currently find hot? Or have they lost track of that and been left to cultural stagnation? Okay, this is all a second topic. Just raising it to give one idea of where else to go.
Quote from: KevinH on November 14, 2011, 01:23:08 PMI recently went through this with a game of PTA where one of the players was extremely passive, disengaged from play and unwilling to contribute in a meaningful way. Admittedly, PTA requires a lot of player effort, but this player would not contribute at all.Week after week, for a five episode series, the rest of the players would have to coach him through scene creation. Generally, his scenes would just be a continuation of the previous scene. He seemed to be playing the game as though it was D&D and it was just his turn to act.The final straw for me was when it came to his turn and he sat silently, apparently thinking about his scene. This went on for so long that everyone else got bored and started a side convrsation, at which point he "woke up" and got involved in the chat. At that point, I decided his behaviour was deliberately destructive to play and stopped the game, which was a pity as everyone else was really enjoying it and bringing a lot of energy to the table.
QuoteIn your posts you work off by simply thinking your opinions are the case.
QuoteNow, I must invite you to go and conduct this scentific test you have in mind and present your results.
Quote from: Callan S. on November 24, 2011, 06:37:16 PMBut there's two invitations here...and one has your name on it as well!
QuoteSo writing something with hard procedure feels like writing moon language no one will care about. Funny thing is, Capes seemed to have a complete procedure, escape from tentacle city 99% had a complete procedure, Spione (as far as I've technically read it) seems to have a complete procedure. Complete procedure games are coming out, yet the talk still hovers around anything but boardgame like procedure.
Quote from: czipeter on February 06, 2012, 11:50:18 AMMy naiveté also suggests that if someone in a group gets his fun out of playing the game instead of the xbox for example, then the non-playing ones are very much pulled towards having fun like his/her. So I still believe in setting a good example even if it certainly seems like a chore sometimes for me. If they see me enjoying the use of a system (thus conversing (and rolling dice) in some way), then they will try it at least, I think.