|
|
Post by Hexenritter Verlag on Mar 6, 2018 1:32:31 GMT -5
That's nothing needing an X-card, just common sense, "Hey guys, glad you're all here, wot's your poison tonight?" So it's the idea of the card, specifically, you don't like? I see it as another potential tool. I doubt I'd use it, but neither do I have a problem with the concept. I can see the advantage of the cards if, for example, I was playing with children. Or, a mix of children and adults; basically any environment in which a child might hesitate to forward their opinion. But, yes ... I should think it wouldn't be necessary with a gathering of adults. I've learned long ago never to discard a potentially useful idea. That, to me at least, is common sense. One,if I play with children - I'll modify the tone & discuss what kind of game they want to play, thus there is no need. If I see X-Cards at my table I'll tell the players to put them away & then discuss how I run game. The same goes for a game at a con or store demo. These games are not with my normal group & thus I need to be more flexible to their needs, but x-cards will be a distraction to the game. Two, I discuss the kind of games I run with new players at my games & then ask them what they want for a game, if they are not compatible I'll suggest they play in another game. I've come to the conclusion I need to find players that share a similar view on games; whether it is tone of campaign or rules we use. My last group imploded in part based on the game I preferred to play & they didn't want to plau. That said I let my frustration with the rules get in the way of everyone's enjoyment; which was also part of it. I accept the blame for my own part in it but ultimately it led me to the realization that 1) I need to run non-overly complex rule sets (for me to run) & 2) Play with people who share the kind of games I prefer (be it tone or rules). |
|
|
|
Post by mormonyoyoman on Mar 6, 2018 1:45:03 GMT -5
On the lighter side - this never happens!!  DM has beautiful map, all sorts of locations, and they all go to waste (cries in his beer) I chuckled out loud at this. How many times have our players made a ruin of our carefully crafted evening of fun & adventure? LOL! That's their job(s)! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2018 8:31:41 GMT -5
Sure, direct discussion is the best way and my preferred method for doing things. And I’m certainly not inclined to play with children, though I would’ve played D&D with mine when they were young if my wife would’ve allowed it.
I must agree with the general sentiment running through this thread, this is not that great of an idea. Unlike others, I can see a few (admittedly uncommon) situations they might come in handy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 6, 2018 11:15:55 GMT -5
Hmm ... I looked the fellow up. His Facebook account is friended by a great many people active in the OSR community, including our very own Michael Mornard. What I mean to say is? It looks like he’s one of us! He may even have an account here.
Some of us don’t like his idea, that’s cool. You can’t like everything. But I would appreciate it if we could go easy on the labels!
|
|
|
|
Post by mao on Mar 6, 2018 11:34:49 GMT -5
This idea offends me in ways I can not even..............
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Mar 6, 2018 11:37:14 GMT -5
Thank you mao for deleting that comment, but I would prefer you did not delete the post itself. It is so much better when members recognize that they are jumping to conclusions or perhaps have went a bit too far. But sometimes you delete things you didn't need to as happened in one thread of yours where only about 5% of the post was iffy and the rest was great stuff and we are still waiting for those ideas to be reposted. I would rather that people did not delete posts, but when it comes to their attention that the post was over the line if the admin did not edit your post for you, but you feel it should be edited in light of comments about the post, then edit instead of deleting. You can always just replace the offending bit with "I've reconsidered this comment and replaced it with this notice". That way the continuity of the thread is maintained. As @piper said, lets avoid the labels, there are plenty of forums where you can throw around labels, let's try to stick to discussing the ideas and not speculating about the character of people we have never met. |
|
|
|
Post by mao on Mar 6, 2018 11:44:31 GMT -5
Thank you mao for deleting that comment, but I would prefer you did not delete the post itself. It is so much better when members recognize that they are jumping to conclusions or perhaps have went a bit too far. But sometimes you delete things you didn't need to as happened in one thread of yours where only about 5% of the post was iffy and the rest was great stuff and we are still waiting for those ideas to be reposted. I would rather that people did not delete posts, but when it comes to their attention that the post was over the line if the admin did not edit your post for you, but you feel it should be edited in light of comments about the post, then edit instead of deleting. You can always just replace the offending bit with "I've reconsidered this comment and replaced it with this notice". That way the continuity of the thread is maintained. As @piper said, lets avoid the labels, there are plenty of forums where you can throw around labels, let's try to stick to discussing the ideas and not speculating about the character of people we have never met. Actually , I have reposted the Pocket Dimensions thread quite some time ago. Unless you are referring to something else.?. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Mar 6, 2018 11:46:54 GMT -5
This idea offends me in ways I can not even.............. The idea offends me too; however, like @piper I can see a need for the concept in some situations. But I would prefer to just have people talk to me if they have concerns. We have always had an open dialogue IMC. But on the other hand I generally game with friends and everyone knows going in what my game is like. My pbp which I hope to get back to soon, is with people I have never met, but I hope that everyone had at least a feel for the what the game would be like, some players would like to get to the action as would I. The roleplaying really slows a pbp down in ways it would not slow down a face to face game. The example in the links, if someone had a completely this will freak me out and give me the screaming meanies type of phobia, I would hope they would tell me about it before they started playing in the game. Then it wouldn't be an issue. If you come into a game with those types of issues and don't tell the ref up front and give him a chance to say "I can work with that" or "I think maybe this game is not for you", then you are the one at fault. Besides if you tell the people who need to know that you have issues you can perhaps get recommendations of games that would be more consistent fun for you. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Pete on Mar 6, 2018 11:48:27 GMT -5
Actually , I have reposted the Pocket Dimensions thread quite some time ago. Unless you are referring to something else.?. I think it is something else and I can't check now but I will when I can. |
|
|
|
Post by raikenclw on Mar 6, 2018 20:31:42 GMT -5
Me, I would just adapt the lead-in they've given me. The herbs they set out to gather just *happen* to grow only in the shade of the Dark Woods . . . Oh I know but they were not having it - they had their own plans whether it was finding herbs, setting up business contacts & what they initially planned went by the wayside. We were playing in a soap box campaign so i let them do their own thing but at least when they got back to it was ready. So they ignore plot hooks (presumably having to do with the growing presence of Evil) in favor of conducting business as usual. Hmmm . . . When they "get back to it," the party discovers people in the background whispering behind their hands, looking away when eye contact is attempted by the PCs, remembering previous engagements if the PCs try to talk to them, etc. Formerly-supportive NPCs now treat them with caution or even outright suspicion. If the party reacts violently to their new circumstances, the situation only gets worse. They find themselves being followed, at first clumsily but then with increasing skill, to the point that fairly soon they can't be sure if they're no longer being followed or if the followers have just gotten *that* good. If the party doesn't do something fairly spectacular to restore their reputation as Fighters For Good, the business contacts they made while off-script learn of how they're being treated and - worried about being tarred by the same brush of suspicion - withdraw from contact with the party. Yeah. I'm an Evil GM.  |
|
|
|
Post by raikenclw on Mar 6, 2018 20:43:11 GMT -5
BTW, has anyone here been keeping up with S. M. Stirlings Novels of the Change? Magical plot elements are getting fairly prevalent in the latest books. There are now two (2) Artifact-level magical Swords Of Good in play, along with Evil Magic (Evil MYTHOS Magic, yet!) to oppose these. What happens when these Swords are drawn - especially in the same battle - is now pretty much a foregone conclusion, to the point that in the last battle scene, the conclusion of the fight simply skips from the "reality shock" as the Swords are unsheathed to the defeat of the Bad Guys. Which is not as anticlimatic as it sounds, because *these* Bad Guys are *really* sneaky and underhanded. Defeating them - even with two (2) Swords - doesn't stop them.
But the reason I bring this up is that - even if Stirling were a GM and not an author - he wouldn't have too much trouble getting his "player characters" to undertake adventures. The Swords see to this. They don't control the characters; they just let them know what will happen if they don't do their jobs and Oppose Evil. Plus - being what They are - They serve as Evil Magnets. If the "PCs" don't take on the adventure, then the adventure is going to come take them on instead!
|
|
|
|
Post by raikenclw on Mar 6, 2018 21:13:29 GMT -5
If the party doesn't do something fairly spectacular to restore their reputation as Fighters For Good, the business contacts they made while off-script learn of how they're being treated and - worried about being tarred by the same brush of suspicion - withdraw from contact with the party. Yeah. I'm an Evil GM. NOTE: It's only in fantasy games with a strong Good/Evil dichotomy that I'm this strict about the Heroes keeping up with the Fight For Good. In other games (ones with more realistic moral codes) I'm much looser. But perceptions and reputation still matter. The game system usually already gives player characters specially protected status (particularly in Savage Worlds). I see no reason to let NPCs assume that they're Good Guys. In fact, as the PCs get more powerful, the usual tendency is for NPCs to begin from the assumption that "these strangers might be dangerous." |
|
|
|
Post by Hexenritter Verlag on Mar 7, 2018 2:01:07 GMT -5
Oh I know but they were not having it - they had their own plans whether it was finding herbs, setting up business contacts & what they initially planned went by the wayside. We were playing in a soap box campaign so i let them do their own thing but at least when they got back to it was ready. So they ignore plot hooks (presumably having to do with the growing presence of Evil) in favor of conducting business as usual. Hmmm . . . When they "get back to it," the party discovers people in the background whispering behind their hands, looking away when eye contact is attempted by the PCs, remembering previous engagements if the PCs try to talk to them, etc. Formerly-supportive NPCs now treat them with caution or even outright suspicion. If the party reacts violently to their new circumstances, the situation only gets worse. They find themselves being followed, at first clumsily but then with increasing skill, to the point that fairly soon they can't be sure if they're no longer being followed or if the followers have just gotten *that* good. If the party doesn't do something fairly spectacular to restore their reputation as Fighters For Good, the business contacts they made while off-script learn of how they're being treated and - worried about being tarred by the same brush of suspicion - withdraw from contact with the party. Yeah. I'm an Evil GM. That happened from time to time but usually things didn't stick as they moved about a lot, only staying in a town or city for a short time, usually earning some accolades when they chose to be "heroic". The next group that I run games for I'll be doing what you do. No more nice GM letting that kind of thing slide. |
|
|
|
Post by Hexenritter Verlag on Mar 7, 2018 2:08:52 GMT -5
BTW, has anyone here been keeping up with S. M. Stirlings Novels of the Change? Magical plot elements are getting fairly prevalent in the latest books. There are now two (2) Artifact-level magical Swords Of Good in play, along with Evil Magic (Evil MYTHOS Magic, yet!) to oppose these. What happens when these Swords are drawn - especially in the same battle - is now pretty much a foregone conclusion, to the point that in the last battle scene, the conclusion of the fight simply skips from the "reality shock" as the Swords are unsheathed to the defeat of the Bad Guys. Which is not as anticlimatic as it sounds, because *these* Bad Guys are *really* sneaky and underhanded. Defeating them - even with two (2) Swords - doesn't stop them. But the reason I bring this up is that - even if Stirling were a GM and not an author - he wouldn't have too much trouble getting his "player characters" to undertake adventures. The Swords see to this. They don't control the characters; they just let them know what will happen if they don't do their jobs and Oppose Evil. Plus - being what They are - They serve as Evil Magnets. If the "PCs" don't take on the adventure, then the adventure is going to come take them on instead! No I haven't read the series but I have considered it. The idea of using intelligent alignment swords has intrigued me ever since I began delving into OD&D & B/X D&D and reading posts in forums & blogs on the subject. I think it would be a great way of dealing with the situation that was plagueing my last group. Thanks for the suggestion raikenclw. |
|
|
|
Post by raikenclw on Mar 7, 2018 20:06:54 GMT -5
No I haven't read the [Change] series but I have considered it. The idea of using intelligent alignment swords has intrigued me ever since I began delving into OD&D & B/X D&D and reading posts in forums & blogs on the subject. I think it would be a great way of dealing with the situation that was plagueing my last group. Thanks for the suggestion raikenclw . You're welcome. You should be aware that the world of the series is our real world, up until the moment of the Change, in our year 1998. It isn't until about the middle of the series that we start seeing much in the way of magic and it's very much of the shamanism variety; e.g. mostly manipulation of perceptions and counterspells against such, very few obvious effects. Magic remains relatively minor until we get to the novels that concern the "Changlings" (the generation which grows up after the Change), particularly those featuring Rudy Mackenzie and Matilda Arminger as main protagonists. When these worthies and their companions (numbering nine in total . . .) set out on a quest to find the Sword Of The Lady is when magic finally starts to have serious plot impact. NOTE: Tolkien's works are a really big deal in the world of these novels! |
|
|
|
Post by raikenclw on Mar 7, 2018 20:21:06 GMT -5
That happened from time to time but usually things didn't stick as they moved about a lot, only staying in a town or city for a short time, usually earning some accolades when they chose to be "heroic". The next group that I run games for I'll be doing what you do. No more nice GM letting that kind of thing slide. Just a thought: if the party is continually changing their base of operations - particularly in a medieval-type society where magic is more heard of than seen by the common folk - then they have no opportunity to acquire a Good reputation. They'll always be mysterious, possibly dangerous strangers of whom everyone is [rightly] wary. At first the players will probably be fine with this: "If nobody knows us, then nobody can turn us in for a bounty." But when nobody believes their claims of being experienced without proof (and thus always offers them 1st Level rewards), they might figure out that if they really want to be taken seriously, then they'll have to hang around and let their reputation build. Oh! And in my worlds, saying something like, "I'm a 5th level mage/4th level fighter, darn it!" will just get the character puzzled looks. Levels and classes are (at least for me) something that only makes sense to players and GMs, not to characters. |
|
|
|
Post by Hexenritter Verlag on Mar 8, 2018 13:34:05 GMT -5
That happened from time to time but usually things didn't stick as they moved about a lot, only staying in a town or city for a short time, usually earning some accolades when they chose to be "heroic". The next group that I run games for I'll be doing what you do. No more nice GM letting that kind of thing slide. Just a thought: if the party is continually changing their base of operations - particularly in a medieval-type society where magic is more heard of than seen by the common folk - then they have no opportunity to acquire a Good reputation. They'll always be mysterious, possibly dangerous strangers of whom everyone is [rightly] wary. At first the players will probably be fine with this: "If nobody knows us, then nobody can turn us in for a bounty." But when nobody believes their claims of being experienced without proof (and thus always offers them 1st Level rewards), they might figure out that if they really want to be taken seriously, then they'll have to hang around and let their reputation build. Oh! And in my worlds, saying something like, "I'm a 5th level mage/4th level fighter, darn it!" will just get the character puzzled looks. Levels and classes are (at least for me) something that only makes sense to players and GMs, not to characters. Great advice raikenclw, thanks again for the insight. |
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on Mar 8, 2018 18:59:56 GMT -5
I don't game in public, but sometimes I do go out of my way to make people uncomfortable. It's been said before, RPG games allow you to do something about it. Playing a game, and feeling a game are two different things, it is that emotional hook that I am going for. Sanitizing the world, I think that that is what we do now, but it is the wrong things. Somebody says that they don't want to look at images of the Holocaust, I say Don't you DARE forget. Once we forget, the razor wire goes back up and the ovens are up and running again.
Table Top Role Playing Games are one of the few tools that actually make those that use them better people. I ask a lot from my players; I ask them to be a hero in a world that desperately needs it. They must also try and figure out what a hero is and what it isn't. Emotional responses, that is the point of the game, isn't it? My games are also motivated by war games, and war is not pretty. If I didn't get an X-Card during play, I think I'd be a little let down.
|
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Mar 8, 2018 19:24:36 GMT -5
Is this for children? I've never DM'ed for children so I can't say if something like this would be useful or not. If it's intended for adults, then the whole concept reads more like satire. I can't imagine an average adult needing such a tool.
However, if someone asked for such a thing, it certainly wouldn't offend me. If someone has an actual crippling phobia, I would rather (and ideally) be made aware of it well beforehand, if possible. If this is something that would make a player more comfortable, then who I am to be offended by it.
A part of me still thinks the whole thing is just a parody and an attempt to mock all the "sensitive snowflakes" (as mentioned upthread) of the world. I could be very wrong though.
|
|
|
|
Post by raikenclw on Mar 8, 2018 19:27:31 GMT -5
Great advice raikenclw , thanks again for the insight. You're welcome.  |
|
|
|
Post by raikenclw on Mar 8, 2018 19:32:26 GMT -5
< stuff about the X-Card possibly being a snide comment on "sensitive snowflakes," which I somehow accidentally deleted > This causes me to wonder: maybe the X-Card creator assumes a pick-up game that includes a high proportion of first-time gamers? People who may not be comfortable with the kind of issues which routinely come up in games, particularly gritty ones? It's still hard for me to imagine the thing being of practical use, particularly if you aren't supposed to ask any questions of a Tapper. Heck, given the chaos which often engulfs the sort of gaming tables I'm most familiar with, a card tap would be sooooo easy to miss. Maybe it should be an "X-Shout?" |
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Mar 8, 2018 19:35:12 GMT -5
I don't game in public, but sometimes I do go out of my way to make people uncomfortable. Very interesting point you bring up. Gaming in public would certainly require an adherence to normal public behavior and speech (whatever "normal" means to the individual). I would certainly be more cognizant and aware of what was being said, discussed, and described at a public table. Being reasonably uncomfortable should be totally fine even in a public setting. I'm sure there are some old sayings that amount to: "If you wouldn't say it in public, maybe you shouldn't say it at all." There are more than enough "safe spaces" on the internet, as the kids say, if one really feels the need to rant about something that wouldn't be well-recieved in mixed company or without anonymity. |
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Mar 8, 2018 19:37:56 GMT -5
< stuff about the X-Card possibly being a snide comment on "sensitive snowflakes," which I somehow accidentally deleted > Maybe it should be an "X-Shout?" Whoa, whoa, now. Way too aggressive, bro!! Haha. |
|
|
|
Post by raikenclw on Mar 8, 2018 19:45:17 GMT -5
I don't game in public, but sometimes I do go out of my way to make people uncomfortable. Very interesting point you bring up. Gaming in public would certainly require an adherence to normal public behavior and speech (whatever "normal" means to the individual). I would certainly be more cognizant and aware of what was seeing said, discussed, and described at a public table. Being reasonably uncomfortable should be totally fine even in a public setting. I'm sure there are some old sayings that amount to: "If you wouldn't say it in public, maybe you shouldn't say it at all." There are more than enough "safe spaces" on the internet, as the kids say, if one really feels the need to rant about something that wouldn't be well-recieved in mixed company or without anonymity. Actually, the only face-to-face gaming I've done lately has been at my local library. About half the players are under 18, with one of the more reliable attendees being only 13 (although a rather mature 13 - she's probably the player which the GM has to caution about getting too risque the most). I don't find that my playing style has changed to any significant degree. I haven't run a game for this group yet, so I can't comment on that dimension yet. |
|
|
|
Post by sixdemonbag on Mar 8, 2018 19:51:33 GMT -5
Very interesting point you bring up. Gaming in public would certainly require an adherence to normal public behavior and speech (whatever "normal" means to the individual). I would certainly be more cognizant and aware of what was seeing said, discussed, and described at a public table. Being reasonably uncomfortable should be totally fine even in a public setting. I'm sure there are some old sayings that amount to: "If you wouldn't say it in public, maybe you shouldn't say it at all." There are more than enough "safe spaces" on the internet, as the kids say, if one really feels the need to rant about something that wouldn't be well-recieved in mixed company or without anonymity. Actually, the only face-to-face gaming I've done lately has been at my local library. About half the players are under 18, with one of the more reliable attendees being only 13 (although a rather mature 13 - she's probably the player which the GM has to caution about getting too risque the most). I don't find that my playing style has changed to any significant degree. I haven't run a game for this group yet, so I can't comment on that dimension yet. That's probably because you are nice, well-adjusted person. Anyway, please report back once the sessions get underway. I'd really love to read some brief session reports. Maybe you can blog it here or elsewhere. Basically, once you get going, I'd be interested to know how it turns out. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 9, 2018 0:18:04 GMT -5
Sanitizing the world, I think that that is what we do now, but it is the wrong things. An artist I admire told me once that good art should make you smile but great art should make you uncomfortable. I don't regard this as a maxim but there is a kernel of truth in her words. Art should sometimes be edgy, make you uncomfortable, smile nervously. I suppose it is like any other public presentation: know your audience. Whether by use of conversation or visual aids (such as the x-cards), this would be a great rule to follow. |
|
|
|
Post by ripx187 on Mar 9, 2018 0:41:39 GMT -5
I don't think that I could DM in public, I tend to get hammy once in a while & do funny voices. I'd be self-conscious and embarrassed, I mean there is some kind of intimacy & a group understanding going on, isn't there? What we do is kind of weird, but when it is just us in the safety of the game, we forget.
|
|
|
|
Post by Traveroark on Mar 10, 2018 11:45:45 GMT -5
I recently learned of a thing called an X-Card by John Stavropoulos. I am violently opposed to such a thing and perhaps explaining why would violate the rules, so I am just looking for yeah or nay, but not really for anyone to go into the reasons. I am just looking for a bit of poll feedback before I do a blog post on the subject. Is this for children? I've never DM'ed for children so I can't say if something like this would be useful or not. If it's intended for adults, then the whole concept reads more like satire. I can't imagine an average adult needing such a tool. However, if someone asked for such a thing, it certainly wouldn't offend me. If someone has an actual crippling phobia, I would rather (and ideally) be made aware of it well beforehand, if possible. If this is something that would make a player more comfortable, then who I am to be offended by it. A part of me still thinks the whole thing is just a parody and an attempt to mock all the "sensitive snowflakes" (as mentioned upthread) of the world. I could be very wrong though. I have read the post by John Stavropoulos and I think he is entirely serious and that it is not a parody or mocking either one. |
|
|
|
Post by Traveroark on Mar 10, 2018 11:55:49 GMT -5
I don't think that I could DM in public, I tend to get hammy once in a while & do funny voices. I'd be self-conscious and embarrassed, I mean there is some kind of intimacy & a group understanding going on, isn't there? What we do is kind of weird, but when it is just us in the safety of the game, we forget. It is really not that different from public speaking and a lot of us have had to do that in the course of our jobs. I think DMing in public is easier than regular public speaking, because the only one you really have to please is yourself and all you really have to do is just never be flustered or at a loss of words. If you know your world inside and out that shouldn't be that difficult. I understand what you are saying. I don't think of what we do as weird and I am not self-conscious or embarrassed about it. I view being into D&D as making me the normal one in the room. I like the intimacy and group understanding that you see with a stand-up comic and a few thousand people in an auditorium. You inviting people into your mind and if you do it well they get enmeshed in your web and become fans for life. |
|
|
|
Post by The Master on Mar 10, 2018 12:37:37 GMT -5
That's nothing needing an X-card, just common sense, "Hey guys, glad you're all here, wot's your poison tonight?" So it's the idea of the card, specifically, you don't like? I see it as another potential tool. I doubt I'd use it, but neither do I have a problem with the concept. I can see the advantage of the cards if, for example, I was playing with children. Or, a mix of children and adults; basically any environment in which a child might hesitate to forward their opinion. But, yes ... I should think it wouldn't be necessary with a gathering of adults. I've learned long ago never to discard a potentially useful idea. That, to me at least, is common sense. I disagree, I don't see it as a potential tool. This tap and no discussion thing won't fly with me. On the other hand I have never witnessed a child, even when playing with adults, hesitate to forward their opinion while playing a game. |
|
