The Unhappy DM (and other sad thoughts) - (from a blog)

[The Disoriented Ranger]

First of all: Thanks for discussing this! It's been educating ... Second: This series is not about me (or my "deluded" self) getting all emo on the scene. I'm quite alright, thank you very much. It's a bit concerning that although I start the post with a disclaimer that this is about illustrating a real problem and even go as far as repeating the sentiment directly after I described the Sad DM, going further into detail why I think it might be like I've encountered it far too many times to ignore it, well, after all that this here left me wondering: why is it that people discuss this as if it was about me being sad or deluded? to disqualify the argument I'm actually trying to make? It's totally oblivious to the question why many people have such an easy time to treat DMs as "service providers". Isn't that a thing? Is it unimportant? I mean, that's what you do when you encounter a guy like that? I mean, you have a guy here, eager to learn, happy to do the work but maybe misguided for lack of instruction and you tell him he'd be better off "exhibiting stuff in the art show of a SF/fantasy convention"? Sheesh ... It's places like this people look for advice and you mock me for being concerned about how our hobby represents itself in public?

It's also fine to read accounts about what happened 40 years ago (and I really admire those early years of the hobby!), but, man, the world and the hobby have changed a bit since then. And not for the better, imo. Or the problems had always been there and nobody felt obliged to do something about it. Your choice.

And lastly: I am aware that most of the problems (or discrepancies) I see between what I thought I wrote and you thought you read might very well be my mistake by not being clear enough to begin with. That's why I decided to comment. I'm willing to discuss it and (hopefully) reach an understanding of sorts. Not to get an psych evaluation from total strangers, but to see if this (meaning: the Sad DM) is a problem or not and why.

One more thing to illustrate how I actually DM and work at my games right now. This is where I come from:

the-disoriented-ranger.blogspot.de/2016/09/the-random-narrative-generator.html

[robkuntz]

Oct 16, 2016 5:04:24 GMT -5 The Disoriented Ranger said:

First of all: Thanks for discussing this! It's been educating ... Second: This series is not about me (or my "deluded" self) getting all emo on the scene. I'm quite alright, thank you very much. It's a bit concerning that although I start the post with a disclaimer that this is about illustrating a real problem and even go as far as repeating the sentiment directly after I described the Sad DM, going further into detail why I think it might be like I've encountered it far too many times to ignore it, well, after all that this here left me wondering: why is it that people discuss this as if it was about me being sad or deluded? to disqualify the argument I'm actually trying to make? It's totally oblivious to the question why many people have such an easy time to treat DMs as "service providers". Isn't that a thing? Is it unimportant? I mean, that's what you do when you encounter a guy like that? I mean, you have a guy here, eager to learn, happy to do the work but maybe misguided for lack of instruction and you tell him he'd be better off "exhibiting stuff in the art show of a SF/fantasy convention"? Sheesh ... It's places like this people look for advice and you mock me for being concerned about how our hobby represents itself in public?

It's also fine to read accounts about what happened 40 years ago (and I really admire those early years of the hobby!), but, man, the world and the hobby have changed a bit since then. And not for the better, imo. Or the problems had always been there and nobody felt obliged to do something about it. Your choice.

And lastly: I am aware that most of the problems (or discrepancies) I see between what I thought I wrote and you thought you read might very well be my mistake by not being clear enough to begin with. That's why I decided to comment. I'm willing to discuss it and (hopefully) reach an understanding of sorts. Not to get an psych evaluation from total strangers, but to see if this (meaning: the Sad DM) is a problem or not and why.

One more thing to illustrate how I actually DM and work at my games right now. This is where I come from:

the-disoriented-ranger.blogspot.de/2016/09/the-random-narrative-generator.html

Well, given the confusion and the disclaimer and your explanation I still will ask:  did you reach the same conclusions and forward them as we did?  What were the ultimate purposes of the posts, then?  To expose how things have not changed for the better or to pose solutions?

[Admin Pete]

The Disoriented Ranger, thank you for joining the discussion. I look forward to your comments. I am not going to be able to follow your link and read the whole thing until later, so I will hold further comments until then. In the meantime, please expand on things in response to the posts above.

[The Disoriented Ranger]

Oct 16, 2016 7:39:15 GMT -5 robkuntz said:

Oct 16, 2016 5:04:24 GMT -5 The Disoriented Ranger said:

First of all: Thanks for discussing this! It's been educating ... Second: This series is not about me (or my "deluded" self) getting all emo on the scene. I'm quite alright, thank you very much. It's a bit concerning that although I start the post with a disclaimer that this is about illustrating a real problem and even go as far as repeating the sentiment directly after I described the Sad DM, going further into detail why I think it might be like I've encountered it far too many times to ignore it, well, after all that this here left me wondering: why is it that people discuss this as if it was about me being sad or deluded? to disqualify the argument I'm actually trying to make? It's totally oblivious to the question why many people have such an easy time to treat DMs as "service providers". Isn't that a thing? Is it unimportant? I mean, that's what you do when you encounter a guy like that? I mean, you have a guy here, eager to learn, happy to do the work but maybe misguided for lack of instruction and you tell him he'd be better off "exhibiting stuff in the art show of a SF/fantasy convention"? Sheesh ... It's places like this people look for advice and you mock me for being concerned about how our hobby represents itself in public?

It's also fine to read accounts about what happened 40 years ago (and I really admire those early years of the hobby!), but, man, the world and the hobby have changed a bit since then. And not for the better, imo. Or the problems had always been there and nobody felt obliged to do something about it. Your choice.

And lastly: I am aware that most of the problems (or discrepancies) I see between what I thought I wrote and you thought you read might very well be my mistake by not being clear enough to begin with. That's why I decided to comment. I'm willing to discuss it and (hopefully) reach an understanding of sorts. Not to get an psych evaluation from total strangers, but to see if this (meaning: the Sad DM) is a problem or not and why.

One more thing to illustrate how I actually DM and work at my games right now. This is where I come from:

the-disoriented-ranger.blogspot.de/2016/09/the-random-narrative-generator.html

Well, given the confusion and the disclaimer and your explanation I still will ask:  did you reach the same conclusions and forward them as we did?  What were the ultimate purposes of the posts, then?  To expose how things have not changed for the better or to pose solutions?

All right, I'll try and answer that as good as I can. To a good degree I write to find out myself where I end up. Sort of my way of reflecting a topic. I usually do that all in one post and don't like splitting it up like I did this time. I also assume that the small readership I have knows what I do and where come from, DMing-wise (but that's the internet for you). What I had planned was the following: Start with a polemic about the hell of being a DM, a pastiche of things I've experienced and encountered. That became part 1, as the middle part (part 2) about exploring the sources of the phenomena I describe, turned out to be quite extensive. As part 2 also was already written, I knew I had to write a third post to wrap it all up. I'm right now writing that third post (and it will take me until this time tomorrow to publish it, I think). The third post, being the conclusion and all, is way more positive than the former two posts and I genuinely believe that we can do something about all the problems I write about (and the ones in the comments, too).

As for solutions, I'd have to get ahead of what I'm writing in part 3, but I think I can give the bullet points: our hobby is basically unorganized. I know of (and work with) local role playing clubs when I get the chance, so I also know that their impact is very, very low. It's a nice way to meet new players and all that, but what we are really lacking (imo) is a non-corporate organisation that has pull enough to get recognized at the one hand and is visible on the other. What do I mean by that? I'm basically a bookseller by trade and when I learned the trade, a lot of that meant reading books, categorizing them and, most importantly, having an overview over that broad field in a way that allows to give qualified advice in almost every genre (or knowing where to find that out). So you could come to me, tell me about the books you like and I could give you some ideas what you could like. That entails, cooking books, comics, books about travelling to Tibet, anything, really. Anything but role playing games, that is. Even most of the shops selling role playing games aren't able to offer that kind of qualified advice. Why is that? RPGs being an extreme niche is one reason, but another is that no one - ever! - took the effort to quantify in an official manner what an role playing game actually is. Is it a sport? An art? As an sport is could have tournaments, leagues, non-corporate rules ... as an art it could have exhibitions (unlikely) or subventions (way more interesting). It is applied in therapy, I've read somewhere, but there is not by a long shot enough academic research about the whole thing ... You get my drift.

That means (and I'll have to keep it short, sorry about that) the solution is in organized play. A bit what World of Warcraft offers, actually. Have clubs organized (local, regional, national, international?) and offer official rules (doesn't matter what people play, but it needs to be recognized) and official settings. It's key to let te groups have an impact on the setting and it needs to find ways to keep all of that in line, but done right (and I have seen this done and working) it results in a publicly accessible gaming culture. Groups can share knowledge about the worlds and it is all connected. It has purpose. That's where you "compete" with computer games or GoT: you offer something that has relevance outside the small social circle that is the group. Done right, you'll also end up with fan fiction, where publishers might get interested (again, I know this happens). At that point publishers will see a market they have to court instead of just imposing their ideals and strategies on it. So you get sponsored gaming and all the possibilities that come with that (lots of that happened in the OSR until very recently). We have no lobby, no voice and no impact. I think we need to change that maybe beginning small (I will attempt something like this here in Leipzig beginning next year). Anyway, short version. I hope it's clear what I'm aiming at here. Think chess, maybe, organized like football (?).

Another point would be emancipating DMs. It's somehow related to the concept above: I think we need some generally recognized collection of experience about being a DM. Where to start, what tools to use and why. There are so many different philosophies and opinions about the subject and the lack of proper definitions doesn't help. Maybe that's what I mean, a collections of definitions that give newcomers a fair grasp of what terminology is used and what it actually means. Keeping it short, I'll add just another post of mine here, explaining that concept in detail:

the-disoriented-ranger.blogspot.de/2016/09/grognardpunk-or-how-we-need-proper.html

The social standing of DMs is another topic. And it's also connected to that aspect of standards and organisation. Having DM-rankings, workshops, maybe even certificates, maybe making it something people can learn (so you see, without public recognition, standards and proper definitions nothing of that is even possible), you'll get the work a DM is doing actually recognized and ... visible. That's actually something writers had to fight for, as the idea of copyright or authorship hadn't really existed a few hundred years ago and it's anything not really self-evident that authors get the recognition they do today (and even that is somewhat debatable ...).

Those are my ideas about the whole thing. Please consider those ideas with nuance as I don't have the time to add more examples (will do so on the blog). I hope this was able to answer your inquiries, Rob (and I have no idea how to to the things with the names you guys do all the time ...). Looking forward to your responses.

[The Disoriented Ranger]

Still turned out to be pretty long. Sorry

[robkuntz]

Oct 16, 2016 13:22:26 GMT -5 The Disoriented Ranger said:

Still turned out to be pretty long. Sorry

Thanks for the answer.  It's probably as long as it should be or else it would be longer or shorter....

I will give it some thought and not respond all at once.  There are some points that I immediately agree with and some that I see as overwrought.  Time will tell as I will give my opinion on this and look forward to your more expansive part III wrap-up. Welcome to The RoM, even though you were forced to appear rather than just popping in, you'll find the climate here very welcoming.

Later!

RJK

[Deleted]

Oct 16, 2016 13:21:45 GMT -5 The Disoriented Ranger said:

To a good degree I write to find out myself where I end up. Sort of my way of reflecting a topic. I usually do that all in one post and don't like splitting it up like I did this time. I also assume that the small readership I have knows what I do and where come from, DMing-wise (but that's the internet for you).

That's the Internet indeed. That'll learn ya!


Now then. Which question or questions would you like me to address? I'll take a few shots just to start off.

Before the game even starts -- THE KEY TO SUCCESS IS CLEAR MANAGEMENT OF EXPECTATIONS. Even if I'm running a con game one-off for total strangers, I spend ten minutes or so giving a very high level overview of the nature of the game and what I expect from players. I have people at GaryCon who have been in my game two or three years in a row, so I must be doing SOMETHING right. For that matter, I have ALWAYS managed to get all the players I wanted. Now, on to some specifics:

First, I have NEVER done the "the game is about a fragile princess" or anything like it. (I speak of fantasy in general and D&D in particular.) The game is "Once there was a world. Some people lived on it. Some of them lived dull lives, some went on to be great heroes, and some died horribly in the attempt. Which are you?" I have no overriding arc.

Next, the point about people not committing or not keeping their commitments: I haven't put up with that garbage in literal decades. This is not a gaming thing, this is a courtesy thing. Yes, some people do this. If they're new I'll mention it; if it keeps up, they are un-invited. Of course I run a game where "whoever shows up plays," so the game doesn't stop if Humperdinck doesn't show up. But there's a difference between "calls me and tells me he can't be there" and "just never shows and doesn't say anything." The first is OK -- life happens. The second is not. But I always, always, ALWAYS end a gaming session with the players at SOME sort of resting place, just like Gary did. Thus, "Ferd the Flatulent decided to go back home when you woke up this morning," and the game continues. If anybody shows up at all, game on.

But as I said above, this is a myth that seems to perpetuate itself in RPGS in particular. There are a TON of social activities that happen on schedule, and people keep that schedule. People find time for what is important to them. If nobody shows up on time, or at all, and doesn't notify you that something has come up, they are telling you that this is not something they think is important.

Third, the "stab the princess in the face." Even with a brand new person I'd say, "What the F*** is wrong with you?" Now, I DO say before any game that I will not put up with out and out psychopathic behavior by PCs, period. If you want to be evil, hold the princess for ransom. "I stab her in the face" is just being a douchebag and EVERYBODY knows it, even if they've never played an RPG before. I don't put up with douchebaggery.

So there you have it from this old grognard's point of view; the things you talk about in those two posts are "the sort of thing up with which I will not put," as the saying goes. I talk to people before the game to outline expectations, we negotiate over things until we reach agreement on what the game will be like, and then I expect people to be as good as their word.

It really is just that simple.

[The Disoriented Ranger]

Oct 16, 2016 13:54:27 GMT -5 robkuntz said:

Oct 16, 2016 13:22:26 GMT -5 The Disoriented Ranger said:

Still turned out to be pretty long. Sorry

Thanks for the answer.  It's probably as long as it should be or else it would be longer or shorter....

I will give it some thought and not respond all at once.  There are some points that I immediately agree with and some that I see as overwrought.  Time will tell as I will give my opinion on this and look forward to your more expansive part III wrap-up. Welcome to The RoM, even though you were forced to appear rather than just popping in, you'll find the climate here very welcoming.

Later!

RJK

Thanks, Rob! I appreciate the courtesy and look forward to your thoughts. I'll let you guys know as soon as the third part is live and adds even more words to this

[The Disoriented Ranger]

Oct 16, 2016 17:17:29 GMT -5 @gronanofsimmerya said:

Oct 16, 2016 13:21:45 GMT -5 The Disoriented Ranger said:

To a good degree I write to find out myself where I end up. Sort of my way of reflecting a topic. I usually do that all in one post and don't like splitting it up like I did this time. I also assume that the small readership I have knows what I do and where come from, DMing-wise (but that's the internet for you).

That's the Internet indeed. That'll learn ya!


Now then. Which question or questions would you like me to address? I'll take a few shots just to start off.

Before the game even starts -- THE KEY TO SUCCESS IS CLEAR MANAGEMENT OF EXPECTATIONS. Even if I'm running a con game one-off for total strangers, I spend ten minutes or so giving a very high level overview of the nature of the game and what I expect from players. I have people at GaryCon who have been in my game two or three years in a row, so I must be doing SOMETHING right. For that matter, I have ALWAYS managed to get all the players I wanted. Now, on to some specifics:

First, I have NEVER done the "the game is about a fragile princess" or anything like it. (I speak of fantasy in general and D&D in particular.) The game is "Once there was a world. Some people lived on it. Some of them lived dull lives, some went on to be great heroes, and some died horribly in the attempt. Which are you?" I have no overriding arc.

Next, the point about people not committing or not keeping their commitments: I haven't put up with that garbage in literal decades. This is not a gaming thing, this is a courtesy thing. Yes, some people do this. If they're new I'll mention it; if it keeps up, they are un-invited. Of course I run a game where "whoever shows up plays," so the game doesn't stop if Humperdinck doesn't show up. But there's a difference between "calls me and tells me he can't be there" and "just never shows and doesn't say anything." The first is OK -- life happens. The second is not. But I always, always, ALWAYS end a gaming session with the players at SOME sort of resting place, just like Gary did. Thus, "Ferd the Flatulent decided to go back home when you woke up this morning," and the game continues. If anybody shows up at all, game on.

But as I said above, this is a myth that seems to perpetuate itself in RPGS in particular. There are a TON of social activities that happen on schedule, and people keep that schedule. People find time for what is important to them. If nobody shows up on time, or at all, and doesn't notify you that something has come up, they are telling you that this is not something they think is important.

Third, the "stab the princess in the face." Even with a brand new person I'd say, "What the F*** is wrong with you?" Now, I DO say before any game that I will not put up with out and out psychopathic behavior by PCs, period. If you want to be evil, hold the princess for ransom. "I stab her in the face" is just being a douchebag and EVERYBODY knows it, even if they've never played an RPG before. I don't put up with douchebaggery.

So there you have it from this old grognard's point of view; the things you talk about in those two posts are "the sort of thing up with which I will not put," as the saying goes. I talk to people before the game to outline expectations, we negotiate over things until we reach agreement on what the game will be like, and then I expect people to be as good as their word.

It really is just that simple.

Nothing is that simple as I really don't see you giving this speech to 13 year old me, for instance. Or not to any beneficial effect, at least. I know that grognard attitude and it's cute and all (sorry), but it doesn't answer my questions or the problems I describe by a long shot. I believe you when you say you are experienced in doing what we do and I'm sure that you are, indeed, a good DM. So how many other DMs did you teach the ropes? Did you write and publish modules to give people a chance to learn from your expertise? Are you active in clubs or the organisation of convention or any kind of public service like this? A blog, then, maybe? I honestly don't know and you might very well do all this, but it isn't in your answer.

About that princess: Well, it's quoting The Neverending Story, which I had on my mind recently. It says so in the post, even has a picture. It's a hint for the reader to categorize what I'm writing and why (just as the Sad DM is quoting the "Rebel without a Cause", go figure). And I don't do those kind of stories unless they arise from play, as I work with a setting (that is: a collection of ideas) and what I call a "world engine" (see the link above to the random narrative generator, if you are interested). But, again, this isn't about how I or, by extension, you or any other kind of experienced DM would do it but about collecting ideas how the chance of this happening is at least reduced (as it will always happen) and explained and defined and made public in a way that allows learning from what I hobby has already established. To me it feels as if we always have to start from scratch in everything although experienced guys like you, gronan, are around and know what needs to be done, because they are actually doing it. You know what I mean?

And just as you must have learned to be a DM, I really believe that players can learn to be players, so dismissing them for their shortcomings, like you describe, really doesn't help either. I know it works to drive a hard line in these things, but you asked what questions to answer and that would be, as I already explained in so many words, how we manufacture a growing gaming culture worth sharing.

Please understand, I'm not saying you are wrong, per se, what I'm saying is that those problems don't need individual solutions, they need a common understanding (imo). I know the experience is there and that's why "Been there, done that" doesn't cut it for me in this discussion. So what's your take on that?

[Stormcrow]

The whole thing about tournaments, leagues, and consensus settings seem to be revisiting strategies that the owners of D&D have been using for years. The RPGA was TSR's RPG organization. Wizards of the Coast had "Living Greyhawk" and "Encounters," and I believe they're doing something similar with the current version of D&D.

I don't favor a standardized experience the way you have, say, a national football league. RPGs are different in that they require imagination, not standardization. You can have GM support groups, player-finding services, leagues and tournaments; but for goodness sake don't standardize the game experience!

How to categorize role-playing games? As games, of course! Not sports, not art.

[The Disoriented Ranger]

Oct 17, 2016 10:54:17 GMT -5 Stormcrow said:

The whole thing about tournaments, leagues, and consensus settings seem to be revisiting strategies that the owners of D&D have been using for years. The RPGA was TSR's RPG organization. Wizards of the Coast had "Living Greyhawk" and "Encounters," and I believe they're doing something similar with the current version of D&D.

I don't favor a standardized experience the way you have, say, a national football league. RPGs are different in that they require imagination, not standardization. You can have GM support groups, player-finding services, leagues and tournaments; but for goodness sake don't standardize the game experience!

How to categorize role-playing games? As games, of course! Not sports, not art.

There is no sport that isn't a game and role playing games being all about collaborative story telling makes it very possible to apply, for instance, literary theory for it. That and some aspects of theater, the fact that writing a good role playing game or module or setting is very well an art in it's own right, make both arguments at least debatable.

It's one thing to think it's a matter of taste, but to have at least the option is something worth considering, I think. Of course it's only natural to assume the worst. But man, that's what you participate for. to make a change. See to it that it's done right. this worked soooo many times in human history, it's actually baffling that there's always someone saying "Please don't do that!". You know what this did for language? That we all write a standardized version of English here makes communicating like we do here possible to begin with. Think about that for a while. It's not the only example, either.

It's really not about attacking your imagination, I mean, come on!

And yes, it's been done, then TSR went corporate and got sold ... corporations aren't the ones that should organize us. We should do that.

[robkuntz]

"See to it that it's done right."

What are the right or wrong ways with an RPG? Very subjective take. This would perforce require to pick "A way" that is "right" by someone's estimation; and since you are the one suggesting that such a course must or will exist then you must say that the right way, your way, is the way. I would tend to counter this in that games are what they are for individuals who just happen to come together as a group to play them the way that they do when they do. If through self-organization they tend towards a standard, then that is the way for that group, for instance. If we pre-suppose that there is a standard way to do this for every group then we have an organizational ideology instead, no matter if it is a corporation or publicly volunteered service that promotes same. As this is a creative medium I perforce side on the self-organizational methodology as extolled by all past game groups. This tended towards creative and organizational diversity and growth due to the lack of central planning. Or, as Gary Gygax said, and with which I concur: "If the time ever comes when all aspects of fantasy are covered and the vast majority of its players agree on how the game should be played, DandD will have become staid and boring indeed.” E. Gary Gygax, Alarums & Excursions #2, 1975.

[Admin Pete]

I like the idea of some types of cooperation and interaction between many different groups, local tournaments not tied to conventions and gaming weekends where people get together to play in someone's else game instead the home campaign. I want every game under each DM to be different from what I could find at any other table. I would love to have a setup where I could start the game at noon and play to midnight with a dozen or more players.

[The Disoriented Ranger]

Oct 17, 2016 11:34:35 GMT -5 robkuntz said:

"See to it that it's done right."

What are the right or wrong ways with an RPG? Very subjective take. This would perforce require to pick "A way" that is "right" by someone's estimation; and since you are the one suggesting that such a course must or will exist then you must say that the right way, your way, is the way. I would tend to counter this in that games are what they are for individuals who just happen to come together as a group to play them the way that they do when they do. If through self-organization they tend towards a standard, then that is the way for that group, for instance. If we pre-suppose that there is a standard way to do this for every group then we have an organizational ideology instead, no matter if it is a corporation or publicly volunteered service that promotes same. As this is a creative medium I perforce side on the self-organizational methodology as extolled by all past game groups. This tended towards creative and organizational diversity and growth due to the lack of central planning. Or, as Gary Gygax said, and with which I concur: "If the time ever comes when all aspects of fantasy are covered and the vast majority of its players agree on how the game should be played, DandD will have become staid and boring indeed.” E. Gary Gygax, Alarums & Excursions #2, 1975.

I agree with the sentiment, but would argue that it encompasses an entirely different level of the argument and not at all what this is about. We already use "standards" when we accept the rules of the game. Right? We furthermore have a good idea what we want at tables and, as experienced DMs, how to enforce that. All that has the possibility for guidelines. I actually can't believe I have to argue this, but is it really so strange to accept that there are, in fact, objective truths about our hobby? I mean, an argument like yours above is contrary to everything we believe to be true in an academic discourse. Going by that logic, the earth would still be flat. Actually, this is one of my biggest points of critique: it's that kind of individualism that negates progress. Don't you see that? You build on the experience of others, that's it. I think we are a long way from agreeing on how the game should be played and I'm offering nothing like that. Not even close. But, and I'm really serious about this, if we keep ignoring the cultural significance of our hobby, others will keep on exploiting it. It's time we have "standards" how to behave at the table, it's time to discuss what role playing games are to build on that (therapy, education, you name it). That's not taking away the imagination or the fun, that's actually doing something with the potential of it.

[Deleted]

Oct 17, 2016 2:53:04 GMT -5 The Disoriented Ranger said:

Nothing is that simple as I really don't see you giving this speech to 13 year old me, for instance. Or not to any beneficial effect, at least. I know that grognard attitude and it's cute and all (sorry), but it doesn't answer my questions or the problems I describe by a long shot.

Balderdash.

One of my GaryCon players was 12 the first time he played and has been back twice. 13 year olds keep their commitments to Boy Scouts. And though I may not use the F word to a 13 year old, I certainly would tell him that "stab the princess in the face" is not acceptable.

I repeat, and continue to maintain, it has f***all to do with gaming. Everything you've described as a "problem" comes under common courtesy and acceptable behavior in a group setting. I was in Boy Scouts and am currently assisting a local troop so I know very well what is and isn't possible to expect of 13 year old boys.

You obviously don't want to be told that "common courtesy" is the cure for your problems. That doesn't alter the fact that it's true.

[robkuntz]

"I mean, an argument like yours above is contrary to everything we believe to be true in an academic discourse. Going by that logic, the earth would still be flat."

This is pretty non-sequitor as I explained and qualified my statements. Academic thought has nothing to do with this, this is a creative medium. The best academia can do for art is to create countless critics who say they know what the artist was implying, usually after said artist is dead.

"it's that kind of individualism that negates progress."

So said the individual, yourself, arguing for progress; but on the obverse we have the Bells, the Galileos, the Steve Jobs, the Fords, the Da Vincis, and the list continues onward, endless. Note that each individual moved intellectual progress and thus allowed for "societal progress". They did this, as did many others, against the grain, the establishment, including in most every case, prevailing political, religious and academic thought.

Now we can go back to Arneson, besides Gygax, for some more insights:

1) “Rules lawyers... I regard them as the enemy”; and 2) “I like loose so you can change things that are not working" --Kobold Quarterly #9

The cultural significance of our hobby has not been ignored, it has in fact been expanded upon since day one and is now at many stages of departure both pecuniary-wise and historical. It had some rough times, for sure, what with the pure monetization of it; but that cycle is short term and will likely self implode as it has been doing if the cycle is not refreshed or changed--that change will not occur due to standardization of any sort but through realization, learning rather than organizing. Outside of that play will never become insignificant as it is an intrinsic part of human nature. Organizing play--as a "game" is perforce in each and every case a generalization for a specific type of play--has always been forwarded by individuals or small groups on the main. For instance, the vast majority of play that takes place on this earth, to this day, has been, and still is, propagated by the open play of children; and they, like bowlers, bridge players, bingo meet ups, seem to have been doing just fine as far as cultural significance is concerned.

I will close with a remark by Gygax and then I wish you well with your endeavors:

"I desire variance in interpretation and, as long as I am editor of the TSR line and its magazine, I will do my utmost to see that there is as little trend towards standardization as possible. Each campaign should be a "variant", and there is no "official interpretation" from me or anyone else." -- E. Gary Gygax, Alarums & Excursions #2, 1975.

[The Disoriented Ranger]

Sorry, published by accident. Will rectify soon.

[Deleted]

I wager 200 quatloos that the newcomer is untrainable and will have to be destroyed.

[Stormcrow]

Oct 17, 2016 11:10:51 GMT -5 The Disoriented Ranger said:

There is no sport that isn't a game and role playing games being all about collaborative story telling makes it very possible to apply, for instance, literary theory for it. That and some aspects of theater, the fact that writing a good role playing game or module or setting is very well an art in it's own right, make both arguments at least debatable.

I can see that we disagree about the very nature of the hobby, and that being the case, how can possibly agree on standards for it, let alone try to get others to follow them?

There are sports that aren't games: hunting, for instance. RPGs aren't all about collaborative storytelling; stories are simply told about your exploits after the game is over. Literary theory works very badly for RPGs: players stubbornly refuse to do what the GM has plotted for them, as you yourself have illustrated. Aspects of theater can be applied to RPGs, but talking in affected voices and accents is not required. Perhaps writing rules or adventures can be called art, but I thought we were talking about playing and refereeing?

You'd have to START by finding some common ground here before expecting to grow a useful organization.

[tetramorph]

The Disoriented Ranger , thanks for being a good sport and joining up and talking with us.

I looked back over my posts and found that I did indeed make the mistake of assuming this was about you rather than hypothetical.

Sorry about that. I meant no offense.

That said, it seems you are speaking both hypothetically and in hyperbole about something that you expect us also to have experience or encountered. I think what most folks here are trying to say is that we simply haven't had an experience like you are describing, hyperbole or no.

I agree with the folks who make the point that most of what seems to be bothering your hypothetical referee are human relationship issues. No RPG rules or tips can help people set mature boundaries and expectations.

From your post and the other one that you link out to, it seems there may be one other area of lack of overlap between the place you are coming from and where many of us on this board find ourselves. And that is the approach to RPGs as if they were primarily about telling a story or collaborating on a narrative.

I love narrative. But for me and many OS folks around here narrative is post-facto. I can narrate a football game I have seen, after the fact. If I told the players they had to follow my script, they would probably object. I can narrate a game of Monopoly:

John wound up with Park Ave. Phil hit Park Ave. by chance way too many times. John won.

I can narrate a game of Monopoly within its "skin," within its completely optional conceit:

Mr. Shoe, that famous entrepreneur managed through luck, skill and a few shady deals to get ahold of old Park Ave. for himself and there he made a killing. Before long his skillful trading left poor Mr. Automobile with nothing but dust in his wallet.

If the ref lets go of the idea that you are trying to tell a story about a fragile princess and instead focus on an interesting world full of lots of opportunities for adventure -- oh, and by the way, over here is a fragile princess . . . does that sound interesting to y'all today? No? Okay, how about these haunted ruins? Yes? Cool -- then the ref is also going to have more fun because it is not about the ref achieving the story he or she hopes to achieve in advance. Writing fiction is a better way to satisfy the urge to tell a story someone has invented.

So that is a fast and loose way for me to describe the difference between the more "sandbox" (objectors to the term not withstanding) approach of OS folks and the more "collaborative narration expectation" I've noticed that some other folks have.

My point is this. I think this fundamental difference in approach may have something to do with why many of us cannot identify with the problems of your hypothetical ref.

I hope my post here helps to clarify the conversation a little bit.

Again, welcome aboard!

PS -- I really like the points you make in part 2 and 3 and I can identify more easily with those as an OS kind of guy. I wish the conversation would start to go that way! Unfortunately, I am heading into an "off the grid week" and probably won't be able to post much again until next Monday. And who knows where things will be then! Good luck!

[Admin Pete]

I have had occasion to game with children on occasion starting with my younger brothers bitd when they were 9 and 12, while I was 19. A few years ago I got to play with them some as adults. I have had several kids in the game and in general I have found them to be better players and better decision makers than most of the adults I have played with (with the exception of the original group of college players). It is fun teaching (in game) a couple of 12 years olds (Think Tom Sawyer and Huck Fin) that their actions have consequences. Also getting the parentlal feedback that their son and his friend spent several hours talking about your game yesterday instead playing their video game. IMO kids are better learners and more malleable than adults and more open to trying something new and playing things a different way. Their imaginations are freer and open and not constrained into some old mould.

[hengest]

I completely sympathize with the sense I get from The Disoriented Ranger's posts that he thinks it would be an improvement if it was clear what was going on.

Sometimes things are clear without being explicitly stated, and sometimes they're not.

While I also agree with tetramorph and @gronanofsimmerya that there may be social problems / problems of courtesy here to which standardized play is not an answer, I admit that I deal much better with information given explicitly rather than implied -- even if the explicit information is "there's going to be implicit information here, so turn on all your senses." While I really doubt this is a solution to anything being discussed here, I wanted to say that I share that sentiment. I was introduced to this stuff early enough that I "get it" -- I can roll with the punches, more or less. Not everyone has the same skill set.

I find that I'm at war with myself in my own field in this way, wanting both to say "you're wasting my time, grow up and act like an adult!" and wanting to "bring everyone in" by making things as welcoming as possible.

[Mighty Darci]

Oct 17, 2016 15:18:48 GMT -5 hengest said:

I completely sympathize with the sense I get from The Disoriented Ranger 's posts that he thinks it would be an improvement if it was clear what was going on.

Sometimes things are clear without being explicitly stated, and sometimes they're not.

While I also agree with tetramorph and @gronanofsimmerya that there may be social problems / problems of courtesy here to which standardized play is not an answer, I admit that I deal much better with information given explicitly rather than implied -- even if the explicit information is "there's going to be implicit information here, so turn on all your senses." While I really doubt this is a solution to anything being discussed here, I wanted to say that I share that sentiment. I was introduced to this stuff early enough that I "get it" -- I can roll with the punches, more or less. Not everyone has the same skill set.

I find that I'm at war with myself in my own field in this way, wanting both to say "you're wasting my time, grow up and act like an adult!" and wanting to "bring everyone in" by making things as welcoming as possible.

Yeah, especially your last sentence, I work with people twice my age that I sometimes/often want to say to them "you're wasting my time, grow up and act like an adult!"

[hengest]

Oct 17, 2016 15:42:41 GMT -5 Mighty Darci said:

Oct 17, 2016 15:18:48 GMT -5 hengest said:

I find that I'm at war with myself in my own field in this way, wanting both to say "you're wasting my time, grow up and act like an adult!" and wanting to "bring everyone in" by making things as welcoming as possible.

Yeah, especially your last sentence, I work with people twice my age that I sometimes/often want to say to them "you're wasting my time, grow up and act like an adult!"

It's difficult, because I know that both of me are "right".  They should act like adults and be responsible for themselves -- but on the other hand, I should act like an adult and deal with the world I live in, not the world I would like to live in (fantasy gaming aside), and so should make sure that I account for people's backgrounds, which are certainly not "their fault".

[Mighty Darci]

Oct 17, 2016 15:48:51 GMT -5 hengest said:

Oct 17, 2016 15:42:41 GMT -5 Mighty Darci said:

Yeah, especially your last sentence, I work with people twice my age that I sometimes/often want to say to them "you're wasting my time, grow up and act like an adult!"

It's difficult, because I know that both of me are "right".  They should act like adults and be responsible for themselves -- but on the other hand, I should act like an adult and deal with the world I live in, not the world I would like to live in (fantasy gaming aside), and so should make sure that I account for people's backgrounds, which are certainly not "their fault".

Just what my mom and dad told me when I got my first job in high school.

[robkuntz]

Oct 17, 2016 14:27:06 GMT -5 @gronanofsimmerya said:

I wager 200 quatloos that the newcomer is untrainable and will have to be destroyed.

I will see your 200 quatloos and raise you 3 tribbles...

[robkuntz]

Oct 17, 2016 15:18:48 GMT -5 hengest said:

I completely sympathize with the sense I get from The Disoriented Ranger 's posts that he thinks it would be an improvement if it was clear what was going on.

Sometimes things are clear without being explicitly stated, and sometimes they're not.

While I also agree with tetramorph and @gronanofsimmerya that there may be social problems / problems of courtesy here to which standardized play is not an answer, I admit that I deal much better with information given explicitly rather than implied -- even if the explicit information is "there's going to be implicit information here, so turn on all your senses." While I really doubt this is a solution to anything being discussed here, I wanted to say that I share that sentiment. I was introduced to this stuff early enough that I "get it" -- I can roll with the punches, more or less. Not everyone has the same skill set.

I find that I'm at war with myself in my own field in this way, wanting both to say "you're wasting my time, grow up and act like an adult!" and wanting to "bring everyone in" by making things as welcoming as possible.

I feel that our current politically correct society, both here and abroad, is damaging in lots of ways.  It has now tended to rank intellectualism as "elitist" and more often sides in the wishy-washy middle where standards are rejected and no concerted base is established.  In other words, it has created the very ground of mud that we all must now wallow in.  YMMV, of course.

[hengest]

Oct 17, 2016 16:14:43 GMT -5 robkuntz said:

I feel that our current politically correct society, both here and abroad, is damaging in lots of ways.  It has now tended to rank intellectualism as "elitist" and more often sides in the wishy-washy middle where standards are rejected and no concerted base is established.  In other words, it has created the very ground of mud that we all must now wallow in.  YMMV, of course.

The sources of this are up for debate (or at least I have some ideas but am not at all certain), but about the fact of it -- completely agree here.  

[mormonyoyoman]

Oct 17, 2016 16:09:23 GMT -5 robkuntz said:

Oct 17, 2016 14:27:06 GMT -5 @gronanofsimmerya said:

I wager 200 quatloos that the newcomer is untrainable and will have to be destroyed.

I will see your 200 quatloos and raise you 3 tribbles...

Call - and remember that by the time you read this, it may be Tuesday.. In which case, the reverse application applies.

[robkuntz]

Oct 17, 2016 16:49:27 GMT -5 mormonyoyoman said:

Oct 17, 2016 16:09:23 GMT -5 robkuntz said:

I will see your 200 quatloos and raise you 3 tribbles...

Call - and remember that by the time you read this, it may be Tuesday.. In which case, the reverse application applies.

I cry "Fowl" (a duck) as you are attempting to have your cake and eat it too (or twice, which would be two ducks).