I don't think like a gamer, help

I apparently don't think like a gamer, at least not the experienced gamers (from AD&D to Star Wars to whatever pretty much) at my table. And it is starting to be a problem for both me and the group. I love playing the game and have a blast, but the fact that I don't think and apply things the way they do is ... becoming an issue. Pathfinder seems like a weird mix of science (extremely specific terminology, mathematical formulas, etc) and religion (application is up for interpretation). As I try to understand and learn, I'm either parsing things too much (scientifically breaking something down) or taking a too broad view of things (interpreting it based on past experience and not parsing it enough).

Anyone have any suggestions on how to "think like a gamer"?

background: lifelong SciFi fantasy fan but no previous gaming experience: no tabletop rpg & no video games (unless Sims and brain game like games count).

Yes... learn to unwind and relax the strict logic. Watch some of the Sam Rani adventure pack shows, Hercules, Xena, the awful D&D movies and perhaps try to get a feel for playing the game with a more cinematic as opposed to anaylytic approach.

I used to worry about this as well, but then I realized it was just a part of the learning experience. Just keep making your characters and playing them as you normally do. Do try to remember that you are sharing the spotlight with others, but also don't just hang back and wait for everyone else to do things- get in there and mix it up. It is more of an art than a science, and it is important to note that everyone has their own way of gaming. Eventually you will learn to balance your character's interests against those of the other people at the table and be able to have a good time together.

Learning to divorce the rules from the game world is an important aspect of roleplaying. You might be aware of bonuses to hit and damage, or of modifiers to rolls based on maneuvers, but you character is not.

The math involved is completely alien to her mind set. She knows if she aims carefully, she has a better chance to hit, but she doesn't know by just what percentage her chances are improved.

The key to roleplaying is to imagine yourself as your character in the game world, but not to lose sight of the things the character is capable of doing. If your character has a maneuver that improves damage done under certain circumstances, she knows that. She doesn't know the math involved, but she knows to do that maneuver and at what time she should do it.

I think a large part of learning to roleplay with experienced players is that they expect too much of newcomers. What has become second nature to them was actually hard to learn back when they started. It's difficult to remember that sometimes.

All I can suggest is to figure out which of the players you feel most comfortable with and ask that person to help you with concepts you have problems understanding. And have a little patience with the players who should be having patience with you.

Yes... learn to unwind and relax the strict logic. Watch some of the Sam Rani adventure pack shows, Hercules, Xena, the awful D&D movies and perhaps try to get a feel for playing the game with a more cinematic as opposed to anaylytic approach.

Thanks LazarX. Being a fan of movies and TV shows like you mentioned is actually one of the things that drew me to learning the game. It's a blast to play in Pathfinder-land. But the mechanics and world of Pathfinder (D&D 3.p) is so well established that everyone but me knows it. I want to do something, either because I did something similar earlier or because it's something I've seen done in a movie and I can't, why I ask, "because that's the way it's been in gaming for years" Even after a year of gaming I feel like I'm a tourist from a neighboring land with different ways of doing things. I'm afraid that "diplomatic immunity" is about to be revoked as patience for my strange-self is wearing thin because "I should know this by now"

Pardon if that got a little rant-ish, just a bit frustrated. I just want to keep playing as an active member rather than become the passive tourist.

Something else to keep in mind is that there are dozens of different play styles for RPGs. Some games and game systems are more "hard-coded" in their play style, but truth be told, different groups play in various ways. This may not be a case of your approach to the game, but rather your approach being a unique one in your group. If you have the opportunity, try to play with as many different people as possible until you settle into a group that fits the best.

Think of it like chess, or any game that requires strategy and has a lot of rules. There's a learning curve in getting familiar with all the things you can and can't do on your turn, and and what works best in different situations.

Each character is good at some things and not so good at others. The party tries to play to its strengths. Fighters fight, rogues try to flank, casters cast spells, etc. You try to do what helps your party "win."

I'd suggest reading and rereading the combat chapter, and the magic chapter if you're playing a caster. Be familiar with what your character can do well, and its weaknesses, too. Read up a bit on what the other characters do, too. If there's a cleric in the party, read a little about the class and get a basic grasp of what they can do in a fight. Different clerics do different things, based on how they're built and played. Some are "battle clerics," and jump right into a fight, while others focus more on using magic to be effective.

There are lots of ways to play, and no one way is "wrong," really. Ask questions if you're not sure how something works, and be patient with yourself. Lots of experienced gamers disagree on various things, too, so in the end you let the GM make the call.

I started playing 3.0 after not playing 2e for a long time, and found the new system a little perplexing at first. It takes a while to get used to the game, and I still find myself looking things up now and then. I don't have every little thing memorized.

The other players were patient with me because I really loved to play, even if I didn't understand how the first few times. Keep reading, keep learning, and bring your enthusiasm to the game, and you'll be playing like a pro soon enough. The main thing is to have fun with it.

I'm gonna have to contradict LazarX almost completely. Granted that logic is a bit twisty in the realms of gamerdom...I still define myself by it, in large part. I hate that Vulcans are so abused, especially in our particular subculture, where a great many of us are scientifically oriented, or else computer programmers, and in many ways distinguish ourselves from society at large by our logic. Fantasy...magic...does not contradict logic. It simply uses a variant set of knowns.

We're an odd bunch, though - if you consider us from a marketing standpoint, gamers are a bloody nightmare. Most other markets are uniform, and pride themselves on it. There are time-tested formulae for affecting such groups as groups, and the groups largely preoccupy themselves with arguments against other groups. Gamers, largely, preoccupy ourselves by arguing...with ourselves. In fact, arguments with non-gamers get to be boring or stale, and are often missing several points of reference.

Actually, that is where I do most emphatically agree with LazarX - catch up on your gamerlore. As your groupmates for their fondest favorite geeky reference materials - do they read Terry Pratchett, or Arthur Conan Doyle, or both? Did they love Ladyhawke despite that ridiculous 80s soundtrack? Speaking of ridiculous 80s soundtracks, how bout that Flash Gordon movie? If you don't know who Max von Sydow is, time to visit your friendly neighborhood wikipedia. While you're at it, brush up on your comic books (Marvel or DC? And who else spent more money than they'd care to admit on that old Xmen arcade game? Or Marvel v Capcom? Anyone else play Chun Li just cause she had nice legs?), and youtube that old Dungeons and Dragons cartoon.

Learn to contribute to those odd half-scientific arguments which concern totally fantastical elements - like this.

Get to know the stories, the archetypes and the tropes - because the logic of magic is in fact centered by how it applies to a story. Consider the science to be your fantasy groundwire - it's maintaining your suspension of disbelief. The magic, then, is part philosophy, part symbolism, part plot even. Magic is made of Story.

[Edit] - I rambled into a rather more geek than gamer aspect, there...these other guys hit the mechanical nail closer on the head, I think. Also, those mechanics are there to describe your character's actions, for you as gamers to interpret in a cinematic fashion. Game mechanics are the physics of Golarion, and the people of Golarion have as much understanding of that as we did in that period. Which is to say, not a lot.

Thanks everyone for your differing perspectives, suggestions and encouragement. Fun huh, kind of like finals in college, I think I forget sometimes that learning all this is suppose to come with fun.

Something else to keep in mind is that there are dozens of different play styles for RPGs. Some games and game systems are more "hard-coded" in their play style, but truth be told, different groups play in various ways. This may not be a case of your approach to the game, but rather your approach being a unique one in your group. If you have the opportunity, try to play with as many different people as possible until you settle into a group that fits the best.

This, I agree it could just be a conflict in gaming style and not the game it's self. It happens and we all have to go thru the finding a group that matches our style of gaming. Good luck.

If you are having fun now, don't try to change, don't try to geek yourself. If one of the other players mentions a movie/book you might like but didn't watch before, watch it, but do not try to like it just because it appears to be 'gamers duty'. If you feel you miss out on something in the game because 'you are not a gamer' ask about it.

Not one of the people I game with since about 10 years now would be considered a gamer by virtue of Michael Radagasts description and not even a third of the people I ever gamed with would be considered a gamer or geek if you take even half of the traits he mentioned.

Not one of them lets this come between him/herself and fun when gaming.

You don't have to be a geek/'gamer'/nerd or anything else to enjoy the game or the company of someone who is. Trying to fit into a cliche is the first step to make a fool of yourself and mess up your life.

Just a side note, and not an assumption in any way, but don't fall into the 'gamer girl' trap. Some players (both sexes) will get into the games, sometimes out of mild interest, or dragged there by a sig. other, but the get into the socializing. The problem is, they show up, but never learn the mechanics required of them. Once outside of the game, they don't crack the books, or even read fantasy in any form.

It can be a frustrating drag on everyone when bob's wife shows up for two years straight, and every time it comes down to her turn, it follows this example from a previous thread:

So I roll this one?
No, roll that one. It's the twenty.
Ok.
Now add it to that number. and don't forget bless.
What's bless do?

etc., etc.

I don't think you fit into this category, but I can't recommend being solid on the mechanics enough. take time to read the spells, and as recommended before, pin down someone, anyone you trust, to grill about the mechanics you don't understand until you are comfortable.

Nothing shuts down a person griping about you not knowing the rules, when you lay into them about the variations to the rule you are trying to use.

Also, don't worry about not thinking like a gamer. Some of the best rp situations evolve from thinking outside expected themes. There's alot of detailed descriptions of categories that gamers fall into, and there's a huge amount of unpleasantness in each one. Stick with what you're comfortable with, and apply it to the situation.

I've got to say, if she was that type of "gamer girl" I doubt she'd go to the trouble of registering here and asking the question.

Like most people, I'm just going to say it sounds like your playstyle and that of your group aren't really compatible. It happens.

@fey - Jumping the gun a bit there, buddy. A gamer, by definition, is one who games. It isn't even in debate; she is a gamer. I wouldn't and couldn't say otherwise. However, she is a gamer who put a specific question out there regarding the gamer archetype, and she seems to be having some difficulty in relating to her mates. Since much of the archetypal 'gamer talk' consists of reference to shared lore, I do indeed recommend sharing in the lore. (Not that I've said nothing about liking or disliking said lore.) It will improve her Linguistics check - which is the relevant skill, of course, because communication is vital to any gaming group. Otherwise, there are really only two options - find another group, or stick around this one obnoxiously proclaiming that they'll have to take her as they find her and they should bloody well be pleased about that. Frankly, she didn't sound that pretentious to me.

You misunderstood me, Michael Radagast. It wasn't my intention to imply she wasn't a gamer (I forgot to put one 'gamer' in parantheses, those should have indicated that I used the word for the archetype). All I tried to say was, she doesn't need to think like a 'gamer'<-archetype to be a gamer.

I agree, she should share the lore, but only if she is interested in that lore, not because she feels the need know it to become a 'gamer'<-archetype.

The latter would possibly become tedious to her and enstrange her even further from her co-players and, as I wrote, I really think doing something just to fit in an arcetype is never the best Idea (note the:just to, that implies I don't think it is a generally bad idea to share that lore).

IMO not trying to 'think like a 'gamer'<-archetype' is not quite the same thing as 'obnoxiously proclaiming that they'll have to take her as they find her and they should bloody well be pleased about that'. If you really think there is no middle ground than we have to disagree about that.

I didn't want to sound snarky or 'jump the gun'. Sorry for any misunderstanding there.

Don't over-think things.

I played with two different groups once doing the same basic scenario. Yes back in the day they would in fact get reused from time to time. Anywho, group A did the bash in the door type play and all but cake walked through this relatively simple group of encounters. Group B, well they came up with a long winded plan with multiple levels of complexity that, not only 1) took all night to come up with and execute, but 2) did not actually work because it was over complex.

Yet I have seen the same players, play detailed oriented non complex characters and have fun with them.

Relax, and just try to enjoy yourself, it will come.

I apparently don't think like a gamer, at least not the experienced gamers (from AD&D to Star Wars to whatever pretty much) at my table. And it is starting to be a problem for both me and the group. I love playing the game and have a blast, but the fact that I don't think and apply things the way they do is ... becoming an issue.

Can I ask if you started the current campaign, with a new, first-level character of your own choosing?

It can be far easier to get to grips with what your character can (and should) do, if you've grown with it, and got used to their abilities incrementally.
Same with the other PCs; seeing them using their early, core abilities and growing into more advanced tactics, gives you more grounding in what is considered 'standard', and what is really only applicable to that one specific 'build' at that specific level.

As I try to understand and learn, I'm either parsing things too much (scientifically breaking something down) or taking a too broad view of things (interpreting it based on past experience and not parsing it enough).

What kind of character are you playing? Is it your first character, and did you design it yourself? There are lots of abilities that sound very cool, but fail to work as the player imagined. Maybe it's time to ask your GM if you can rebuild the character, with the help of one of the more mechanically-minded players, so it more accurately performs as you imagined it?

-Fantasy Literature is mostly (subjective) horrible, I cannot stand comic books except Tintin, and people who talk in Quotes from TV shows drive me nuts. I also have a slightly anti-technology bent (dislike computers in general, prefer real paper and pens)
-That said I consider gaming to be one of my strongest interests and most important hobby. Even here in China I look for gamers, and talk about on the internet.
-Secondly not all 'groups' of gamers are the same. One group of gamers may be insular, even like a little clique. Another maybe a gathering of social rejects, with all the fun non-social skills that brings. A third might be casual gamers, who really just use RPGs the way other people meet and talk over chess or book clubs.
-So yeah, don't overthink the situation. The first rule is have fun, and if you aren't having fun, you don't alway need to change. You might just have a different playing style.

I would say to just remember the first 2 rules of pen & paper gaming.

1. You are at the table to build friendships and bond with the people therein and to tell an amazing story together as a team with your fellow heroes and your GM.

2. Don't troll. If you find your party or GM grumbling about what you are doing and it is bringing entropy and discord, consciously or unconsciously, you should sit down and ask them what it is and what they would like you to do.

Outside of that I would just say to remember that the game is about a crack team of heroes working together as a squad to solve problems not one hero and his 3-5 other sidekicks, this may not be your problem in particular but it is a more common occurrence then you think.

Now my next question is do you like all the details and things within the setting you are playing in and do they get you excited to be at the table?
If that's the case you may want to talk to your GM about giving you some chances to show that off as it brings you to the table each time, remember part of his job as GM is to pander to the players in one way or another so that they are excited to come back each time. Second you may want to try and explain the things you love to your party and maybe get them excited about it, one example I have from my home games is when one of my friends joined and I let him start off the cuff add things to the world about his races culture & religion while rp'ing which helped him flesh out the world and his character. After it happen I told the rest of the players that none of that was rehearsed and to feel free to give it a try or just ask questions and they were off like a shot. This helped them be in character more easily and helped me as a GM build adventures that would interest them.

Final thing I can think to do is ask you GM what to expect in the coming games that way you can focus your attentions on those topics to better ready yourself and not get distracted. Good example is how Paizo's ap's come with player companions so that players can know what to build for without being spoiled (ex. you probably shouldn't build a paladin if you plan to play in skull & shackles).

Lots to reply to so I hope I answer everyone. Thank you all. Lots of think about and analyze as to where the malfunction is.

First, I do believe that I share a common lore (movies, tv, etc). My problem is I do not share an experience base. I don't have the experience or knowledge to know what has "never been true" or "always true" about the Pathfinder (D&D 3.p) universe. I feel like I'm trying to find lightsabers on the Enterprise.

I began this campaign from the start with a first level character of my choosing. I have a handle on my character, at least on a broad level. For the most part my character rocks, and I have no complaints over the parts that aren't as cool as I thought they would be (because some things are cooler than I thought so it balances). It's the fine points, the creative application of my character's abilities, which I constantly stumble over. "You would think you can do that but no, never been that way in D&D" or something along those lines I get told. It's like "I know the book says you can but what it doesn't tell you is that you can't because of x"

What gets me excited to be at the table is ... when everything is working well most of it. My character rocks, and everyone in the group rocks their particular role (sneak attacking rogue, healer cursing cleric, smiting paladin etc). I just start to feel straightjacketed and confused when I don't understand what is going on and can't do what I think I should be able to. How do I respond to "that's the way it's always been"? I feel like a Methodist in a Catholic stronghold and no one is telling me when to sit/stand/kneel; I didn't grow up with the customs and rituals and reading the book doesn't help most of the time because it's interpretation mixed with 'how it's always been.'

I'm trying to stay relaxed and go with the flow, but being shot down and confused is starting to mess with my zen.

-sounds more like they are not the best teachers. Teaching the game is not a skill everybody has. In General, a DM says "you can't do THAT" to a very specific thing, for example, can I make a new spell? Can I use a great axe in my hand. Remember ANYTHING you can do, a characer can do. Now, using out of character knowledge is an obvious exception. For example you can not say, my character will make a nuclear weapon because I work for DARPA or my character knows how to find north because I'm a boy scout.
-It would be more productive to give us an actual example of 'being shotdown' than a generality. For example a case where you wanted to do action X and the DM said 'no'.

Yes it does sound like they are not doing a good job teaching you about the game. They need to explain more than just "you can't do that" they need to explain WHY your character can't do that.

Have you talked to your game master or one of the other more experienced players away from the game and explained how you feel lost and would like to know more about the game and how it works. Then ask them if they could get with you one night away from the game and help go over some stuff and explain the in's and out's to some stuff. That should help you learn the game and make you less confused.

Lots to reply to so I hope I answer everyone. Thank you all. Lots of think about and analyze as to where the malfunction is.

First, I do believe that I share a common lore (movies, tv, etc). My problem is I do not share an experience base. I don't have the experience or knowledge to know what has "never been true" or "always true" about the Pathfinder (D&D 3.p) universe. I feel like I'm trying to find lightsabers on the Enterprise.

Sounds to me more like you've got a group very set in their ways. Maybe the issue isn't that you're not thinking like a gamer, it's that you're not thinking like them.

I began this campaign from the start with a first level character of my choosing. I have a handle on my character, at least on a broad level. For the most part my character rocks, and I have no complaints over the parts that aren't as cool as I thought they would be (because some things are cooler than I thought so it balances). It's the fine points, the creative application of my character's abilities, which I constantly stumble over. "You would think you can do that but no, never been that way in D&D" or something along those lines I get told. It's like "I know the book says you can but what it doesn't tell you is that you can't because of x"

My initial, gut reaction to this is "wow, you've been told a load of b+$++!#@."

I admit I may be missing certain information however.

What are they telling you you can't do? What are they telling you you can do?

To me, thinking like a gamer is in fact finding creative solutions to problems. It is finding--within the parameters you've been given to work with, but those parameters are hella broad--the most interesting, effective, and cool thing you can do at any given moment. And part of the joy (and, I admit, sometimes frustration...). It is about, in fact, being in a situation where you're on the Enterprise, and you can't find any lightsabers because they don't exist in that universe, so you invent them yourself. I have as a GM is throwing my players into a situation and watching the crazy stuff they come up with to solve it.

It is possible there's some stuff you're trying to do that the game does limit. I remember one time a new to D&D player of mine on her turn in combat said, "Okay, can I jump off my pony, onto that tree branch, swing off a vine, and knock the bandit out of the tree?"

And I was like, "Wow, that's a really awesome description! And if we were in Exalted I'd give you a stunt bonus [that was the system we were playing in before]. But unfortunately in this game we're restricted to two move or a move and a standard action, and that's two or three move actions before your attack, especially since you're a dwarf and you can only move 20 feet per move action. But, you can make the attempt to jump onto the tree and stay balanced there this round, and on your next turn make your bull rush attack, or... I think you could also leap off your pony and pummel the other guy to your right if you want to do that."

I couldn't let, within the rules, the player do exactly what she wanted but I tried to find a way to make it work (and I was a less experienced GM then, as a more experienced one now I might have even tried to fudge a way to make it work as she wanted to do it). (But my personal philosophy of GMing is, "Never say why you say no. Explain why you can't say yes. And if there's a way you can say yes, then do it.")

So if that's the issue where the rules really are constricting your style of play, learn the rules well enough that you can find ways to make things work at least to a degree.

And if then the GM is still telling you, "you can't do that," I think--in my personal opinion--the flaw lies with the GM and not you. Or, at least, that your playstyles are not compatible, as others have noted.

And no matter what, it might behoove you to have a chat with him about your expectations versus his, and how to reconcile them.

What gets me excited to be at the table is ... when everything is working well most of it. My character rocks, and everyone in the group rocks their particular role (sneak attacking rogue, healer cursing cleric, smiting paladin etc). I just start to feel straightjacketed and confused when I don't understand what is going on and can't do what I think I should be able to. How do I respond to "that's the way it's always been"? I feel like a Methodist in a Catholic stronghold and no one is telling me when to sit/stand/kneel; I didn't grow up with the customs and rituals and reading the book doesn't help most of the time because it's interpretation mixed with 'how it's always been.'

I am rather curious as to what they think how "that's always been." Especially since if you're playing Pathfinder, there's been a LOT of changes to "what's always been."

I'm trying to stay relaxed and go with the flow, but being shot down and confused is starting to mess with my zen.

I'd be frustrated in your shoes too. Good luck.

I realize this entirely depends on whether or not you can find anyone else interested in such a game, but have you considered something a bit less rules-intensive than Pathfinder? In my less-than-humble opinion, it's the setting, the flavor material, and their top-notch production values that make Paizo a great publisher, not their slightly revised take on the d20 system.

There are a lot of systems out there that are much simpler. Some are even free, if you don't mind using/printing off PDFs.

The down-side, of course, is that none of those systems are anywhere near as wide-spread as Pathfinder. You might find some interested gamers, but you also might not.

As an off-again/on-again GM of 16 years, allow me to butt into the argument. What is it you (or your character) is trying to do, that your group (or DM) says you can't do "because it's never been done that way"?

Actually, that is where I do most emphatically agree with LazarX - catch up on your gamerlore. As your groupmates for their fondest favorite geeky reference materials - do they read Terry Pratchett, or Arthur Conan Doyle, or both? Did they love Ladyhawke despite that ridiculous 80s soundtrack? Speaking of ridiculous 80s soundtracks, how bout that Flash Gordon movie? If you don't know who Max von Sydow is, time to visit your friendly neighborhood wikipedia.

Are you kidding? One of the reasons to love that Flash Gordon movie WAS that ridiculous Queen soundtrack. That and the Max von Sydow costume. The whole movie was an overthe top ridiculous romp that was played pretty much for camp. Kind of like the old Adam West Batman series. "Some days you just can't get rid of a bomb!"

There's an interesting anecdote about that. Initially Von Sydow was worried that he wouldn't be able to carry off Ming's style of evil. But after spending several hours inside that 80 lb costume, he was more than motivated enough to carry it off.

As an off-again/on-again GM of 16 years, allow me to butt into the argument. What is it you (or your character) is trying to do, that your group (or DM) says you can't do "because it's never been done that way"?

Yes, an example or two would be really helpful, ValkerieStorm!

If you are having fun, just have fun. It is a game.

Focus on making your character the way you want it to be, and don't worry so much about how everyone else is doing it. Unless the DM is pulling you aside, you are fine.

Every table is going to have rules, you will learn them and if you don't like them you can eventually run a game and do it how you think would work better.

Just a side note, and not an assumption in any way, but don't fall into the 'gamer girl' trap.

Personally, I enjoy playing with people who are more interested in the story than the mechanics. As a GM, I do not mind worrying about the rules and letting the players get more into character.

… but have you considered something a bit less rules-intensive than Pathfinder?

Rules light systems are more permissive of 'mad, beautiful' ideas.

I'm afraid if I give examples this will become a discussion of who is right and who is wrong, which I don't want. Right or wrong it is the standard of the group, whether house rule, interpretation of a fuzzy rule, or hard rule.

I have, however, gotten some excellent advice. Patience from all involved (myself and group). I think like any culture (for lack of a better term) it just takes time to learn the ways of the land. If I want different interpretation of the fuzzy or different house rules, argue for them or leave the group. Otherwise, I just have to learn the way things work. And try to remember that stumbling or not, it is fun and suppose to be fun. I have started to make note of things in movies that I see and ask outside the game "in movieX Y happened, is that how it works in Pathfinder?" (example, long spear being used as both a reach weapon and melee close combat weapon) and "I read on page X of the Core that I could do X, am I understanding correctly? how does that apply to situation Z in the past? does that apply to me trying to do B?

I have started to make note of things in movies that I see and ask outside the game "in movieX Y happened, is that how it works in Pathfinder?" (example, long spear being used as both a reach weapon and melee close combat weapon)

I would be remiss if I didn't tell you that this example cuts right to Pathfinder's greatest weakness.

Nothing in Pathfinder works like that. You cannot rely on verisimilitude to guide your character's actions, and an alarming number of situations insist that you make counter-intuitive decisions because "the rules say". It's not limited to spears, but they're a good example of the dissonance of which I speak. Spears and reach don't work that way in Pathfinder, despite reality; in order to do that in a game you'll need the GM to house rule it.

It drives me nuts. Likewise, mounted combat as written is nearly impossible to conceptualize, so you need to throw out everything you ever learned about horses and battle and just go with the rules on the page. There are many more things like this. The greatsword is inexplicably the best weapon in the world. Don't use real world logic to make your decisions — use the rules, and the rules only.

However.

There are a lot of great things in the game too. As a super-powered, monster-slaying romp, it is unmatched on many levels. It's a great teamwork game that keeps everyone playing a role in the same scene. It has decent balance tools for the GM. Realism/Verisimilitude just happens to be a huge weakness, and so I hope my saying so gives you some insight into the problems you are having.

One thing that helped me when I was a much newer gamer was asking the group to stop helping me so dang much. It was fine if the GM was telling me that something couldn't be done within the rules since that was kinda his job and all, but unless it was a quick suggestion for how that action could be done within the rules, I didn't want to hear it. Suboptimal choice? Okay. Let me learn the hard way. It helped me learn the rules for myself. And many of those suboptimal choices weren't. You just had to approach them from a different angle. Getting the guys to stop helping me really helped me learn the rules faster and left me free to make more creative choices.

I'm afraid if I give examples this will become a discussion of who is right and who is wrong, which I don't want. Right or wrong it is the standard of the group, whether house rule, interpretation of a fuzzy rule, or hard rule.

Well, getting judgmental replies is par for the course on the interwebs. Most of us learn how to recognize the chaff after a few years of forum discussions. :/

I'd like to give you specific advice that applies to your particular situation, but without context I'm really having a hard time wrapping my head around your feelings of being an outsider. I mean I've seen a lot of group-related issues arise on the forums, but I've never seen "I don't think like a gamer" and I don't quite know what to make of it. Oh well.

I have, however, gotten some excellent advice. Patience from all involved (myself and group). I think like any culture (for lack of a better term) it just takes time to learn the ways of the land. If I want different interpretation of the fuzzy or different house rules, argue for them or leave the group. Otherwise, I just have to learn the way things work. And try to remember that stumbling or not, it is fun and suppose to be fun. I have started to make note of things in movies that I see and ask outside the game "in movieX Y happened, is that how it works in Pathfinder?" (example, long spear being used as both a reach weapon and melee close combat weapon) and "I read on page X of the Core that I could do X, am I understanding correctly? how does that apply to situation Z in the past? does that apply to me trying to do B?

What Evil Lincoln says is probably true about PF. It's also true about all D&D editions, to varying degrees: things don't necessarily work in a logical or intuitive fashion.

For what it's worth though, 3.5 has a feat somewhere that allows a wielder to attack an adjacent foe with a reach weapon. Possibly at a penalty, I'm not sure. 4e allows everyone to do this at no penalty for free. And I believe TSR editions do too, just because combat is more abstracted in those editions.

One thing that helped me when I was a much newer gamer was asking the group to stop helping me so dang much. It was fine if the GM was telling me that something couldn't be done within the rules since that was kinda his job and all, but unless it was a quick suggestion for how that action could be done within the rules, I didn't want to hear it. Suboptimal choice? Okay. Let me learn the hard way. It helped me learn the rules for myself. And many of those suboptimal choices weren't. You just had to approach them from a different angle. Getting the guys to stop helping me really helped me learn the rules faster and left me free to make more creative choices.

Yeah, us guys have an unfortunate habit of dogpiling girl gamers with suggestions and advice, which I'm sure can easily result in her feeling clueless -- even if she learns as fast as the next guy.

Yeah, us guys have an unfortunate habit of dogpiling girl gamers with suggestions and advice, which I'm sure can easily result in her feeling clueless -- even if she learns as fast as the next guy.

Or worse the new player starts to depend on the advice and fails to bother to learn the rules. I have seen that happen.

"I read on page X of the Core that I could do X, am I understanding correctly? how does that apply to situation Z in the past? does that apply to me trying to do B?"

This is probably one of the best things you can do. Once you have a firm understanding of the Core Rules (I'm presuming you've read the entire Core Rulebook, front to back), all you need to understand is your particular group's nuances.

Knowing the Core Rulebook is the first fundamental step.

ValkyrieStorm wrote:

"I read on page X of the Core that I could do X, am I understanding correctly? how does that apply to situation Z in the past? does that apply to me trying to do B?"

This is probably one of the best things you can do. Once you have a firm understanding of the Core Rules (I'm presuming you've read the entire Core Rulebook, front to back), all you need to understand is your particular group's nuances.

Knowing the Core Rulebook is the first fundamental step.

And even that takes time to master. I don't think until you've played regularly for at least a year you really have your feet wet with the rules most of the time.

I got lucky on learning how to play all around. Both of my parents were gamers. My mother still is and so I've been around D&D for as long as I can recall. Though I still run across people who insist on building my character for me or say I do not act like a gamer chick.

On the whole learning the game just takes a lot of patience. Teaching it takes a lot of patience as well and a willingness to explain everything or to clarify rules for their table. As you learn the rules things will make more sense or at least you will know just how far you can push the rules.

lynora wrote:

One thing that helped me when I was a much newer gamer was asking the group to stop helping me so dang much. It was fine if the GM was telling me that something couldn't be done within the rules since that was kinda his job and all, but unless it was a quick suggestion for how that action could be done within the rules, I didn't want to hear it. Suboptimal choice? Okay. Let me learn the hard way. It helped me learn the rules for myself. And many of those suboptimal choices weren't. You just had to approach them from a different angle. Getting the guys to stop helping me really helped me learn the rules faster and left me free to make more creative choices.

Yeah, us guys have an unfortunate habit of dogpiling girl gamers with suggestions and advice, which I'm sure can easily result in her feeling clueless -- even if she learns as fast as the next guy.

Not just guys. I'm in a group where I am by far the most experienced Pathfinder player, and it is very hard for me sometimes to not just tell someone what I think they should do (that we are only able to play sporadically and thus folks forget what their class features are doesn't help). Particularly when they sit and say, "I have nothing to do," or "I don't know what to do" I really have trouble keeping my mouth shut, or at least not being dictating in the way I say. Last game I shouted at the druid who was complaining she had nothing to do (that's a hint of a problem right there, though) to cast summon nature's ally if she felt her other spells were useless and she didn't want to enter melee (we were fighting a dragon skeleton so I understand why she wanted to avoid that).

Mind, I think what some guy gamers do is assume the girl at the table is inexperienced no matter how much she actually knows what she's doing, or at least has confidence in her abilities even if she's just learning. I have had guy veteran gamers "dogpile" as you say in groups I'd just joined, even though I'd been gaming for years, with them telling me what to do. Even ones that known I'd been playing for awhile, some guys in particular would really badger me to play according to their tactics rather than my own (My favorite moment was with a friend who should have known better, kept yelling at me, saying my melee oriented fighter-cleric should stand in the back and cast while his bard and the monk tried tanking this giant undead thing. At first I did sit back and cast some buffs, somehow feeling like I should do as I was told, but then realized the whole situation was ridiculous, it was not what my character was built for--a melee cleric with ideal build and equipment for fighting undead, for god's sake--which the other player knew. So she walked up to the monster both meleers had been having trouble hitting/damaging, clocked it in the face with her quarterstaff of disruption, and it promptly disintegrated). How much of that is guy-ness and how much of that is know-it-all gamerness I don't know. Maybe a bit of both.

===

As to the OP, I can understand why you don't want to give the gritty details, but I'd say bear in mind you may not be doing anything wrong. You may well be thinking "like a gamer" already--could be the other guys just think differently. Good luck navigating that and hope you find some compromises.

I'm afraid if I give examples this will become a discussion of who is right and who is wrong, which I don't want. Right or wrong it is the standard of the group, whether house rule, interpretation of a fuzzy rule, or hard rule.

I have, however, gotten some excellent advice. Patience from all involved (myself and group). I think like any culture (for lack of a better term) it just takes time to learn the ways of the land. If I want different interpretation of the fuzzy or different house rules, argue for them or leave the group. Otherwise, I just have to learn the way things work. And try to remember that stumbling or not, it is fun and suppose to be fun. I have started to make note of things in movies that I see and ask outside the game "in movieX Y happened, is that how it works in Pathfinder?" (example, long spear being used as both a reach weapon and melee close combat weapon) and "I read on page X of the Core that I could do X, am I understanding correctly? how does that apply to situation Z in the past? does that apply to me trying to do B?

As a DM, I could easily come up with a feat that allowed you to do that, perhaps with a penalty. Unlike some DMs, I don't penalize a player for coming up with interesting (even if they are slightly cinematic and unrealistic) ideas, and actually prefer games that have some kind of cinematic stunt rule in them. Iron Heroes and Arcana Evolved spring to mind, where hero points and stunt points are given out for valiant deeds which you can use for fantastic effects, unbelievable stunts, and risky, but ultimately rewarding stretches of the imagination.

You might consider investing in a pdf of either of these two books and asking your group if they can modify some of the rules for incorporation in a Pathfinder game. I myself kind of want to DM a Pathfinderized Iron Heroes campaign, and actually find that the modularity of 3rd Edition and its break-offs, make combining Iron Heroes, Pathfinder, and Arcana Evolved a fun and rewarding activity.

Hafted Weapon Mastery
In your capable hands, a spear of polearm becomes the instrument of a maestro of battle. You use your weapon's long haft to deflect attacks, reach out and strike an opponent before he can close with you, or defend yourself against a foe who steps within your reach.
Prerequisite Spear or polearm proficiency
Mastery: 1 If your spear or polearm has reach, you can lose the benefits of its reach to threaten adjacent opponents. You twirl your weapon like a staff, defending yourself with the haft. In your case, your polearm or spear inflicts damage as a club of the same size. You can shift your weapon's reach as a free action once per round.
If your spear or polearm does not have reach, you can select a single square adjacent to the area you normally threaten: You now threaten that square. You can pick a square or change your current square to a new target once per round as a free action.
Mastery: 2 You can use your two-handed spear or polearm as a double weapon. You lose the benefits and drawbacks of the weapon's reach, and the spear or polearm's second head inflicts damage as a club of the same size. You gain the benefits of the Two-Weapon Fighting feat's base benefit with your weapon when you use it this way. You can spend feat selections to gain Two-Weapon Fighting's expanded mastery abilities for this use of your spear or polearm. You can change to wield your spear or polearm as a double weapon or go back to using it normally as a free action once per round.
Mastery: 3 If you wear light or no armor, you can vault forward using your spear or polearm, gaining a +4 bonus to Jump checks on stable ground.
In addition, as a full attack action, you can make a single unarmed strike that does not provoke an opportunity. To do so, plant your spear in the ground and vault forward to deliver a driving kick. There must be one square (and only one square) between you and your target: when you end this attack, you land in that empty square. You inflict damage equal to twice your unarmed damage, with double all the normal bonuses you gain to unarmed attacks.
Mastery: 4 You can extend your spear's reach by making a powerful, lunging attack at your opponent. When you use a full attack action with a spear or polearm, you gain a 5 foot bonus to your reach.
Mastery: 5 With a punishing flurry of jabs, you attempt to force a foe backward. If you hit him with more than one attack during your action, you can force him to make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + half your level + your Strength modifier). If this save fails, he moves one square away from you. You choose the square your opponent enters: however, he never enters a space that would inflict damage to him due to obvious environmental effects, such as a raging fire or a deep pit. The chosen square must land your foe farther away from you than he was when he started.

Borrowed from Iron Heroes, this series of feat selections demonstrate just about everything cinematic or trope-like that a spear might be used for. So it's a bit of a stretch to say that "it has never been done". It's just a different system than Pathfinder, but one which is not entirely alien, and is fully adaptable to the Pathfinder rules.

So it's a bit of a stretch to say that "it has never been done"

Indeed. "Short Haft" was a feat in WotC's 3.5 Player's Handbook II.

Every time someone uses a Feat to patch an obvious oversight or badly conceived rule, a little part of me dies.

The point I am trying to make, gentlemen, is that ValkyrieStorm is indeed thinking like a player. (And I think the feat system in Iron Heroes is an integral and decisive part of the game, not a "patch") She (referencing the Valkyrie's avatar), is just one of the many different types of gamer, preferring a more cinematic style of combat.

ValkyrieStorm wrote:

I have started to make note of things in movies that I see and ask outside the game "in movieX Y happened, is that how it works in Pathfinder?" (example, long spear being used as both a reach weapon and melee close combat weapon)

I would be remiss if I didn't tell you that this example cuts right to Pathfinder's greatest weakness.

[lots of good stuff removed]

I don't think that it is a specific Pathfinder weakness - I've come across similar limitations in a number of systems. It comes down to GM style. If the GM does not support cinematographic play then the game will be formulaic and mechanical.

Example: Player stabs someone with their longspear at reach and drops them. They have an iterative, but the only other opponent is adjacent and they can't manoeuvre to put them where they need them. Strictly by the rules, they can't attack. Or, the GM allow the haft of the weapon to be used as an improvised weapon and do damage as a club. No rules were seriously harmed in the making of this call and the game was more fun for it.

It all depends where on the spectrum between wargame and free-form improv acting the GM and players want to sit.

It is surely a problem that other games share, but some do not.

I'm not wanting or expecting Pathfinder to be accurate or like something that it's not. It doesn't have to be like the documentary said it should be. My problem is that I'll have an idea, possibly something that I've seen somewhere (movie etc), and I'll want to do it during the game.

From my perspective, our group's gaming style is pretty rules intensive. Doing things according to the rules seems to be of primary importance and play is often slowed or stopped to look stuff up and/or discuss it. Between gaming sessions the boards here on Paizo are used to research the fine points of how things are done. If someone has a creative idea, no matter how glorious, if it can't be proven possible by the rules it doesn't happen, or happens with the caveat that it is a one off until the rules are researched to see if it should have and can be done again. Again, this is my perspective. I've been gaming with the same group for over a year and have no frame of reference as to what is and is not rules intensive. I don't have a problem with this adherence to rules; it leads to consistency.

There is a cultural history of gaming that I do feel like I'm missing. I don't know that way it's been in gaming, and I often feel like I asked for something completely outlandish when I ask for something which goes against that "that's never been possible" cultural knowledge base. So when I want to do something that isn't expressly forbidden, often lots of time is spent looking for the book reference as to why to back up their "that's the way it's always been." Maybe I should be satisfied with "that's how it's been since back in the day" but I learn best when I know where in the book it says it, especially when it's something cool that I really wanted to do.

I'm not being dogpiled with advice; I don't think that I ever was. I used to get hints and multiple choice like options in tight critical situations, but to have a more "real" gaming experience that has stopped. This is actually what has created the problem I think. I now think for myself completely, and I don't think like the more experienced gamers. I feel more creative, but I also feel more frustrated.

I think that you just lean towards a different style of gaming than the rest of your group.

There is a cultural history of gaming that I do feel like I'm missing. I don't know that way it's been in gaming, and I often feel like I asked for something completely outlandish when I ask for something which goes against that "that's never been possible" cultural knowledge base. So when I want to do something that isn't expressly forbidden, often lots of time is spent looking for the book reference as to why to back up their "that's the way it's always been."

It's not you.

Back before 3ed, it was understood widely that the rules were not intended to be complete, and that the DM would make rulings on the spur of the moment to guide the game and to keep things fun. That was also the intent in 3ed, but for a lot of people it became lost in the expanded body of explicit rules. So no, it hasn't always been that way.

The DnD Next playtest leans strongly back towards that style of game, but it is perfectly possible to play Pathfinder in that style, if the group chooses to do so.

How about trying a play by post game here on the boards? Those tend to lean towards role-playing more than strict rules adherence - perhaps one of those would be more to your taste?

ValkyrieStorm, I understand your frustration. There are a number of people who post in these forums who have been gaming since the late seventies. We began playing in a time when the D&D experience was exactly as you would like it to be.

There weren't much in the way of rules to prevent us from doing the things we saw in movies and read about in books. If it was something new, the DM would adjudicate it and tell us what we needed to do to make it work. The dice often prevented us from succeeding, but the point is that we go a chance to try it.

Successive editions have piled more and more rules on top of what was a simple, very creative game, all in an effort to provide the DM with rules to make things happen. Unfortunately, this has engendered an atmosphere that stifles creativity in actions; the recent generation of D&D players has reached a point where they believe they can't do anything in the game if there's no rule to make it possible. They also fight against the idea theat a DM can make his own rules to deal with the unexpected; to them, DM Fiat is a sin.

All I can do is sympathize; my gaming group is a mixture of older and younger players, and we all approach gaming from the point of view that the rules are merely guidelines, and the DM is the arbiter of the game.

Ironically, I believe you would fit into our group perfectly. :/

I don't think that you're missing a cultural history of gaming, just your group's cultural history of gaming which is totally different than what you would find with another group. Your style and theirs aren't totally meshing.