People are coming in with no respect for storyline, immersion, character development, and richness of play. Because of this, the people who love that stuff are having their fun partially ruined, and they don't like that.
That isn't untrue. But I object to the absurd accusations of anyone who doesn't play that way is some new MMORPG kid coming into the game. That is both insulting to MMORPG players and new players to tabletop gaming. People can say it isn't an insult all they like, if you use it like a catch-all insult, it's an insult. People who want to play like amateur thespians can find others to act with instead of complaining about 'kids' ruining 'their' game without all their reverence for deep, rich character backgrounds and storylines coupled with offhanded insults of MMORPGs and new players.
Personally, I learn something new about gamin' all the time. People...well, people are always the same :)
Greg
|
Well, there's also the fact that some of these people come in without ever having TRIED to immerse themselves in a character, and they criticize the gamers who do. That's pretty insulting. Even worse is when they belittle the knowledge and experience that these people have. Just because 1st and 2nd edition were different games doesn't mean that none of the tactics and ideas they learned there will apply to Pathfinder. On the contrary, many of the great ideas in those games are still great ideas today.
And then there's the fact that they get called 'amateur thespians' and other crap when they bring up their preferred style of play - as though this is somehow inferior to pure tactical play. Really, it shouldn't be much of a surprise that some of them retaliate with insults. They feel like they're under attack.
Lastly, there's a question of values. The tactical players often value only what is on a single character's character sheet. Each character is only as good as what he or she can contribute directly to a fight on his or her own. Other players (the 'amateur thespians' included) often value resourcefulness above bonus-stacking, and teamwork above team play.
I have no idea who Pete Townshend is and imagine I don't care.Dude, you sound like a young Pete Townshend. Seen any pictures of him lately? (I liked Pete. Still do. Interesting the change with the years.)
All I've seen from the gray haired gamers is the assertion that they know the game .... you can save the waxing nostalgic for other gray haired gamers instead of using it to look down on people just joining the hobby either tabula rasa or from mmorpgs.
I think a lot of people read this the wrong way, and in hindsight I can see why: poor wording. What I should have said was: I think one of the reasons that you see elitism in older players is they've been immersed in the pen and paper world for the past twenty or so years, and therefore have a much more in depth knowledge of the game both in front of and behind "the curtain." When I said "due to" I didn't mean, you owe us/them elitism. I meant, "it is due to the fact that..." Like I said, poor wording.All I've seen from the gray haired gamers is the assertion that they know the game backwards and forwards, not because they do but because they have been playing it so long thus they are inherently knowledgable about everything ever and they should be listened (and catered to) by all the young disrespectful whipper snappers who play this "wow" thing.
One of the reasons you see elitism in older players is because they are older players. "Oh look, we have been in the hobby forever, let's look down our nose at new people interested in this new fangled version and complain about them being video game kids whether they are or not."
Just because you played AD&D back in high school doesn't make you the god of 3rd edition or Pathfinder some 30 years later. It just means you get to learn a new system like everyone else. You can save the waxing nostalgic for other gray haired gamers instead of using it to look down on people just joining the hobby either tabula rasa or from mmorpgs.
I was not going comment in this thread at all; but you just had to play the "you are old and this a new version of the game so you know nothing" attitude.
Want to know why we "old timers" have such negative attitudes towards younger/newer players like you? That attitude right there.My 37 years of experience as a hobbyist, My 31 year membership in the RPGA (as a GM), my long conversations with Gary Gygax, Dave Arneson, Monte Cook, Kevin Sembieda, Erick Wujick, Bill Coffin, Bill...
YOU MET WUJICK?!?!?!? What was he like?!?!?!
Well, there's also the fact that some of these people come in without ever having TRIED to immerse themselves in a character, and they criticize the gamers who do.
Which has jack all to do with using "WoW-like" like an accusation and derogatory term for new players.
That's pretty insulting.
Then perhaps you should call them on it instead of defending people being jerks.
Even worse is when they belittle the knowledge and experience that these people have. Just because 1st and 2nd edition were different games doesn't mean that none of the tactics and ideas they learned there will apply to Pathfinder.
I see what you did there.
On the contrary, many of the great ideas in those games are still great ideas today.
And many were probably great a hundred years ago in other similar games.
And then there's the fact that they get called 'amateur thespians'
Would they feel better if they were referred to as "role-players" and everyone else "roll-players" so we make a distinction between the true gamers and the pretenders?
If you want to be an actor at the table, you are an amateur thespian.Lastly, there's a question of values. The tactical players often value only what is on a single character's character sheet. Each character is only as good as what he or she can contribute directly to a fight on his or her own. Other players (the 'amateur thespians' included) often value resourcefulness above bonus-stacking, and teamwork above team play.
False. And wrong. And bs.
That is some nice passive aggressive elitism there. But let me break it down for everyone.You are saying that "role-players" never do stuff to hurt the team in the name of their role and always play useful, helpful characters. Furthermore, you are saying that "roll-players" only value what they can do in a fight by themselves and don't care about the team and don't care about what they can do outside a fight, even if that is a equally tactical bit of work.
What a load.
Perhaps you are unfamiliar with the "diplomancy" concept created by "roll-players?" Or the MYRIAD threads where "role-players" are perfectly playing loner jerkasses that make it difficult for the team to get anything done? There is one on the forum today in fact.
Dudes, you guys who are looking for elitism are looking in the wrong game. You know what game has a lot of real elitism? World of darkness. There's player elitism, character elitism, story elitism... man, those guys have so much elitism they beat us at it before we even start trying to compete.
Oh man. The MEMORIES..thanks for the flashback man, good times...good times.
|
I have no idea who Pete Townshend is and imagine I don't care.Dude, you sound like a young Pete Townshend. Seen any pictures of him lately? (I liked Pete. Still do. Interesting the change with the years.)
All I've seen from the gray haired gamers is the assertion that they know the game .... you can save the waxing nostalgic for other gray haired gamers instead of using it to look down on people just joining the hobby either tabula rasa or from mmorpgs.
Who?
Who?I have no idea who Pete Townshend is and imagine I don't care.Dude, you sound like a young Pete Townshend. Seen any pictures of him lately? (I liked Pete. Still do. Interesting the change with the years.)
All I've seen from the gray haired gamers is the assertion that they know the game .... you can save the waxing nostalgic for other gray haired gamers instead of using it to look down on people just joining the hobby either tabula rasa or from mmorpgs.
This thread, like the seven before it, should be closed or moved to Gamer Life.
Only seven?
Only seven?
That's all that I am willing to accept being in existence without killing myself. So yeah. Seven. The next one will be the seventh as well.
Cartigan, your last post makes me positively certain you are unfamiliar with diplomacy.Aggressive negotiations?
It worked for Anakin Skywalker. Look how he turned out!
YOU MET WUJICK?!?!?!? What was he like?!?!?!
He was cool... He treated every single person as if they were the only person in the room (even if he were talking to room of twenty).
He was an all around cool guy. And one of the best damn GMs I have ever had the pleasure to meet. He loved to talk gaming and game theory (as does Sembieda and Jackson). Honestly he was one of the Legends of the hobby. He is still missed by many. (I like to think he and Gary are up there somewhere running the grandest game ever.)
YOU MET WUJICK?!?!?!? What was he like?!?!?!He was cool... He treated every single person as if they were the only person in the room (even if he were talking to room of twenty).
He was an all around cool guy. And one of the best damn GMs I have ever had the pleasure to meet. He loved to talk gaming and game theory (as does Sembieda and Jackson). Honestly he was one of the Legends of the hobby. He is still missed by many. (I like to think he and Gary are up there somewhere running the grandest game ever.)
I am sorry I didn't get a chance to meet him. I really liked Ninjas and Superspies, as INCREDIBLY cheesy(and to one of my friends, incredibly offensive) as it was.
I am sorry I didn't get a chance to meet him. I really liked Ninjas and Superspies, as INCREDIBLY cheesy(and to one of my friends, incredibly offensive) as it was.YOU MET WUJICK?!?!?!? What was he like?!?!?!He was cool... He treated every single person as if they were the only person in the room (even if he were talking to room of twenty).
He was an all around cool guy. And one of the best damn GMs I have ever had the pleasure to meet. He loved to talk gaming and game theory (as does Sembieda and Jackson). Honestly he was one of the Legends of the hobby. He is still missed by many. (I like to think he and Gary are up there somewhere running the grandest game ever.)
Legend has it he wrote TMNT in 4 months and he used to say he turned it in 2 weeks late. lol
It worked for Anakin Skywalker. Look how he turned out!Cartigan, your last post makes me positively certain you are unfamiliar with diplomacy.Aggressive negotiations?
Whiny, disaffected, and burned to a crisp?
Also...what does it even mean in the OP that these durned whippersnappers don't have the same respect for the hobby??? I can't even fathom what the heck that might mean. They regard it as a game?!?! Oh noes!I'll tell you what I think it means. I have players at the table who couldn't tell you who Gary Gygax or Dave Arneson are (unless they googled it first)... Who know every person that works at Blizzard software, but don't know names like Monte Cook or Erik Mona.
You are confusing respect for the hobby with interest in the history/minutiae of the hobby. For instance, someone can respect comic books without knowing (or caring) about the (many) versions of Batman, the Hulk, Superman, Wolverine, etc. released by various artists/media over the years. That they are more interested in the minutiae of computer games than RPGs means about as much as those that are more interested in the minutiae of comic books than RPGs (and I've met tons of gamers who are fanatical comic book trivia nuts with no knowledge of RPGs beyond a basic understanding of the rules).
Not everyone who wants to play RPGs has an interest in the history or "big names" of the hobby. They may not even care about learning more than one game system or playing in more than one genre (i.e., gritty fantasy, historical fantasy, high fantasy, steam-punk, horror, gritty modern, heroic modern, modern fantasy, cyberpunk, superheroes, space opera, etc.). This does not mean that they "lack respect for the hobby." If all the only RPG they care about is the oWoD Vampire, how does their lack of knowledge of the history of AD&D/D&D show lack of respect for the hobby? Even if they play 3.5/4e/Pathfinder, asking they to know about previous/other versions of the game is setting the bar pretty high, IMO. Gygax and Arneson had limited to no contribution after 1st Ed AD&D and Cook was pretty much gone from WotC by the 3.5 roll-out.
Who think a character background means "His mom got raped by an orc, so he's half-orc and he loves to rage, so he's a barbarian."
Umm, yeah. Nothing new here. There were players like that going all the way back. It has nothing to do with new/old gamers, but rather individual playstyle.
Who think it's "unfair" that they don't get their dexterity bonus to AC in a surprise round, or before they act in the initiative order.
Again, nothing new. The existence of rules lawyers and/or "the rules don't let me do what I want" types have been around since the beginning.
Who think there's absolutely no problem dropping into a long running campaign for a short session here and there, because they want some "gaming time."
Unless you're very lucky, being able to game on a regular schedule (especially more often than once or twice a month) is pretty rare outside of a few dedicated individuals who devote most of their free time to RPGs. Again, you're setting the bar pretty high for those with a life outside of gaming (note that this isn't meant to be a slam, but a recognition that work, relationships, children/family, and other hobbies/interests can seriously eat into available time).
Those are the things that I see as a lack of respect for the game... I was just saying I think I understand where a certain amount of elitism comes from. It comes from a standard of knowledge about the game that doesn't seem present or active in some players.
"A standard knowledge of the game" that is about events/people from 10-30 years ago. Those who have been in the hobby for less than 5 years (or who switched from another system they've been playing for 15-20 years) "lack respect."
"Cast thou the beam from thine own eye..."
Well, even as someone who had been gaming for a long time, I prefer our hobby to have a big tent — bring 'em on. The more the merrier.
Kids are much more likely to discover the awesome old style RP if they pick up a d20 and step away from the computer. And if they never get around to playing the way I do, but they still have fun and financially support creative companies, I can live with that!
I don't much care if they "respect" the game, whatever that means. We can try to freeze the game in carbonite, but then in 10 years we'll just be complaining about the disappearance of RPGs altogether. RPGs, like all media, adapt over time. People who complain that new == inferior tend to be made fools by history.
Here's an amusing blog entry by David Malki of Wondermark. It's about the rejection of new developments in media, going all the way back to Socrates. The luddite crowd in this thread may find it enlightening.
I believe elitism is bad for any hobby which wants to increase its population.
I think part of the problem from the 'Greybeards' perspective if the 'lack of foundation'. There is a lot that has been done before that a neophyte may be unaware of. While I may be sympathetic seeing the 100th Drizzit clone, the elitism is still counter-productive. Would it not be better to gently point out to the new person this has been done before, but encourage the creativity?
One of the few topics I can agree with Cartigan on. I really wish people would stop with this old-school vs new school bs. Its not some new-fangled way of playing that is happening. Its not inspired by WoW or anime. Those types of people have always been in the game, and always will be.
I have only been playing for 15 years, but I saw all of the types of behavior the OP describes back when I started in 2nd ed. Look at RPG products from the 80s and you will see systems to accommodate all of these types of players.
The big difference I see are things like living campaigns and expanded play groups replacing more isolated play groups. You can't turn someone away from your table at a store, and everyone is playing in the same system. I don't know how true this is, but its my guess of what the OP is experiencing. My guess is his core group of gamers developed a style in fairly high isolation and he is now interacting with a wider range of players. Some are more beer & pretzles, and some are deathly serious. Some are more rules heavy, and some want as minimal interaction with the rules as possible. New players haven't become accustomed to the culture surrounding the group, and so they stick out. Since the majority of new players are young, he associates age with play style. But this is wrong. Some play styles are more prevalent in different age categories, but that is not necessarily dependant on the culture surrounding the age group so much as it may be maturity level. Even then different people want different things out of the game, and always have. Go back 30 years and I am willing to bet that you will see eager anime kid who wants to play Goku and guy who wants to play a half-orc whos mom got raped so he hates orcs in the 70s. The later one I have seen called out in GMG type books from that era, and the earlier one will just have a different icon they want to emulate.
I will finish by asking the OP to please stop being patronizing and insulting to young players.
And add me to the Pete Townshend, who? list
I just got off the phone with one of my regular players, and we had an in depth (yes we're nerds of the machine) discussion about the differences between "old school" "new school" "role players vs. roll players" and RPG elitists vs. mmorpg fodder. At the end of the conversation we decided that since the hobby we love brings all kinds out of the "woodwork." We should be happy with everyone that is playing; however, after all was said and done we agreed that there's a certain part of us that believes the newer "toon" creating element, doesn't have the same respect for the hobby that we believe we do. Take that for what you will, maybe I think a certain amount of elitism is due to those RPers that have been playing pen and paper first and foremost for the past twenty or so years. Flame war, begin!
I remember once reading about a man complaining about his children. According to him, they were disrespectful, lazy, indolent, and irreverent. They spent all night getting drunk and listening to wild music. Their lack of work ethic and moral fiber was going to cause the end of civilization.
It was from 200 bc in ancient greece.
People tend to look at the past through rose colored glasses. Someone gets the wrong change from a cashier and thinks its the end of the world because in THEIR day, kids could do math in their heads without calculators. Never mind that when you do 1,000 transactions a day you'll mess one of them up, but people tend to forget that in their generation there were also a number of people who couldn't do math.
Likewise, people role playing today either don't notice or don't remember folks who treated the game like a giant video game (before such things as video games were possible/practical/widespread)
The problem isn't roleplay elitists or tactical optimisers, it is mixing them together in the wrong game. Not that either is better or worse but tossing one into the others game is like throwing a grenade on the gaming table.
I bet you would find more mixing than you think. I think it is the extremes that cause clashes.
The problem isn't roleplay elitists or tactical optimisers, it is mixing them together in the wrong game. Not that either is better or worse but tossing one into the others game is like throwing a grenade on the gaming table.
Exactly. Some want to play one way,some a different way. If they can't find a way to reconcile their differences and enjoy a game,it just won't end well.
I just got off the phone with one of my regular players, and we had an in depth (yes we're nerds of the machine) discussion about the differences between "old school" "new school" "role players vs. roll players" and RPG elitists vs. mmorpg fodder. At the end of the conversation we decided that since the hobby we love brings all kinds out of the "woodwork." We should be happy with everyone that is playing; however, after all was said and done we agreed that there's a certain part of us that believes the newer "toon" creating element, doesn't have the same respect for the hobby that we believe we do. Take that for what you will, maybe I think a certain amount of elitism is due to those RPers that have been playing pen and paper first and foremost for the past twenty or so years. Flame war, begin!
I remember when we had to roll dice up hill, both ways, in the snow. And you don't want to know where we had to keep that 10' pole.
Seriously, there are vastly less people playing the hobby than there were in the 80's. Anyone supporting the hobby is good. It means better and more diverse products for everyone.
And yes, their is a new generation of gamers that is into things I just don't really care for like MMOs and anime (though I do like some of it). They also don't appreciate all the cool things from my youth like Wizards and Heavy Metal, and games like Aftermath where character generation was like calculus homework. That's OK, I like to focus on the common ground rather than sweating the differences.
I've been playing for over twenty-five years and I always look forward to playing with new people.
Court, I think this thread contains some insight for the last thoughts in the Taosim OTD thread.
The problem isn't roleplay elitists or tactical optimisers, it is mixing them together in the wrong game. Not that either is better or worse but tossing one into the others game is like throwing a grenade on the gaming table.I bet you would find more mixing than you think. I think it is the extremes that cause clashes.
I agree. They can mix,and even complement each other. But 2 players that want to kill everything and make hats out of their scalps will clash with 2 players that want to talk the God of Destruction into sparing the world and convince him that this plan is just a result of his bad childhood.
Seriously, there are vastly less people playing the hobby than there were in the 80's. Anyone supporting the hobby is good. It means better and more diverse products for everyone.
I keep seeing people claiming this, but have never actually seen any statistics to back it up. How true is it? Got any data?
I don't much care if they "respect" the game, whatever that means. We can try to freeze the game in carbonite, but then in 10 years we'll just be complaining about the disappearance of RPGs altogether. RPGs, like all media, adapt over time. People who complain that new == inferior tend to be made fools by history.
That's interesting considering a lot of players in this thread and on these boards have rejected 4th edition Dungeons and Dragons.
And add me to the Pete Townshend, who?...
Pete Townshend was the guitar player for The Who, which was one of the British invasion bands of the late 60's.
They had a song called My Generation which was basically about old people putting down young people and not understanding them.
That's interesting considering a lot of players in this thread and on these boards have rejected 4th edition Dungeons and Dragons.I don't much care if they "respect" the game, whatever that means. We can try to freeze the game in carbonite, but then in 10 years we'll just be complaining about the disappearance of RPGs altogether. RPGs, like all media, adapt over time. People who complain that new == inferior tend to be made fools by history.
And a lot of players playing 4th Edition like it.
I'm sure there are people still playing AD&D somewhere, that doesn't mean time hasn't marched on. Pathfinder is a branch from 3.5 and 4e is an evolution. If no one had decided to take up the mantle, 3.5 would have eventually faded to the point of a minuscule percentage of the gaming world. But Pathfinder isn't 3.5. And the more books that come out, the more it won't be.
And add me to the Pete Townshend, who? list
And statements like this are sublime in their irony.