/tg/ is pretty unhappy place to discuss games and I reckon a lot of it can be boiled down to nobody understanding that their desires are in conflict.
>I want strategic depth but I hate how slow everything is.
>I want choices to matter, but I want everything to be valid.
>I want things to be balanced, but I don't want things to be same
>game should be about the narrative, but I'm going to complain about the mechanics being the problem.
>I want to gatekeep, but no one wants to join my game
>I want to be invested in my character, but I also demand that they are more vulnerable and disposable than ever.
You guys really need to understand that not everything can accommodate all desires and that you simply are gonna have to put up with the logical consequences.
Just, please, learn to know what you actually dislike and pick accordingly rather than just grab a bag of adjectives that sound good in your head and complain when reality can't accommodate.
 |
 CRIME Shirt $21.68 |
|
>and I reckon a lot of it can be boiled down to nobody understanding that their desires are in conflict
Wrong.
I know what the problems are and I just don't care. I like what I like and everyone that does not like it can die in a fire.
See, right here.
>I don't care, but everyone can die in a fire.
You don't know your own level of investment. And now you are butthurt because you don't actually have apathy like you claim to have.
>And now you are butthurt because you don't actually have apathy like you claim to have.
moron that cannot read and does not understand the difference between CAN and I WANT THEM TO.
Really fricktard, learn English.
You would only present human immolation as a viable option, "can" if you will, only if you desired it to a degree.
Fpbp.
You're a fricking idiot and you're wrong in all your assumptions, as well as painting false dichotomies.
>/tg/ is a pretty unhappy place to discuss games
No it's not, but more importantly, you're free to leave at any time.
>>/tg/ is a pretty unhappy place to discuss games
>No it's not,
your attitude says different.
My assumptions may be wrong, but your problems are clear facts.
>You disagreeing with me in a discussion not about games is evidence of this being an unhappy place to discuss games.
You're a frickong idiot that can't follow a simple trail of logic even in an argument of your own creation. Consider immediate suicide.
>animeposter is moronic
>is also an ESL
Every time without fail.
See, if you were merely disagreeing, you wouldn't be reacting this vehemently, but you decided to sperg out unprompted. That's why I called your statement out as an obvious false one.
Also if anyone should leave, it appears to be you, since you are the one most angry here.
>I accused you of being false because I think you're angry
If you think being angry or not has anything to do with being truthful in this case, then you are an idiot.
>I want strategic depth but I hate how slow everything is.
You can have strategic depth that's fast, that relies on the players.
>I want choices to matter, but I want everything to be valid.
Yes, every option should be equally viable. This creates MORE choices and makes you actually consider which playstyle you want to use rather than saying "this one is objectively the best therefore I'm going to use it"
>I want things to be balanced, but I don't want things to be same
Yes, that's also possible. They don't have to be the same, they just need to be effective within their niche.
>game should be about the narrative, but I'm going to complain about the mechanics being the problem.
A game can have solid narrative mechanics, and bad mechanics can absolutely shit on a narrative-focused game.
>I want to gatekeep, but no one wants to join my game
Gatekeeping is impossible in TTRPGs, because everyone plays them differently. Wargames are different, they're more rules and mechanics-oriented. Board Games are even more rules-oriented than Wargames but you can still have houserules (i.e. the common rules with monopoly and the Free Parking space). Anyone who tries to gatekeep /tg/ hobbies will ultimately fail.
>I want to be invested in my character, but I also demand that they are more vulnerable and disposable than ever.
Nobody says this.
I know exactly what I want, and to that end have started making my own systems to run and play.
>No it's not
It absolutely is. 0.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000001% of the posters actually play games. Nobody other than that small fraction of actual people who play games has an ounce of creativity, ingenuity, or higher-level problem solving ability. Everyone else is just a dumb drone who parrots shit they read online to whine and complain or are le ebin contrarians to try and be popular... on an anonymous website.
Frick /tg/, this place is a husk of what it once was.
>onbody other than that small fraction of actual people who play games has an ounce of creativity, ingenuity, or higher-level problem solving ability. Everyone else is just a dumb drone who parrots shit they read online to whine and complain or are le ebin contrarians to try and be popular... on an anonymous website.
Being part of a playgroup isn't a prerequisite to problem solving. Despite whining about parrots, you have parroted a common complaint and attached unrelated positive attributes to it, which is incredible dumb. Despite mocking the attempt to be popular and anonymous, your post is a blatant claim to superiority.
You have low self awareness.
You constantly project.
And your involvement in this board makes the average post just a bit dumber.
>Being part of a playgroup isn't a prerequisite to problem solving
If you don't play games, you don't belong on this board. Go frick off to Ganker or Ganker or whatever other board that isn't about Traditional Games, and if you aren't capable of being part of a group activity your problem-solving ability along with your social skills are just evidence of your lacking mental capacity.
>you have parroted a common complaint and attached unrelated positive attributes to it
The difference is that I'm not parroting it, I'm able to tell just by looking at this thread alone (not to mention all the other dogshit threads on this board) that the majority of people on this board do not play traditional games. They pretend they do then proceed to whine about non-problems that they'd know are non-problems if they actually played traditional games. Nogames election tourists killed this board, and if you weren't one of them you'd know that.
>your post is a blatant claim to superiority.
Because I am superior, and I don't need you gameless homosexuals to validate that. I know, inherently, by virtue of my creativity, intelligence, capacity for problem solving, and fact that I run 3 games and play in 5 (was 4/5 but I wrapped up a game I was running this week) that I am superior to (you) and the rest of the nogames sub-brick morons on this godforsaken husk of a board.
>You have low self awareness.
I know myself better than you know me, I simply put no weight in what others think of me. It's a conscious choice. Why should I have to bend my will to that of others when I can instead make them bend their will to mine?
>You constantly project.
Wrong. I'm in 8 games. I run one of them in 3 and a half hours. You, on the other hand, do nothing but shitpost and project your own failures as a human being onto others.
>And your involvement in this board makes the average post just a bit dumber.
I've done more to keep this board alive than 99% of the people posting on it today.
I reckon a lot of it can be boiled down to dogshit threads
>I want to beat up strawmen, but I know they only really exist in my head
Not really a strawman when there's an example
If someone's on Ganker, they're either sad, horny, or racist. Certainly not happy.
Pretty much. There are exceptions and genuinely great threads, but they've become increasingly rare.
I think a lot of people here also need to realize that they just badly need to break out of their habits. You don't gotta play thirsty sword lesbians or whatever, but I've watched and taken part in groups that try to play the same shit for years and no one ever stops to say "this shit isn't working, why do we keep doing it?" So instead, they just keep trying to run the same systems in the same way, with the same mentality. They never stop to really talk with their players to figure out what everyone wants or what sort of options are on the table. If they should switch systems. If they should readjust their mindset and stop trying to play braindead murderhobo games. They never listen to any outside advice or see what other people are doing, or if they acknowledge other ways of doing things, they just assume that it's wrong or that it's not for them.
I know a guy who ran some of the most miserable games I've ever played, but he had the benefit of being consistent and dedicated to continuing the campaign, no matter what. So we played with this frustrating, immature GM for years and we have few fond memories of those games. Years later, playing under the same GM, he's still running shit the same way. He's still frustrating to play with. He never abandoned D&D and never tried to improve his games. He never asked himself why his shit still sucks and why the way he does things doesn't work... But at the same time, no one else ever sat down to have that conversation with him. It's also a ridiculous proposal that someone who has been doing something wrong for years and been miserable because of it the entire time should need a group of friends to intervene and tell him this shit sucks.
>I think a lot of people here also need to realize that they just badly need to break out of their habits
If they could break their habits, I guess they wouldn't be on /tg/
/tg/ isn't the problem here. /tg/ may give people certain impressions or opinions on things, but shitposting on a mongolian finger puppet enthusiast site isn't going to frick you up as much as playing the same shitty game in the same terrible way for years and years will.
/tg/ is the problem here, it's literally THE worst place to discuss traditional games. Say what you will about Twitter or Reddit but at least they play games, as shitty as the games they play are.
>/tg/ is pretty unhappy place to discuss games
people that actually care about games left this place long ago
Consider that /tg/ is made up of multiple people with opinions differing anywhere from slight to vast. Moreover...
>I want strategic depth but I hate how slow everything is
This is not a dichotomy. If everyone playing the game has the same level of base knowledge of the rules & is smart about organizing their character information, a strategically-deep game isn't going to slow down.
>I want choices to matter, but I want everything to be valid
This is not a dichotomy. The key is making certain choices valid only in specific situations, so another party member can step in & have a moment to shine. Also: don't have one choice tread on the feet of every other choice & outclass them at their own niche.
>I want things to be balanced, but I don't want things to be same
This is not a dichotomy. The key with balance is about effectiveness, but the resources spent on the effect, time taken on the effect, consequences of using the effect, etc. should be different, & the overall power adjusted accordingly. This is what balance is, not "Class A has to beg daddy for a new sword but Class B gets ultimate cosmic power on level up" & not "every class has [at will/encounter/daily] powers despite their source being described as different".
>game should be about the narrative, but I'm going to complain about the mechanics being the problem
This is not a dichotomy. Mechanics are what make the game, narrative is what gives the game stakes.
>I want to gatekeep, but no one wants to join my game
This is not a dichotomy. Having undesirable players, regardless of your world views, makes people not want to play together, & the more those thoughts are ignored, the worse they explode when someone's finally had enough.
>I want to be invested in my character, but I also demand that they are more vulnerable and disposable than ever
This is not a dichotomy. In fact, a character that is easily lost is more precious than one that is in no actual danger.
Learn how to avoid false dichotomies.
>This is not a dichotomy. If everyone playing the game has the same level of base knowledge of the rules & is smart about organizing their character information, a strategically-deep game isn't going to slow down.
what? that's moronic. Even with optimal actors, the more complicated a game gets, the higher processing time becomes.
What exactly increases the processing time of strategic play? And no, GURPS-level trigonometry mechanics doesn't count, because it isn't inherent to strategy.
>I want to gatekeep, but no one wants to join my game
Gatekeeping is a word made up to apply negative connotations to the practice of maintaining standards for entry. The lower standards become, the further overall quality is diminished. This is demonstrable fact. The only people who b***h and moan about gatekeeping are just the ones who couldn't pass muster.
>I want strategic depth but I hate how slow everything is.
Not contradictory.
>I want choices to matter, but I want everything to be valid.
Not even close to contradictory.
>I want things to be balanced, but I don't want things to be same
Not contradictory
>>I want to gatekeep, but no one wants to join my game
The second does not necessarily follow the first. To assume it is a logical consequences betrays a simple, dishonest mind.
>I want to be invested in my character, but I also demand that they are more vulnerable and disposable than ever.
Not contradictory.
You're the one who cannot accommodate reality.