Earlier today I got a comment from Calstaff, a new reader I believe. And I jumped down his throat, because he reiterated the same old tiresome trope from Gygax that I've heard too many times. Calstaff, of course, has no idea that I've written fifty or sixty posts blasting the argument being made.
This isn't going to be one of those.
Impatience is a natural part of me. I've struggled with it in various ways, and occasionally it's made things difficult for me with former employers and sometimes friends. My partner Tamara tolerates it, my daughter tolerates it ... and so do most of my friends. A lot of my readers here have come to expect it from me, and no longer worry about it. They write it off as passion, which it is. Some probably also write it off as the typical tempestuous fury that creative types tend to have. And some of my most reliable readers, no doubt, act exactly like me.
For a long time with this blog, I worried about burning potential new readers like Calstaff. I'm worrying about that less and less these days. Perhaps because I'm getting old. Perhaps because I've never felt this overall creative. Pretty much, from when I first get up in the morning, I'm working on the creation of something new ... usually for five or more hours a day. Because of that, I'm feeling a tremendous indifference towards rehashing old ideas, and especially hearing someone post them as if those ideas are new and profound.
Poor Calstaff. The post's argument was that immersion begins with staying alive. And from Calstaff I got the answer that what matters is "acting out your character." Approaching the game this way plainly has the player put his or her character BETWEEN his or her self and the DM. But I'm not running the character. I'm running the player. The character is incidental.
This should be obvious. Somehow, it isn't. I don't know why it isn't. And that is the source of my impatience. Like a mad professor trying to give a class, to educate those students who will go on with the material and do important things, I'm infuriated by the dolts in the class with their impertinent, idiotic questions — who are, after all, just there for the credit. And, like a mad professor, I shout at them to shut up and learn, or get the hell out.
After all, it's plain from Calstaff's bio that, having played D&D since the 70s, and still believing the DMG is one of his favourite books, that he hasn't a chance in hell of getting better than a "D" in this course. I really haven't got the time to waste on him.
You're right not to worry about burning potential new readers. If the newbie in question has the right stuff, he/she will just put ice on the burn and come back reading - and maybe change their alias for their next comment (or so I'm told ;))
ReplyDeleteAnyway I was hoping that post would be an occasion to revisit the 'Tackle a Dungeon' thread. I understand why you lost interest last time around, but since then I've read so many half-baked variations on the theme (or its idiotic cousin "Me and my mates banded with the monsters and stormed the keep we were twelve y.o. and so effin smart don't ask me any specifics but it's true I swear") that I would appreciate a serious dissection.
This post got a raw chuckle out of me. Many times, reading your blog, I've felt like a student being forced to retake a failed course...trying to get a passing grade in hopes of (some day) achieving a degree in my major.
ReplyDeleteWe all have different tolerance levels when it comes to swallowing "abuse." How many pro athletes were willing to abuse themselves with relentless daily schedules of eating and working out in order to achieve their goals; endless meetings and film-watching sessions; endless tirades and dressing downs by coaches? I'd guess there comes a point for most folks when they say, eh, not worth it.
New readers will stick it out if they want it. I don't think you were too "abusive" of the man...you were just hard on Gygax (as you often are).
; )
RE The Reiterated Post (Immersion)
I think we (long time RPGers) have come to a place where we want to have distance between ourselves and our character, because the self-identification is simply Too Strong. This happens over years of trauma that occurs from playing...new players (who do not put up these walls) feel loss TREMENDOUSLY in a game where the play is more detailed and (as a by-product) intimate. My wife dislikes RPGs (and doesn't play) because it is far too easy for her to place herself in the shoes of her character...she suffers immensely (mental/emotional anguish) in the games she's played. D&D is not "fun" for her: it is an intense bout of feeling and confrontation.
Creating a "character"...what with a fictional name, background, history, etc. helps distance players from that emotional connection. However, it (generally) distances themselves from the immersion, too. They go into "game mode" thinking in trope terms rather than "what would I do in this situation REALLY?"
It is a difficult challenge to be both engaged AND detached from the possible outcomes. Some folks have a knack for it; for others it's a learning process. I think your essays about building trust (between the DM and the players) are probably the best way to teach it.