While I haven't been as active (even lurking) lately as much as I like (online courses, work, and a child pretty much tend to eat up your day), I have to say (a bit late, I suppose) that I much prefer cooperative to competitive any day.
Think about it this way. I once played a marathon game of Dungeon Siege with my wife, pre-marriage (pre-marital gaming? ). Anyway, we enjoyed it immensely. We weren't trying to rack up the highest kills, we were just trying to survive. Same thing when we networked NeverWinter Nights. And then we tried Unreal Tournament. The UT games didn't last as long, didn't provide as visceral an experience, and just didn't click well with us. Didn't last long on the hard drive either.
I think my experiences go this way with pen n' paper RPGs. There is something to be said for Neutral Evil characters, but they need to play well with the group. I played a fairly nasty character, one that would kill to serve his own ends, but he still played all his actions to aid the group, even disguising himself as a noble and forging documents to bust his friends out of jail. I got a lot of Karma (think of them as brownie points) in that game for the planning and forethought that went into my plans. Even the DM wasn't sure where my loyalties lay, but I never did a thing to harm or inconvenience the other players.
Why is it no one can seem to agree that this is the best way to go?
Why is it no one can seem to agree that this is the best way to go?
Sociologist write all kinds of papers about stuff like this. Basically, some people like acting like a smeghead in a context where there are no serious penalties.
Sociologist write all kinds of papers about stuff like this. Basically, some people like acting like a smeghead in a context where there are no serious penalties.
I like having penalties for people acting like smegheads.
__________________
Quality is like buying oats. If you want good, clean oats you must pay a fair price. However, if you are satisfied with oats that have already been through the horse... well, they are a little cheaper.
Last edited by PaladinCA; 05-24-2007 at 09:57 AM..
Reason: typo
1. Character development is awesome, forget experience points or treasure, developing a character is the main reason I play.
2. GM plots should be made to be messed with. A GM who wants to have everything go according to his scripted plan is writing a novel, not preparing for a game. Interactive imagination demands flexibility.
3. Character development around the table = the absolute best RP situations.
4. As to the "darker and less socially acceptable things" done in role-playing, I don't agree that they're not sustainable to a game. 600 year (game-time) Vampire chronicles have been successfully run, with PCs doing atrocious things to nPeeps and sometimes to each other. I believe the difference is with expectation. When you're playing a game such as Vampire, "trust no one" is a mantra your characters live by.
5. I don't agree with good-roleplaying taking a year to happen. The time-frame depends on how passionate the GM and the players are about their characters and the story. The last few games I've run have had really solid RP begin after a month or two, and this was with groups that have never gamed with one another before, but did know each other on a social basis. As a GM I've done things such as use music to set the mood of a scene and create visual aids, or even change the decoration of the gaming room to bring the best out of my players. Again, with passionate players and an appropriate mood set by the GM, the nirvana you're talking about can be achieved. And yes, it is awesome when you get there, however long it takes your group.