/tg/ - Traditional Games

People have different definitions of fun.

>>18056158
but I spend a great amount of time organising everything

>>18056151
I think it's got more to do with how your players have (or haven't) changed then how your material's different. It's in vogue to be reserved and indifferent if not directly Trollish. Your players might be trying very deliberately to _not_ react to otherwise engaging events.
Can't really say, I don't know them.
Interesting question though. I'm usually good for a game of the latter type above the former.

I noticed the same phenomenon in my games OP. I think it's probably just a combination of nostalgia and familiarity though; when I think about it logically, the games have gotten a lot better. Things are just a little less exciting after your first great games, and you remember those times fondly because they were great in spite of bad rules and fuckups, not because of them.

Evolution is the name of the game when it comes to GMing.

>>18056174
doesn't matter, people wanna have fun. Some people find well developed plotting and setting fun, others enjoy explosions and fuck logic. Know your groups expectations and discuss what kind of fun you as a group want to have.

>>18056179
once they got into the rules,they sticked to them and always try to find a "bug" in the books or my narration.

Earlier, they let the characters decide only by instict.

>>18056211
Sounds like they've chosen to "win" in the concrete, tangible sense over just doing what seems right. MMO logic, kinda. Bigger numbers and sniffing around for exploits.
Good news is that's temporary.
Bad news is that's temporary on the scale of years.

That said, I'm running on a last few emergency power braincells so my internal analytic processes could be faulty. But that does sound like the kind-of-classic Adversarial Play approach.

>complicated political system
Translates to "boring horseshit" in the eyes of myself and a lot of other gamers. Just so you know.

>>18056248
I get the same idea everytime we play.I try to encourage them with badass description of their "moments of glory" but I dont know if it really helps.What would you suggest?

>>18056266
it's not that they are directly involved in the political life.It just makes it hard to blame someone specific for the actions of the state

>>18056289
Just means they have to kill a lot more people to voice their displeasure over the state's actions.
I'm doing a future/modern game and the group really don't give a shit who's in charge of the megacorp that's ruining their lives, only that they get to blow their shit up good.

>>18056304
I dont that's very entertaining.It's like playing vidya without the graphics

>>18056319
Trust me, with the bosses' right-hand man and other NPCs added in it's a lot more than that. Been doing this game for three months now, maybe more; gonna wrap up in a few weeks, though.

I think my key to success is having recurring NPCs and letting characters build up relationships with them, garnished with investigation and mystery and with a side order of action every once in a while.

>>18056353
Hmm...recurring NPCs.I ll try it out,thanks bro.

>>18056272
From my experience the Badass Description does actually help, even when it's not acknowledged. Try to do this with social encounters, too.
Try to corner a smarter/wiser one after the session at a meal or the like and get some feedback. Gamers with a face-full of burger sometimes drop their guard.
Frack, I'm tired. Can't do enough thinking....but, incentivize Give permanent Feat-style bonus for fluff and flavor, particularly in any system that has neat-but-weak Feats. Or introduce your own. Also try to get them to "reach" out of their normal performance range.
What's going on is a little related to complacency -they're probably not really trying because they just fall back on the numbers instead.
Kinda like the mentality that a Swashbuckler must be a Class, not a Role. Anyone should have the potential to be a dashing duelist with a pimp hat and an arched eyebrow.
But very few try because either A) they do something similar far better (I Power Attack) or B) they do nothing at all like Swashbuckling (but I'm a Cleric!), and are afraid of failing. Part of the Adversarial Mindset is competitive in-party status-seeking; trying to be awesome and failing is shaming in the eyes of the others.
I could be wrong, but it's a weird dynamic driven by forces outside the game as much as events at the table.

>>18056377
Don't mention it. The way to really get your group angry at someone is if the friend they've been running into for the past four sessions ends up suffering by their hand.

It helps if they have an identifying feature: something that sticks in the players' minds. The hacker that was killed by the company had a friend who died too; the group didn't give a shit about him, they only cared about the hacker because he had a silly name and was pretty good at what he did.

>>18056383
To sum up: give incentives for being creative, be generous when you can coax someone into doing something they're not optimized for, and (I just remembered) while they probably want more permanent Magic Loot try to tie _everything_ to someone or thing of significance in the campaign. Stylish, legendary, memorable, or merely distinct, loot is ultimately FAR more enduring then the usual "+1 Longsword of Blandness." Design patterns, unusual materials, curious inscriptions, whatever. Go Cool, and even sparse loot will be ravenously sought after.
To offer a parting metaphor it's kind of like Weeaboo. Back in the day when I was, I totally didn't give a shit if anyone thought it was a violation of good taste to think adding Japanese to anything made it better.
I moved past that.
However, now I miss the genuine enthusiasm and blind glee of those days. Now I am more restrained and I "know better" but something of innocent fun has been lost, and so I moved forward again.
I'm still discriminating and dignified, but when I can totally wig out over Catwomen or whatever I do just a little because it's fun to recall being less inhibited if a lot more That Guy.
Your players may be playing to an audience composed of each other, and if so that's helping things go awry.

Hope all this helps.
I.L.

>>18056383
>Feat-style bonus
sounds good

also,your remark about the Swashbuckler reminds me of this incident:
>player who always play fighter.ONLY FIGHTER.ALWAYS.
>he is the typical scale-mail-greatsword dude
>decides to try something else for a change
>"A trident and a net is cool combo.Gladiator style"
>2 sessions afterwards,he sells the trident and the net to buy a greatsword because "more damage"

>>18056490
Complacency.
He left his comfort zone, got something different, was disappointed, and went right back to where he was.
He might have kept the Gladiator combo if it'd done something remarkable and effective, but instead he probably just looked at it like it was Not A Greatsword and gave up when it was he was proved correct.

>>18056553
it was a pity because ,at a point he caught on fire,and he was striking with his trident while he was surrounded by flames.DEVIL REINCARNATED

>>18056580
Heh, cool.

One last thing that occurs: the limits of the system. Take that Trident/Net combo. In a lot of d20-centric gaming, this would be crap. You can decide for yourself what's appropriately effective and what's not, but one thing that makes your situation just a little bit harder is a system that simplifies things down so much that there's no practical reason not to use a Greatsword.
Take 4E, which I like in spite of this example, and the Fullblade. Damn near any class or archetype that plans on hacking at things is going to carry a Fullblade. There's just too few reasons not to. If not an FB, then an Executioner's Axe. Or a Mordencrad. If my interest is a two-handed weapon my choice is already made. There's just not enough core incentive to choose otherwise, and 4E's ham-handed attempts at balancing that through gratuitous injections of weak Feats does nothing.
Now if some component of that were free, I might take a second look at carrying a War Pick or a Maul or a Greatspear instead. Otherwise the deal is Spend More, Do Less and that especially doesn't work under circumstances like yours.

Not really a regular here on /tg/ but I gotta say, I have enjoyed reading this thread.

>>18056652
I get your point.

At your example,could a badass or quest-important (but not magical) War Pick replace your Fullblade?

I had a player once that loved his rogue. Would use poisons to make an enemy sleep, or blind them, then use his sneak attacks and such to lay waste. Another player loved his greatsword fighters, right up until the rogue got a higher damage roll than him. Now he just complains whenever he plays.

>>18056662
I'll take some credit for that, ho ho ho.
I aim to inform, or at least to entertain.

>>18056752
So then be smart or be funny?

>>18056742
It could, and did. I found one made of a petrified wood haft topped by an enormous, unshatterable raven's skull.
It had a minor effect that every time I drew it it felt like I handling it for the first time.
This was a Dark Sun campaign, too.
Although FYI I'm passed where your players are. Not meant as bragging or as an insult, just that I'm in a position to understand what it is that I want to do and what I'll compromise to do it. I still want to be efficient, but being interesting and engaged in the setting is just as important.

>>18056780
Touche`.

>>18056790
great man.That's the spirit.Thanks a lot for your help/advice.

>>18056826
You're welcome, I hope it matters.