Same old, same old. Every time I start a role-playing game, two sessions pass and then the complaints start. Not anything huge to begin with, just little niggling complaints that start small and become of the utmost importance. Players not happy with the way they made their characters. Players taking personally things that were said or done in character. Bitterness over dice rolls, or because things didn't run exactly the way they wanted, when they didn't express an opinion on the matter in the first place. Everyone looking at me expecting me to solve all their problems, like I should have complete control over the actions of the other players and therefore should have stopped [insert-problem-here] from happening. Then, as soon as I do my best to do exactly that and work my butt off to fix the problems, when everyone who had complaints is happier about their place in the game, the players who had no complaints suddenly have a gripe of exactly the same nature. And amongst it all are little slights and attempts to manipulate me: "I don't want to leave the game but...", "The only thing I'm enjoying about the game is...". Okay, some of the problems expressed by players have been caused by me, something I will freely admit, and such things I would rather hear about than not, otherwise I can't do anything about them. But this raises another issue: the fact that everyone complains to one of two people, who then have the onerous task of passing complaints on to me, something which fair on neither me nor them.
And the basic message of the complaints always seems to be the same: why can't I run a game the way Richard does?
Don't get me wrong. I love role-playing. I enjoy DM-ing. And I especially enjoy the games Richard runs: he is a great DM. But I'm not him. And I find it ironic that most of the individuals who would really prefer I do things Richard's way are the self-same people who insist that it absolutely necessary to be completely yourself, that tempering your personality (with anything) is the ultimate in dishonesty (and therefore thoroughly repugnant).
I'm sorry, I don't want to upset anyone but I myself am upset. The only time I actually see any of my friends (with the exception, of course, of Psi and, curiously enough, Tim, who is three hours drive away) is when I run Feathers of the Lion (my current game) and this time is now soured for me. On top of that, I spent very little time planning for the last session because I felt quite strongly that there was no point if the players had only complaints. I'm happy to cater for people and try to help them enjoy the game. At the moment, however, I'm doing so at the expense of my own enjoyment and, rather more importantly, that of other players. I do appreciate people's votes of confidence at the end of the last session. At the same time, the effect of that is somewhat lessened when I was then approached with fresh complaints from other quarters, and when I spent two weeks trying desperately to get people to help me help them (to the detriment of my physical and mental health) and was, for the most part, met with unconstructive belligerence or simple reinforcing of the problems.
That said, allow me to add that I do not want to stop running the game. I do not plan to stop running the game. I want people to enjoy the game and I want to enjoy running it, especially since it is a great story (if I do say so myself). I've put an enormous quantity of work into it and I want it to go well (and to run all the way to the end: it would make a nice change.) To that end, I do encourage people to tell me if they have concerns or problems, on the proviso that they are willing to be constructive and help find solutions. Otherwise there is no point raising the problem in the first place and we may as well not play.
On a more different note, anyone who wants to re-watch Mysterious Cities of Gold, just let me know. We now have all of it.
And I do love you all.
And the basic message of the complaints always seems to be the same: why can't I run a game the way Richard does?
Don't get me wrong. I love role-playing. I enjoy DM-ing. And I especially enjoy the games Richard runs: he is a great DM. But I'm not him. And I find it ironic that most of the individuals who would really prefer I do things Richard's way are the self-same people who insist that it absolutely necessary to be completely yourself, that tempering your personality (with anything) is the ultimate in dishonesty (and therefore thoroughly repugnant).
I'm sorry, I don't want to upset anyone but I myself am upset. The only time I actually see any of my friends (with the exception, of course, of Psi and, curiously enough, Tim, who is three hours drive away) is when I run Feathers of the Lion (my current game) and this time is now soured for me. On top of that, I spent very little time planning for the last session because I felt quite strongly that there was no point if the players had only complaints. I'm happy to cater for people and try to help them enjoy the game. At the moment, however, I'm doing so at the expense of my own enjoyment and, rather more importantly, that of other players. I do appreciate people's votes of confidence at the end of the last session. At the same time, the effect of that is somewhat lessened when I was then approached with fresh complaints from other quarters, and when I spent two weeks trying desperately to get people to help me help them (to the detriment of my physical and mental health) and was, for the most part, met with unconstructive belligerence or simple reinforcing of the problems.
That said, allow me to add that I do not want to stop running the game. I do not plan to stop running the game. I want people to enjoy the game and I want to enjoy running it, especially since it is a great story (if I do say so myself). I've put an enormous quantity of work into it and I want it to go well (and to run all the way to the end: it would make a nice change.) To that end, I do encourage people to tell me if they have concerns or problems, on the proviso that they are willing to be constructive and help find solutions. Otherwise there is no point raising the problem in the first place and we may as well not play.
On a more different note, anyone who wants to re-watch Mysterious Cities of Gold, just let me know. We now have all of it.
And I do love you all.
39 comments:
I am resisting the urge to type an essay in response, because every time I start it I realise that it comes down to one thing; that I need to know whether or not this post referes to me personally. Particularly, the paragraph about tempering your personality makes me feel like you /are/ referring to me in particular, but if that's the case, then the rest of this post just plain offends me. So, instead of going spare at you, I'd like to ask for clarification. Thanks.
This really isn't directed at anyone in particular, rather it refers to responses I've had from all the people who have been involved in the games I've run. Yes, that includes you, but the post isn't directed at yo, or at anyone in particular. On the whole, I really don't aim to offend anyone. I'm trying to express how I feel and some of this stuff has been festering for a while, so I am sorry if I have given offense.
First things first, really happy you got a Blog. Sometimes it's easiest to say how you're feeling when you can passively put those thoughts onto the internet - which is good.
Second, to clarify something, I know I come to you primarily as the voice of complaining for other people; Jesse specifically has asked me to stop this, because it gives you the impression she's simultaneously whiny, and not willing to approach you herself.
Third, there's a veritable essay to be written on this, which I want to avoid doing unless I can be constructive. Besides, I fail at doing essays. ;p
I really don't fell like Jesse is whiny, though I certainly got the impression she was unwilling to approach me herself. I just wanted to clarify that. And I don't mind you telling me when there is an issue, except that it means that people aren't speaking on their own behalfs. It shouldn't be up to you to be everyone's voice; you shoudn't have to be the one who is forced to deal with me. Unless it's on your own behalf, of course.
As for the other, can you be constructive? I'd really rather that stuff was... um... better? Right? Something like that.
Well, it's just that everything I look at there makes me angry, because you say it like it's fact, when I believe it's more your interpretation of things - at least where I am concerned. As I spoke to you about on Saturday, I had never intended to "complain by proxy", and was planning to speak to you about my only problem with the game (that being the alchemy rules) promptly. Indeed, I was under the impression that you and Talen had recently discussed rebuilding Rhandis, not the alchemy rules. If I had known what you were talking about, I would have been there too. My only other corncern about the game was addressed on Saturday in all of three seconds, and I no longer have the slightest concern about it (I make a point of this because you still seemed to worry about it, despite the amount of times I said it was okay).
Sure, there are other things about the game which I might do differently, but none of them are enough to make me dislike the game or not want to play (if you think there are things I have problems with and haven't told you about, then they are things which I don't think matter enough to mention - ie, I don't really have a problem with them at all). They're just differences between your style and mine, which I'd like to think I can respect. Sure, ultimately I like Talen's games better than yours, but if I didn't like yours at all, I simply wouldn't be playing ( my stance on this is comparative to my recent rant on love, in my own journal).
Just to be clear, while I cannot speak for anybody else (not to imply anything, simply saying that I'm not trying to speak for anybody else here) I have not /ever/ tried to manipulate you, subtly or otherwise, and nor have I ever failed to bring a serious concern to you, personally, when I have had one. I have not taken anything in-game personally, and while I have been pissed off at my dice frequently, that has nothing to do with you. And I have certainly not expected you to "solve all my problems", not that I'm aware I even had any. So this is why I ask to what degree you refer to me personally; if all of this includes me, then you have seriously misinterpreted me.
In short, to the extent that this applies to me, you shouldn't be worrying so much. I have no problems with the game. I am aware of some other peoples' concerns, but they need to be resolved between player and GM, and I have no part in them. At the moment I feel rather like an accessory to depression, a problem I have not /actually/ contributed to - and if I have, certainly not intentionally, and I was not made aware that I was being seen as doing so. If this does all relate as much to me as everybody else (once again, not implying anything, just trying to speak only for myself), I feel you are viwing me quite unfairly.
Now, in the interest of keeping things in the open, I /am/ starting to be displeased with Avael, but that is an issue with the Healer Class, not you or your game or style. I made a bad choice when we began - my fault, all mine. I am currently trying to come up with a theory on what might fix it; if I do not, I will simply deal with playing a sub-par character, because I enjoy the game and it wouldn't be worth leaving it because my character is mechanically inferior. And I wouldn't say that if I didn't mean it.
Yes. This is my interpretation of things. It wasn't intended to be anything else. I do, however, apologise that I have gained the wrong impression; I'm very sorry to have upset you so much. It was not my intent.
Richard and I talked about a whole lot of stuff in the game, especially problems in general, and I get the impression (with my 20/20 hindsight) that the reason he talked to me about alchemy stuff without waiting for you was as much to do with the fact that it came to mind at the time and he was enthused about the idea. I guess I got the impression that you didn't want to talk to me directly about stuff because of the alchemy discussion, because you talked to Simon rather than me about wanting armour stuff and because, when you were originally making your character, it was Richard who asked me for the stuff you wanted rather than you. I am sorry that I garnered this false impression but I do think it at least understandable in the circumstances.
Regarding Avael, I am, of course, happy for you to change him (or create another character) if you decide that's what you want to do. Both Psi and Richard have and I really don't think it's an issue. (On the other hand, Psi wants to change Will again damnit ;). )
Again, I really didn't intend to offend or upset you and I am sorry that wires got crossed.
hmmm interesting. at the risk of being blunt let me see if i can sum up your comments. It appears that someone has done/is doing somthing that is causing you to not enjoy running you game, is that it?
So now we all write back and forth for the next fortnight saying "is it me?" or "I have done nothing like that" getting indignant and haughty ect.
Well thats not for me, over the last 12 months I have had a gut full of "being subtle" or "not getting the hidden meaning to things", so for the sake of me could everyone make a clear list of complaints/transgresions and interpersonal (both in game and out) problems so we can talk about them like adults do. I will keep checking in here if I dont see anything else I will just assume that No-one is having any problems at all and continue with that train of thought.
Sorry if I have offended
Hook
Hon, if it was a matter of one person I would talk to the individual concerned and deal with it. Nor would I be so offensive or crass as to air such a thing publicly. This comes as a result of a general impression, not from the actions of one individual. As such, I would consider the fact that I've brought this up at all a rather adult move, especially since actually talking to, say, you for example, hasn't exactly yielded positive results up until now.
Similarly, I don't find your attitude of superiority to be either constructive or appropriate.
Look, the issue is that I feel hurt and undervalued, both as a DM and as an individual. And apparently it is highly offensive for me to express such an opinion.
the point I was trying to get across is that somthing is bothering you ovbiously, but we as a group cant do anything about it unless we know what it is.
"Look, the issue is that I feel hurt and undervalued, both as a DM and as an individual. And apparently it is highly offensive for me to express such an opinion."
No it is not offensive it is somthing we as players NEED to know as is it ultimatly is us CAUSING this, thing is the fact that you are feeling hurt and undervalued is a to vague for me to act upon (unless you wast applause everytime you make a statement?)
I need things I can work on, not just general statements, again I am sorry that I am a bit simple minded but that is the way I am
Once again speaking only for myself, it's only offensive because I feel accused. I realise you don't mean to cause offense, and in turn, I don't mean to seem as angry as I evidently do; but I just don't know where you're coming from. I don't believe I've given you a reason to feel hurt and undervalued, as a GM or as an individual - and, if I /have/ somehow done this, then I don't know what more I can do to /avoid/ it.
As a DM, this is a feeling that comes from my experiences in all three games. This one has been better than the previous two, and it is quite possible that I'm over-reacting based on the earlier games along with tiredness and the fact that I feel like only three of my friends make any effort to see me (which includes Psi who doesn't really need to make an effort) when I have a great deal of difficulty getting out to see them. This applies not just to people involved in the games but to my friends in general: I haven't, for example, had any communication with Hell in about 3 months and, even then, it was because I was calling her. Yes, everyone is busy, I understand that and would be right there with you if I was well. I do feel, however, that friends are friends and one should make time for them. I don't mean to be accusatory or make people upset. But I feel on the out. I do make an effort to see people but it is exhausting for me to do so. Not that this means I'm going to stop doing so. I guess I feel that there isn't much effort made in return. Again, not meant to be accusatory. I'm trying to express why it is that I'm upset.
In terms of game foo, I probably am over-reacting, perhaps due to negative experiences beforehand and the recent rash of... concerns. So I guess my stance on that for the moment should be to wait and see how things go.
Can I just interject on that last one?
Karen, I'm NEVER busy :p Call me when you're bored or lonely, and I shall fly right over.
Luv ya,
Naomi
Well, that certainly explains things. I'd be the first to admit that I don't often get out to see people. If it makes you feel any better, I don't often see (for example) Bri or Fletch, or Matt, aside of gaming time (and anime club beforehand). We see Steve more often, but only because he drops around of his own accord (damn car-owners ;p).
I'm really sorry if this has upset you; I hadn't really thought about it. I've just never really been somebody who socialises for the sake of socialising - one of my quirks, I guess. The added difficulty of getting to your place doesn't help, of course, but I certainly don't have something against you personally :\
Oops - addendum; have you considered using an instant messenger? I'm available on all of them (yay Trillian). Just saying, since I know we're very difficult to contact by phone ^^;
sorry you're having problems. maybe if you express how it all makes you feel when it's happening it'll stop. make them fix the problems that don't have anything to do with you. just a thought.
btw thanks for adding a link to me. and love the layout.
hope all is well.
much love
Jess
You should know by know that it is not in my makeup to visit or call unless I think I am needed. Experiance has taught me that I am best kept in a closet somewhere and trundled out only on special occiasions lest people become "sick of me".
But to quote Hoggle "should you ever need me, you just have to ask"
Hook
M'kay. Most significantly, Karen, you need to recognise that the problems that plagued Mists and Flame and Crucible aren't in Feathers. Yet. I say yet because the problems in those two games had common factors that are borne into Feathers as well, and like it or not, if you don't stop their cause, you're going to get the effect. Also, you can't act like the woes that occured in those games are player faults, or just something about that game. The things that transpired and caused problems in those games did so due to common factors.
As to defining those factors, one strong part of it was the DM's story becoming more important than the players' characters. Bear in mind, I feel that the DM's story is of equal importance; but the players need to be as important, and there needs that balance to be struck.
Feathers lacks for this imbalance. Right now, there is enough interwoven with the player characters that is unique to those player characters that I don't feel abstracted from the story, waiting for my 'moment' to crop up. I also feel that the handshake was important. Not so important that now, we must go over and return to it, or rerun it, or somesuch. That would be silly. However, it is important enough that those involved should recognise that the hand was effectively shaken, and to act in correspondance.
Right now, the character dynamics in the party I like. Leamni feels a bit on the outside, but I quite like the dynamic that lies between Rhandis and all the other characters; Avael and Lyntafaea appear to have enough comical synergy (mainly when bouncing off someone else) that they appear friendly. Will is being a bit of a tosser, but that's his character.
Overall, I don't think there exists a Problem with Feathers.
Addendum: I remember why the alchemy thing came up! We were discussing characters for Dying Star (the 14th level game), and I mentioned the new alchemy rules that I'd be using. I mentioned that I'd started on them because of Avael and the thematics and blah blah blah.
That's it, I'm spent of all useful advice at this point. Let the fires begin.
(crackle crackle)
Did anyone ask Lintafea why he didnt shake hands? or was there an instant swelling of, gee Hook what an immature player your being vibes, complete with "I think we all should take a break so that people can think about what they are doing" In conclusion I wish I had have shaken hands now rather than act as I felt Lintafea would.
Perhaps I should put all future character decions up to a simple majority vote with the rest of the players?
Hook
It's true, and to my shame, it hadn't crossed my mind.
But Rhandis did explicate - we set everything else aside and make a clean start. Lint's actions indicated that he wasn't doing that. Hence why everyone reacted to it badly. Sure, it was mature roleplay and whatnot, but it also came across as standoffish and rude IC, or worse, outrightly immature OOC. And I don't think our group is quite ready to bear out pure mature roleplay in that regard - so some training wheels in a side word of "By the way, there was a reason for that," would be nice.
Ack. I close my eyes for a few hours (okay, to be fair, about 24 hours) and suddenly there are twice as many comments!
First things first. Naomi, I was counting you as one of the three, since I see you nearly every week for lunch. But I certainly appreciate the sentiment. (Hey Jess. I will write soon, I promise.)
I get that some of you guys don't just hang out with friends and I understand that my place is a pain in the arse for most people to get to. I just feel like I'd like to see you guys without having to be the one who made the effort. I have an ICQ membership and I have Miranda somewhere. I've been planning to set it up since Tim has an account with MSN (I think) and it's the easiest way to get in touch with him in Canberra. (Possibly the only way. If you think it's difficult to reach Richard and Jesse by phone, try calling Tim!) And, Darren, I have never got sick of you in the time that I've known you and I don't plan to. I enjoy your company. (How could you go past someone who quotes The Labyrinth ?) So, allow me to express my need for said company.
Game foo: to clarify, I never considered the plot more important than the PC's in either Mists and Flame or Crucible, but that is neither here nor there. I'm glad you feel that issue isn't there with Feathers. As for the handshake, I , at least, had assumed that the reaction was purely Lintafea's and, thus, did not think of it in terms of Darren as a role-player. And purely for that reason, I feel that acting like the handshake actually happened shouldn't occur. It was a character choice that will result in character reactions. For Liamne the handshake didn't occur, which is a negative thing, yes. But she does recognise that Lintafea was making a step towards a place where such a handshake could occur. Her grudge is lessened at any rate (though she is a little upset about the handshake thing) and she rcognises that Lintafea is coming to terms with stuff. (Darren, if this isn't where Lintafea is, my apologies.)
And, just to make things clear, I don't find a problem with the way Darren role-played that scene. I do understand Richard's point of view, however, since it does leave things unfinished in terms of clearing up some of that conflict.This is not necessarily a problem, as long as stuff does get sorted out, preferably sooner than later.
"Will is being a bit of a tosser, but that's his character.".. I'd be outraged at this comment, except for the fact that it's really true..
Will is a tosser, and it's driving me mad. Although it makes sense (to me anyway) that he is the way he is, I'm not enjoying playing him (except when he got drunk). Unfortunately I'm not the kind of RP'er who can just go, "Oh, that personality isn't working well, lets change it.", the character has it's own personality which I don't control and usually don't know much about untill a few sessions into a game.. I don't know if this is normal or not, but it seems to be the way it's always happened with me.
Don't get me wrong here, I do like the character, and I do like the way he's involved in the story. I don't want to kill him off or anything drastic. I'd like to be able to help him become a well adjusted member of society, and a useful part of the group. So to that end I'm open to constructive suggestions on how he could be "guided" into being a better person.
Ok, enough about Will.
As far as the handshake goes, I agree with everyone. Not having the handshake is bad. For the sake of clearing up problems, Lintafea should have shaken. If it's not what Lintafea would have done, then it's good that he didn't, and should be played through as if it didn't. If a characters actions are going to create/prolong conflict, it would be nice if out of character that was acknowledged so that we can all be aware that it is the character acting as the character even if it's not the 'best' thing for the situation, and we can all respect the characters actions, even if we don't agree with them.
I can't say I really understand the issues with PC vs Plot. I'm used to games where the PCs play a significant part in the plot, and have an impact in the story, but the world doesn't revolve around the PCs. To be honest I'm really not comfortable with Will being so deeply interwoven as he's become, but I was asked (in a round about fashion), I did say yes, and I haven't actually talked with Kay about it yet, so I can't really bitch too much about that. It's mostly a difference of style thing.
<warning type='inflammatory'>
Why is it that everyone seems to jump to the defensive/offensive here anyway? Ok, by everyone I really mean Fox and Hook. Chill pills anyone? Yes Fox, I said you, your extreme indignation at the suggestion that you may have been somehow seen to have done anything in the slightest wrong, ever, counts as jumping to the defensive. And Hook, your snide sarcasm, self-worth derisive attitude, and indignation are collectively both.
For people who generally strike me as sensible, resonable, adults, you're really letting the side down with your apparent lack of ability to take something that may or may not be directed at you, that may or may not be intended as offensive, and the may or may not be an accurate representation of what was even meant by the person expressing it, and calmly discussing the issue. Sentiments like "You better not be talking about me here", or "Why don't I just make my character into a gestalt democracy" really don't go far to further understanding of the situation or contribute to the overall resolution of the issues at hand.
That said, yes, right now I'm being guilty of not being a nice, quiet, rational voice here, but only because you guys started it (Oh look, how childish of me), and I feel that it's really not helping the situation. And for the record, this is me, on my own, speaking for myself, not presenting someone elses point of view, purely my own feelings on the matter.
</warning>
Now, after all that, everyones going to be all annoyed/angry/<insert choice word here> at me. Well feel free to flame away at me if it'll help, or actually take what I've said to heart, and quite calmly tell me that what I've said is harsh but reasonable.
And try not to forget that I'm also looking for suggestions to help fix Will (personality wise).
Addendum: I didn't say this before but, Richard, in terms of plot vs PC and Feathers, thanks for saying... well... anything. Particularly for being positive, I guess.
Karen I have sent you an email that hopefully explaings my behaviour in game
Hook
Well, Rhandis did mean it when he said he was going to kick some sense into Will. Admittedly, it's going to be a large amount of rolled-up-newspaper-style 'dude, not cool', but there's something there.
Rolled-up-newspaper-style repremands are the kind of thing he really deserves, but I doubt he'll react too well to them. He's the kind of person that gets frustrated with something, so he hits it.
A way to bury the proverbial axe with 'elves', particularly Lintafea would be good. It's really not helpful for him to have this unfounded (for him personally anyway) dislike/hatred for elves. A childhood of influence from prejudice parents shouldn't be too hard to change should it?
Anyway, what might be helpful is for people to put forward what (in their perceptions) are the things that make him seem like such a tosser. Hopefully it'll throw into relief some ideas that could help alter him.
my biggist complaint about will is that up until recently he has be the......
(cue ominus fanfare) ULTRA MYSTERIOUS GUY (cue random storm effects)
basicly the type that when you remove the hood that always covers his face in shadow he is wearing ANOTHER hood underneath, and Will apears to be loving every minute of it
Hm, well I'm not sure about being "Ultra Mysterious Guy", but he certainly isn't very open about himself, but openness /usually/ comes with some degree of trust or at least comfort/familiarity. I don't see much of that within the party.
How well do any of us really know anyone else in the party (or themselves even in some cases). We all seem to have been caught up together in something and have been stumbling around trying to bump into it ever since. I think the fact that the group is actually running around together is more an act of meta-gaming than of actual character actions. As far as Will is concerned, he's deepest in it as he has the same mark as seems to be popular on many of the corpses, he doesn't understand why the rest of you seem so involved. Yes that's a relatively selfish perspective, but what do you expect from someone who's emotional and social development ended around age 9?
But aside, yes, being very closed is one of his big issues, but he needs to feel some form of connection/trust with the party before he'd share.. Not that he really has much to share. He has been building a trust in Randis, and so long as Randis doesn't start beating him too much with afore mentioned paper, he'll probably continue building from there. Aveal's slightly comic nature, and the fact the he takes care of everyone, does make him seem to be a friendly person, but I don't think it's really in Will's character just to approach someone and talk to them about stuff.
That, and it may just be me forgetting that I haven't talked about something, but I really don't think Will has anything all that important or interesting held back..
(Stumbles on blog [first blog ever read] reads 'for teh brids', gets sinking fealing, wanders off.)
(wanders back [without sinking feeling] and notices 'comments' link and the number '27' next to it, thinks "this could be interesting" and cliks...)
Wasn't wrong was I?
Nope certainly wasn't. Much interesting juciness going on here.
Here is an email I sent to karen explaining the general gist of what makes up my character so that you all can maybe understand my actions in game
Karen
You have the rather dubious honour of hosting the first character that even I find hard to dstinguish from myself, as such after a long talk with myself last night I will attempt "explain" him/me somewhat.
First things first he is a thief, now that may not seem like much of a statement until you look at him.
Remember that he only started stealing becuase he did not have the apptitude for the normal accepted paths that an Elf should follow. He constantly refers to himself as a "requsitions officer" or an "adventurer" these are not just funny lines (although like me he uses humour to delflect others) He hates the idea of being a thief of depriving people of somthing. Now this is in conflict with the fact he loves the challenge of beating people who are trying to protect their belongings from him.
Up until Liamne's death these opposing points of view were balanced out by always making sure that the items stolen were placed out in the open so that the owners could recover them (and TRY to protect them better next time). After her death he became somwhat detached for a while as had he deprived someone of her life (Liamne), so he started stealing for real, firstly to build the grave marker then just becuase he had started to hate himself to the point of being self-destructive.
It wasnt until he met Serena that he statrted to change back, the fact that she didnt appear to see him as this dark shadowy goul that feeds of others (as he sees most thieves) slowly brought him out of his mindset enough to almost see himself with her eyes as it were, and for a time he almost felt worthy of existance.
Then with her death he was delt a heavy blow and were it not for his new companions would have slid back into his old pattern, the fact that he seemed able to use his only skills in a way that was "constructive" and served a greater good for the first time also helped.
Then surprise surprise Liamne re-appears belittling his megere gesture of attonment (the grave marker) and forcing him to face a part of his life he wanted to forget.
Now this may sound strange to you but Lintafea actually blames Liamne for his decent into true thievery so at first he was dealing with a combination of woman he was very attracted to/ woman whose supposed death caused me to actually become what I hate most. Then she swans around with the rest of the party paying him little to no attention whitlst he is obsessing over her, at one stage he was almost ready to strike her. and lastly he finds that she did infact die but was resurrected and served HIS prision time.
So after all his gestures, all his hopes of using his abilities for the "greater good" he was still just a common thief, only this time he had stolen her freedom.
He couldnt shake her hand, he was/is not worthy of attonment from her or anyone.
Hook
Psi - You can say whatever you want, but I don't think I did anything wrong in reacting the way I did. I asked for clarification, and what I got was an indication that the post related to everybody, so I defended myself as I felt was appropriate. And yes, it upset me, because it upsets me when people misinterpret me, particularly when people accuse me of being dishonest or manipulative. I think I have every right to be angry when, out of nowhere, I am accused of the things which Karen's original post mentioned. While I am aware it wasn't a personal remark, she did address it to all of us; so, since I am only responsible for myself, I dealt with it only as it applied to me. And it was offensive - I'm sorry, but it was.
Regardless of whether or not you think it's childish, I don't think there's anything wrong with standing up for myself. And how else am I supposed to react, anyway? I curbed myself considerably from my initial reaction, but if I'd held back any more, I would have been dishonest, and there's no damn point even responding if I'm not going to be honest.
And incidentally, criticising Hook's imflammatory remarks while yourself saying "extreme indignation at the suggestion that you may have been somehow seen to have done anything in the slightest wrong, ever," isn't exactly a shining example. You know perfectly well I'm only talking about Feathers of the Lion here - if you're going to criticise the way I'm acting, please keep it relevant.
Wrong? I don't remember right and wrong being brought into this. Last I check we are still dealing with perceptions, not facts.
The "clarification" you got was that it "isn't directed at anyone in particular", and that the post was in reference to things that came from "all the people who have been involved in the games I've run". Just as an aside, "I...I...I...I...I...me...me...me...me...I...I...I...I...". Firstly, as you claim to be aware, it wasn't a personal remark, it was addressed to everyone. Kay was expressing how she was feeling about the game to everyone. Her comments were based on things said and done by everyone. Now that doesn't mean that everyone was doing everything she was talking about, but that the range of things that were being mentioned covered all of us. To take the ones that you feel were most upsetting, and attributing them to yourself is just plain silly.
I think the accusations of dishonesty are non-existant, it was mentioned in regards to it being dishonest to be someone you aren't, when Kay was talking about people prefering Richards GMing style, I can't see anywhere that anyone is accused of being dishonest. Being upset about accusations of being manipulative is understandable. The thing here is that I really doubt anyone was actually trying to be manipulative. Kay is very sensitive to having anything impacting her freedoms, and to be quite frank, I don't agree with her way of classifying manipulative. So yes, I can understand you being upset and offended by being accused of being manipulative, but in this context the word probably doesn't have the same meaning you are associating with it. That's not to say that Kay's feelings of people trying to manipulate her aren't valid, just that it's a matter of degree between how she feels about it, and the kind of thing you would probably assume that means.
Jumping back a fair way, secondly, notice the plural 's' in "the games I've run". That would imply more than just Feathers being the source of Kay's original post, so lets not go ignoring potentially 'relevant' occurances in other games.
As for standing up for yourself, that's perfectly fine. People should do that, it shows spine (something which at least one of my lecturers seems to missing at the moment, but that's a completely different story) and character. It's just standing up for yourself without trying to understand and resolve the situation isn't very constructive. Honest is good too, but honesty needs to be tempered with compasion. It's good to be honest and tell the mother that her son has just been brutally killed, but generally you try to leave out the brutal part, and cushion it to help the truth sit better. Don't need to compromise on truth, just need to consider how it's delivered.
I thought my use of a warning tag, hyperbole and acknowledgement of my own behavouir there was making it clear that I wasn't leading by example when I said that. I was hoping to highlight the flaws of that way of putting things by using and exagerating it.. I guess I didn't achieve that very well.
you know thats' what I loved about our little group back when we were at IGS, there were so many issues and hangups being carried around by ALL of us that somedays I think I went to just to see if anyone would explode. That being said I think MAJOR thanks should be givin to Karen becuase this is the first time I believe that a frank converstation has taken place.
So what do I believe we have established?
1)We are all very sensitive to slights real OR imagined and quick to jump on the defensive.
(while we are on that topic Jess I believe that the topic of manipulation could be refering to me as I had said that I believed that Lintafea was a distruptive element to the rest of the group to Karen and had offered to leave the game on those grounds)
2)We are all chock full of suggestions for how Karen should run HER game.
3)we are all FRIENDS
4)we all want to CONTINUE THE GAME
Now my suggestion based on my OPINION is that we dont look at blame I mean who cares about the blame really? What I beleive we should do is just work the intervidual problems.
Case in point the infamous handshake people have stated that Lintafea should have shaken hands I have explained why he didnt, so where do we stand on that? is everyone ok with the reasoning or do we need to work somthing else out?
no blame just solutions
I await your replies
Hook
Reason's good. Perfectly fair and fine. A bit subtle for me to have caught it at the time though (hence my reaction).
From what Darren said to me about Lintafea, the "bit subtle" goes beyond that. This was Lintafea's reaction based on information that no one in the party is in a position to know. There is, therefore, no reason why anyone would have realised his motivations.
I feel the immediate issue here is that we should be trusting one another as role-players and not confusing character reactions with player reactions. Also, if the issue does arise, talk about it so there are no misunderstandings. As indeed Darren has done.
Psi, you don't seem to get it. I know that these comments are not explicitly directed at me, but I feel that I have to respond to them as they apply to me, since they were said to generally apply to everybody, which includes me. As I can't speak for anybody else (and I certainly don't /want/ to - an occurrance like that has already led to Karen getting the wrong impression of /me/ once) I have to address these issues in a personal sense. If this is the case, then I feel that I have every right (and indeed, every obligation - if Karen feels like I'm not enjoying her game when I in fact /am/, letting her go on thinking that for no reason would be nothing short of cruel) to respond to the comments. I'm not /trying/ to say that they're all about me - I did not "take the ones that (I) feel were most upsetting, and (attribute) them to (my)self"; I am /trying/ to address them all as they relate to me, because if Karen /does/ believe that they apply to me, she needs to know that there has been misconception/miscommunication/untruth somewhere along the line, and these things are /not a problem/ for me.
It seems to me that the vast majority of problems in our group are caused by little more than misunderstandings; after all, the main problem in Crucible sprang from a miscommunication about how Talen's character had treated Matt's character, coupled with a miscommunication about changes to the Paladin Code of Conduct - the whole thing could have been avoided. When such serious problems arise from these issues, the last thing I want to do is be /part/ of one. Like I said, it makes me feel like an accessory to depression, an excuse (NOT to imply that Karen is deliberately looking for an excuse or anything - I just couldn't find a less accusatory word which added "unintentional" to the meaning) to be unhappy. If refusing to be that, makes me immature in your eyes, then so be it.
Anyway, I won't post to this topic again. It took me a week or so just to work up the energy to post this response, which I should probably be using to get some commissions done. Anything else I was planning to say to you was just spiteful, so I'll leave you to it.
You are right, I didn't get it.
I misunderstood the direction you were coming from, and my response was unreasonably agressive. Somewhere along the line I seemed to have the impression that there was more accusation than explanation in what you were saying, looking back over what has been said, I can't see how I came to that position. So in all sincerity, I'm sorry for misunderstanding your point, and for being so aggressive in my persuit of clarification.
I also have to agree that the vast majority of problems in the group are simple misunderstandings, and with that in mind, your concerns about clarifing your position to ensure you aren't seen as a part in that are understandable.
Hopefully you read this post, even if you don't post on the topic again, and hopefully you accept my apology. Once again, I'm sorry for any undue stress and/or upset I've caused.
By the way, reminded text, everyone - you're all awesome.
...Wow. People really can be reasonable on the internet O_o; Thanks for understanding, really, and I'm sorry if I did come across incorrectly at first (hey, I was upset, so it's perfectly possible. But thanks, really. *HUG*
(Ooops, I posted again ^^;; Sorry. I just had to say thanks! ^^;)
Post a Comment