@darwinian, on May 1 2008, 12:49 PM, said in Werewolf Game Meta-Discussion:
And, with that sentence, you have exactly described my complaint. The werewolf game should be player-vs-player, not player-vs-GM. What you are describing is a player-vs-GM game.
xander
Yes, it's a different game, but still fun.
None-the-less, I agree your point is valid.
Ok, you win. If that is your objection to my hosting style, then you will , I guarantee, have to look elsewhere.
On the other hand, those who don't mind the rug occasionally being pulled out from under them, come on in!
@darwinian, on Apr 30 2008, 11:49 PM, said in Werewolf Game Meta-Discussion:
And, with that sentence, you have exactly described my complaint. The werewolf game should be player-vs-player, not player-vs-GM. What you are describing is a player-vs-GM game.
Yup, that's the disconnect right there.
@soitbegins, on May 1 2008, 10:01 AM, said in Werewolf Game Meta-Discussion:
Ok, you win. If that is your objection to my hosting style, then you will , I guarantee, have to look elsewhere.
On the other hand, those who don't mind the rug occasionally being pulled out from under them, come on in!
Look, I have nothing against you, and I have nothing against there being player-vs-GM games. However, the werewolf game (or global thermonuclear war, or mafia, or however you call it) is not supposed to be such a game. If it is to be such a game, this needs to be incredibly clear up front, and it wasn't. This isn't about your hosting style. This is about the game that you are hosting, and the fact that that game is not the werewolf game. It is some kind of mafia themed players-vs-players-vs-GM RPG. I would like to think that I am being clear in this, but you seem not to understand what I am saying. Let me try one more time.
I signed up to play a game of global thermonuclear war. Global thermonuclear war is a game based upon the werewolf game. In the werewolf game, there are wolves that try to eat the innocents, and innocents that try to kill wolves. The innocents are given just enough power (a seer, maybe a vigilante or guardian angel, sometimes more roles if there are a ton of people) to have a fighting chance of killing the wolves, and the wolves are pretty much on their own (though I have seen a few games with some wolf specials, but all of those games had 25+ players). Information that comes from the GM can be trusted, and the powers that the roles have a pretty well spelled out at the beginning. Thus, if a vigilante uses his skill, then it is known that the vigilante is innocent. In a nutshell, that is the werewolf game, and that is what I signed up to play.
The game that you are now hosting was advertised as the above, by nature of being in a series of similar games. However, it most decidedly is not that kind of game. That, I think, is the root of my ire.
xander
I see what's going on here. It's as if I'm running an ice cream parlor, and I'm serving up GTW ice cream. You think it's chocolate-covered banana. However, I'm really digging into the bin for chocolate-covered cherry. So you complain when you bite in, of course.
Now, the solution isn't to fire the guy serving up the ice cream; maybe he's deaf, or is slow to accept new ideas, or didn't understand when you complained the first time. (For me, it's two out of three.) What the solution is is to complain, and explain things, and wait for the guy to cotton onto the fact that he should be serving you from the bin over on the far left.
Now that I've figured out the exact nature of your (and a number of people who played Game 17's) complaint, I'll start serving chocolate-covered banana GTW next time it's my shift and someone takes an order.
To hijack your analogy, it's more like an ice cream parlor that only serves yogurt.
@eugene-chin, on May 1 2008, 10:12 AM, said in Werewolf Game Meta-Discussion:
To hijack your analogy, it's more like an ice cream parlor that only serves yogurt.
No, you've got it wrong-way up. Think of it this way: The ice cream parlor does actually serve ice cream, because when other clerks have manned the counter, they've been able to scoop up chocolate-covered banana GTWice cream.
I've just been getting the wrong bin, and have been a little slow to figure out which bin you wanted me to pull from.
@soitbegins, on May 1 2008, 04:47 PM, said in Werewolf Game Meta-Discussion:
I see what's going on here. It's as if I'm running an ice cream parlor, and I'm serving up GTW ice cream. You think it's chocolate-covered banana. However, I'm really digging into the bin for chocolate-covered cherry. So you complain when you bite in, of course.
Now, the solution isn't to fire the guy serving up the ice cream; maybe he's deaf, or is slow to accept new ideas, or didn't understand when you complained the first time. (For me, it's two out of three.) What the solution is is to complain, and explain things, and wait for the guy to cotton onto the fact that he should be serving you from the bin over on the far left.
Now that I've figured out the exact nature of your (and a number of people who played Game 17's) complaint, I'll start serving chocolate-covered banana GTW next time it's my shift and someone takes an order.
YES! You get it! Yay! I was beginning to wonder if I was ever going to be able to explain it clearly enough that you would understand.
xander
I hope this will convince people to stop complaining about the way SIB tends to run games and we won't have to have another argument the next time it's his turn to host. For the record I enjoy both types of games, and if enough people are interested we could occasionally have a players vs. GM style game to mix things up a bit. Now that we are clear on that, let's all sit back and have fun.
How about here's what we do: When the GM posts the signup sheet, they indicate whether the game is going to be a player-vs-GM game (we could call that type of game 'Adaptability') or not (for ordinary games, this could be 'Reasoning').
Once the prospective player sees whether they're going to be playing an Adaptability game or a Reasoning game, they can sign up as they will.
Or not.
Sound good?
Or you just call it Player vs GM so anyone who wishes to can understand exactly what type of game they are playing.
A better analogy for what has happened with you style of hosting is we enter the ice cream shop wanting rocky road ice cream. You instead grab our throats and force italian ice upon us.
Or you know that kinda is a worthless analogy because he didn't force you to play the game. The parlor is the defcon board. We have a section for help, game discussion, and finally GTW. You came in and decided to order some GTW. The exact flavor wasn't specified by either of you and so you end of getting mad. Now if it was the way you say it, this would have happened. You click on the Defcon board and a post is made by you signing up for game 22 without your consent. Now does you analogy make any sense at all, especially when we see that YOU AREN'T EVEN PLAYING THE GAME. Sorry manta try again.
@ekhawkman, on May 2 2008, 10:21 AM, said in Werewolf Game Meta-Discussion:
Now does you analogy make any sense at all, especially when we see that YOU AREN'T EVEN PLAYING THE GAME. Sorry manta try again.
Only one game runs at a time. Every moment a badly run game is active is another moment a Good game Isn't.
That's reason enough.
And SIB once again shows he is completely unfit to host. He's being "Slow to cotton on to" the fact that is was a list of Bad ideas; that it was Criticism, not Praise.
If he really does this, I vote we bar him from hosting again.
Look, didn't you just hear my solution? In the future, if someone's hosting a player-vs-GM game, they should just say so! and all of this could be avoided.
P.S to Manta and Eugene Chin: Seeing as you did not participate in game 22, but you're still criticizing my hosting style anyway, are you sure you aren't still sore from being singed in game 17?
P.P.S: If it does end with a huge mushroom cloud, I'd like to point out that you suggested it.
P.P.P.S: By the way, if it ends with a huge mushroom cloud, it'll be in an Epilogue. I'm not going to RFED everyone again.
This post has been edited by SoItBegins : 02 May 2008 - 11:57 AM
@eugene-chin, on May 2 2008, 02:01 AM, said in Werewolf Game Meta-Discussion:
It wasn't a suggestion
@soitbegins, on May 2 2008, 12:26 PM, said in Werewolf Game Meta-Discussion:
He's being "Slow to cotton on to" the fact that is was a list of Bad ideas; that it was Criticism, not Praise.
View PostSoItBegins, on May 2 2008, 12:50 PM, said:
P.P.S: If it does end with a huge mushroom cloud, I'd like to point out that you suggested it.
I stand by my previous statements.
You're talking about doing something I am specifically advising Against. Don't go pinning it on me.
I know. 
