[KorinWhiteFang]

Ahmen brother lowfly and sister kuinn!
I have been running a game for over what 2-3 years now lowfly?
and due to distractions and out of game conversation or in-game
purpose driven distruption i literialy have not been able to move the group
more than 65 feet from a source room.
Now i do have to admit at the time the group
was getting too big for me to run smoothly.
I am hoping what i have planned for Saturday will move smoother.

[Da Gamers Den Boss]

Originally Posted by Kuinn Stormbringer

There is nothing worse than "table talk" during a game. I haven't personally experienced technology getting in the way, but I bet it could really be a distraction. As a DM, I feel that it is rude and disrespectful for all the time you have to put in to prepare an awsome game for everyone. I no longer play with my old gaming group because of this very issue. So, if you are a player, please keep that in mind while waiting for your DM to finish some paperwork or something.

Really??? That kind of sounds hard core Draconian to me...

[lowfly]

As Korin said.....some table talk is ok but when it distracts from the game itself it is annoying and makes the game unenjoyable for others. It is also very disrespectful to the GM as they have spent a lot of time and effort into creating a game for you to play. I know of what Kuinn speaks of......I have ALWAYS wanted to be involved with a weekly or monthly game with her as GM but because of a few "bad Apples" she will most likely not runa game for a while. It is a shame because she is a heck of a GM and i would hope that she would invite me, Phoenix and some others to join in on a weekly or monthly game (Hint...Hint...Hint)

I PROMISE not to table talk!

[Da Gamers Den Boss]

Well if you are saying that someone who doesnt pay attention to the game and wants to do something else other than play I would agree with you on that, but from what the post stated it sounded like you could just sit there an be quite while the DM was doing something...that seemed a little too much, but I could be taking it more seriously that what it was meant as. I have run into "problems" with wives and girlfriends, who dont want to be there, or dont want all these people in their house, and only are there because their man wants to play. That kind of thing is annoying. But someone talking about their car while I am looking something up isnt a problem at all.

[KorinWhiteFang]

Nah i have no prob with small talk while i am looking things up or while i am drawing something on the map. The challenge i have is when i am setting up the plot line or in the middle of combat or NPC conversation with one of the PCs and another players decides its time to tell the story about his other character in another game who went through something like this before or someone just being distruptive not to be mean but to be funny it kinda gets old.

As far as wives and girlfriends go has anyone ever had a player convince their non-gaming significant other to game with them in YOUR game?
I always welcome new people in our group of friends but what do you do when the spouse or GF decides to be insultive during the game?

I think this may be off topic so if you want to move this string please do.

[Loremaster]

*bump*

Ahem, so D&D 4th edition has been out for over a year, and I'm guessing that most of us still haven't gotten around to trying it out. Still probably trying to pay off the credit cards from those 3rd edition books, heh heh. Anyway, now there's a lot of 4th edition books out there, and people have at least had time to play the game in-depth. Two questions I have, the second one is the one I'm keen on:

Question 1: Is D&D 4.0 for teeny-boppers and those of us that aren't, ahem, "Old School" RPGers? Or is it a true RPG in the classic sense that any of us old-schoolers would prefer to the old versions?

Question 2: The prepared adventures make my mouth water, enough to tempt me to buy into the whole new edition again. ESPECIALLY mutliple full-color maps for the adventure, and the adventure SEEMS to have a lot more thought to it than the 3rd edition adventures (unless you actually liked Meepo and fighting the tree blights, or a 3rd-level party ambushed by CR 11 assasins). But I'm outside looking in, and a good module is a game in and of itself. And then, I can steal the maps too! Are the WotC-made Adventures worth playing? I need a seriously reply to this one.

[Da Gamers Den Boss]

I have absolutely no desire to get into 4th edition. I looked a the books when they came out, and other than rolling a d20 it just didnt feel like D&D to me. As far as adventures, if you have been playing RPG games for over 10+ years and watching movies, reading novels etc, adventures really shouldnt be a problem.

[lionrampant]

I've been playing in a monthly D&D4 game for almost half a year now, so I have some experience with it. Can you do lots of roleplaying in it? Absolutely. Granted, I'm that guy that roleplayed boardgames before I ever came across RPGs, so I'm one of those guys that doesn't let a lack of rules get in the way. And I can't say that D&D4 provides any actual rules for roleplaying, as the rules seem to be almost universally focused on tactical combat and its attendant details.

Which is fine. If I look at my D&D Rules Cyclopedia from 1991 I find no real rules for roleplaying, either, so this isn't something new with D&D4. Basically, D&D4 is a very detailed tactical combat game in a fantasy milieu that bares no resemblance to anything you have dealt with before (clerics shooting lasers everywhere, for example). I think the big problem with it is that it is called D&D, because it feels very different from previous versions of D&D. But if taken on its own merits, it is a perfectly workable combat system with a simple skills system tacked on it seemingly as an afterthought. If you run combat-intensive games, it totally works. If you don't, then I wouldn't recommend playing it.

[Loremaster]

Well, the few players I have interested right now are tactical-combat junkies, who want more hack-n-slash and less story. Not your typical roleplayer, just a different kind of gamer. It sounds like D&D 4th may be more our style that the previous versions.

But they had to call it D&D, or few people would find out about it. I'm partial to a boardgame-style D&D, where adventure design is simple (but still able to do what you want). That way, you can open up a favorite module and play it again with no prep, like a boardgame (um, you CAN version the adventure so that, for example, the key is in room 7 instead of room 12, to keep players from memorizing the layout).

That said, I also liked the Rules Cyclopedia. But I prefer a single comprehensive book to having to buy a book for monsters, a book for players, for DMs, for this and that class, for setting, etc. I've always said that the rulebooks need to be more refernce material and quick-to-research with lots of handy tables, rather than missing an important rule in the paragraphs because it was buried in the text. It's a rulebook, not a textbook. It's a reference book, not a novel. Rant over.

[lionrampant]

From what you wrote, D&D4 would be great for your group, if you can handle the cost. The supplement treadmill is working quite hard over at WotC these days.