Why do US-Americans have to make a competition out of everything? I am close to excluding US-Americans

And an overemphasis on winning tells the guy in second place that all his hard work and accomplishments are meaningless just because he's not first.

>US-Americans
Who?

unfortunately theres not really a good way to strike a balance between rewarding effort (participation trophies for all y'all faggots) and rewarding excellence (if you're not a winner then you're nothing but dog shit)

>Why do US-Americans have to make a competition out of everything?

what has happened that is making you upset?

okay

Non-Canadian, Non-Mexican Americans.

Sure there is. Sliding scale rewards. Partial credit. All sorts of reward mechanisms can both reinforce the desire for great success and also reward solid, earnest effort towards success.

>thinking mexicans and canadians are americans
>2011+6
ISHYGDDT

What else would you mean?

I have already excluded Americans from my games. They suddenly jumped in quality and enjoyment for every other player and myself.

did a bunch of american beat your shitty boss monster super easily or something?

>playing on roll20

literally no one cares about the opinions of someone with no friends so he has to play on roll20

Good lord, are you autistic or something? What kind of shut-in uses that formulation?

Its the niggers fault, and yours for letting the penetrate so deep into your sports and wives.

Look m8, you can't be above something and then not be above it.

As a burger, it's called ''''reality'''' TV.
People are expected to be cheating, cutthroat cunts in TV competitions.

>North America
>South America
>Central America
Hmm....

>Part America
>Not America
>Drugland

Honestly I've started to avoid (Particularly west coast) American's who's tabletop background is DnD/Shadowrun. Worst players on the planet. Can't RP, can't play and have no bants. Just very dull, self-important people who take everything too seriously. Have one in your group and all the fun/comedy/drama will just seep out.

They're fine if you avoid the DnD and Shadowrunners though.

>What is e-gaming? What is South Korea?

>implying real friends can't play via roll20, or use it as a tool

But we've had that for ages now.

Just look at the olympics, just qualifying to be there is seen as a huge deal that someone should be proud of accomplishing.

>Shadowrun
I don't get this one.
SR generally demands you "get" the setting, and are prepared to work in it and with others. You can't do a run alone, others are required to get the job done, interacting with the party is getting the job done, and everyone is a needed quality.

Gues you never played with Russians, user. Americans are perfectly fine.

The focus on that party dynamic is part of the issue I'd say. Adds a paint-by-numbers approach to character making and an almost autistic aversion to inter-party conflict. Characters don't exist as their own entity, they are just The Party.

That being said though it pretty much just comes from the fact that it's a game that's popular with the sort of people who play DnD that haven't moved away from DnD habits.

I'm just exceedingly tired of doing DnD rehab.

>autistic aversion to inter-party conflict
Are you looking for something more world of darkness-ish, where the players are scheming against each other?

...

No. Not necessarily. I mean if it made sense then go for it my dude. That's the thing: whenever party conflict is brought up it's always "So you want them all to kill and rob?" but that isn't the alternative. It's only an alternative if you're one of THOSE DnD players.

I just like it when my players act in character. The primary focus of an IC argument should not be "How do we resolve this and move on with the GM's plot?" As if the plot belongs to me. The story is about the party. Why are we shutting down avenues for interaction and plot hooks? Let's see where it goes.

>But how can you trust them not to go stupid with it?
If I can't trust somebody to be responsible and mature with this shit then I don't want to play with them. Full stop. You shouldn't have to make rules at the table dictating what the players can do OOC, if you do you're playing with the wrong people.

>How do we resolve this and move on with the GM's plot?
So they don't have enough of their own personal missions and motivations, and are just a homogeneous quest-following blob of a party?

>waaaaaah i'm not gonna use the convention that 99% of everyone uses because americans fucked my ass as a child or something

Pretty much, or if those motivations are there they're pretty superficial. Almost like an accessory rather than a character trait.

This mixes with their (incredibly polite and well meaning, but unnecessary and detrimental) mentality of not fucking up the DMs plot to create something truly bland. A very reactive, rather than proactive playstyle. They need to be lead by the nose. Their characters don't want anything. Their characters don't do anything. Hell, their characters don't barely say anything
>I ask the innkeeper about the suspect

That and the mentality of a detailed backstory before the first session being good or important for roleplaying.

I don't see the problem with any of that? Speed and efficiency trumps looks.

>Adds a paint-by-numbers approach to character making and an almost autistic aversion to inter-party conflict
My last SR game consisted of myself, a CSA Ork (Human) mage, a Japanese dwarven street sam swordsaint (who was my roommate) and a Tir Na Nog expatriot elf face.
We did NOTHING but bicker, rob drug houses (our biggest client was KE), swap each other's liquor for other shit (moonshine, sake and gin all look the same in the bottle with no label), occasionally fight (dwarf usually won unless I pulled up a F8 earth/dog spirit I named "Poochy"), and generally had a fucking good time.
Granted, this was my irl group which is full of good players.

Sounds great dude. I'm really happy for you. A good party of players are worth their weight in gold.

Stay in touch with them, even if life starts to pull you different ways.

In the original version, what mattered was beating the course, not each other. It was an unneeded add on to suit the American concept of "You gotta beat the OTHER guy!", and diluted the idea that the course itself was the biggest foe.
We actually had a catastrophic break in the group due to the only time male/female shit came up 3 years ago. Since then, I've built it back up slowly with a solid mix of decent to quality players.
I broke them in with WoD, the Dark Heresy, and I'm just not running 4e D&D for them, and the difference in approach is fucking amazing. I mean, they actually chose to ignore loot in order to escape a bad situation.
I've NEVER seen D&D players ignore loot they knew was there.

The point is that in the original, if you were able to actually make it across this ridiculous obstacle course designed by madmen, like some kind of saturday morning cartoon hero, then you were declared a "Ninja Warrior." It's crazy hard, and weeks can go by without anyone managing to do it.
If, by some chance, two people did it in one episode, they were both declared Ninja Warriors. Sort of like graduating from boot camp - being able to do it is a feat in itself.
But when they brought the show to the US, one of the changes they made was that if two people somehow made it through successfully in one episode, one of them would be declared the "Ninja Warrior" and the other would basically be a loser. Which is stupid.

Any tips for building a good group back up? I'm unsure how to go about it myself aside from trying to get a good handle of their character before you play. I wasn't the person who brought the last one together, feeling a bit overwhelmed.

>an almost autistic aversion to inter-party conflict
>shadowrun players

>Otherwise we have a bunch of people handing out participation trophies like it's the best thing since sliced bread and saying shit like "We're all winners!".
isn't this also America?

You gotta do the footwork, really.
user, my group has had A LOT of people come and go over the years. It has been going on continuously for...15 years now, and I've only been in it for 10, and none of the OGs are still around.
I used to run games at different LGS, put up signs that I was looking for players, and generally would accept anyone that wanted in, but I told them if they didn't work out, I'd ask them to leave. All I really want is for them to gel with the group and it's idiosyncrasies, be flexible with games and be willing to give anything a shot (I've played 20 some different systems with this group), and be a decent person/gamer.
Roleplay with others, do not hog spotlight, be ready to do cool shit and accept you will have to watch others do cool shit, handle disagreements maturely, have fun!
And accept that I run MY group with an iron fist, am the last word in all things and brook no bullshit from anyone, including myself

I found that US players are usually good at being social (they'll hop into or start a conversation easily and enjoy chit-chat) but not at communication (they have trouble getting their thoughts across, which are often disorganised, and they can't seem to manage to talk without saying 'like' at every 6th word on average). Most of them are fun people, but they really need to express themselves better. Sometimes it feels like I'm listening to a guy sing with a great voice but he's deaf and it goes wrong instead of well. It's a loss for all involved.

That's not even that many of us that do that, my friend, and generally we hate that like every sixth word shit too, it's even more annoying to us.

>it's even more annoying to us.
This.
The whole "like" thing is a internet borne issue used by the new generation in place of "um", "uh", other such place note phrases.

If you think Americans are bad in this regard, you've never dealt with Russians.

So, black men?