NotVonKaiser

OP is acting chaotic stupid and wondering why there are consequences.

We worked around the above issue by changing our masterpage to force IE to run in 10 compatibility mode.

I don't know that there's a way you can back out of that, unfortunately. By the way, my experience with the Jan 2016 CU and the list view issues was resolved by forcing IE to run in 10 compatibility mode (Chrome never experienced them).

This is a cheesy answer, I know, but have you just tried re-running psconfig? Sometimes it has to go through 2 or 3 times to work correctly.

Have you actually experienced the accounting department re-arranging their office one? That seems... weird.

I agree that edits that remove some irrelevant content are OK, but in my opinion both yours and the guy who came afterwards not only changed the scope of the question by removing content but removed arguably relevant content on top of that.

@TRiG That is so, so wrong for about 500 different reasons. "Getting a virus" is around #487

to @jt0dd I believe that I downvoted your revision, although I did not see the later one and would have done the same to him. All of this is personal preference but IMO both revisions changed the actual content of the question, which to me is a huge no-no. As far as I'm concerned, if there's too much extraneous information it turns into more of a whine post than an answerable one and I'd vote to downvote the question as a whole.

Seems legit

later

okay, you're just arguing to read your own type at this point. I think I"m done.

what the fuck do you think an analogy is?

I'm not going to entertain that question, I'm sorry

I've just explained how the book analogy fails

the level that you keep introducing issues that aren't really bad roleplaying issues into a so-called discussion about bad roleplaying

(for what it's worth, I wrote backstories for all the characters in the last book that I finished a draft on, and by the end of the first draft I may as well have thrown those in a fire)

the level that you are now comparing well established characters in books to PCs with by your own admission consist of a character sheet and a 2 or 3 page backstory

the level that I just mentioned

on several levels, yes

consider why the US has so many fat people even though the US also leads in image consciousness

in trying to make this analogy to writing, what you're actually doing is pointing out that you're holding your players to a far, far higher standard than any writer holds themselves to

right, this is my point

yes, it is bad writing... when it stays in there. However, there is this great thing in modern word processing known as the backspace key which can be used to remove passages which do not make sense

it's not about being "allowed", it "happens"

then you're just plain wrong

because when you write a book, you can do that

you then go back and fix it

because I've written 2 books and that shit happens all the time

have you ever tried to write a story?

however, every fighter is not Beowulf. Every wizard is not Gandalf. Every cleric is not Joan of Arc. There is lots and lots of room in there for interpretation, even room that you may not like at first glance

which, sure, if you're going to roleplay well known characters like that, people are bound to get angry

it seems to me that your issue isn't actually with super man beating someone to death and then acting as though nothing happened, it's with superman beating someone to death in the first place

so now "actions don't have consequences" is the fault of the players, too?

you lost me at "should be".

these are issues inherent to roleplaying, but they aren't necessarily "bad roleplaying".

having a party play Chaotic Stupid is also not usually something you can resolve by saying "hey. you're not playing your character correctly" either; in fact, my experience with that is that it's generally the result of people saying "hey, I want to play a character who thinks X this time" and not realizing that believing in thing X makes them an antisocial jerk if they carry it too far

having a player act on information their character shouldn't know is IME 9 times out of 10 the result of the GM not being clear whether or not this is party information or just character information

having a monk or any character throw poop because throwing poop is funny is not going to be the kind of thing that stops because you tell them they're playing their character wrong. It's stopped by you saying "guys, I don't feel comfortable with interacting with feces. Please stop."

but these examples you keep bringing up, they're not solvable by you telling the person how to play their character

you can go to passing notes if you want to do that, and then the player who gets the note is free to tell everyone else if they want to

still, the issue of players acting on information they're not supposed to be party to can be circumvented a number of ways

No, you definitely didn't

As a GM, I don't think it's your job to keep people in line so much as it is to understand the direction they are taking their characters and to adapt to that. Again, in extreme cases like poop throwing there is even a thing out there that you can invoke to tell them to knock it off

The tricky thing about roleplaying is that players will do things with their characters that you didn't expect. Sometimes it's just to be silly, but that specific example you just gave? In the right hands, that would be an amazing evening

wow, good point.

right... I think that when you're first starting out, what you need to know isn't what a character got for his 4th birthday, it's what their outlook on life is and maybe a set of traits and beliefs you can lean on at first while you're trying to figure out exactly how that character interacts with the group dynamic

to compare and contrast, Fate has you actually generate it during character creation, as a collaboration with the rest of the group

@Lord_Gareth Absolutely, but in my experience the little writing exercise where you put together 2 or 3 pages all by yourself to do that, doesn't actually accomplish that for most people.

Honestly, I think that writing up backstory is usually a waste of time, although some game systems (Fate) have good ways of putting that together. Backstories are not roleplaying and to be honest I think you're setting yourself up for failure if you think they are.

So ironically that means that if you start punishing players for "bad" roleplaying, you're going to get nothing but bad roleplaying.