Rant 1 and Pyramid of Futility II

Story-time: I got the Dungeon's and Dragons Monster Manual 3.5 edition when I was around 12? I just really liked all the different monsters illustrated and couldn't figure out why the book was around 40$. Some time later I acquired Monster Manual 2 and 3, and at some point after that I realized that these were supplements for a game. I was a freshman in highschool when I tried to DM my first game. I remember having the great idea to set a gothic/oppressive tone after reading Heroes of Horror (a supplement of 3.5 time which tried to explain how to have a horror/darker campaign). I thought it was really awesome that you could rise above rolling dice and playing pretend and elevate it to proper storytelling which could illicit a proper guttural reaction just like music could. Needless to say it went about as awful as I imagine most people's first time playing a tabletop rpg goes. I played with two friends and I remember that I had one of them save against a door and I think they got through a single room before we gave up. I remember that I played most of a death-core album as background music. ¹

2009 was a hard time for me, but pictured are handouts and music for a dnd session

It's been a while since then and I know that I have better skills as a DM/Referee/Storyteller. I wouldn't go as far as to call myself a good storyteller. In my opinion I am better than a lot of the people I have encountered as a player, but I think that's a unrealistic perspective. I know that there is a great difference between an educated group and a non-educated group. As of 2009, 16% of the USA belongs to a gym (IHRSA). Now lets assume that about half of those people actually go to the gym and about half of those people lift weights. That means about 1 in 25 people has familiarity/education in lifting. That 1 in 25 will have radically different views on strength and lifting compared to the other 24. Further within the 4% of people who are lifting, Only a percentage of them is doing so correctly/ enjoys success in it. Their mental schema of benching 225 would be very different from a person's who is not familiar/educated in lifting. I know that the ability to compare oneself to the elites in strength sports, especially with social media, skews one's perception of self. The same way that every model being skinny and tall or every male in porn seemingly having a 10+ inch penis constructs a skewed assessment of what a "normal person" looks like, exposure to the elites skews one's understanding of what a baseline is.

I know among the people I train with whatever your current PR is, its not enough. Everyone has this sense of unworthiness which disallows them to stagnate. I think that all greatness is derived from this same source, but exposure to the elites/ those better than you serves to impart a need to be better yourself. The phrases "Iron sharpens Iron" and "if you're ever the smartest person in the room, you're in the wrong room" come to mind.

Maybe I'm a great DM, but it benefits me much more If i believe that I'm garbage and need to improve in all regards. Not only me, but it benefits my players, and I think it betters the tabletop rpg experience. I know the single most beneficial change I have ever done is to have a "Roses and Thorns" session after each play session. I stole this from my boy-scout troop, where the scoutmasters used as a way to receive feedback from us scouts. The only other time i have seen player-DM conversations about how the DM runs the game is when the player brings it up to express his dissatisfaction. I think by getting feedback after every session I don't let the situation get that far. More importantly, it has let me learn a great deal about the effectiveness of my DMing techniques. I think lifting is a unique hobby because results are so incredibly evident. You lift a weight many times and then you get stronger. Further the effectiveness of what you do is so visible with how much weight you can lift, in contrast to cooking where you may not be able to gage how effective a new method is. We have yet to quantify taste profiles.

This brings me to another pyramid of futility, this one for DMing/running a game.

Figure 1.

______
Worldbuilding
__________
Uniqueness
_____________
Worrying about player agency/railroading, Game "Balance" innate to the system
___________________
Reinforcing the mood via Lighting/Music/Handouts
______________________
Adjectives
_________________________
Quality NPCs/Dungeons
____________________________
Meaningful adventures
_______________________________
Consistent Rules/Theme, Informed Players
__________________________________
Consistent playtime, System-Tone alignment
_____________________________________
Players and DM agreeing to tone/theme/mood, Efficient usage of game time
________________________________________
Players playing with consistency, being able to effectively communicate with the players, the goal of having a pleasurable experience as a group
___________________________________________

I will not try to explain what I mean by each level of the pyramid

the goal of having a pleasurable experience as a group: People shouldn't do things if they are unpleasant, this is the core philosophy of why you guys are at a table

being able to effectively communicate with the players: If your players cannot understand what you are saying y'all wont be on the same page and this conflicts will emerge

Players playing with consistency: If people don't show up they 1. make problems with keeping their character in the narrative, and 2. miss stuff, which harms their enjoyment of the game

Efficient usage of game time: If you spend 3 hours of your 4 hour session dealing with a single player who wants to harass the wait staff and everyone else wants to go in a dungeon, there will be issues

Players and DM agreeing to tone/theme/mood: Its a collaborative game. The DM is essentially the conductor of an orchestra. Agreeing on what music you play beforehand not only puts everyone on the same page, it also allows players to prepare how to roleplay. Don't be the guy playing free-form jazz while everyone else struggles through the Scythian Suite.

System-Tone alignment: The tone of the game needs to be congruent with the narrative. Using pathfinder for a horror campaign is likely to cause issues simply because how pathfinder's mechanics don't reflect high lethality and rewards those who play the character building minigame. (Sidenote,- IMO Pathfinder is only good for a superhero campaign)

Consistent playtime: If you only meet for one session it better be a fantastic session.

Informed Players: If your players don't know what their character's can do then there will be an inconsistency in the challenges you can put in front of them and the challenges they can solve. If you know that your players can fly and they don't then it generally won't end well if you drop them off a cliff.

Consistent Rules/Theme: If one session is grim horror, the next is three stooges slapstick, and the third is guns blazing akimbo your players will probably not know what to expect and will likely end up confused/ their suspension of disbelief will end.

Meaningful adventures: I think a really important concept is that the world reacts to the players, otherwise why give the players the ability to take an action. So they can just waste time?

Quality NPCs/Dungeons: These two components are how you directly interact with the players. The better these are the more fulfilling it will be for players to interact with them.

Adjectives: The more you describe things, the more accurately you put into the player's mind what is in yours. If anything this is just a very specific case of effective communication.

Reinforcing the mood via Lighting/Music/Handouts: This is fairly self explanatory, thought I think you can screw this up more ways than correctly do it.

Game "Balance" innate to the system: Okay lets be real, like .1% of people actually play by the rules as written, and that's not getting into rules as intended. Sincerely almost all of "game balance" issues are not actually playing the game as it was supposed to be run. Even then, if the game systen supports the theme, then you shouldn't be having that many issues.

Worrying about player agency/railroading: Its a game of pretend with your friends as evaluated by dice. I think worrying about illusionism and false choices in a game beyond not real is tantamount of trying to police how people play pretend.

Source: Flintstones Comic

Uniqueness: Whether or not your elves are unique is not going to make or break whether someone has fun at your table. After I ran a super generic plot, my skills as a DM greatly improved, it allowed em to focus on other things below which I believe made it much tighter. 

Worldbuilding: Don't do this. There is literally no purpose. Especially don't write long back stories for your entire setting. All you do is delay actually working on things which make your DMing better. Now, this doesn't mean don't have names for anything, but if the players don't interact with it, its of no use.

In summary, DMing is an art. Fundamentally one makes "good" art by demonstrating their mastery over the medium. Once they achieve this mastery it allows them to express themselves effectively. No artist got good at evoking sadness by practicing evoking sadness, they got good at evoking sadness by getting good at making their art. Its the same for you, you get good at creating an atmosphere of dread and fear in your tabletop RPG game by getting god at running tabletop RPG games. 

1. The album in question was Carnal Reprecussions by Salt the Wound. I still think it's a really good album. (their label Rotten Records has purged Youtube many times so the link was the only one I could find online)

Pyramid of Futility

if you search pyramid weight you get this, note the similarity to d4

A seemingly simple principle in weightlifting is that one has to be strong enough to be able to move the weight they wish to lift. On the surface level, this seems self explanatory, however an often ignored underlying concept is that one must align their "lever arms", limbs, or what have you correctly. I use my triceps and pectorals in order to bench. However, I have to have a certain alignment of my pectorals and triceps in relationship to the barbell so that I can lift it. I have to be strong enough to allow my pectorals and triceps to fire and complete the lift. If my lats, forearms, biceps, shoulders, rhomboids, glutes, etc are not strong enough to keep the relationship of my triceps and pectorals to the barbell I won't be able to complete the lift.

In lifting there is a concept called strengthening the base which looks at one's ability to lift a certain weight as the size and stability of an imagined triangle. The height of the pyramid refers to a person's skill/technique/mastery of a lift and the base as the strength of their musculature. The base refers to not only the primary movers ie Triceps and Pectoralis, but to also the other musculuar groups which keep the primary movers in place. If one has a poor base of their pyramid they won't be able to keep it upright, it won't matter how good your technique is if you have weak muscles.

The imagined triangle is a tool one can use to assess what their weakness truly is. In my experience a very common problem most lifters face is overthinking. Most people will try to figure out what is wrong with their skill/technique/mastery of a lift rather than the simple fact that they may be weak. They then read up on what elite lifters do to fix their problems and seek to emulate them. They seek to elevate their tangle rather than to spread the base. I think this is a problem endemic to every hobby But I think it is most easily personified in lifting. Rather than trying to increase their general strength lifters will emulate the elites in their problem shooting with no regard for WHY the elites are doing those corrective measures.

After one lifting session where my team-mate and I spoke to a competitive bodybuilder we ended up talking about people incorrectly trying to solve their problems. Our friend (J) thought his quads overshadowed his hamstrings and as such he decided to stop training his quads rather than simply training his hamstrings. This struck us both as counter-intuitive and rather than correcting the original problem simply trying to mask it. Another fellow lifter we train with (D) has been trying to solve an issue of his overhead jerk stability and has been reading many articles regarding how elites train their stability. He has yet to actually train his shoulders/traps/triceps more.

I know that myself only recently focused on fixing my nutrition. I have been training for about 5 years now and am fairly competitive in strength sports, qualifying for drug-free power-lifitng nationals in the 220 weight class and hitting an unofficial qualifying total for USA weightlifting National open at a backyard meet. After focusing on hitting my macros there is a literal night and day difference in not only by body composition (lower body fat%) But I feel much more capable when I am at the gym. This got me thinking if there was a way to create a algorithm for excellence in order to not waste time "choosing a warm paint color for my living room, while ignoring a 5 foot gash in the wall, and not understanding why people were still cold."

So I compiled the following pyramid of futility, similar to Maslow's hierarchy of needs but in regards to actually competent troubleshooting. It's shown below.


Figure 1: Pyramid of Futility Strength Sports Edition
The Top of this pyramid is things that are ignorable/unimportant

______

Carrying Negative energy, Alignment of barbell to ley-lines 

__________

Chakra Alignment, managing adrenal fatigue

_____________

Classical conditioning of working loads via music, circadian rhythm disruption, Micronutrient consumption

________________

Electrolytes, Dynamic/static training, mental training state analysis

___________________

Periodization/long-term planned fatigue management, Usage of Bands/Chains

______________________

Preworkout, Mobility/Prehab + Rehab

_________________________

Good/efficient form, assistance work

____________________________

General Programming in order to reach a goal 

_______________________________

Macro-nutrient ratios, Getting enough sleep in

__________________________________

Getting enough calories in, Consistent training

_____________________________________

Correctly doing a lift, Efficient usage of gym time

________________________________________

Consistently getting to the gym, Being injury free, Attempting to get strong

___________________________________________

When a lifter is having issues in training they need only look at the pyramid and check off things that they are doing right and then go up until they find something they need to fix. There is no reason for you to add chains to your overhead squat if you haven't slept in 3 days. I think access of the internet alongside sensationalized articles titled "top ten reasons you're not benching 315" written by a fitness blogger paraphrasing things another blogger paraphrased from someone else's blog. I feel the "extra ten pounds to your bench" dead horse is just too fun to beat. Honestly, I feel that the more ignorant a lifter is the easier they can get stronger. I know that from coaching this is entirely true, the more that someone reads online the more they fill their head with grandiose ideas. Though I realize this can go both ways as I saw collegiate athletes doing occlusion training as their coach felt this was the best way for them to get faster on the field. In an ideal world, we bomb bodybuilding.com HQ and in it's place host a single web page that reads "JUST LIFT THE WEIGHT".