Let me make it easy on myself, oh Argent Feline.

I'll give the pools and the die rolls for the players as best I remember them. Some matches may be off slightly.

I, however, will be using a few pages of truly random numbers from Random.org, arranged in rows of 10 numerals; when I need an NPC roll I'll just use that many from the next row down and record those. So in my case, I can present you with exact numbers, but tracking the rolls of all 5 players die by die is Not Happening.

Groovy?

Quote from: Christmas ApeLet me make it easy on myself, oh Argent Feline.

I'll give the pools and the die rolls for the players as best I remember them. Some matches may be off slightly.

I, however, will be using a few pages of truly random numbers from Random.org, arranged in rows of 10 numerals; when I need an NPC roll I'll just use that many from the next row down and record those. So in my case, I can present you with exact numbers, but tracking the rolls of all 5 players die by die is Not Happening.

Groovy?

Fair enough, I was just wondering about the method for testing purposes. Have fun

I´d take Thematic Games out of that. I have nothing against them, Thematic play can surely be fun, healthy and mind provoking. Not neccessarily for me, but that´s because I´m an armchair general, who gives fuck about exploration of individual motivations.

Thematic Gaming is definitely a decent hobby, and it is not damaging the rest of the hobby per se, or by design.

Just look at Puppetland: Did it start bile, hate and mockery? No, of course not.

Most games, I have no issues with.

But with some designers, and nearly all forger-fanboi-posters on forae or the diaspora blogs. Luckily,  most of them have fell silent.

But now and then, the  IPR-guerilla marketing venom  is injected, and I, the ugly anti-body, have to make you cough or puke.

Never forget: Bacteria don´t make you cough. It´s your immune system that does.

We have been vaccinated, because we see the viral idea, and reject it early and hard, so it can´t multiply.

Again:

WotC does the best playtesting that exists in the RPG market. Everything else is slander for sinister purposes.

If you can admit they dropped the ball utterly on Truenaming, sure.

Alternately, if you don't have it and haven't seen it, that's cool too.

Quote from: SettembriniNow, bullying for public space is okay on the marketplace of ideas. But lying and distorting truth isn´t.

What universe do you live in?

QuoteIf you can admit they dropped the ball utterly on Truenaming, sure.

I don´t have the book, but our Truenamer had to give up after some levels because he was totally wimpy. So my experience indicates a serious underpowering of Truenamers.

Quote from: SettembriniNow, bullying for public space is okay on the marketplace of ideas. But lying and distorting truth isn´t.

Quote from: Levi KornelsenWhat universe do you live in?

Well, I happen to agree with Settembrini on this, too.

"Bullying" is completely subjective, and basicly amounts to someone weak crying foul when the other person has an overwhelming argument. We obviously aren't talking about physical bullying here. Nobody's getting stuffed into a locker or threatened. We're also saying it is a completely different subject than using dishonesty and distortion.

So yes. "Bullying" if we can call it that, and like I said-  based entirely on a subjective interpretation of the "victim" being verbally and intellectually outmatched--  is completely fair game in the marketplace of ideas.  The whole fucking point of a marketplace of ideas is that some ideas suck and need to be discredited. I can accept that my ideas might be wrong, but you'll have to prove it to me. I accept all challengers.  

Lying isn't part of the equation. Dishonesty- spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt..then turning around and trying to stealth market your stuff by exaggerating it's health and beneficial qualities.. is not engaging with the marketplace of ideas at all. It is simply using the veneer of discourse to manipulate the market.

Finally, there is a monetary aspect to why the use of dishonesty in the service of marketing is wrong. These aren't just ideas we are talking about, but ideas that are being promoted to sell actual things. Money is being taken, so there is a whole set of ethics here.

Now a product is a product. It should be sellable or not-sellable on it's own merits, right? And caveat emptor and all that. People have a right to sell their stuff. I agree. I have no problem with that.

But when outright dishonesty is used to sell things (and to downgrade and negate the "competition") people find themselves in the position of enriching themselves through dishonesty. An example is saying a given game has psychologically beneficial properties ("this game will help people overcome codependent relationships!") while at the same time spreading fear, uncertainty and doubt about the competition ("but if you play the wrong game, you might become brain damaged..")

The fact that we're just talking games makes this pretty screwed up, doesn't it?

And if you haven't seen those exact examples, I can show them to you.

Anyhow.

That's .. well. That's fucked up. That's something that should be challenged.

Are you saying we shouldn't have the right to challenge it?

Well Levi, I live in: Reality.

And reality is a place where people "cuten up their Avatar" to evoke sympathy for their agenda.

And a place where lies are dangerous.

Quote from: Christmas ApeIf you can admit they dropped the ball utterly on Truenaming, sure.

Alternately, if you don't have it and haven't seen it, that's cool too.

Geez, if that's all you want.

Truenamers seem screwed up to me as well, other than (possibly?) as an experiment.

But Binders rule.

Quote from: SettembriniI don´t have the book, but our Truenamer had to give up after some levels because he was totally wimpy. So my experience indicates a serious underpowering of Truenamers.

Absolutely their problem, so far as I've seen. Who the hell creates a D&D class around abilities that don't scale with level

Quote from: Abyssal MawBut Binders rule.

No argument here.

Quote from: SettembriniAnd reality is a place where people "cuten up their Avatar" to evoke sympathy for their agenda.

You're bashing on the turtle now?  I like the turtle.  I don't think I'm alone.

Anyway, I think this whole "I fight dirty because they fight dirty" thing is childish, in the literal sense.  It is an attitude that you should have grown out of long, long ago.

Simple, simple lesson:  "Young man, the fact that your brother hit you does not mean that it is alright for you to hit him back.  Both of you are wrong for hitting each other."

Now, why don't we (as a society) want to go with the far simpler, more readily understood moral code of "Eye for an eye"?  Well, apart from the whole mass-blindness thing, let's think for a moment about how it encourages you to perceive another person.

Let's say that a young child wants to hit his brother, because he's angry and frustrated, and his brother isn't sharing the lego blocks.  But, this young man knows that it's not alright to hit.  So he looks for a loophole.  Aha!  If he is hit first then he is the injured party, and it's alright to hit ... just like he wants to!  NOW, how does he manage to get hit first?  Easy ... just be on the lookout for normal interactions (like reaching for a lego block) where people bump into each other, and choose to interpret that as an attack.

An attitude that retaliation is okay makes people prime themselves to see attacks in everything.  It's the kind of self-deception that can lead a person to believe that a picture of a cute little turtle is an attack upon them.

Quote from: SettembriniThe Truth is:

Others have divided gamers into "childish and under the influence of big business brainwash, but sane", "real adult-artists" & "emotional, braindamaged cripples", and sell product with that idea.

The truth is that you are trying to encourage gamers into believing that there is a war going on when the reality is that a small group of gamers/designers who have no influence on the majority of rpg design are trying to peddle their wares.

QuoteTrue is also, that WotC does the most, best and deepest playtesting of all RPG companies that exist.

Yes. I think this is the case.

QuoteTruth:

Forgers try to push the idea of the nuked applecart, that only individuals can deliver quality. IPR, IPR, IPR. That´s what this is about.

Well I happen to believe that this may be the case. Most of the games I like are produced by individuals or at least teams. I mean IHW is pretty great IMO and if I'm not mistaken Clash is the main guy behind it. I don't think the Forge would agree with me, but who cares. I off course don't think that this is the only way to go about designing games.

QuoteAlso truth:

Andy K belongs to that group, and spreads his propaganda here. Now, bullying for public space is okay on the marketplace of ideas. But lying and distorting truth isn´t.

Sett your whole war is based on deception. Don't go lecturing folks on lies and distortion.

QuoteThat´s why this is about truth, my dear fellow gamer.

Your version of it.

QuoteAnd as before, you can think about me what you want, as long as you think equally bad about the other side.

I think badly of any SWINE who spouts the kind of bullshit you do.

QuoteIf all your defense is: "But Set, all the ugly things you attribute them with, you do them, too!"
Then, albeit it does not justice to me, the important part of the message has come through: The uglyness that is the IPR-movements modus operandi.

Nope my defense is that at the end of the day, honest gamers who love rpgs don't buy the shit you , me or anyone else is peddling. They enjoy their games and leave all this internet bullshit, to folks who have to much time on their hands.

Regards,
David R

I´ll roll with it: Let´s say, I´m childish
[the first line of defense  Forgers take, it´s getting lame. Besides being condescending and patronizing].

So, what does this change the fact that Andy K was injecting his poison in the debate.
How are the actual facts changed by me being allegedly childish?

I tell you what:
Go fuck yourself with the judgement of my person. You can think of me what you want.

What I see is Andy´s poison.
And nothing you say has anything to do with his venom-injection.
Nothing I do will take that guilt away from him. I´m not responsible for him.

By doing this [not talking about the Elephant in the room], you tacitly acknowledge that Andy was guerilla marketing.

Again, David, whatever you think about me doesn´t matter. A cough might give you a sore throat.

But it´sthe bacteria that must get out.

With the bacteria out, the coughing stops.

EDIT:

It´s about truth. And the truth is: WotC only lets professional  or freelancing designers design D&D texts, that have a huge amount of insight and play experience.

It´s also about politics.

You mess these up continuosly. I can tell the truth AND have a bias. Andy has a bias AND is telling a lie.

You might hate the bias, but you must bow to the truth.

Quote from: SettembriniI´ll roll with it: Let´s say, I´m childish

But I don't think that you, as a person, are childish.  I think this line of argument that you're pursuing is.

I assume that you're a mature, sensible individual.  If you find yourself being drawn into childish behavior ... or worse, into trying to justify what you know is childish behavior, I expect you'd want to correct that.  Yes?

Now, frankly, I think that Andy's been drawn into some pretty childish behavior in this thread too.  If he comes out and says that he's hugely proud of the way he handled himself in this (the way you have) then maybe I'll have to have words with him too.  But for the most part, when I see people acting like doinks I assume that given a day or two to think about their actions they'll regret them.  I do the same damn thing:  I spout off about something, and then later I think "Aw man, I shouldn't have written that."