Quote from: Charlie Sheen;641726Weren't you putting me on ignore? And yet you continue to talk about my points and now respond to them directly.

I use the ignore list rather differently than most people do, it marks the poster as someone who generally isn't worth responding. I still read everyone's posts to see if they do have to say something worth comment on (or others in reply to them say something worth commenting on).

It's rare, and in this case 'offensive bias' is such an odd idea that it's worth comment on.

Quote from: Charlie Sheen;641726Anyways, I already know how a game with high defenses for everyone would work because I designed and run it.

Then you should know that claiming "all" RPGs was wrong. Why do it then?

Quote from: Charlie Sheen;641726But when 99.9% of people start talking about defenders, they mean some guy that goes out and "tanks" enemies for their less defended fellows. And when asked why, or how, there is never any answer.

I only use the term 'tanking' for MMORPGs with their aggro mechanics. Never for PnP Games. I'm that .1%.

Quote from: Charlie Sheen;641726No it doesn't. Attempting to limit who is adjacent to you and who can/will attack you are two different things. Between reach attacks, ranged attacks, and spells there is no practical limit to the number of units that can engage a single unit... and they can pick just about any unit they want.

Why do you assume this applies to all games? It doesn't you know.

Quote from: gleichman;641729Then you should know that claiming "all" RPGs was wrong. Why do it then?

Here is what I actually said:

"My point was that worrying about the defender probably isn't going to work. Mostly because defense can't work unless everyone has it, as one person with high defense just says attack someone else... especially if he cannot attack effectively in turn.

If he does have high offense and defense, first I question what the rest of the party is doing, and second if he takes every attack from everything he's gonna die anyways."

Do you understand now?

QuoteWhy do you assume this applies to all games? It doesn't you know.

So there are games with no spears, polearms, bows, javelins, magic, etc?

Well I suppose they are, but those games must suck pretty horribly. Even turn based strategy games, who are notoriously melee biased still have units that use bows/crossbows/guns/spears/spells, as well as special attacks with actual range. Even if it is literally throwing a rock at their head.

Quote from: Charlie Sheen;641730Do you understand now?

I understand the first time, I don't happen to agree.

Quote from: Charlie Sheen;641730So there are games with no spears, polearms, bows, javelins, magic, etc?

There are games where they don't work like they do in D&D.

Quote from: The Traveller;641694I see you've added imaginary assertions to your declamatory skills, have a quick look at the threads I've started in my profile. Sorry that getting annoyed about paedophiles strikes you as 'venomous', though.

My declamatory skills are greatm thanks for asking, I make a living with them. Now, I'm not imagining things: when I say that you get venomous I'm not referring to you getting upset about the pedophiliac shit in Maid or other stupid ass fringe games which I find despicable. I am referring to your forum warrior attitude when it comes to topics you dislike based only in tastes, and not in objective facts like pedophiles being sick people. So no, nice attempt to bullshit, but no cigar.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;641712I think he just has a posting style that tends to piss people off. It isn't his opinions themselves that generate the reactions (lots of posters here think other poster's favorite RPGs or playstyles are shit). It's the way he communicates, the way he insults people and his general disposition that trigger the hostile responses. Sure people probably should just ignore him. I think part of the reason that is hard for some is because underneath all the orneriness and inflexibility, he has some interesting things to say. Also he does take personal digs at people and those are hard to ignore (whether its online or real life). I do think he brings the reactions on himself and there really shouldn't be much of a surprise about it.

I understand where you come from, and I definitely see how his opinions may be seen as insulting, and I concur that they may be insulting in fact. What I think is that, given that most people are so ready to fling insults to other people based on their gaming styles, they should have a thicker skin when it comes to see their own styles being disregarded as idiotic.

What I always found so baffling about this place is how everyone and his fucking dog are ready to insult whoever happens to disagree with their opinions on how to play an elf, while at the same time feeling so butthurt when someone says them they're doing it wrong.

I think some of gleichman's opinions are definitely interesting, despite if I agree with them or not. And if he finds my gaming style inferior or undesirable, more power to him.

Quote from: Imperator;641744I understand where you come from, and I definitely see how his opinions may be seen as insulting, and I concur that they may be insulting in fact. What I think is that, given that most people are so ready to fling insults to other people based on their gaming styles, they should have a thicker skin when it comes to see their own styles being disregarded as idiotic.

What I always found so baffling about this place is how everyone and his fucking dog are ready to insult whoever happens to disagree with their opinions on how to play an elf, while at the same time feeling so butthurt when someone says them they're doing it wrong.

I agree people ought to have thicker skin about their style being insulted or people not agreeing with it. I also think the insults here, though an outgrowth of a valid free speech policy, don't do the forum any favors. I usually try to keep my tone pretty civil unless something s particularly egregious and warrants a strong reaction.

I the case of Gleichman, I think he tends to get a bit personal is all (and to be fair many posters have gotten too personal with him). For me, I am totally fine with a poster saying my gaming style sucks or whatever. But if you accuse me of carefully constructing a persona to seem unrealistically even tempered or reasonable, I am going to be insulted by that. Normally I don't respond. But the fact that he continues to level this accusation against me does make me pay more attention to his posts and respond less charitably to them than I otherwise would. And my point is he is largley just reaping what he sows. I often disagreed with Gleichman, but I have always tried to treat him like a human being and not engage in some of the real nasty attacks some others here direct at him.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;641745For me, I am totally fine with a poster saying my gaming style sucks or whatever. But if you accuse me of carefully constructing a persona to seem unrealistically even tempered or reasonable, I am going to be insulted by that.

Interesting. And yet...

...given that you admit that I often have cause, being unrealistically even tempered or reasonable is exactly what I feel you are asking me to be. But you don't think I should object?

Quote from: gleichman;641746Interesting. And yet...

...given that you admit that I often have cause, being unrealistically even tempered or reasonable is exactly what I feel you are asking me to be. But you don't think I should object?

If someone insults you and you insult them back, that is just being human. I dont fault you for that, though I think ideally we dont repsond to insults that way and rise above them. Where I think you go overboard is taking that out on everyone else or against folks who simply disagree with you or engage in some light verbal sparring (but nothing on the level of some of the crueler insults I have seen directed your way). So I am inclined to sympathize with you. But your insults can be equally cruel. Particularly in how they are delivered (and here I am not speaking of your insults to me, which I think are unwarranted, but not especially cruel---they just get under my skin a bit). And I generally find assaults on peoples' intelligence (whether its calling someone a slur for aspergers or just calling them an idiot for not grasping a particular argument or set of rules) or overt displays of arrogance/intellectual snobbery off putting. A part of gaming culture that I think is one of our worst features (and one of the things that makes it harder to recruit new blood).

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;641748Where I think you go overboard is taking that out on everyone else or against folks who simply disagree with you or engage in some light verbal sparring

You don't pay much attention to me do you? Will you pay great attention to the battles, no so much otherwise.

John Morrow and I disgree on a number of areas (he plays FUDGE, a stupid game if there ever was one). Bloody Stupid Johnson has a whole list of odd ideas IMO, Imperator notes that I don't like his games, Zachary is OSR and you know what I think of that. Beejazz used to be on ignore list of all things but he made an change in tone over the last few weeks and look at how I respond to him now.

These are all people I disagree with. And they are all people I treat with respect because they deserve it.

I wonder what the differences might be... perhaps they are "disagreeing with me or engaging in some light verbal sparring" and others are doing something significantly worse.

Quote from: gleichman;641751You don't pay much attention to me do you? Will you pay great attention to the battles, no so much otherwise.

John Morrow and I disgree on a number of areas (he plays FUDGE, a stupid game if there ever was one). Bloody Stupid Johnson has a whole list of odd ideas IMO, Imperator notes that I don't like his games, Zachary is OSR and you know what I think of that. Beejazz used to be on ignore list of all things but he made an change in tone over the last few weeks and look at how I respond to him now.

These are all people I disagree with. And they are all people I treat with respect because they deserve it.

I wonder what the differences might be... perhaps they are "disagreeing with me or engaging in some light verbal sparring" and others are doing something significantly worse.

Fair enough. You can do what you want. But I think if you rose above some of that, baited less or maybe buried the hatchet on previous exchanges, your ideas would get more traction.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;641756Fair enough. You can do what you want. But I think if you rose above some of that, baited less or maybe buried the hatchet on previous exchanges, your ideas would get more traction.

Pick a person and I'll give it a try with them, if you can get them to apologize for past insults tossed my way. I'll even apologize for my own pass behavior in return.

You won't get any takers (except yourself perhaps).

Quote from: gleichman;641757Pick a person and I'll give it a try with them, if you can get them to apologize for past insults tossed my way. I'll even apologize for my own pass behavior in return.

You won't get any takers (except yourself perhaps).

That is up to others if they want to take the offer. Happy to start with myself though. I apologize  for any of my posts that attacked you or insulted you personally rather than dealt with the substance of what you had to say. And if you have any specific posts in mind, happy to take a look at them and offer an apology if I feel it is warranted.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;641758That is up to others if they want to take the offer. Happy to start with myself though. I apologize  for any of my posts that attacked you or insulted you personally rather than dealt with the substance of what you had to say. And if you have any specific posts in mind, happy to take a look at them and offer an apology if I feel it is warranted.

Very well, we'll give it a try.

I accept.

I've already said that my questioning of your intent behind your 'fair and balanced' (that's a joke reference btw) posting was unfair and wrong. I state that again and offer my own apology for that and any past insults I may have tossed your way.

BTW: This whole idea is a limited time offer and doesn't apply the Pundit (who after all isn't a real person).

2nd BTW: anyone else wishing to take this offer may wish to do so by PM, I leave that to them but please copy BedrockBrendan on it.

3rd BTW: None of this alters my opinions and will still those games and styles I think are worth of it. This affects only my tone to the person.

Group hug? :cheerleader:

Quote from: gleichman;640994Does the game have an escalating Hit Point Mechanic? Examples: All D&D and its copies, Dark Heresy

This is not bad game design. It directly serves a purpose that a probabilistic system (such as what Dave Arneson favored) simply does not accomplish.

If you can offer an alternative means that is in some sense better, then right on. If you claim that the end in itself is "badwrongfun," then we can be grateful that you have chosen to express your obnoxious species of foolishness in a field that harms nobody!

Escalating HP randomly (as in D&D, C&S, etc.) serves an interest in the sheer vagaries of chance that many (probably most) FRPers today do not share. It was well suited to the game form for which it was designed, though.

Bad game design is copying approaches heedless of whether they actually do what one is trying to accomplish.

QuoteDoes the game have dice pools, non-standard methods of reading die rolls, or doe sit swap out die types? Examples: All WoD games, Shadowrun, All versions of Deadlands

I personally find the amount of emphasis on such novelties in some quarters tiresome. People who imagine that coming up with yet another variation on Yahtzee is JOB ONE in RPG design are misguided in my view.

That said, it can only be arbitrary special pleading to single out dice pools or such as "illegitimate" mechanical interest, whilst admitting other elaborations simply because they happen to suit one's taste (which one inevitably must, unless one's ideal RPG is distinguishable in essence from the minimalism of Risus or The Pool only by using something other than dice pools).

QuoteDoes the game fail Simulation of Process such as To-Hit rolls which don't actually hit things or damage rolls that don't really cause damage? Examples: All versions of D&D, Dark Heresy

I see that your standard of 'goodness' is indeed as navel-gazing as I had feared. Moreover, your contrived problem in this case might be solved by simple semantic substitution of, e.g., "attack roll."

Beyond that particular silliness, how much process to model depends on the interests of the players.

I am curious how you would "simulate the process" of marksmanship, for example, or of picking a lock? Must we resort to the kind of techniques often employed in LARP and video games?

QuoteDoes the game use Fate Point, Hero Points, Bennys and the like to balance an otherwise unbalanced system? Examples: Shadowrun, Dark Heresy, Deadlands

'Unbalanced' in what sense? What do you mean by 'balance', and do you imagine that there is only one kind (or only one 'proper' kind)?

As with excalating HP, what is at hand is a straightforward solution to a problem. Obviously, one will have little use for a solution to something one happens not to regard as a problem in the first place.

What is astounding is your seemingly comprehensive ignorance of game-design issues that have been amply documented over the past 40 years.

QuoteIs it diceless? Examples: Amber, Theatrix

This is a pointlessly silly criterion.

QuoteDoes it include mechanics that control or limit role-playing choices? Examples: Call of Cthulhu, Pendragon

Those limited being, of course, choices to act in total disregard of the fact that humans are subject to passions. See the special pleading: here is a selected aspect of reality to the process-simulation of which you object!

QuoteDoes it fail to scale for the entire human (normal and heroic) range and at least near human superheroic? Examples: Call of Cthulhu, Dark Heresy

I do not see that CoC so fails. More fundamentally, WHY ought it to be incumbent on a game about, say, the Arizona Territory in the 19th century to account for comic-book figures?

QuoteDoes it include mechanics granting a player control over elements besides the decisions of his character? Examples: Hong Kong Action Theater

This is not to my taste, but neither is such a 'fundamentalist' definition of RPG. Moreover, not being acquainted with HKAT, and considering that I disagree with such a characterization of Joss in Dangerous Journeys, I will await such opportunity as may present to see for myself how HKAT works.

QuoteDoes the game brag about 'getting out of the way' or being transparent? Examples: The Window, FUDGE

Wow. Besides being tripe, this mistakes *marketing* for game design. The billing might not be accurate in those cases (I reckon it's not for FUDGE), but is not lack of transparency your issue with non-process-simulating procedures? If it were accurate to say that a rules set in that (or some other way) got out of your way, would saying so be verboten?

QuoteDoes the system fail to support maps and minis? Example: HERO 6th Edition

Every single RPG must be a board game? You must be joking.

QuoteIs the Pace of Decision too low? Examples: D&D, HERO using the published builds, Dark Heresy

I have no acquaintance with this Dark Heresy to which you keep referring. I think the ORIGINAL D&D approach was spot on.

QuoteDoes the game rules reward non-genre behavior? Examples: D&D, Dark Heresy, Shadowrun... really nearly all of them.

'Genre' is in the eye of the beholder. I daresay you don't know squat about the influences on D&D -- or else you're going to insist that the mix is 'illegitimate', whereas your preferred sources of inspiration are the only proper ones.

QuoteDoes the game focus on trivialities unimportant to the genre it's suppose to model. Examples: OSR Style D&D

Are you really so incredibly ignorant?

QuoteIs the game system uninteresting to play outside the framing of a role-playing session? Examples: Just about everything

WTF??? In what other context must it be "interesting to play?"

Quote from: Imperator;641744My declamatory skills are greatm thanks for asking, I make a living with them. Now, I'm not imagining things: when I say that you get venomous I'm not referring to you getting upset about the pedophiliac shit in Maid or other stupid ass fringe games which I find despicable. I am referring to your forum warrior attitude when it comes to topics you dislike based only in tastes, and not in objective facts like pedophiles being sick people. So no, nice attempt to bullshit, but no cigar.

Yes I'd imagine working in HR, people like job applicants have to sit there and listen to you regardless. Sadly you aren't in your office now. You appear to be dividing the world into two parts - your part, where real gamers game from on high, and the other part, where petty internet bickering wears down the keyboards of the hoi polloi, and never the twain shall meet.

Naturally of course the world is far from that simple, and people are quite capable of holding discussions, often with vim and vigour, on subjects you find petty, while simultaneously being able to enjoy gaming just like a real gamer and have productive conversations on that basis.

Getting pulled up by both the real and substantive contributions I do make to gaming discussions as well as the recent unpleasantness with maid is severely jarring to your two tone worldview, and so you must needs respond with a good dollop of that venom you attribute to my posts; it's either that or change your worldview and we both know that's not going to happen.

Lest we forget, this delightful segue is a result of you telling people not to take things too seriously, an impressive logical contortion.