Quote from: BWA;404778Maybe someone is! Somewhere. But as near as I can tell, no one in this thread, or any AP I've read about this game, has claimed that playing this game is "hip", or that they are being "edgy" by doing so. No one in this thread, or any AP I've read about this game, has claimed that they are deserving of "accolades" for playing it.*

I know this is the internet, and inventing something purely in order to enjoy the sensation of outrage that it brings, is the thing. We all enjoy that. But please be aware that some of you are objecting to the mere *existence* of a unique, interesting game because of things that YOU MADE UP.

* And geez, even if they were, that wouldn't have anything to do with the game itself.

Be careful about saying that people made things up please.  Let's try not to get personal about it.  

For example, I think some people are reacting to the actual play post linked in the original article, which is here:

http://www.indie-rpgs.com/archive/index.php?topic=24603.0

The poster here, Clyde, does make claims about getting insight from his play of the game.  Though I suspect one issue is that the OP article by Chauncy DeVega quotes Clyde's statement starting with: "This experience has always made me not accept the 400 years of oppression argument."  From the positioning, one can easily interpret the "this experience" Clyde is talking about his game of Steal Away Jordan, when he is actually talking about his childhood.

Fuck it, Elliot's right. Moved.

Quote from: One Horse Town;404780Didn't you read Jason's post earlier about how he got an insight into the slave's condition through playing the game? Sounds like self-accolade to me.

Quote from: StormBringer;404781Factor in how the proponents keep pushing how 'cool' the game is, and how much they 'learned' from the 'experience of being a slave', and you have a potent concoction: public displays of pretension.

Someone said he got "insight" into a facet of history by playing this game. Someone else said the game was "cool". That is people commenting on a game that they liked, sharing their actual experiences with it.

These are straightforward comments. But you guys seem to be objecting to something else - to insulting allegations of superiority that you feel are hidden within these comments.

But - as near as I can tell - no one is saying those things. Seriously. Or, if anyone is, they are not posting in this thread or the blog posts that are informing it.

Quote from: StormBringer;404781Which, I am guess, you are already aware of; you likely wouldn't present a challenge for actual quotes if you weren't.

No challenge. I don't want to do that thing where we focus narrowly in "winning the thread" by minutely parsing one another's comments for points of attack.

I'm just saying that I think the things you're objecting to aren't actually there, and maybe you're reading something into things that isn't warranted.

Or, if you really are seeing these kinds of remarks posted somewhere, or have heard them, share them if you want to, and then I'll see exactly what it is that you're objecting to. (That's not a challenge - it's easy to respond to one conversation online and have other ones inform your thinking. I do it all the time.)

Quote from: jhkim;404787Be careful about saying that people made things up please.  Let's try not to get personal about it.  

Good point, and thank you! I was being needlessly combative, and I'm not a regular poster here. My apologies.

Quote from: BWA;404789Someone said he got "insight" into a facet of history by playing this game. Someone else said the game was "cool". That is people commenting on a game that they liked, sharing their actual experiences with it.

These are straightforward comments. But you guys seem to be objecting to something else - to insulting allegations of superiority that you feel are hidden within these comments.

But - as near as I can tell - no one is saying those things. Seriously. Or, if anyone is, they are not posting in this thread or the blog posts that are informing it.

It's actually wrapped up fairly neatly in the one post:

Quote from: Jason Morningstar;404581It doesn't. What it does do pretty well  is establish the parameters of oppression and provide consequences for  pushing those boundaries.

Four or five people sitting around a table with Cheetos and Mt Dew cannot possibly in any way 'establish parameters of oppression' nor 'provide consequences for pushing boundaries' in any realistic sense.  Unless one of them was restrained in some manner, and the rest of them had cattle prods, baseball bats, and other devices for inflicting pain.  Perhaps a demonstrated ability to have their family or other loved ones tortured and killed with a phone call.  But it is pretty much impossible for a slim game book and a group of people in the 21st century sitting around a table in comfortable chairs to accomplish anything like the above.  Hence, pretentious.

QuoteSo if you're playing a slave (which isn't  required), every choice you make is freighted with danger, sometimes  even choices that have nothing to do with resistance.

Freighted with danger?  Like actually being killed or having your wife or daughter raped?  Getting beaten on a daily basis, burned, mutilated, and any number of other inhumanities?  That kind of danger?

QuoteSteal Away Jordan does  a lot of cool things to reinforce the slavery dynamic. Players  collectively have an agenda that they keep secret from the GM, for  example.

I will refer to the above paragraph on 'freighted with danger'.  And in what way does keeping secrets from the GM even remotely re-inforce this?  It is SOP in most of my games.  The players don't feel like slaves because of it.

 

QuoteThere's a amazingly simple mechanic called the skull die, which  anyone can roll at any time to get a little extra mojo. The odds in  conflicts invariably make it tempting, but if you roll it, there's a one  in six change your character will die. Arbitrary, brutal, stupid death, no saving throw.

In other words, better than those stupid fantasy games.

Hence, loads of pretentiousness, with a liberal sprinkling of 'borderline offensive trivializing'

QuoteGood point, and thank you! I was being needlessly combative, and I'm not a regular poster here. My apologies.

Don't let that stop you.  Despite the sometimes contradictory tone, merit is much more valued around here than seniority.

For fucks sake can we stop moving threads about indie games into this forum. It's ridiculous, counter productive and it's the sort of stupid shit i'd expect from the twats that run rpg.net.

StormBringer, I still think you're seeing something that isn't there. Although probably further argument is futile.

So, someone says all this stuff about Steal Away Jordan. It's awesome, it's enlightening, the dice mechanics are great, yadda yadda yadda.

Then you come along, and you read these comments.

Two things:

1. You haven't played or read the game. So your opinion is not really about the game at all, right?. It's about some stuff you read online that some dude said. That's what I think we're talking about at this point.

2. Maybe those things aren't in the game. Maybe that internet dude is totally wrong on all counts. Or, since these things are subjective, maybe the game is fun and enlightening to him, but wouldn't be to you. Who knows?

But whatever the answer ... where does "pretension" come into it?

For THAT to be the case, you have to believe that person commenting (Jason M in this case, but it could be anyone) didn't really experience that stuff, and is making it all up in order to impress you.

Does that seem logical?

Quote from: BWA;404910StormBringer,
....blah, blah..........yadda, yadda, yadda...............

1. You haven't played or read the game. So your opinion is not really about the game at all, right?. It's about some stuff you read online that some dude said. That's what I think we're talking about at this point.

Why the hell would Stormbringer WANT to play that game? You have a choice between playing a possibly heroic adventurer or playing a pretentious designed scenario thing where you are supposed to be an oppressed slave to learn that slavery was bad?.

Its a bullshit game that starts from a bullshit assumption.

Games like that are designed by people that assume lessons must be taught and the rest of us are somehow stupiod and won't 'get it' unless we play their psycho-drama piece of crap mind fuck experiment.
They are the same sort of people that beg for more government regulatiuon so us peons will eat the right foods and possibly be punished because we ordered french fried instead of apples for lunch.

Fuck that shit.

We don't psycho-drama bullshit exercises that pretend to be role playing games.

- Ed C.

Quote from: StormBringer;404781Yes, they are.  By going public with the play reports and such, they are inviting comment.  Typically, people don't do that seeking negative comments.  Factor in how the proponents keep pushing how 'cool' the game is, and how much they 'learned' from the 'experience of being a slave', and you have a potent concoction: public displays of pretension.  The very foundational principle is that they are so post-modern, they alone are capable of delivering and consuming this kind of 'edgy' content without complaint, while the rest of the 'prudes' are out there wallowing in their seriously un-hip morality.

I assume you will now ask for specific quotes.  There aren't any, naturally, but that is because the rest of us already know the rhetoric, and how it is couched in posts that sound reasonable on the surface.  Which, I am guess, you are already aware of; you likely wouldn't present a challenge for actual quotes if you weren't.

Perhaps we can agree on principles, and agree to disagree on whether the people or game in question fit.  So my thoughts:

1) No one should think they're better than other gamers for playing a particular game - regardless of how tactically deep, or profoundly dramatic, or whatever.  It's the same as being pretentious over what books you read or what movies you watch - it's not a real-world accomplishment.  

2) No one playing a soldier in an RPG should think they know what being a soldier really feels like, and no one playing a slave in an RPG should think they know what being a slave really feels like.  

3) Nevertheless, you can learn things from playing games, watching movies, or reading books.  Many wargames will help you learn a little tactics; many historical RPGs will help you learn a little history.  

So, if someone plays a Spartacus RPG and says they learned something about Roman history, I think that is a reasonable statement.  Similarly, if someone plays Steal Away Jordan and says that they learned something about slavery, that is also a reasonable statement - presuming that it does not imply #1.  

You may judge that people who play Steal Away Jordan are necessarily engaging in #1 and #2 - and I don't think I agree, but we could at least agree that these are bad.  

Quote from: SgtSpaceWizard;404739The something else you are missing, is that we are talking about an RPG. Not a textbook. Not a movie. The medium makes a big difference. I think slavery trading cards would be crass and exploitative too. The thing is, most people play games to have fun. No one goes bowling to learn about physics. Making as "unfun" a topic as slavery in colonial America into something "fun" doesn't sit well with most people. The idea of a bunch of white guys sitting around in metaphorical blackface and claiming to have an educational experience from it sounds incredibley pretentious, if not entirely offensive.

So here is the Harriet Tubman trading card from the Real American Heroes Collectible Set.  I don't find the trading card offensive at all.  It's celebrating the heroism of people like Tubman who struggled against an evil system.

Quote from: jhkim;404933Perhaps we can agree on principles, and agree to disagree on whether the people or game in question fit.  So my thoughts:

1) No one should think they're better than other gamers for playing a particular game - regardless of how tactically deep, or profoundly dramatic, or whatever.  It's the same as being pretentious over what books you read or what movies you watch - it's not a real-world accomplishment.  

2) No one playing a soldier in an RPG should think they know what being a soldier really feels like, and no one playing a slave in an RPG should think they know what being a slave really feels like.  

3) Nevertheless, you can learn things from playing games, watching movies, or reading books.  Many wargames will help you learn a little tactics; many historical RPGs will help you learn a little history.

I actually agree with all three of these points.  I certainly don't fault the designer for making the game.  Hell, I would love to design a game so more power to her for actually doing it.  The only issue for me is that I don't understand who would buy this game and/or play it more than once.  Role playing a slave doesn't rank really high in my book as "fun" and I doubt it does with too many other people.  This seems to be more of a "lesson plan" for educating people that slavery was bad.  That is fine, but is any fucktard who doesn't think slavery was bad really going to play this game anyway.  I can't see this game getting a lot of play on Saturday nights at the old KKK lodge.

So to your points, I don't look down on anyone playing this game to have fun, I just question whether anyone really does have fun playing it or just pretends they learned something to fake enlightenment.  And I suppose there is no way to actually know that.

Oh, and I particularly like your point #2.  I was in a conference in a Judge's chamber when one of the other attorneys present mentioned how realistic and cool he thought "Call of Duty" was and then shared his "combat" anecdotes.  The Judge, a very even-tempered and decorated Vietnam combat vet about handed him his ass for that statement.  No video game or rpg can ever really substitute for the real experience after all.

Quote from: Ghost Whistler;404903For fucks sake can we stop moving threads about indie games into this forum. It's ridiculous, counter productive and it's the sort of stupid shit i'd expect from the twats that run rpg.net.

If I may give you the advice, use the New Posts button. This way, the threads will appear no matter which forum they are.

Also, an email subscription can solve this.

Quote from: Koltar;404915Games like that are designed by people that assume lessons must be taught and the rest of us are somehow stupiod and won't 'get it' unless we play their psycho-drama piece of crap mind fuck experiment.
They are the same sort of people that beg for more government regulatiuon so us peons will eat the right foods and possibly be punished because we ordered french fried instead of apples for lunch.

I love it when people tries to psychoanalize other persons they don't know, through their works that they haven't read. It's one of our assigments at college "Annalyze a personality through third hand reports on Internet.

Also, I understand that exposing yourself to new experiences is unwholesome and probably un-American to you, Ed, but seriously, your analysis is way off. No one is saying that you should play the game to be a better person or whatnot, so your tirade about government regulations makes no sense. No one has said or implied that this or other games should be mandatory. The only thing that has been said is that someone played it and enjoyed it.

I find the premise of the game boring, uninteresting and a bit silly, so I won't play it. Said that, I like that there is such variety and that people finds games that they like.

Your position could be perfectly applied to you when you talk about GURPS, which is another kind of game I don't give a shit about. If I behaved like you, I should be yelling at yoyu that you are a pretentious fucktard for the very same reasons you cite, and because accountability and number crunching is an unheroic as it gets. Well, to be honest, to be like you I should be critizicing GURPS without having more than third hand accounts of the game.

But I don't do so because it is a silly thing to do.

QuoteWe don't psycho-drama bullshit exercises that pretend to be role playing games.

You don't do them, and it is fine. I don't because I do enough of that at my practice. But some people do that, they enjoy it, and that doesn't impact your gaming a bit.

Also, I fully endorse jhkim's post below:

Quote from: jhkim;404933Perhaps we can agree on principles, and agree to disagree on whether the people or game in question fit.  So my thoughts:

1) No one should think they're better than other gamers for playing a particular game - regardless of how tactically deep, or profoundly dramatic, or whatever.  It's the same as being pretentious over what books you read or what movies you watch - it's not a real-world accomplishment.  

2) No one playing a soldier in an RPG should think they know what being a soldier really feels like, and no one playing a slave in an RPG should think they know what being a slave really feels like.  

3) Nevertheless, you can learn things from playing games, watching movies, or reading books.  Many wargames will help you learn a little tactics; many historical RPGs will help you learn a little history.  

So, if someone plays a Spartacus RPG and says they learned something about Roman history, I think that is a reasonable statement.  Similarly, if someone plays Steal Away Jordan and says that they learned something about slavery, that is also a reasonable statement - presuming that it does not imply #1.  

You may judge that people who play Steal Away Jordan are necessarily engaging in #1 and #2 - and I don't think I agree, but we could at least agree that these are bad.  


So here is the Harriet Tubman trading card from the Real American Heroes Collectible Set.  I don't find the trading card offensive at all.  It's celebrating the heroism of people like Tubman who struggled against an evil system.

Quote from: StormBringer;404781By going public with the play reports and such, they are inviting comment.  Typically, people don't do that seeking negative comments.  Factor in how the proponents keep pushing how 'cool' the game is, and how much they 'learned' from the 'experience of being a slave', and you have a potent concoction: public displays of pretension.

By "proponents" I assume you mean "me" in this case. I've participated in this thread to present information (rather than hearsay) and answer questions (rather than engage in identity politics). I was asked to describe the experience of play, several times, and I did. If that constitutes advocacy, well, OK. Steal Away Jordan is a good game, I advocate that you try it. Pretense is obviously a subjective quality, but your bar is set pretty low and you are uncharitably presuming an agenda I don't share.

QuoteThe very foundational principle is that they are so post-modern, they alone are capable of delivering and consuming this kind of 'edgy' content without complaint, while the rest of the 'prudes' are out there wallowing in their seriously un-hip morality.

If this mysterious cabal includes me, your paranoia is demonstrably off base.

Quote from: jhkim;404933Perhaps we can agree on principles, and agree to disagree on whether the people or game in question fit.  So my thoughts:

1) No one should think they're better than other gamers for playing a particular game - regardless of how tactically deep, or profoundly dramatic, or whatever.  It's the same as being pretentious over what books you read or what movies you watch - it's not a real-world accomplishment.  

2) No one playing a soldier in an RPG should think they know what being a soldier really feels like, and no one playing a slave in an RPG should think they know what being a slave really feels like.  

3) Nevertheless, you can learn things from playing games, watching movies, or reading books.  Many wargames will help you learn a little tactics; many historical RPGs will help you learn a little history.  

So, if someone plays a Spartacus RPG and says they learned something about Roman history, I think that is a reasonable statement.  Similarly, if someone plays Steal Away Jordan and says that they learned something about slavery, that is also a reasonable statement - presuming that it does not imply #1.  

You may judge that people who play Steal Away Jordan are necessarily engaging in #1 and #2 - and I don't think I agree, but we could at least agree that these are bad.  


So here is the Harriet Tubman trading card from the Real American Heroes Collectible Set.  I don't find the trading card offensive at all.  It's celebrating the heroism of people like Tubman who struggled against an evil system.

I would agree that Steal Away Jordan might be able to teach a player about the history of slavery in America, but that's not the same as what was claimed by folks who have played it, including the player referenced in the article in the OP.

Quote from: Jason Morningstar;405033By "proponents" I assume you mean "me" in this case. I've participated in this thread to present information (rather than hearsay) and answer questions (rather than engage in identity politics). I was asked to describe the experience of play, several times, and I did. If that constitutes advocacy, well, OK. Steal Away Jordan is a good game, I advocate that you try it. Pretense is obviously a subjective quality, but your bar is set pretty low and you are uncharitably presuming an agenda I don't share.

Unfortunately, when I have asked you specific questions about the game, you have answered in only the sparsest and most vague way possible, urging me instead to talk to the designer. So, the information you have presented so far has not been very helpful in getting a view of this game that apparently is so wonderful despite how it appears on the surface. I remain willing to be convinced, but I also remain extremely sceptical. You have not actually described the experience of play, only your opinion of play, which really are not the same. How many dice do you roll, and when? What kinds of attributes are the characters created with? How are tasks and conflicts resolved? In what other ways besides having secrets of some kind kept from them are GMs "limited" in this game? What does the game say it's purpose is? If we're truly operating from assumptions that are not true, and our ignorance is causing us to form opinions about the game with no basis in the reality of it, then I would think ya'all would be happy to provide answers to these questions and more. I wait patiently for that to occur.

Quote from: BWA;4049101. You haven't played or read the game. So your opinion is not really about the game at all, right?. It's about some stuff you read online that some dude said. That's what I think we're talking about at this point.

I also haven't stabbed myself in the face with a red-hot icepick.  There are valid methods of gathering information and making assessments outside of 'direct experience'.  

For your point to be valid, everyone who talks about the game would have to be lying.  Or I would have to assume they are.  In either case, that means there is no possibility of accumulating valid data from any source other than myself.  I don't make that assumption.  I assume they are presenting their honest opinion.  It may be completely ill-formed and wholly incorrect, but a good-faith conversation isn't possible if I were to automatically assume everyone is presenting an opinion they don't actually hold (until proven otherwise, of course)

Quote2. Maybe those things aren't in the game. Maybe that internet dude is totally wrong on all counts. Or, since these things are subjective, maybe the game is fun and enlightening to him, but wouldn't be to you. Who knows?

See above.  A person can be completely wrong on all counts, whereupon it can be pointed out that their opinion was formed in error.  But that has to be demonstrated, not assumed.

And since everything is subjective to a certain extent, why discuss anything?  Why not just stay off the internet and claim that flat-earthers have their 'opinion' and leave it at that?  Why not let creationists into the classroom?  How about we go back and take a hard look at the 'humours' version of disease?

No, you can't just dismiss any argument that becomes uncomfortable or untenable with a wave of the 'subjective' wand.  Opinions are not sacrosanct.  They can be challenged, and in many cases, they should be challenged.

QuoteBut whatever the answer ... where does "pretension" come into it?

I showed that already.  We aren't going to start discussing the definition of 'pretention' nor are we going to start discussing every possible denotation of the word in relation to the quotes I have already provided.

QuoteFor THAT to be the case, you have to believe that person commenting (Jason M in this case, but it could be anyone) didn't really experience that stuff, and is making it all up in order to impress you.

But that is exactly what you are recommending I do several paragraphs up.

Quote from: jhkim;404933Perhaps we can agree on principles, and agree to disagree on whether the people or game in question fit.  So my thoughts:

1) No one should think they're better than other gamers for playing a particular game - regardless of how tactically deep, or profoundly dramatic, or whatever.  It's the same as being pretentious over what books you read or what movies you watch - it's not a real-world accomplishment.  

2) No one playing a soldier in an RPG should think they know what being a soldier really feels like, and no one playing a slave in an RPG should think they know what being a slave really feels like.  

3) Nevertheless, you can learn things from playing games, watching movies, or reading books.  Many wargames will help you learn a little tactics; many historical RPGs will help you learn a little history.  

So, if someone plays a Spartacus RPG and says they learned something about Roman history, I think that is a reasonable statement.  Similarly, if someone plays Steal Away Jordan and says that they learned something about slavery, that is also a reasonable statement - presuming that it does not imply #1.  

You may judge that people who play Steal Away Jordan are necessarily engaging in #1 and #2 - and I don't think I agree, but we could at least agree that these are bad.

We are in complete agreement in regards to your above statements.  I see the people talking about Steal Away Jordan as heavily engaged in #1 and #2.  But we can certainly agree to disagree on that point.