Quote from: Drew;262171Good lord, you change tactics more often than Koltar does avatars. The basic picture remains though. You mischarcterise. Then, when challenged, you denounce. Then, when your denunciations are ignored you make a call to history, and by doing so directly contradict your original mischaracterisation. All that's left is ad hominen, which I expect we'll be seeing anytime now.    

So, were you going to wander back to the topic at hand anytime soon?

QuoteThen please, keep denouncing people as "Forgist" the moment you run out of argument.

I will specifically denounce you as Forgist the moment you present an argument, assuming it falls along those lines.

But the whole 'culture of play' specific to certain games?  I am getting a whiff of GNS from that emergent nonsense.  Please, rather than re-iterating another dozen times a vague re-statement of 'culture of play', I invite you to go ahead and start describing exactly what it entails.  Because that is what a person who has a point to make would be doing.

Quote from: StormBringer;262173So, were you going to wander back to the topic at hand anytime soon?

So you've decided to huff and puff your way back up to the high ground? I love how you keep shifting stances, it's almost like being to win an argument is all that actually matters to you.

QuoteI will specifically denounce you as Forgist the moment you present an argument, assuming it falls along those lines.

Back to the cheap ploys. You already have /I] denounced without evidence, presumably in the hope that the term 'Forgist' is loaded enough to annihilate meaningful discourse and thus cover your own ignorance of 4E and how it actually plays.  

QuoteBut the whole 'culture of play' specific to certain games? I am getting a whiff of GNS from that emergent nonsense.  Please, rather than re-iterating another dozen times a vague re-statement of 'culture of play', I invite you to go ahead and start describing exactly what it entails.  Because that is what a person who has a point to make would be doing.

GNS doesn't own the idea of emergent behaviours. Stop trying to implicate by association. I think you're quite aware of what Pseudo meant when he said culture of play, but right now all you want to do is associate his ideas with other, unrelated theories that have very low currency around here. It's pretty obvious, and pretty fucking spineless to boot.

Anyway, on to the question at hand: play culture is the full range of learned, play-based behavior patterns that are specific to a particular roleplaying game. It describes how a game is organised, played and amended by an informed userbase who are in regular contact with one another.

Now, let's watch you push for more precising definitions as you scrabble around for something - anything - that helps you keep up with the denunciations. Whatever it takes to hide you woefully thin undrstanding of 4E.

Quote from: Drew;262178So you've decided to huff and puff your way back up to the high ground? I love how you keep shifting stances, it's almost like being to win an argument is all that actually matters to you.

And yet, you keep bitching about it, as though you will be able to use this as a distraction for not having presented an argument.

QuoteBack to the cheap ploys. You already have /I] denounced without evidence, presumably in the hope that the term 'Forgist' is loaded enough to annihilate meaningful discourse and thus cover your own ignorance of 4E and how it actually plays.

I've denounced what, exactly?  Your vague and undefined terminology?

QuoteGNS doesn't own the idea of emergent behaviours. Stop trying to implicate by association.

No, I was saying that your 'culture of play' is emergent nonsense.  In fact, I was unaware that particular set of theories even considers emergent behaviour.  I would say it is a mistake if they do, the topic is a good deal more complicated than I would guess they are able to handle.

QuoteI think you're quite aware of what Pseudo meant when he said culture of play, but right now all you want to do is associate his ideas with other, unrelated theories that have very low currency around here. It's pretty obvious, and pretty fucking spineless to boot.

Well, no, because you are just now scrambling for a description of 'culture of play'.  How would I have any idea what that is supposed to mean when you make it up as you go?

Oh, and hey, there is that ad hominem you were looking for.

QuoteAnyway, on to the question at hand: play culture is the full range of learned, play-based behavior patterns that are specific to a particular roleplaying game. It describes how a game is organised, played and amended by an informed userbase who are in regular contact with one another.

So...  following the rules?  Talking to other players occasionally?

Seriously?  That's all it is?  Pseudo thinks it is some act equivalent to the Oracle at Delphi to 'predict' people would follow the rules and talk on the internet.  What's next in your collective bag of tricks, are you going to guess my username?

No wonder you were stalling on that one.

QuoteNow, let's watch you push for more precising definitions as you scrabble around for something - anything - that helps you keep up with the denunciations. Whatever it takes to hide you woefully thin undrstanding of 4E.

No, that definition is quite pitiful enough without having to press you to further embarrass yourself.  I am sure you consider it quite clever, but really, 'learning the rules'?

You certainly have a keen grasp of the obvious.

Of course, 3e never had large mounds of books that were intended to be essential to play.

And, of course, no conspiracy theorist could ever think that maybe the secondary books brought out ever more powerful stuff to provide even more incentive to buy them.

Here's a theory of mine: I don't need to know WotC's motives. If they bring out stuff I don't want to play, I won't buy it. If they bring out stuff most people don't want to play, they will fail.

If they continually produce sub-par, 'oh, here's another bit that should have been in a main book' stuff, then people won't buy them because they cost too much money and they will fail.

Or, you know, they could be trying to replace mounds of secondary books with once-a-year essentials and then a few secondary works to flesh them out.

Either way, I don't have to theorize ahead of actions on what or why they are doing. Fail motives produce fail books, which ends in fail for them. Screaming and yelling at them just produces a lot of verbiage.

I have yet to see any sort of positive result from screaming and yelling - Including mine.

Quote from: Narf the Mouse;262187Of course, 3e never had large mounds of books that were intended to be essential to play.

And, of course, no conspiracy theorist could ever think that maybe the secondary books brought out ever more powerful stuff to provide even more incentive to buy them.

Agreed.  The trend can be said to have started with the original Unearthed Arcana, but it really kicked into high gear with 2nd edition.  The ideas were actually damn good ones, but the implementation was oftentimes very sub-par.  The Monstrous Compendiums were a good example.  One monster per page, loose-leaf so you can organize them how you wanted.  Well, it ended up being one monster on the facing page, then one monster on the obverse page more often than not.  As much of a woolly-pated environmentalist nut as I have been called, I think adding a bit to each entry to get some data on the back, or some supplemental information, or when necessary, just leave the back page blank for notes or something was a good deal less wasteful than the actual product ended up being.  Same with the Complete Handbooks.  Great idea, but the kits were all over the map, some had good information, others had garbage, and after they covered all the classes and races, they really should have started on another line of books.

4e is not the first, nor is it the greatest offender in this regard.  3.x continued the trend from 2nd edition in a big way, more or less out of the gate.  If I recall, the 3.0 books were followed quickly by Sword and Fist, then Blood and Tome within six or eight months.

The funeral meats did coldly furnish the wedding table, as it were.  

Quote from: StormBringer;262181And yet, you keep bitching about it, as though you will be able to use this as a distraction for not having presented an argument.


I've denounced what, exactly?  Your vague and undefined terminology?


No, I was saying that your 'culture of play' is emergent nonsense.  In fact, I was unaware that particular set of theories even considers emergent behaviour.  I would say it is a mistake if they do, the topic is a good deal more complicated than I would guess they are able to handle.


Well, no, because you are just now scrambling for a description of 'culture of play'.  How would I have any idea what that is supposed to mean when you make it up as you go?

Oh, and hey, there is that ad hominem you were looking for.


So...  following the rules?  Talking to other players occasionally?

Seriously?  That's all it is?  Pseudo thinks it is some act equivalent to the Oracle at Delphi to 'predict' people would follow the rules and talk on the internet.  What's next in your collective bag of tricks, are you going to guess my username?

No wonder you were stalling on that one.


No, that definition is quite pitiful enough without having to press you to further embarrass yourself.  I am sure you consider it quite clever, but really, 'learning the rules'?

You certainly have a keen grasp of the obvious.

As obvious as your continual attempts to shift position. You have no argument to speak of, no analysis to offer, nothing beyond a wildly contradictory set of avoidance tactics.

If you're seriously claiming that "Learning the rules" represents the totality of summation I offered then I have nothing more to say to you. I'm done wasting my time on someone unable to construct anything beyond his desperate need for personal validation via groupthink.

Go back and denounce more people who have nothing to do with GNS of being "Forgist." Then pretend you didn't. Then argue about how things are simulteaneously exactly the same and completely different from thirty years ago. Try laying blame at the feet of the designers, then shifting the same hollow accusations to the userbase - or even individual members of this site - when it's demonstrated that you haven't even the loosest grasp of what you're talking about.

In short, continue behaving in the wildly inconsistent and intellectually bankrupt way you have in this thread, and remember that "no, YOU are!" is always there in case you need to crack out the really big guns. Toodle pip.

Drew> Thanks for the assistance. It's unfortunate that Stormbringer is an intellectually dishonest troll.

:popcorn:

Quote from: CavScout;262203:popcorn:

The talk is so hot because the stakes are so low .

IMO, Mearls is a guy with old-edition sensibilities that works on a game that may not fit with them anymore. However, I would never begrudge a game designer the urge to treat any game like their own personal lump of clay. That's definitely rocks and glass houses territory.

Quote from: CavScout;262203:popcorn:

Agreed, but this one comment is so very true when typing at 4e fanatics.

Quote from: StormBringer;262172Mearls and 4e didn't introduce the wheel.

Quote from: CavScout;262203:popcorn:

Oh, the fucking irony...

Quote from: Pseudoephedrine;262202Drew> Thanks for the assistance. It's unfortunate that Stormbringer is an intellectually dishonest troll.

So, no point to make either, then?  Not even going to try to expand on the 'culture of play'?

You could lack the courage of your convictions, but you have none.  Just this latest ploy to appear thoughtful, and oh so 'too cool for school'.

Please, display this vast intellectual honestly, and make something like an argument.

Quote from: Drew;262201As obvious as your continual attempts to shift position. You have no argument to speak of, no analysis to offer, nothing beyond a wildly contradictory set of avoidance tactics.

Yes, shifting the focus to the other weak parts of your statements is an avoidance tactic.

QuoteIf you're seriously claiming that "Learning the rules" represents the totality of summation I offered then I have nothing more to say to you. I'm done wasting my time on someone unable to construct anything beyond his desperate need for personal validation via groupthink.

You didn't actually have anything to say in the first place, clearly.

Also, that isn't the sum total of my interpretation of your doublespeak, but it was clear you weren't actually reading the posts in this thread sometime ago.

"play culture is the full range of learned, play-based behavior patterns that are specific to a particular roleplaying game. It describes how a game is organised, played and amended by an informed userbase who are in regular contact with one another."
"So...  following the rules?  Talking to other players occasionally?

Seriously? That's all it is? Pseudo thinks it is some act equivalent to the Oracle at Delphi to 'predict' people would follow the rules and talk on the internet. What's next in your collective bag of tricks, are you going to guess my username?"

QuoteGo back and denounce more people who have nothing to do with GNS of being "Forgist." Then pretend you didn't. Then argue about how things are simulteaneously exactly the same and completely different from thirty years ago. Try laying blame at the feet of the designers, then shifting the same hollow accusations to the userbase - or even individual members of this site - when it's demonstrated that you haven't even the loosest grasp of what you're talking about.

Yes, please keep bitching about presentation rather than content,  That is doing wonders for your "argument".  Well, it might be, if you had one.  But here, check this out:  "Then argue about how things are simulteaneously exactly the same and completely different from thirty years ago"  We still pay taxes, like we did 30 years ago.  But the amount is different.  Holy shit!  The government doesn't even have the loosest grasp of what they are talking about!

QuoteIn short, continue behaving in the wildly inconsistent and intellectually bankrupt way you have in this thread, and remember that "no, YOU are!" is always there in case you need to crack out the really big guns. Toodle pip.

Certainly, because the height of intellectual richness is bitching about the way your opponent presents points you are unwilling or unable to answer.  Escpecially after pulling some ad hoc, tautological, complete bullshit answer out of your ass.

"play culture is the full range of learned, play-based behavior patterns that are specific to a particular roleplaying game"
Learning the rules.  Your towering intellect is truly breathtaking.  I am assuming you will use it to further demonstrate how you are unable to grasp the intricacies of normal debate rather than supporting this poor, ragged point you have introduced.

Quote from: Caesar Slaad;261943Heh.

I don't remember the level our characters were at, but I remember back in Junior High, a erstwhile DM obviously just paging through the MM and picking out whatever looked cool uttered a phrase that will live forever in my memory:

"You encounter a Demogorgon."

Way back in Lotsoftimeago, there was a rather infamous AD&D club in Budapest, where, in addition to inventing the +7 vorpal mace, it was a common test for high level characters to slay their Orcus and take its wand. Some folks were running around with two or three of those things.

Needless to say, they were an anomaly, although an entertaining one. Still, by all accounts, they had fun, and the games were challenging.

+7 works, if it's +5 and bane. Maces can have sharp edges - Add magic and Vorpal isn't impossible.

Also, if Manshoon can have hundreds of clones strewn everywhere, so can Orcus.