Quote from: droogI'm not insulted. I was initially, but I think it's just your arguing style. I'm finding it very irritating, not least because it's basically apologetics. And so very copious.

It's going to look like apologetics when it's defending something against critics.  Some of your argument look the same way, though maybe you don't see it.  As for being copious, that comes from trying to make myself clear and sometimes come from simply explaining what pops into mind when I think about something.  Yes, sometimes my connections are a bit odd and don't help but they usually help me understand what I'm saying and sometimes help other people, too.

Quote from: droogThat whole long rant about The Matrix and Hackers is surely beside the point. First, they're films, not RPGs.

Correct.  But they both have the same basic problem.  They need to make things that happen interesting.  And the same things that push movies to treat hacking in montage but combat in slow-motion detail is part of what drives the disparity in detail between two activities like that in role-playing games.  The pacing, decision points, action, and so forth are all very different.

Quote from: droogSecond, I've already addressed the popularity of RPGs with combat-heavy systems. See if you can find it.

Is it different from the post that I was responding to, the one that starts, "I think it's all very simple and it's a matter of history."?  That's the claim I was addressing.  If you've made other claims elsewhere, that's fine.  If it's clear I'm missing something else you said, links aren't that difficult to add to a reply.

Quote from: droogThanks. It's nice of you to say so.

I'll try to remember to add that standard disclaimer if it makes you happy.  I tend to consider it a fairly standard assumption.

Quote from: droogHow about just reading what I wrote?

I did.  I think part of the problem is that you know what you mean and read that into what you wrote.  What you write is often a lot more sparse and ambiguous than you seem to think it is.  I'll tell you what I tell my wife.  I  don't read minds.  I can only go by what you actually tell me.

Quote from: droogPeople say "Why don't you just ROLEPLAY IT?" To which my reply is: engaging the system is fun. You have fun rolling dice and angling for modifiers in combat, why shouldn't I have fun rolling dice etc in other situations as well?

Your statement that "engaging the system is fun" is not qualified to apply to only you, nor does your statement, "You have fun rolling dice and angling for modifiers in combat, why shouldn't I have fun rolling dice etc in other situations as well?" specify which "you" you are talking about.  Where are all the qualifiers of scope you seem to expect me to include?  I don't think your language is as precise and clear as you seem to assume it is.

What I did in my reply was explain, (A) I'm not the "you" you were referring to in that statement and how I do feel and (B) asked you if you really do enjoy just rolling dice and "angling for modifiers" because that's a very particular preference in play and hardly universal.

Quote from: droogWhich bit of that is hard to understand?

The assumptions and qualifications that seem so clear to you but never actually make it into your replies as far as I can tell.  Maybe I'm just dense.  Maybe you aren't as clear as you think you are.  Maybe being a little more copious would help.

Quote from: droogWhy are you dragging in jargon when there's no need for it?

The jargon had a purpose.  When you said, "You have fun rolling dice and angling for modifiers in combat", that's the very specific play style that I mentioned and not all people feel that way.  I'm curious if you do.

Quote from: James McMurrayI prefer dulce de leche, Haagen-Daz when possible.

Yes, but what's your Creative Agenda when you eat it?

You wantin' a piece o' this war too bucko?

Quote from: John MorrowYes, but what's your Creative Agenda when you eat it?

Kineticist.

There is no war. There is only a small if vocal minority that thinks Green Tea ice cream is superior to normal more mainstream flavours.

Regards,
David R

Quote from: David RThere is no war. There is only a small if vocal minority that thinks Green Tea ice cream is superior to normal more mainstream flavours.

Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Quote from: John MorrowNot that there's anything wrong with that.

I agree. But for some, there has to be conflict. They are worried, that the Green Tea Swine will corrupt the flavours making it normal for all to be eating green tea flavoured ice cream and behaving rather twee...

Regards,
David R

Quote from: Levi KornelsenKineticist.

I'm waiting to see if anyone is a Chadouist.

John, I'm afraid I can't talk to you. For every line I write you write a page. I don't want to get locked into another ten-page discussion on what I mean and what you mean, so let's just forget it.

Quote from: David RI agree. But for some, there has to be conflict. They are worried, that the Green Tea Swine will corrupt the flavours making it normal for all to be eating green tea flavoured ice cream and behaving rather twee...

Regards,
David R

No need to fear any longer. I've taken it as my sacred duty to make sure that doesn't happen.

This whole thread really comes down to one issue: Pundy is so egotistical that he just can't believe anyone wouldn't realize his way of doing things and thinking are the only right ones for any situation in the world, and that fact is so obvious that anyone who disagrees with him on any issue is either a "swine" or a "retarded".


Jeezus, I hope pundy and steve jackson are never near each other, their combined conceit might cause them to be sucked into each other and form a super black hole made of pure arrogance that could swallow the world.

Quote from: droogJohn, I'm afraid I can't talk to you. For every line I write you write a page. I don't want to get locked into another ten-page discussion on what I mean and what you mean, so let's just forget it.

Sure.  For whatever it's worth, I do think you do have interesting things to say and make good points.  If I didn't care about what you were saying, it would be a lot easier to just ignore your comments.

I find D20 to be a fairly robust, all-around system that handles combat pretty well and in-depth, but which includes a decent non-combat skill system to handle, for example, social situations.

I have found the social system built into the game to be imperfect, but then again, it's not bad and it's at about the level my players have enjoyed. (Though, I also like Burning Wheel's social combat thing.)

Crafting is too limited, in my opinion, and regular D&D's "thief skills" are a little too in-depth. (Sneak and Move Silently vs. Spot and Listen, I'm looking at you.) That mostly seems like a hold-over from the earlier editions.

But, despite those issues, it holds up pretty well. It gives mechanical means of approaching situations from multiple angles and having that angle covered.

Why avoid combat? It depends really heavily on what you're playing. Fighting and not fighting are neither one inherantly superior, and I don't see many people arguing that it is.

Quote from: James McMurrayI prefer dulce de leche, Haagen-Daz when possible.

Do you know that Dulce De Leche is a Uruguayan invention?

RPGPundit

I wondered if you'd say that. Source?