Quote from: jhkim on July 21, 2023, 09:23:14 PM

Quote from: Aglondir on July 21, 2023, 08:32:17 PM

Quote from: jhkim on July 21, 2023, 04:44:47 PM
"Conan ran panther-like after the strange masked figure, getting closer whichever way they turned in the narrow alleyways. Near the city center, they tripped and sprawled as they crossed the darkened square."

In this case, it is clear that "they" refers to the masked figure, while "he" refers to Conan. If we do a search and replace, though,

Did you quote that passage correctly? I don't see "he" anywhere.

Sorry. It's an off-the-cuff example, not a quote. I should have said "he" would refer to Conan. If changed to generic "he", then it becomes less clear if "he" refers to the masked figure or to Conan.

In the bigger picture, when using pronouns there are going to be ambiguous situations lots of the time -- it just take a little care in writing to resolve them. A language isn't objectively superior because it has more differentiated pronouns. Finnish people can express themselves perfectly clearly even though their language has no gendered pronouns, for example. Traditional Korean writing doesn't have third person pronouns at all - though modern Koreans have adopted the practice from translations.

None of which has anything to do with the fact that DCC revised an already existing game to use pronouns that make the text harder to read and did so explicitly to pander to the woke.  Which is the problem.

Put me down as another 'Gender was a way of avoiding the word sex, and gender and sex have always been interchangeable until 2016 or so.'

Pretending gender is some separate thing is just a linguistic weapon to push through woke nonsense.

Quote from: jhkim on July 21, 2023, 02:37:49 PM
In general, it seems for me like a silly thing to get outraged over either way. I don't agree with anyone who was outraged over DCC's previous use of pronouns, and the minor edit seems like virtue signaling, but I also don't agree with people outraged over singular "they".

Not so much the case when you KNOW the gender of the singular person.  It's literally going out of your way to sound stupid to feed an agenda.  It's very jarring for innocent readers minding THEIR (plural) business.

2x post

Quote from: Eirikrautha on July 21, 2023, 10:13:42 PM

Quote from: jhkim on July 21, 2023, 09:23:14 PM
In the bigger picture, when using pronouns there are going to be ambiguous situations lots of the time -- it just take a little care in writing to resolve them. A language isn't objectively superior because it has more differentiated pronouns. Finnish people can express themselves perfectly clearly even though their language has no gendered pronouns, for example. Traditional Korean writing doesn't have third person pronouns at all - though modern Koreans have adopted the practice from translations.

None of which has anything to do with the fact that DCC revised an already existing game to use pronouns that make the text harder to read and did so explicitly to pander to the woke.  Which is the problem.

I think if they hadn't announced it, but instead just wrote it that way, then I think most people wouldn't have even noticed.

I don't agree that singular "they" is harder to read. Singular "they" for indeterminate person or a specific person of unknown gender is a long-established tradition, and is easy to read. For me, it is easier to read than the convention of "he or she" used in AD&D 1st edition.

I think a parallel to this might be announcing layout changes for color-blind people in the name of disability rights -- where in practice that just means not having text highlighted in red and green. It might be virtue signaling, but it has no effect on non-color-blind readers.

Quote from: Cathode Ray on July 22, 2023, 04:30:51 PM

Quote from: jhkim on July 21, 2023, 02:37:49 PM
In general, it seems for me like a silly thing to get outraged over either way. I don't agree with anyone who was outraged over DCC's previous use of pronouns, and the minor edit seems like virtue signaling, but I also don't agree with people outraged over singular "they".

Not so much the case when you KNOW the gender of the singular person.  It's literally going out of your way to sound stupid to feed an agenda.  It's very jarring for innocent readers minding THEIR (plural) business.

But that's not what DCC is doing. It's using singular "they" for indeterminate people in rules references.

Quote from: jhkim on July 22, 2023, 08:49:00 PM

Quote from: Eirikrautha on July 21, 2023, 10:13:42 PM

Quote from: jhkim on July 21, 2023, 09:23:14 PM
In the bigger picture, when using pronouns there are going to be ambiguous situations lots of the time -- it just take a little care in writing to resolve them. A language isn't objectively superior because it has more differentiated pronouns. Finnish people can express themselves perfectly clearly even though their language has no gendered pronouns, for example. Traditional Korean writing doesn't have third person pronouns at all - though modern Koreans have adopted the practice from translations.

None of which has anything to do with the fact that DCC revised an already existing game to use pronouns that make the text harder to read and did so explicitly to pander to the woke.  Which is the problem.

I think if they hadn't announced it, but instead just wrote it that way, then I think most people wouldn't have even noticed.

I don't agree that singular "they" is harder to read. Singular "they" for indeterminate person or a specific person of unknown gender is a long-established tradition, and is easy to read. For me, it is easier to read than the convention of "he or she" used in AD&D 1st edition.

I think a parallel to this might be announcing layout changes for color-blind people in the name of disability rights -- where in practice that just means not having text highlighted in red and green. It might be virtue signaling, but it has no effect on non-color-blind readers.

Quote from: Cathode Ray on July 22, 2023, 04:30:51 PM

Quote from: jhkim on July 21, 2023, 02:37:49 PM
In general, it seems for me like a silly thing to get outraged over either way. I don't agree with anyone who was outraged over DCC's previous use of pronouns, and the minor edit seems like virtue signaling, but I also don't agree with people outraged over singular "they".

Not so much the case when you KNOW the gender of the singular person.  It's literally going out of your way to sound stupid to feed an agenda.  It's very jarring for innocent readers minding THEIR (plural) business.

But that's not what DCC is doing. It's using singular "they" for indeterminate people in rules references.

Your beliefs are wrong as proven by the example you wrote to make your case, wich can be read as speaking about both Conan and the wizard without even trying to be contrary.

Quote from: jhkim on July 22, 2023, 08:49:00 PM
I don't agree that singular "they" is harder to read. Singular "they" for indeterminate person or a specific person of unknown gender is a long-established tradition, and is easy to read.

I find it difficult to read. As Zalman has already pointed out...

Quote from: Zalman on July 19, 2023, 11:33:29 AM
Complete nonsense. What is common is to use a plural pronoun for an indeterminate person, i.e., "if anyone sticks their hand in the fire, they will get burned". Using plural pronouns for specific individuals is entirely different -- complete aberration of English intentionally designed to disrupt, confuse, and control.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on July 23, 2023, 03:52:48 PM

Quote from: jhkim on July 22, 2023, 08:49:00 PM
I don't agree that singular "they" is harder to read. Singular "they" for indeterminate person or a specific person of unknown gender is a long-established tradition, and is easy to read.

I find it difficult to read. As Zalman has already pointed out...

Quote from: Zalman on July 19, 2023, 11:33:29 AM
Complete nonsense. What is common is to use a plural pronoun for an indeterminate person, i.e., "if anyone sticks their hand in the fire, they will get burned". Using plural pronouns for specific individuals is entirely different -- complete aberration of English intentionally designed to disrupt, confuse, and control.

You're certainly entitled to your preference. As a question -- what do you think of the convention of "he or she" and "his or her" that is used in AD&D 1st edition? How would you compare it to other pronoun usage options?

Regarding Zalman's claim:

1) Pronoun usage in a rules book is typically an indeterminate person rather than a specific person - i.e. "If a character takes 30 or more hp damage, then they must make a Con saving throw."

2) In literature, using singular "they" for a specific person of unknown gender is neither new nor edgy - as I pointed out with the Jane Austen quote. ("Who is in love with her? Who makes you their confidant?" — Jane Austen, in Emma) I do not believe that Austen was trying to disrupt, confuse, or control.

Quote from: jhkim on July 23, 2023, 06:39:41 PM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on July 23, 2023, 03:52:48 PM

Quote from: jhkim on July 22, 2023, 08:49:00 PM
I don't agree that singular "they" is harder to read. Singular "they" for indeterminate person or a specific person of unknown gender is a long-established tradition, and is easy to read.

I find it difficult to read. As Zalman has already pointed out...

Quote from: Zalman on July 19, 2023, 11:33:29 AM
Complete nonsense. What is common is to use a plural pronoun for an indeterminate person, i.e., "if anyone sticks their hand in the fire, they will get burned". Using plural pronouns for specific individuals is entirely different -- complete aberration of English intentionally designed to disrupt, confuse, and control.

You're certainly entitled to your preference. As a question -- what do you think of the convention of "he or she" and "his or her" that is used in AD&D 1st edition? How would you compare it to other pronoun usage options?

Clunky, like the he/she term as well.

I much prefer them to alternate he or she. Or stick with just 'he' AS THE PATRIARCHAL GOD INTENDED.

QuoteRegarding Zalman's claim:

1) Pronoun usage in a rules book is typically an indeterminate person rather than a specific person - i.e. "If a character takes 30 or more hp damage, then they must make a Con saving throw."

2) In literature, using singular "they" for a specific person of unknown gender is neither new nor edgy - as I pointed out with the Jane Austen quote. ("Who is in love with her? Who makes you their confidant?" — Jane Austen, in Emma) I do not believe that Austen was trying to disrupt, confuse, or control.

No, but while I haven't read any Jane Austin, I'm willing to bet a few internet bucks she's used other pronouns and not limited herself to only the kind of universal plurals for every situation that we're talking about in this thread. (I mean, it's right there in your example.)

A proper example would be to "edit" the quote to read:

"Who is in love with them? Who makes you their confidant?"

DCC's claim to fame, was being gonzo and hardcore.  It's laughable; that gonzo and hardcore, bowed their knees to woke ideology.  I guess they weren't very gonzo and hardcore, after all?

Quote from: Zalman on July 19, 2023, 11:33:29 AM
Complete nonsense. What is common is to use a plural pronoun for an indeterminate person, i.e., "if anyone sticks their hand in the fire, they will get burned". Using plural pronouns for specific individuals is entirely different -- complete aberration of English intentionally designed to disrupt, confuse, and control.

You do realize that anyone is a pronoun as well as everything in bold here (in some use cases).
There are many others.
So you could rewrite your example in countless ways:

"If anyone sticks his hand in the fire, one will get burned."
"If any stick one's hand in the fire, one will get burned."
"If thou stick thy hand in the fire, thou will get burned."

Quote from: Ratman_tf on July 23, 2023, 08:25:45 PM

Quote from: jhkim on July 23, 2023, 06:39:41 PM
You're certainly entitled to your preference. As a question -- what do you think of the convention of "he or she" and "his or her" that is used in AD&D 1st edition? How would you compare it to other pronoun usage options?

Clunky, like the he/she term as well.

I much prefer them to alternate he or she. Or stick with just 'he' AS THE PATRIARCHAL GOD INTENDED.

Fair enough. "He or she" reads as clunky to me as well -- but I also don't think it was a major problem.

That's what gets me about this. It seems like by modern standards, that back in the 1970s, Gary Gygax was bowing to the woke and making the rulebooks clunky to fit leftist politics. Maybe he'd go onto Ocule's red list for this sort of bowing to wokeness, while at the same time he'd be boycotted by left-leaning gamers for other crimes.

Just using singular "they" as a replacement for "he or she" is a perfectly reasonable and readable choice. One can attack the reasons for doing so, but it isn't particularly weird or controversial.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on July 23, 2023, 08:25:45 PM

Quote from: jhkim on July 23, 2023, 06:39:41 PM
Regarding Zalman's claim:

1) Pronoun usage in a rules book is typically an indeterminate person rather than a specific person - i.e. "If a character takes 30 or more hp damage, then they must make a Con saving throw."

2) In literature, using singular "they" for a specific person of unknown gender is neither new nor edgy - as I pointed out with the Jane Austen quote. ("Who is in love with her? Who makes you their confidant?" — Jane Austen, in Emma) I do not believe that Austen was trying to disrupt, confuse, or control.

No, but while I haven't read any Jane Austin, I'm willing to bet a few internet bucks she's used other pronouns and not limited herself to only the kind of universal plurals for every situation that we're talking about in this thread. (I mean, it's right there in your example.)

A proper example would be to "edit" the quote to read:

"Who is in love with them? Who makes you their confidant?"

I haven't read the 9th or 10th printing of DCC yet, but my understanding is that it will use singular "they" for indeterminate persons and possibly persons of unknown gender. I saw about the dedication Jim Roslof, but I assume that was a mistake with search-and-replace, not intentional.

Even among self-proclaimed woke people, they insist on using preferred pronouns - not using "they" for everyone.

Quote from: jhkim on July 25, 2023, 04:42:51 PM

Quote from: Ratman_tf on July 23, 2023, 08:25:45 PM

Quote from: jhkim on July 23, 2023, 06:39:41 PM
You're certainly entitled to your preference. As a question -- what do you think of the convention of "he or she" and "his or her" that is used in AD&D 1st edition? How would you compare it to other pronoun usage options?

Clunky, like the he/she term as well.

I much prefer them to alternate he or she. Or stick with just 'he' AS THE PATRIARCHAL GOD INTENDED.

Fair enough. "He or she" reads as clunky to me as well -- but I also don't think it was a major problem.

That's what gets me about this. It seems like by modern standards, that back in the 1970s, Gary Gygax was bowing to the woke and making the rulebooks clunky to fit leftist politics. Maybe he'd go onto Ocule's red list for this sort of bowing to wokeness, while at the same time he'd be boycotted by left-leaning gamers for other crimes.

It was all very reasonable at the time, and most people agreed or didn't care. It was still comprehensible, if a bit clunky. In hindsight, it was giving them the proverbial inch.

QuoteJust using singular "they" as a replacement for "he or she" is a perfectly reasonable and readable choice. One can attack the reasons for doing so, but it isn't particularly weird or controversial.

You're welcome to your opinion. As I said, I have found passages in RPGs that were incomprehensible due to using "they" for singular pronouns.

Quote

Quote from: Ratman_tf on July 23, 2023, 08:25:45 PM

Quote from: jhkim on July 23, 2023, 06:39:41 PM
Regarding Zalman's claim:

1) Pronoun usage in a rules book is typically an indeterminate person rather than a specific person - i.e. "If a character takes 30 or more hp damage, then they must make a Con saving throw."

2) In literature, using singular "they" for a specific person of unknown gender is neither new nor edgy - as I pointed out with the Jane Austen quote. ("Who is in love with her? Who makes you their confidant?" — Jane Austen, in Emma) I do not believe that Austen was trying to disrupt, confuse, or control.

No, but while I haven't read any Jane Austin, I'm willing to bet a few internet bucks she's used other pronouns and not limited herself to only the kind of universal plurals for every situation that we're talking about in this thread. (I mean, it's right there in your example.)

A proper example would be to "edit" the quote to read:

"Who is in love with them? Who makes you their confidant?"

I haven't read the 9th or 10th printing of DCC yet, but my understanding is that it will use singular "they" for indeterminate persons and possibly persons of unknown gender. I saw about the dedication Jim Roslof, but I assume that was a mistake with search-and-replace, not intentional.

Even if it's a 'mistake', it does lead me to believe that they're going to do a shoddy cut and paste. We shall see.

QuoteEven among self-proclaimed woke people, they insist on using preferred pronouns - not using "they" for everyone.

A rulebook doesn't have preferred pronouns. Just the pronouns the authors use. We could just go back to using 'he' in that case.
The whole point is that DCC is jumping on the endless treadmill of pleasing the wokesters who are going to be unhappy no matter what changes they make.

Quote from: Ratman_tf on July 25, 2023, 06:32:23 PM

A rulebook doesn't have preferred pronouns. Just the pronouns the authors use. We could just go back to using 'he' in that case.
The whole point is that DCC is jumping on the endless treadmill of pleasing the wokesters who are going to be unhappy no matter what changes they make.

and Poor, you can't forget that the wokescolds are dirt poor and can't afford these products anyway

Skipping out on using the terms "He" and "She" in rpg books has been around for more than a couple decades now. I avoided using gendered terms in my own stuff back when I wrote for Gun Metal Games in 2010.

It's just asinine to assume your reader is a dude or a chick right off the bat... and switching between random He and Shes just gets awkward. There are lots of ways around it too, using the term "Player, Character, GM, You," ect.

This is making a mountain out of a molehill.