Quote from: Omega;1104820Im really sick of various venues and product being changed to meet the demands of insane people who apparently cannot tell fiction from reality and think that "reading or playing thing = You WILL become that thing!" its like this recent crackheaded piece by Extra Credits on how playing on a a Nazi or terrorist side in a game will make you susceptible to and may even want to become one! No. Im no joking.

I used to love Extra Credits. They had some interesting and insightful things to say about video games. Their video about Choice and Conflict remains my favorite, as I think it applies to all games.
But Gamergate broke their brains, and now they're a bunch of ideological shills.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1104836This thread reminds me of the inverse one on TBP about people screaming about the CSA and how wrong it was to exist.

Y'awl don't play the game. It's not like Deadlands Classic will ever go out of print (they always print more when needed). PEG always updates settings when they revisit them. In Rippers Resurrected, using ripper-tech no longer damns you while it did in the first version. This was done so more character concepts could use ripper-tech (monster parts you rip out and put into yourself).

But yeah, all the pearl-clutching from people who will never play the game because you already have a 200 session OSR sandbox prepared are totally irrelevant. You can speculate on the wider effects of such a change, but your personal dislike of it is just virtue signaling.

As to this thread being the inverse of the TBP thread, nobody has caught a ban on this thread. So if by "inverse" you mean "better" then, yes, this thread is better than the one on TBP because the mods don't ban members on a weak ass technicality for interrupting their Two Minutes of Hate with a different point of view.

I don't even hate the change.  I'm more in the wait and see camp, but I'm glad this site allows push back and criticism.

Quote from: wmarshal;1104852As to this thread being the inverse of the TBP thread, nobody has caught a ban on this thread. So if by "inverse" you mean "better" then, yes, this thread is better than the one on TBP because the mods don't ban members on a weak ass technicality for interrupting their Two Minutes of Hate with a different point of view.

I don't even hate the change.  I'm more in the wait and see camp, but I'm glad this site allows push back and criticism.

The sad part is before the guards willingly handed over the keys and joined the inmates in making TBP an incredibly regressive and intolerant forum they did allow push back and criticism. Yet somehow we are the worst forum out of the two.

The biggest hypocrites though are the social chameleons who when they have a cause come here and try to get validation and support then turnaround and then attack this place when they no longer need an echo chamber and validation.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1104850Some of your explanations are completely wrong

Which ones? I started watching this crap more closely in the past year and I'd say everything he points out is an accurate portrayal of how RPGs are being attacked by progressive ideology.

So, which ones?

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1104850What's wrong with trying to make the game better?

Nothing, as long as the people trying to make the game better have some understanding of the idea of "game" and "better".  It's a low bar, but plenty on his list are from people that failed to clear it.

Quote from: GameDaddy;1104837I kind of like to think of it as mythic fantasy from the age of Charlemagne, with a healthy dose of Sorcerors and Wizardry thrown, in addition to the historical religion from early Europe. It's a great setting to run as an alternate Europe, where magic and enchantments twisted the fabric of reality there into Aldea.

That's a good take on the idea, and I have to admit I've read and enjoyed my share of the work of Mercedes Lackey (which is one of the original fiction inspirations for the game and the genre).

However, to get a sense of why the game annoys me personally to the extent that it does, I can do no better than to quote Dan Davenport's original review on the game back when it first came out:

Quote from: Dan DavenportBlue Rose is very, very much about the acceptance of alternate sexual preferences. If this were simply a side-note to the setting as a whole, it really wouldn't warrant mentioning; however, Blue Rose beats the reader over the head with its message of tolerance to the point of being cloying: a major god has a young male god as his gay lover and is the patron of gay couples, a mother in the game fiction prays that this god watch over her gay son and his lover, fully half of all Sea-Folk are gay, clothing styles are fully androgynous, and so on. Conversely, conservative religious values (represented by the Jarzoni) are objectively closed-minded and bad.

Speaking as one of those conservative religious people, I have no problem with the existence of a game that advocates LGBT values, but I resent being cast by proxy in the role of moral villain for daring to disagree with those values. Now as long as simply refusing to play the game wasn't taken in itself as an unforgiveable attack, that was nobody's problem but mine. But, as already noted in this thread, people are being made to care. The neutral space for "live and let live" is shrinking every day.

Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser;1104862That's a good take on the idea, and I have to admit I've read and enjoyed my share of the work of Mercedes Lackey (which is one of the original fiction inspirations for the game and the genre).

However, to get a sense of why the game annoys me personally to the extent that it does, I can do no better than to quote Dan Davenport's original review on the game back when it first came out:

Speaking as one of those conservative religious people, I have no problem with the existence of a game that advocates LGBT values, but I resent being cast by proxy in the role of moral villain for daring to disagree with those values. Now as long as simply refusing to play the game wasn't taken in itself as an unforgiveable attack, that was nobody's problem but mine. But, as already noted in this thread, people are being made to care. The neutral space for "live and let live" is shrinking every day.

  Seconded. I was looking at Blue Rose when it came out with the expectation that I could just ignore or rework the 'problematic' parts of the setting; I do it all the time when reading or watching things like Star Trek. But what I saw of the setting wound up so heavy-handed in promoting its values, and in casting my own as the bad guys, that I couldn't get into it. The Kickstarter for the 2nd Edition doubled-down on this to the point that I haven't bought a Green Ronin product since, and I'd been keeping up with Mutants & Masterminds.

Quote from: jhkimRoughly speaking, there are a set of people who buy into the idea that there is territory in a war of ideas. So, if other people are playing RPGs in the wrong way, then they'll try to spread their ideas and take over the hobby. From this view, the other side needs to be actively opposed, rather than tolerated.

It's roughly the same logic regardless of whether they're conservatives or liberals. The other side's ideas are poison, and can't be allowed to fester. So, rather than just positively promoting your way of play -- it's important to attack the other side and show how awful they are, rather than stick to what your side is.

Quote from: tenbones;1104847I could list more... but you know. And who on the other side is complaining about any of this shit being *real* or even impactful? Practically no one. What people on the other side complain about is the level of outrage levied at not just these games - but pretty much all entertainment these days being infected by these SJW asshats and their retarded ideas.

On this site, I see a lot of people who seem to think that RPG publications are impactful -- at least enough to spend a while complaining about it. In just the last few weeks, we've seen complaints about gaming products like:

5E Essentials Kit -- for it's married co-kings subplot
Consent in Gaming -- for its advice on gaming
Cyberpunk Red -- for implied stuff about gender
SWORD DREAM -- for the philosophy behind whatever they produce
CoC: Berlin - The Wicked City -- about the LGBT characters and culture portrayed
Cthulhu Confidential -- for it's comments about "straight white guys"

Quote from: jhkim;1104866On this site, I see a lot of people who seem to think that RPG publications are impactful -- at least enough to spend a while complaining about it. In just the last few weeks, we've seen complaints about gaming products like:

5E Essentials Kit -- for it's married co-kings subplot
Consent in Gaming -- for its advice on gaming
Cyberpunk Red -- for implied stuff about gender
SWORD DREAM -- for the philosophy behind whatever they produce
CoC: Berlin - The Wicked City -- about the LGBT characters and culture portrayed
Cthulhu Confidential -- for it's comments about "straight white guys"

Weird.  It's almost like there's a pattern.

Quote from: jhkim;1104866On this site, I see a lot of people who seem to think that RPG publications are impactful -- at least enough to spend a while complaining about it.

It's not the publications in themselves which "have" an impact, or about which we're complaining. It's the pre-existing attitudes whose existence they confirm and reinforce -- which in themselves are less about the values they promote and uphold than about the critical breakpoint of how one should ethically address differences in such values within the community.

Put bleakly, "live and let live" only works as a way to handle disagreement as long as it isn't itself one of the things you disagree on. That condition seems to be eroding.

But this is beginning to veer outside the topic of specific game-related activity (for which I admit my share of responsibility), so I suggest we pull back to focus more on the games themselves.

Quote from: wmarshal;1104852As to this thread being the inverse of the TBP thread, nobody has caught a ban on this thread. So if by "inverse" you mean "better" then, yes, this thread is better than the one on TBP because the mods don't ban members on a weak ass technicality for interrupting their Two Minutes of Hate with a different point of view.

I don't even hate the change.  I'm more in the wait and see camp, but I'm glad this site allows push back and criticism.

Right, but the people complaining are very similar, just opposing viewpoints.

The opinion itself has never been a problem but the antics are annoying.

"Oh I'll never buy products from these SJW-apologist. I never did, but I super won't in the future!"

Is the same as:

"Oh I'll never buy products from these Southern-apologist. I never did, but I super won't in the future!"

It's virtue signalling.

Quote from: deadDMwalking;1104850Some of your explanations are completely wrong, but even if you were RIGHT, that doesn't mean that there aren't things that are presented badly and could be improved.  Have you ever read an adventure and didn't have some thoughts about how it could have been improved?  What's wrong with trying to make the game better?

I'm not explaining anything. I'm telling you what I've actually seen and participated in.

You tell me how any of these things make things BETTER. To WHOM? And in what manner is this being delivered to us? Are you that ignorant and obtuse?

Quote from: jhkim;1104866On this site, I see a lot of people who seem to think that RPG publications are impactful -- at least enough to spend a while complaining about it. In just the last few weeks, we've seen complaints about gaming products like:

FUN! Let's play Context Is King!

Quote from: jhkim;11048665E Essentials Kit -- for it's married co-kings subplot

- Set in a setting where Gnomes don't have kingdoms. This isn't a kingdom. The writers either know nothing about the setting which has been fairly established in terms of norms for 30+ years- decided to shoe-horn and extreme outlier for the singular purposes of putting forth their ideological agenda for WHOM?

Quote from: jhkim;1104866Consent in Gaming -- for its advice on gaming

- Where the writers decided to put forth their ideological views on things that do not matter to anyone with a shred of common sense for the purposes of establishing "behavior standards" free of context. NO better! To insulate people from engaging with others that might have different beliefs, or opinions, FOR WHOM?

Quote from: jhkim;1104866Cyberpunk Red -- for implied stuff about gender

Where people are outraged that CPR isn't representing their enough. Despite these conceits being part of the game LITERALLY since its inception in 1991.  Fake outrage. FOR WHOM?

Quote from: jhkim;1104866SWORD DREAM -- for the philosophy behind whatever they produce

Here you have a point. Because people, now tired of the ideology of the shitheads making this game have finally are making their attempt at creating their shit-show of a product make fun of it. I'm not one of them. I say let them eat their own shit-cake. If they like it. Great. Game on.

Quote from: jhkim;1104866CoC: Berlin - The Wicked City -- about the LGBT characters and culture portrayed
Cthulhu Confidential -- for it's comments about "straight white guys"

Because the writers decided to put forth their ideological views on things that do not matter to anyone with a shred of common sense for the purposes of injecting that ideology into every gaming nook and cranny for WHOM?

Quote from: Rhedyn;1104873"Oh I'll never buy products from these SJW-apologist. I never did, but I super won't in the future!"

Did you miss the posts where people who have bought product are commenting? I, for one, did buy Deadlands. Twice. Plus sourcebooks.

I find it amusing that people pretending to care on this thread defend, passive-aggressively, the notion that these ideas injected into entertainment designed to be consumed by us implies that if you DON'T like these ideas - then you are by default presumed to be a racist/misogynist/racist/bigot/etc.

As if that is some kind of rampant consumer practice among those that actually 1) engage in this hobby 2) create content for this hobby 3) actually want to encourage people to do 1) and 2) have actually been those things to the degree that SJW's pretend.

That's a funny game to watch. But it's not fun to play.