Quote from: Vmerc@;479079What small means I have are spent on whiskey.  Despite what you have been told, dictionaries are a luxury of which I rarely think.

Dude, you're online. You have access to hundreds of free dictionaries. Just google that shit.










Hey, only 295 posts to go now....

Quote from: skofflox;479229Remember that next time you need healing (1/2) Elf boy...

Dude, you know Gareth loves everyone

QuoteRunch has a good Wis. though mediocre Int. Coupled with a low Cha. he is a bit socialy inept.
Tudd has the Cha. and Str...taken as a whole we are a formidable and friendly force!

Indeed. man, I miss the game.

Quote from: beejazz;479214I get it. It's distasteful for me, and not for you. Stuff like that varies. I'm cool with that.

So your answer is that it doesn't actually matter, then? And that infanticide doesn't contribute anything but infanticide?

No imaginary infanticide of monster babies doesn't contribute anything but imaginary infanticide of monster babies.

QuoteOf course not. Because orcs=minorities is a stupid concept. I dismissed it as such pages ago.

That's kinds the topic though. It's what I've been addressing. What you seem to be referring to is personal preference, and in that case nobody is wrong.

QuoteHonestly? This wouldn't come up at my table for about the same reason PCs don't shit in the dungeon. It's just plain not what I showed up to the game to do. I'm just not into the helpless baby-killing.

I get what you're saying, but orc babies are not helpless in everyone's gameworld. It all depends on how you imagine them in your individual gameworld.

QuoteBut off the top of my head, eggs aren't really sentient yet, and even young dragons are still potentially combat-ready.

I'd guess most people imagine dragon babies to be potentially combat-ready, but not everyone. Actually, if I remember right, the protagonist of the movie Dragonslayer slaughtered some baby dragons that appeared pretty helpless to me, and I don't remember any moral fallout from that.

QuoteThe topic has kind of drifted to when "inherent evil" is really an okay distinction to use. Or rather, when we as GMs would be okay with using it (since there isn't really an objective answer on when it's okay to imagine a particular thing).

For some, it seems it has. That's not really what I am addressing though.

Quote from: Imperator;479238Dude, you know Gareth loves everyone


Indeed. man, I miss the game.

Flighty Elvish philosophies....

Yup...

Quote from: SigmundThat's kinds the topic though. It's what I've been addressing. What you seem to be referring to is personal preference, and in that case nobody is wrong.

There aren't objective right or wrong, but there are right and wrong tools for specific jobs. Bowser isn't an objectively crappy villain, but he'd be the wrong villain to plop into Watchmen.

Which is why I asked what killing helpless foes brings to the table. I tend not to add or nix things for their own sake, unless they are totally inconsequential, like the hair and eye color of every single NPC everywhere just isn't important to me. If I need to set it down it'll be as likely to be one thing as another.

QuoteI get what you're saying, but orc babies are not helpless in everyone's gameworld. It all depends on how you imagine them in your individual gameworld.

Non-helpless orcs are about the same as fungus orcs for the purpose of the argument though. The fungus orcs can be one year old or less. You kill them because they have killed and because they will kill you if you don't kill them.

Likewise non-sentient orcs would be fair game. Like wolves.

If they aren't helpless, harmless, and sentient, most of my problems with it go away.

But when they're helpless, harmless, and sentient, and you just kind of slap the "inherent evil" label on there without a specific reason... it looks like some special effort going in. Which makes it seem less inconsequential than what your wizard is wearing. From where I sit. Which is what prompts me to ask why.

QuoteI'd guess most people imagine dragon babies to be potentially combat-ready, but not everyone. Actually, if I remember right, the protagonist of the movie Dragonslayer slaughtered some baby dragons that appeared pretty helpless to me, and I don't remember any moral fallout from that.

I haven't seen dragonslayer. So I don't know if those were sentient dragons or not.

QuoteFor some, it seems it has. That's not really what I am addressing though.

So why respond to me as if I was the OP? I did not say most of the things you seem to be responding to. I didn't tell you (for example) that it was morally wrong to pretend a particular thing or that orcs were racist analogues.

So why quote me and respond as if I had said any of that?

Quote from: John Morrow;479119"Don't waste my time with telepathy. One of the most tremendously intellectually dishonest things people do around here on a consistent basis is pretend to read other people's minds."

I don't have to read your mind; you've said it in the past, you dishonest troll. You probably don't find it parochial and stupid, but it doesn't require telepathy to characterise your shitty, self-serving, ignorant worldview as such.

You also continue to utter statements that align with it, so I see no reason to believe that you've changed your mind.

Quote from: Sigmund;479121Are you kidding? I like Pseudo too, but that post is silly. You want outrage, there it is. He's grossly misrepresenting 90% of the posters who don't agree with him and belittling any opinion counter to his own. That's the worst way to argue a point, because he is leaving no room for being convinced. He's expressing his opinion as objective fact and discounting everyone else out of hand. I wouldn't be surprised if he hasn't even read most of what's been said by folks.

I read everything. Most of the discussion on this thread is low-value echo-chamber bullshit, and the little that isn't that, isn't particularly insightful or valuable either.

QuoteLook, I agree it's a silly topic, but that doesn't mean we aren't allowed to discuss it, especially when folks like Pseudo seriously try to defend Dray's ridiculous bullshit.

If I thought for one minute that there was actually racism in D&D I'd be right beside Dray in condemning it, but the entire idea is ludicrous. It's an escapist fantasy game, with very little that based in reality. Even it's portrayal of Medieval society and technology is only loosely based on historical fact. It's a game, nothing more. That it can be used by folks with a more sinister agenda (like Dray himself it seems) is sad, but does not speak to the point of the game itself.

Mate, you're a nice guy and a chum and everything, but if you think I'm arguing Adam Dray's position that killing orcs is racist, you're losing track of what I've actually said.

Quote from: beejazz;479247There aren't objective right or wrong, but there are right and wrong tools for specific jobs. Bowser isn't an objectively crappy villain, but he'd be the wrong villain to plop into Watchmen.

True, unless that's the kinda Watchmen the individual wants. Hell, might be amusing

QuoteWhich is why I asked what killing helpless foes brings to the table. I tend not to add or nix things for their own sake, unless they are totally inconsequential, like the hair and eye color of every single NPC everywhere just isn't important to me. If I need to set it down it'll be as likely to be one thing as another.

It could be nothing, as there are no helpless foes, only imaginary foes. However, if one were to want to introduce a wrinkle such as imagined morality into the game, then this would serve to help in that regard. It all depends on the goals of the players.

QuoteNon-helpless orcs are about the same as fungus orcs for the purpose of the argument though. The fungus orcs can be one year old or less. You kill them because they have killed and because they will kill you if you don't kill them.

Ok.

QuoteLikewise non-sentient orcs would be fair game. Like wolves.

If they aren't helpless, harmless, and sentient, most of my problems with it go away.

Ok, your preferences are your preferences, I gotcha. As long a you're not saying they're objective there's not much I can respond to there anymore.

QuoteBut when they're helpless, harmless, and sentient, and you just kind of slap the "inherent evil" label on there without a specific reason... it looks like some special effort going in. Which makes it seem less inconsequential than what your wizard is wearing. From where I sit. Which is what prompts me to ask why.

Not from where I sit, because none of this is real, and I don't look to RPGs for my lessons on morality.

QuoteI haven't seen dragonslayer. So I don't know if those were sentient dragons or not.

My first reaction here was to ask why sentience makes a difference, but honestly, I don't care. You are certainly entitled to your opinions on this, and as long as we're clear they are just personal preferences, I don't really have much to say about this either.

QuoteSo why respond to me as if I was the OP? I did not say most of the things you seem to be responding to. I didn't tell you (for example) that it was morally wrong to pretend a particular thing or that orcs were racist analogues.

So why quote me and respond as if I had said any of that?

Because I'm still talking about the actual topic of the thread. If you are not, that's not my problem. You seemed to be, but if you actually weren't, then I will stop discussing this with you. What I was getting out of your insistence, basically, that labeling things as "inherently evil" sucks, is that you find it to be a morally wrong. I am freely willing to admit that I am mistaken in getting that out of your posts if that's not what you meant, I was just thinking that you were still attempting to be on-topic. I have no interest in discussing whether "irredeemable evil" or imaginary morality has any worth at his time. You might try starting another thread if that's where you want to go... just a suggestion. At the very least we got to learn about some of each other's game preferences anyway.

Quote from: Sigmund;479124Brother, you sure do participate quite a bit for someone with such a low opinion of his fellow posters. Why are you here? do you need us to belittle in order to feel superior, or are you trying to educate us poor, ignorant souls in your infinite benevolence?

"All that is required for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing".

Or in this case "All that is required for idiots to run rampant is for no one to mock and despise them publicly".

QuoteWhat is your stand on the OP again? You support his opinion on the inherent racism of D&D why? Or is this the "ignore the topic and just insult people" portion of the thread?

You're getting angry and not paying attention to the actual comments I've made in this thread. Go do something else, come back when you're not pissed off, read the thread, and pay attention to what I've written.

Quote from: TristramEvans;479234Dude, you're online. You have access to hundreds of free dictionaries. Just google that shit.

He's trolling, not very well. So far he's a solid 4/10.

Quote from: Pseudoephedrine;479253"All that is required for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing".

Or in this case "All that is required for idiots to run rampant is for no one to mock and despise them publicly".

Really? I normally try to respond to posts in order, but this was a bit too much. Really? You don't honestly think you're over-reacting to the gravity of this shit here?

QuoteYou're getting angry and not paying attention to the actual comments I've made in this thread. Go do something else, come back when you're not pissed off, read the thread, and pay attention to what I've written.

I'm really not angry. Kinda disappointed, and not even that very strongly. It is always possible, however, that I have missed something as I am only human. I will get back to you then, because it sure seems to me like you've been supporting Dray's position to me. That is what this thread is about after all, isn't it? First beejazz and now you are saying you aren't actually talking about the thread topic in this thread? Has the topic of the thread changed when I wasn't looking or something? It has the same title.... I'll check when I get home from work.

Quote from: Pseudoephedrine;479251I read everything. Most of the discussion on this thread is low-value echo-chamber bullshit, and the little that isn't that, isn't particularly insightful or valuable either.

Does it always need to be? We're talking about fantasy roleplaying games here. What about that is high-minded or serious in any way? In fact, that's the whole point, at least from my perspective. This Dray feller is taking this shit WAY too seriously.

QuoteMate, you're a nice guy and a chum and everything, but if you think I'm arguing Adam Dray's position that killing orcs is racist, you're losing track of what I've actually said.

I really do think that, so as I said in my previous response to you, perhaps I have lost track. I'm always willing to admit when I'm wrong. Once again, I'll check when I get home.

Quote from: Pseudoephedrine;479255He's trolling, not very well. So far he's a solid 4/10.

I don't agree, I'd give him at least an 8 just for the creative writing. I'm not the biggest fan of trolling, but if I'm being entertained I'll say so He might end up being as good as Aos even. It helps that we're on "the same side".

Quote from: beejazz;479214To clarify:

I did not say that the purpose of evil in game was only to justify killing evil things.

I did say that evil is not the only justification for killing things.

Appears I have fucked up once again.  

So then you would agree that

Cosmology A with no absolute alignment system

is in no way intrisically superior or inferior to

Cosmology B with an absolute alignment system and irredeemable beings - as well as redeemable, free-willed creatures.

Quote from: Pseudoephedrine;479255He's trolling, not very well. So far he's a solid 4/10.

Right.  And you're not.  Address my point or join me at the bar of irrelevance.  Just dont ask me to sip wine from a thin-rimmed glass.