Wasn't Ten Bones involved with Savage Lands?

Now that is a classic RPG!

Quote from: LouProsperi on June 29, 2023, 04:39:05 PM

From December 1992 through June 1998 I was the Product Line Developer for Earthdawn at FASA. During that time I lead the develop of the entire product line, designed rules systems, wrote supplements, and was (to use your words) "a pivotal figure in a particular game's development".

LOU!

Earthdawn!

One of my favorite games and settings!  I remember asking you questions about various rules all those years ago!  Hell, I still have the printouts of your replies in my old Earthdawn books  

Evolving magic items and how elemental magic can be woven into things is still something I carry forward into all my RPG games to this day!


Anyways back you guys bickering-dickering over things

Hello,

Quote from: Brad on June 29, 2023, 09:59:45 PM

Quote from: Rob Necronomicon on June 29, 2023, 06:37:22 PM
As was pointed out. No one gives a shit about your credentials. You're the one who started the ad hominem attacks in the first place. You big baby.

No on cares in the sense that his credentials mean fuckall as to the legitimacy and/or notability of this "award". I, for one, would like more people with industry experience to post here because you can get some good information about, I dunno, the INDUSTRY. But you gotta have a thick skin...and you'd think someone who wrote stuff for publication, much less RPG stuff, would be able to put up with the grumbling rabble. Alas...

So yeah, he started off as a total ass, but if he actually makes a reasonable argument I am totally willing to listen.

I think I have thick skin when it comes to criticisms about my work. It's considerably less thick when I'm accused of lying about the work I've done.

That said, you are correct, I started off in this thread as an ass.

Quote from: Rob Necronomicon on June 29, 2023, 10:04:53 PM

Quote from: Brad on June 29, 2023, 09:59:45 PM
So yeah, he started off as a total ass, but if he actually makes a reasonable argument I am totally willing to listen.

Absolutely. I'd be willing to listen to any reasonable argument as well. But when you come in guns blazing you're opening yourself up for people giving it back to you from the off. Hostility breeds hostility...

And it would also be cool to have more industry pros talk here as well.

Yes, my aggressive stance was a mistake, and the response I got was deserved.

As for a reasonable argument...

My argument that the Diana Jones award is more than mere virtue signaling boils down to one basic and personal thing: I value and trust the opinions of the people on the committee more than those who are attacking it. When people who I know and respect, and who have worked in the gaming industry for many, many years say "Hey, this thing is excellent!", I take notice. I don't always agree with their assessment, but I still stop and listen to what they say.

Then when someone like Pundit, a narcissistic, self-described "shitlord" who seems to believe that he and he alone understands roleplaying games comes out and attacks the credibility of those same people who I know and respect, is it a surprise that I would side with the committee members?


Do I wish the descriptions of the nominees were more focused on their work than their gender identity or race or other non-game related stuff? Absolutely. But I also believe that there must be more to those nominees than just their gender identity and race and other non-game related stuff to make them worthy of being nominated for the award (with the notable exception of Journeys through the Radiant Citadel, which was intended as a work designed by people of color, so we can't really dismiss the race part on that one).

Consider the following rewrite of one of the nominee descriptions:

QuoteLINDA CODEGA
A journalist focusing on tabletop gaming
Published on io9 and Gizmodo

Linda Codega is a journalist and critic focused on tabletop gaming, as well as a speculative fiction writer and tabletop game designer. Their investigative reporting for io9 of Wizards of the Coast's proposed deauthorization of the Open Gaming License led to widespread reexamination of open gaming. As a result, Wizards released the core rules of Dungeons & Dragons under an irrevocable Creative Commons license and opened a new dialog about the future of the game with fans and creators.

All I did was take out 2 words related to gender identity. The rest of the description still makes a strong case for recognizing Linda's work. And while Pundit may claim otherwise, if you were paying attention during the bruh-ha-ha around the OGL, you saw several pieces by Codega that helped spread the word and explain what WotC was planning (and how their plans changed when they realized just how deeply they'd stepped into it). She contributed in a material way to WotC's change of direction. Isn't that excellent and worthy of acknowledgement?

So that's my argument. I think it's reasonable. You might disagree. That's okay. I also understand that my argument may not change any one's mind here, and that's okay too.


Take Care,

Lou Prosperi

Personally I do think that Linda Codega's holding WoTC's feet to the fire on the OGL is a justification for the award nomination. She acted as a lightning rod for the whole community. Her claiming to be 'genderqueer' etc adds nothing to that. She could have been an (actual) straight white male and been equally worthy. To my more Based colleagues here, I'd say that Codega being fucked in the head re 'gender identity' shouldn't disqualify her as a journalist. Yes she collated stuff other people had already said, but as a relatively mainstream journalist she took it to another level.

Quote from: LouProsperi on July 03, 2023, 12:09:36 PM
My argument that the Diana Jones award is more than mere virtue signaling boils down to one basic and personal thing: I value and trust the opinions of the people on the committee more than those who are attacking it. When people who I know and respect, and who have worked in the gaming industry for many, many years say "Hey, this thing is excellent!", I take notice. I don't always agree with their assessment, but I still stop and listen to what they say.

Then when someone like Pundit, a narcissistic, self-described "shitlord" who seems to believe that he and he alone understands roleplaying games comes out and attacks the credibility of those same people who I know and respect, is it a surprise that I would side with the committee members?

Do I wish the descriptions of the nominees were more focused on their work than their gender identity or race or other non-game related stuff? Absolutely. But I also believe that there must be more to those nominees than just their gender identity and race and other non-game related stuff to make them worthy of being nominated for the award (with the notable exception of Journeys through the Radiant Citadel, which was intended as a work designed by people of color, so we can't really dismiss the race part on that one).

You trust the committee's members. Great. Given that 2/3rds of them are anonymous, you are in a privileged position. To everyone else it sounds like "bro just trust me."

You believe that the award is not entirely based on gender/race identity? This translates to: There might be some gaming merit to the award. Is this your position?

In other words, as a gamer with limited time and money, why should I pay attention to this award? How can I trust the committee when they are obviously influenced by identity? I want to play good games and don't give a shit about the identity of the creator.

Quote from: rytrasmi on July 03, 2023, 01:10:28 PM

Quote from: LouProsperi on July 03, 2023, 12:09:36 PM
My argument that the Diana Jones award is more than mere virtue signaling boils down to one basic and personal thing: I value and trust the opinions of the people on the committee more than those who are attacking it. When people who I know and respect, and who have worked in the gaming industry for many, many years say "Hey, this thing is excellent!", I take notice. I don't always agree with their assessment, but I still stop and listen to what they say.

Then when someone like Pundit, a narcissistic, self-described "shitlord" who seems to believe that he and he alone understands roleplaying games comes out and attacks the credibility of those same people who I know and respect, is it a surprise that I would side with the committee members?

Do I wish the descriptions of the nominees were more focused on their work than their gender identity or race or other non-game related stuff? Absolutely. But I also believe that there must be more to those nominees than just their gender identity and race and other non-game related stuff to make them worthy of being nominated for the award (with the notable exception of Journeys through the Radiant Citadel, which was intended as a work designed by people of color, so we can't really dismiss the race part on that one).

You trust the committee's members. Great. Given that 2/3rds of them are anonymous, you are in a privileged position. To everyone else it sounds like "bro just trust me."

To clarify, I only know the committee members whose names are on the public list.

Quote
You believe that the award is not entirely based on gender/race identity? This translates to: There might be some gaming merit to the award. Is this your position?

I believe that the award is based on gaming merit. I'd like to think that gender/race identity have little to no role in how the committee chooses nominees, but in fairness I have to confess I don't know that for certain, and would be quite disappointed to learn otherwise. For example, I would be very disappointed if I asked Ken Hite or Matt Forbeck (both committee members) why they feel Coyote and Crow deserves to be nominated and their answer was "Because the designer is a Native American."

Quote
In other words, as a gamer with limited time and money, why should I pay attention to this award? How can I trust the committee when they are obviously influenced by identity? I want to play good games and don't give a shit about the identity of the creator.

At the crux of my position is the fact that I don't agree that the committee is "obviously influenced by identity", so I'm probably not the right person to answer that question. I don't know. Maybe you shouldn't pay attention to it.


Take Care,

Lou

Monday, July 3, 2023

Greetings!

You are welcome, Lou Prosperi! I am glad to provide you with such nostalgia and happiness. I have always liked the Greyhawk world.

Thinking about your opening, well, yes, it takes some humility, fortitude, and integrity to admit when you are wrong, and apologize. Outstanding, Lou! It is good to see that you have returned, and in better spirits! Welcome back!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

The Codega nomination is quite obviously justified.  Can anyone seriously suggest another piece of RPG journalism that had anywhere near its impact?  Pundit is just salty because the edgelord ecosphere was reduced to playing catch-up on the issue.  Also, anyone who has EVER had a direct financial relationship with WotC is not a neutral source on 5e.  If you wouldn't take the word of an ex employee in another industry at face value, don't do it here.

Coyote & Crow? Dunno, haven't read it.  Not interested in it from what I know.  A KS campaign of that size probably is significant in its own right though.

Radiant Citadel.  I'm assuming it's shit because it's 5e and everything for 5e sucks  Perhaps that's unfair.

Rosenstrasse?  Could be interesting; I like historical games.  Not at that price though, especially for a one shot. (Perhaps unfairly, the pricing structure makes me suspect it's largely aimed at academic, not a general RPG audience.

So that's three games I don't know enough about to really have an opinion not based entirely on my own instinctual bias.

And then we come to Cole Wehrle where the whole thing just descends into farce.

Wehrle is a big name.  But he's a board game designer, not a RPG designer like Pundit seems to think.

The main argument against his inclusion seems to be that Pundit hasn't heard of him, which seems rather thin.

The guy designed Root.  You don't have to like the game, but if you know anything at all about boardgames I have trouble believing you haven't heard of it.

Pax Pamir is more of a niche taste (it's a heavy Euro) but again, it's successful.  Enough to warrant a second edition.

John Company seems to be what he's been nominated before but again apparently it's too obscure because Pundit's not heard of it.  It's a heavy negotiation game and it's excellent, although admittedly I only own first edition.  Try it for yourself on Tabletop Simulator if you want to see how it plays.  It's an excellent historical game and a lot of fun.  (It also, like all of his games, has nothing that could be described as identity based) at all.

Honestly, the only way I think that anyone could seriously question Wehrle's inclusion is either a) they don't think boardgames should be eligible or b) they know absolutely nothing about modern boardgames.

Sadly, sales figures don't seem to be available, or I would absolutely take the bet that Wehrle has made more money from game design than Pundit.  Which I'm absolutely sure is the case, but can't prove without that evidence.

Quote from: SHARK on July 03, 2023, 02:30:19 PM
well, yes, it takes some humility, fortitude, and integrity to admit when you are wrong, and apologize.

Exactly... So fair play to, Lou for that.

I can't in all good conscience agree with his position, given the skewing of the award towards identity and diversity politics. It goes beyond the realm of probability.

Quote from: Rob Necronomicon on July 03, 2023, 02:43:33 PM

Quote from: SHARK on July 03, 2023, 02:30:19 PM
well, yes, it takes some humility, fortitude, and integrity to admit when you are wrong, and apologize.

Exactly... So fair play to, Lou for that.

I can't in all good conscience agree with his position, given the skewing of the award towards identity and diversity politics. It goes beyond the realm of probability.

And I can appreciate your position, can understand where you're coming from, and have to concede that unfortunately the messaging around the nominees in some cases supports your POV.

Of course something to keep in mind is that merit and identity/diversity politics are not mutually exclusive. For example, the addition of pronouns to the Call of Cthulhu character sheet doesn't change the fact that it's an excellent game.


Take Care,

Lou

Quote from: LouProsperi on July 03, 2023, 03:05:39 PM

Quote from: Rob Necronomicon on July 03, 2023, 02:43:33 PM

Quote from: SHARK on July 03, 2023, 02:30:19 PM
well, yes, it takes some humility, fortitude, and integrity to admit when you are wrong, and apologize.

Exactly... So fair play to, Lou for that.

I can't in all good conscience agree with his position, given the skewing of the award towards identity and diversity politics. It goes beyond the realm of probability.

And I can appreciate your position, can understand where you're coming from, and have to concede that unfortunately the messaging around the nominees in some cases supports your POV.

Of course something to keep in mind is that merit and identity/diversity politics are not mutually exclusive. For example, the addition of pronouns to the Call of Cthulhu character sheet doesn't change the fact that it's an excellent game.


Take Care,

Lou

I agree... If a game is good then a game is good, it's that simple  . So adding pronouns doesn't take that fact away.

I'd be far more open to awards if they were at least being honest about a category (the who, what & why) they were after.

I don't have a problem with inclusion or diversity but I don't really like the way some of the game companies pander to the nth degree either. Or slot aspects in that are not congruent to the game's canon or lore. Especially when they are being very heavy-handed or preachy like WoTC.

Quote from: LouProsperi on July 03, 2023, 03:05:39 PM

Quote from: Rob Necronomicon on July 03, 2023, 02:43:33 PM

Quote from: SHARK on July 03, 2023, 02:30:19 PM
well, yes, it takes some humility, fortitude, and integrity to admit when you are wrong, and apologize.

Exactly... So fair play to, Lou for that.

I can't in all good conscience agree with his position, given the skewing of the award towards identity and diversity politics. It goes beyond the realm of probability.

And I can appreciate your position, can understand where you're coming from, and have to concede that unfortunately the messaging around the nominees in some cases supports your POV.

Of course something to keep in mind is that merit and identity/diversity politics are not mutually exclusive. For example, the addition of pronouns to the Call of Cthulhu character sheet doesn't change the fact that it's an excellent game.


Take Care,

Lou

Theoretically they aren't, in reality they are, or at least they prove to be when your main marketing point is "Muh Diversity!". For example ALL the recent Disney/Marvel/Pixar flops.

Same is true in gaming, for example the radiant citadel.

huh...I hadn't thought of a subscription as a way to force people to pay for content they would have boycotted otherwise.  From that angle the "no more books" concept makes sense.

Quote from: David Johansen on July 03, 2023, 08:26:18 PM
huh...I hadn't thought of a subscription as a way to force people to pay for content they would have boycotted otherwise.  From that angle the "no more books" concept makes sense.

Currently, D&DBeyond users don't get any additional content by subscription. They pay for additional content by micropayments (plus bundles that put together a bunch of small content pieces).

If anything, the micropayment model makes it easier for users to selectively boycott content that they don't like.

Quote from: LouProsperi on July 03, 2023, 02:02:08 PM
I value and trust the opinions of the people on the committee more than those who are attacking it.

Do I wish the descriptions of the nominees were more focused on their work than their gender identity or race or other non-game related stuff? Absolutely. But I also believe that there must be more to those nominees than just their gender identity and race and other non-game related stuff to make them worthy of being nominated for the award.

I believe that the award is based on gaming merit. I'd like to think that gender/race identity have little to no role in how the committee chooses nominees

I don't think it.  The fact that the first thing the site showcases is their ideological identity: "so and so is a queer non-binary (that is, biology-denier)" so-called "journalist" and "critic", is the first thing they wish to let you know, mot "this person made a great game", and with Coyote & Crow as a finalist, you know it's anything but merit-based.  These first two games are oozing with ideology.  It's no secret in the RPG industry that privilege comes with wokeness, and you don't have to try as hard to get the industry's approval and praise, and those who produce quality works are at a disadvantage without it.