Quote from: anthologos on August 30, 2022, 05:05:32 AM
I think that while the concept of the 'October Surprise' is a valid one, going back centuries in politics, the 1980 Reagan campaign story has been fairly discredited...I believe the first proponent of the theory that Reagan et al. negotiated with Iranian leaders secretly to win the 1980 election in a tit-for-tat agreement was started by Lyndon Larouche, of all people, and within a month after the '80 election. (Larouche, not exactly a man known for his moderate and balanced views, was a bit of a moonbat, but quite fascinating. More games should include Larouche elements of conspiracy, intellectual hubris, and paranoia.)

I did not realize LaRouche started this.  And you are right about both counts: he is out there and he is an interesting character.  I read one of his books back in the 1980s, and it's thought-provoking.  I haven't gotten too much into politics in Radical High, since the game's main focus is high school students, but when I cover 1980s politics, I won't forget to include him.

Quote from: FingerRod on August 30, 2022, 08:28:16 AM
Kyle, I am a fan of the overall TFL product. The art alone is worth the price of the product

That is correct: it has excellent art  it looks like stills from a VHS tape.  (But this has nothing to do with the gameplay so Kyle might say we can't discuss the art)

The server double-posted this, so disregard this one.  (Or read this one and disregard the original.)

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on August 30, 2022, 08:38:25 AM

Quote from: FingerRod on August 30, 2022, 08:28:16 AM
It was not answered because it is not the topic.

Gaming should always be the topic. If you want to get indignant over things that are irrelevant in play, there's always rpg.net.

That's my view too. But here, by bringing up gaming, I apparently interrupted the Two Minutes of Hate that others were trying to get going...much as we have seen on RPGnet.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on August 30, 2022, 07:38:38 AM
Games can have all sorts of nonsense backgrounds to them, what matters is what shows up in play.

If that's so, then one wonders why the author included all of the nonsense background. I think the latter is the question this thread begs an answer to. If the content of a game book beyond a rules summary is irrelevant, then why are people writing it, and why are people reading it?

The entirety of the content matters to me if I'm purchasing or reading a product.

Quote from: HappyDaze on August 30, 2022, 09:37:17 AM

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on August 30, 2022, 08:38:25 AM
Gaming should always be the topic. If you want to get indignant over things that are irrelevant in play, there's always rpg.net.

That's my view too. But here, by bringing up gaming, I apparently interrupted the Two Minutes of Hate that others were trying to get going...much as we have seen on RPGnet.

I hope you aren't including me in this statement. Nothing I said was "hateful" toward the book or the creators. The worst I said was that the writers were biased, but I think that's been objectively shown. Nothing "hateful" about that. In fact, as I looked into the game, it really resonated with me and I'm actually considering buying it, biases and all. You're right, gameplay is all that really should matter, but that's also not the topic of this thread. Do you think lactose-intolerance should be discussed in a topic about favorite ice cream flavors?

Quote from: Effete on August 30, 2022, 11:05:06 AM

I hope you aren't including me in this statement. Nothing I said was "hateful" toward the book or the creators. The worst I said was that the writers were biased, but I think that's been objectively shown. Nothing "hateful" about that. In fact, as I looked into the game, it really resonated with me and I'm actually considering buying it, biases and all. You're right, gameplay is all that really should matter, but that's also not the topic of this thread. Do you think lactose-intolerance should be discussed in a topic about favorite ice cream flavors?

My sentiments exactly.  It's about RPGs.  I saw this, noted it, and didn't think the lie should stand unchallenged.  This game isn't for me, but NOT because of the lie, although that is a turn-off.  It's just not the 80s universe for me.  For other people, this is a perfect setting, and that's also fine.

Quote from: HappyDaze on August 30, 2022, 09:37:17 AM

Quote from: Kyle Aaron on August 30, 2022, 08:38:25 AM

Quote from: FingerRod on August 30, 2022, 08:28:16 AM
It was not answered because it is not the topic.

Gaming should always be the topic. If you want to get indignant over things that are irrelevant in play, there's always rpg.net.

That's my view too. But here, by bringing up gaming, I apparently interrupted the Two Minutes of Hate that others were trying to get going...much as we have seen on RPGnet.

Nobody was hating on anything. Go back and read my posts. I praised the product and said I would recommend it. That is not indignant. Telling people to leave and go to another forum shows how weak both of your arguments are.

Oh, for fuck's sake!  Please stop treating Happyderp as if his opinion is based on anything other than shilling for lefties in gaming and trolling this site.  If the game had a conspiracy that denigrated lefty ideas or historical leftists, he'd be the first to claim that it destroyed the setting and had everything to do with the "game."  The reality is that the lefty writers of this game included revisionist history for no reason other than it suits their biases.  It also suits Happyderp's biases, so he sees no problem with it.  Were it a right-wing conspiracy, he'd treat it completely differently.

If you want to play the game, fine.  If not, that's fine, too.  But the idea that the setting has nothing to do with players' and GMs' reaction to the game is ignorant at best and disingenuous at worst.  If these authors had blamed the AIDS epidemic in the 80s on promiscuous gays recruiting underaged kids and molesting them, causing a mutated illness, none of these leftists here would be claiming that it was no big deal and that it had no effect on the game or its players.  Lying liars are gonna lie...

Quote from: Eirikrautha on August 30, 2022, 10:36:51 PM
Oh, for fuck's sake!  Please stop treating Happyderp as if his opinion is based on anything other than shilling for lefties in gaming and trolling this site.  If the game had a conspiracy that denigrated lefty ideas or historical leftists, he'd be the first to claim that it destroyed the setting and had everything to do with the "game."  The reality is that the lefty writers of this game included revisionist history for no reason other than it suits their biases.  It also suits Happyderp's biases, so he sees no problem with it.  Were it a right-wing conspiracy, he'd treat it completely differently.

If you want to play the game, fine.  If not, that's fine, too.  But the idea that the setting has nothing to do with players' and GMs' reaction to the game is ignorant at best and disingenuous at worst.  If these authors had blamed the AIDS epidemic in the 80s on promiscuous gays recruiting underaged kids and molesting them, causing a mutated illness, none of these leftists here would be claiming that it was no big deal and that it had no effect on the game or its players.  Lying liars are gonna lie...

You're full of shit. I don't care about historical inaccuracies in my RPGs regardless which way they blow in the political winds. I buy games to play them (or to chew up for material to run other games), not to use as a history primer.

Everybody here missed the obvious answer?

They wanted to include a short overview of 1980's history. Wanted to make the US government come of as a bit shady in that overview, because that fits in nicely with some of the broader themes of the game. So they included the Iran Contra scandal and misremembered the details, because the specifics of the scandal aren't important for the game, so they did not bother look them up.

Quote from: igor on August 31, 2022, 01:53:59 AM
Everybody here missed the obvious answer?

They wanted to include a short overview of 1980's history. Wanted to make the US government come of as a bit shady in that overview, because that fits in nicely with some of the broader themes of the game. So they included the Iran Contra scandal and misremembered the details, because the specifics of the scandal aren't important for the game, so they did not bother look them up.

"Everybody" missed that?
Read the thread again fucko. I said in my very first post that if the authors were purposely revising history, they need to make that clear. I also alluded to the possibility that they simply believed the conspiracy theory and didn't look beyond their own biases.

Also, the Iran Contra scandal was something completely different from the Iranian Hostage Crises, which is what the book is misrepresenting.

You didn't allude strongly enough...
Because I missed that, if that was the intend.

(It was actually hidden away in your 2nd post)

Sorry. I'm being petty.

I think that is the proper explanation. It's actually one of the few conspiracy theories that makes a bit of sense. So people who aren't paying closes attention can easily pick it up and just believe it is the way it happened. 

Quote from: igor on August 31, 2022, 02:52:28 AM
Sorry. I'm being petty.

Big on you for saying this!
Much respect!

QuoteI think that is the proper explanation. It's actually one of the few conspiracy theories that makes a bit of sense. So people who aren't paying closes attention can easily pick it up and just believe it is the way it happened.

Yes. Occam's Razor.
People love to have their biases validated. Ergo: they will believe whatever confirms their biases.

For the record. The conspiracy is that the Reagan election campaign convinced the Iranian government to drag their feet during the hostage negotiations, promising them a better deal if they get into power. That works and that better deal manifests as the Iranian half of the Iran Contra scandal. 

This makes sense. Especially because the Nixon campaign actually did something like this during the Vietnam peace negotiations in Paris during Nixon's first successful presidential campaign.