I understand WotC went with an MMO style for a good reason. I personally don't like it, but I am not surprised many people do.

Quote from: jibbajibba;421187Rather like the Tea party, with whom I suspect he identifies strongly, Koltar yearns for a simpler time when things were clear and there was a lot less confusion.

Oooh, oooh!  Do I get to make an analogy with people who put all their hope in "change" under the assumption that any "change" will be an improvement and that things can't possibly get worse?  

Or, maybe the way it's really similar to politics is that people who are happy with the way things are don't want them to change and people who don't like the way they are do want them to change, regardless of their political orientation?

The same people who regularly call for "change" suddenly become sticklers for precedent when they like the way things are and don't like the change just as advocates for tradition and the status quo suddenly become advocates for change when they don't like the way things are and like the change being proposed.  It fascinates me how quickly both sides of a political debate throw their supposedly core principles under the bus for expediency and victory.  Most of the time, principles are simply rhetorical devices rather than real principles, and that includes the people who fancy themselves as being "open-minded" and desirous of "change".

Quote from: jibbajibba;421187Now the risk of this of course is that the time that Koltar harks back to never really existed, there were always multiple strands in RPGs and completing ideas and memes. By fixating on his own game experience at a point in time as a halycon age,  he ignores all the other stuff that was going on in the hobby at that time. In addtion by ignoring these influcences there is little room for improvement or innovation.

Or another way to look at it (going back to my point above) is that people who were never quite happy with the hobby as it was are trying to drag the hobby in a new direction and the people who were happy with the hobby as it was don't like it and don't think it needs to change.  Or does the explanation for the difference of opinion have to frame one side of the debate as psychologically unstable individuals and the other side as champions of truth, justice, and all things good?  

Because everyone (in the developed world) gets a smattering of psychology in school and through the media, everyone fancies themselves an armchair psychologist qualified to psychoanalyze people that they've never actually met.  And, yes, almost everyone does it, myself included.  Post-modernism, by rejecting objective truth and making people focus on language, power, motivations, and politics, has really screwed people and debate up.  Instead of arguing the merits of an argument against the facts, people wander off into logical fallacy land and spend all of their time debating semantics, the motivations behind the argument, politics, and whether one can make any objective statement at all.

Quote from: John Morrow;421206It fascinates me how quickly both sides of a political debate throw their supposedly core principles under the bus for expediency and victory.  Most of the time, principles are simply rhetorical devices rather than real principles, and that includes the people who fancy themselves as being "open-minded" and desirous of "change".

Human nature at its best.

That is why I like variety, and people trying new things. I don't like most of them, but I think that the continuous generation of ideas is a good thing.

QuoteOr another way to look at it (going back to my point above) is that people who were never quite happy with the hobby as it was are trying to drag the hobby in a new direction and the people who were happy with the hobby as it was don't like it and don't think it needs to change.

John, if D&D 4e proves something is that no one has or will have the capacity of dragging the hobby in any direction.

I dislike post-modernism as much as you do, but I don't think that we can deny that tastes are, indeed, a subjective thing. And I think is sensible to say that RPGs are a very wide umbrella that allow for an enormous variety of ways to pay them, while still being RPGs.

The phenomena you describe (a hobby being driven in this or that direction by any agent) is really difficult, thanks to Internet. WotC launches D&D 4e? Lo and behold, you can kick it old-school with the OSR, you can acquire legally or ilegally any material for any game you want, be it OOP or in-print, and it is not dependant on any publisher.

Apart from that, you have the plethora of blogs, websites, messageboards and other venues of content-generation. Fuck, you have even dice-rollers, online tables and whatnot. Gaming has dramatically changed in many aspects, and remained the same in many others.

My problem with Koltar's position is not that I consider him evil, delusional, or mentally unstable (and I am indeed a psychologist). The problem I have is that he's ignorant, and his assertions are baseless and unfounded in facts. For all I know, he can be the nicest, sanest guy around. I don't care, I'm not questioning that.

Quote from: Imperator;421214I dislike post-modernism as much as you do, but I don't think that we can deny that tastes are, indeed, a subjective thing. And I think is sensible to say that RPGs are a very wide umbrella that allow for an enormous variety of ways to pay them, while still being RPGs.

Correct, and that's why I keep quoting Ryan Dancey's point from 2000 that a successful game should offer something for all styles of play rather than trying to specialize around a single style to produce the perfect game for that style (which was the whole point of "coherency" in Forge-speak) or even to improve one style by throwing another style under the bus.  I think a lot can be controlled by how a game is set up and played, which can be tuned to a particular group, rather than crafting core mechanics that do only one style of pay well that must be used by everyone.  I continue to be an advocate for systems that can be used in more than one way.  As such, I don't have a problem with things like Fudge points as an option or starting out with competent characters (which I actually enjoy

• ).  My objection is to making such things mandatory or the core mechanic of the game.

Quote from: Imperator;421214The phenomena you describe (a hobby being driven in this or that direction by any agent) is really difficult, thanks to Internet.

I said they are "trying to drag the hobby".  I'm not saying that they will succeed.  But any small hobby such as role-playing is not helped by segmentation and division, which such movements can create, even if they don't succeed in domination.  See Cole's point about the damage done in the 1990s by people trying to use D&D to tell stories.  Plenty of people kept doing what they'd already been doing and it didn't really change the hobby in the long run, but it hurt the hobby as a whole by affecting what was published and what people could buy.

Quote from: Imperator;421214My problem with Koltar's position is not that I consider him evil, delusional, or mentally unstable (and I am indeed a psychologist). The problem I have is that he's ignorant, and his assertions are baseless and unfounded in facts. For all I know, he can be the nicest, sanest guy around. I don't care, I'm not questioning that.

I saw it as a rant.  "Get off my lawn, you darned kids!"  Rants are rarely well-formed arguments.  They are an expression of frustration.

• My Robin Laws style percentages from an online test (the one jibbajibba uses in his signature) were:

Method Actor: 100%
Butt-Kicker: 75%
Tactician: 42%
Casual Gamer: 33%
Storyteller: 33%
Specialist: 33%
Power Gamer: 33%

The last for are at 33% because I'm not strongly against having them at the table.  The top three are how I self-identify.  To be able to "kick butt" in the game generally requires reasonably competent characters, which is why I don't mind creating them that way from the beginning of the game.  But that's easy enough to do in a game that also allows you to play starting characters.  Just add experience points and improve the character before play.  You don't need a whole new system for that that precludes the ability to play the other way.  The Tactical blip is why I don't want totally abstract combat and prefer combat systems that take position and timing into account.

Quote from: John Morrow;421217Correct, and that's why I keep quoting Ryan Dancey's point from 2000 that a successful game should offer something for all styles of play rather than trying to specialize around a single style to produce the perfect game for that style (which was the whole point of "coherency" in Forge-speak) or even to improve one style by throwing another style under the bus.

In this we can agree. OTOH, I don't think a game can be good to everyone, and I don't think it should even try. I think that the author should have a clear goal in mind (usually about the setting or genre he wants to emulate), and roll with it.  

QuoteI think a lot can be controlled by how a game is set up and played, which can be tuned to a particular group, rather than crafting core mechanics that do only one style of pay well that must be used by everyone.

You mean by houseruling?

QuoteI continue to be an advocate for systems that can be used in more than one way.  As such, I don't have a problem with things like Fudge points as an option or starting out with competent characters (which I actually enjoy

• ).  My objection is to making such things mandatory or the core mechanic of the game.

I can agree on that, definitely.

QuoteI said they are "trying to drag the hobby".  I'm not saying that they will succeed.  But any small hobby such as role-playing is not helped by segmentation and division, which such movements can create, even if they don't succeed in domination.  See Cole's point about the damage done in the 1990s by people trying to use D&D to tell stories.  Plenty of people kept doing what they'd already been doing and it didn't really change the hobby in the long run, but it hurt the hobby as a whole by affecting what was published and what people could buy.

My point is that Internet has changed all that, forever. What happened in the 90s cannot happen again due to the Web. That is my opinion.

Anyway, your opinion is very similar to mine. I would simply add that many indie games allow for different levels of power when creating a PC

Quote from: John Morrow;421206Oooh, oooh!  Do I get to make an analogy with people who put all their hope in "change" under the assumption that any "change" will be an improvement and that things can't possibly get worse?  

Or, maybe the way it's really similar to politics is that people who are happy with the way things are don't want them to change and people who don't like the way they are do want them to change, regardless of their political orientation?

The same people who regularly call for "change" suddenly become sticklers for precedent when they like the way things are and don't like the change just as advocates for tradition and the status quo suddenly become advocates for change when they don't like the way things are and like the change being proposed.  It fascinates me how quickly both sides of a political debate throw their supposedly core principles under the bus for expediency and victory.  Most of the time, principles are simply rhetorical devices rather than real principles, and that includes the people who fancy themselves as being "open-minded" and desirous of "change".



Or another way to look at it (going back to my point above) is that people who were never quite happy with the hobby as it was are trying to drag the hobby in a new direction and the people who were happy with the hobby as it was don't like it and don't think it needs to change.  Or does the explanation for the difference of opinion have to frame one side of the debate as psychologically unstable individuals and the other side as champions of truth, justice, and all things good?  

Because everyone (in the developed world) gets a smattering of psychology in school and through the media, everyone fancies themselves an armchair psychologist qualified to psychoanalyze people that they've never actually met.  And, yes, almost everyone does it, myself included.  Post-modernism, by rejecting objective truth and making people focus on language, power, motivations, and politics, has really screwed people and debate up.  Instead of arguing the merits of an argument against the facts, people wander off into logical fallacy land and spend all of their time debating semantics, the motivations behind the argument, politics, and whether one can make any objective statement at all.

Well actually I was trying to hint that there is a degree of nostalgia in Koltar's original point. He played these games back in the day when no one was trying to get him to tell stories or use cards or any of that crap he just rolled up a Space Mercenary that was basically a Dorsai with the serial numbers filed off and went round killing stuff and that was ALL GAMES WERE ABOUT GOD DAMN YOU!

The fact that in the 80s when he was doing that some other kids were experimenting with diceless games, or storytelling games using cards or games with complex social rules and so on is irrelevant because he didn't know about it or care.

People have been dragging the hobby in a new direction as soon as there was a hobby. What do you think Gygax was doing? He was innovating changing adding stuff rejecting other stuff. At the same time he was far more guilty than most in trying to control the direction of the hobby and recast it in his own image.

You can imagine Koltar's post being written by a wargaming fan in the late 70s saying how when he was a kid we just played with minis and I was Napoleon and you were Wellington and there was none of this crap with Roleplaying and fucking elves and pixies and shit and what the fuck is wrong with ordinary dice and a bit of string to measure range.

The Tea Part analogy is was becuase they do they same thing in politics they harken back to a simpler age when the sides were clearer and gas was cheap. When The American's traded Coke with Columbians and used it to buy weapons for Iraq. When 1/3 of the world was at war with America but they were commies so you could see them easily cos they all wore red pyjamas
The point is that stuff is always complex and difficult and mutli-layered with competing factions. Life is never simple and everything always changes that is just how it works.

Good grief. How many "X are not RPGs" and "RPGs aren't this" and "RPGs don't do that" threads do we really need around here?

I enjoy a good rant as much as anybody, but couldn't we consolidate them under some kind of "THE WAY YOU PLAY OBJECTIVELY SUCKS" mega-thread or something...

Quote from: Insufficient Metal;421229Good grief. How many "X are not RPGs" and "RPGs aren't this" and "RPGs don't do that" threads do we really need around here?

I enjoy a good rant as much as anybody, but couldn't we consolidate them under some kind of "THE WAY YOU PLAY OBJECTIVELY SUCKS" mega-thread or something...

Now that is a proposal I can get behind.

This whole thing sounds more and more like the old roll-play versus role-play debate with some new words and more virtiol

Okay, who mixed PCP and DMSO and smeared it on Koltar's Chap-Stik this morning?

Quote from: Insufficient Metal;421229Good grief. How many "X are not RPGs" and "RPGs aren't this" and "RPGs don't do that" threads do we really need around here?

I enjoy a good rant as much as anybody, but couldn't we consolidate them under some kind of "THE WAY YOU PLAY OBJECTIVELY SUCKS" mega-thread or something...

Agreed. My problem is not with anyone ranting: my problem is with the rant being sad, boring, and trite.

Quote from: thedungeondelver;421232Okay, who mixed PCP and DMSO and smeared it on Koltar's Chap-Stik this morning?

You owe me a new keyboard.

Hm, jalapeno-flavoured reese's peanut butter cups... I bet those'd be yummy.

Couldn't we just re-name this thread, "Koltar Has His Period (Again)"?

Seanchai

My God...it's full of bullies!

Way to pound on an easy target, guys.

Quote from: Tim;421253My God...it's full of bullies!

Way to pound on an easy target, guys.

If this is people bullying someone then I was a target of the CIA, FBI, Manson Family, Trilateral Commission, the Symbionese Liberation Army, al-Qaida and the Mossad in this thread.  And I wasn't.  And this isn't.

Quote from: Seanchai;421251Couldn't we just re-name this thread, "Koltar Has His Period (Again)"?

/QFT

Seriously, Ed - we get it. No really, we do. If it isn't D&D (pre-4e) or GURPS, you don't like it. That's fine, but if your sole participation in the discussions is "no it isn't roller-playing!111OneOEN!" then really, you shouldn't be participating.

I know, I haven't contributed jack-squat myself, but that's because a) not much time b) I like D&D (not 4e so much) and DitV and MMOs, and c) everyone else is saying it better than I probably could anyway.

But still... really?