Quote from: Black Vulmea;942741Get in line.

Cutesy pics don't change the fact quite a few people act like pricks, unprovoked, then circle the wagons when called on it.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;942752Cutesy pics don't change the fact quite a few people act like pricks, unprovoked, then circle the wagons when called on it.

For the record, I wasn't one of the people telling Vigil his definition of sandbox was off and Brady was just white-knighting because he has a fit anytime Gronan opens his yap.

So, I'm not sure what you're even on about?  Did you even post to this thread at all, or just decide to jump in and cry foul?  Or are you carrying over from the other thread?  In which case I think my replacement IronyMeter might break also.

Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;942277Hmmm, yeah. I see where you could think I was poking at you/others. I was pretty spun-up last night and being snippy, so apologies. Like I said, I wasn't taking a cheap shot but I really don't post here enough (I lurk often, though) for anyone to know my tone. It's rather pointless to take pot-shots at each other over things, because they can escalate quickly and ruin future discourse.

Be the change you want to see?

EDIT: Oh I get it, "Narratives Seeking Acceptance."  Was that it?  Grove's been basically doing the same thread for 6 months now, and is always amazed when everyone doesn't agree with him.  That's what that was for.

Why couldn't the Space Opera GM just tell his players "hey, I want to run a campaign about space nobles who crash land on a primitive planet. If you want to play, make PCs for that"?

Wouldn't that solve all the handwringing?

If that really any different than the Fantasy GM who tells his players "hey, I want to run an all-Dwarf LotR campaign about the retaking of Moria, so make PCs for that."?

Quote from: CRKrueger;942756For the record, I wasn't one of the people telling Vigil his definition of sandbox was off and Brady was just white-knighting because he has a fit anytime Gronan opens his yap.


EDIT: Oh I get it, "Narratives Seeking Acceptance."  Was that it?  Grove's been basically doing the same thread for 6 months now, and is always amazed when everyone doesn't agree with him.  That's what that was for.

I thought you were pretty fair and balanced in your exchanges, especially compared to some of our more, er, "vehement" posters. This certainly seems true, so maybe there is some carryover from that going on here and there.

Quote from: Spinachcat;942771Why couldn't the Space Opera GM just tell his players "hey, I want to run a campaign about space nobles who crash land on a primitive planet. If you want to play, make PCs for that"?

Wouldn't that solve all the handwringing?

If that really any different than the Fantasy GM who tells his players "hey, I want to run an all-Dwarf LotR campaign about the retaking of Moria, so make PCs for that."?

You'd think so, though somehow I envision at least one player doing the snowflake thing ("Hey, can I be a captured Orc who's come around to the ways of the Dwarves and now fights for them?" [because I am oh, so special among these plebes]).:-)

Quote from: Black Vulmea;942588Yes, they most certainly do, so let's take a look at them again.


In both cases, this supposed referee - again, I don't think Grover is A Real Boy - stated that the players were at least somewhat justified making the choices Grover reported, to wit, burn down the haunted house rather than investigate it and make a trip to Shanghai as part of investigating events transpiring in San Francisco.

Except . . . the example of the San Francisco game didn't come from actual play


So the players 'hypothetically' could be justified in deciding to go to Shanghai, based on the events in the game, which suggests that, if this game really happened at all, there were clues or descriptions or whatever-the-fuck-ever that might've led players to surmise going to Shanghai could be a good idea.

But I don't believe this ever happened at all. See, every time Grover posts something about his games and receives feedback - often negative feedback - the examples change, for which Grover blames us.


The example from the Star Wars game. The example from the haunted house. The example of San Francisco. Each time the example changes as the replies roll in. Of course they had freedom to explore the space station. Of course they had reasons not to burn the haunted house down. Of course the example of the trip to Shanghai was only hypothetical.

And nearly every time Grover offers an example, then 'clarifies' the example with all the information he didn't include originally, it's orthogonal to what pretty much everyone else is posting about the same topic

The patter(n) occurs over and over again, thread after thread, leading to me to two possible explanations: (1) Grover is the stupidest fucker on the planet, or (2) Grover is an elaborate troll.

As for me, I'm done with this bullshit. I use my Ignore list for one reason and one reason only, because reading a given poster is a waste of minutes of my life I will never get back. Grover's dead to me, as of now.

Tearing up here. I'll suffer a terrible void in my life without this idiot's bullshit posts. He and a couple others insist on twisting my words around to feed their own high brow agenda. By all means ignore me, please.

Quote from: Spinachcat;942771Why couldn't the Space Opera GM just tell his players "hey, I want to run a campaign about space nobles who crash land on a primitive planet. If you want to play, make PCs for that"?

Wouldn't that solve all the handwringing?

I done that several times and it works.

Quote from: cranebump;942794You'd think so, though somehow I envision at least one player doing the snowflake thing ("Hey, can I be a captured Orc who's come around to the ways of the Dwarves and now fights for them?" [because I am oh, so special among these plebes]).:-)

That is certainly a issue. For example I ran a campaign where everybody was a mage in the Majestic Wilderlands. It went very well so we decided to try to have me run a campaign where everybody played a thief type character in the Majestic Wilderlands. Except one players was bound and determined to play a mage. Really obstinate about it.

In this case it worked out as it developed an aspect of my setting where there a culture of illicit mages working for criminals.

Quote from: rgrove0172;942799Tearing up here. I'll suffer a terrible void in my life without this idiot's bullshit posts. He and a couple others insist on twisting my words around to feed their own high brow agenda. By all means ignore me, please.

Look you are not special. Everybody calls everybody on their bullshit including me. Sometime they are right, sometime they are wrong. Most of time it in-between where it is a matter of opinion.

For example not a lot of people agree with my assertion that RPGs are about running a campaign first playing a set of rules second. That the rules should always reflect what the character can do in the setting not the other way around. Some vehemently argue against me about it, many are indifferent, some find it a useful insight.

It doesn't bother me because when it comes to other topics, the same cast of posters often align different. Which to me indicates that most (not all) are thinking the issues through and posting their honest opinions however contrary they may be. But there are exceptions and given time they are mocked incessantly because it obvious that they are NOT thinking the issues through and their opinions are anything but a honest expression of how they feel about the issue.

As for you, over the course your posting you managed to illicit a common response that is negative. Moreso most have taken the time to explain, including myself, why they are negative about your posts. One choice is to decide that we are a bunch of dickweeds and you go off in a huff to some other forums. However I would submit that you really dig into the posting history of those involved and take note that many of us are published authors or bloggers within the hobby and industry. It not what we have some special authority but we have a known history of being involved.

Another choice, is to decide that yes after all I have something learn here. That maybe there is an actual point that you should listen too. Note that it is you posted several times of ISSUES you been having. People only do that when they are looking for solutions.

Now you could be a advocate of a particular point of view. Certainly I do that when I talk about campaign over rules. I know full well that most gamers look at the rules first, that the choice of rules is a HUGE personal preference to one's enjoyment of tabletop roleplaying.  But I advocate my point, because I strongly feel that many common complaints would better addressed or avoided if the stance was adopted of campaign first, rules second.

However you come across as oblivious to the bias in your posts. The uncharitable view is that you are trolling as form of entertainment. And before you focus on that statement in my post and get upset remember I am taking the time to write to you. And I giving you the reasons for why I am responding the way I am.

So stay or leave, that on you. But if you want the mocking to cease then start listening to what we are telling you.

That is about the nicest mic-drop ever.

Quote from: estar;942802Look you are not special. Everybody calls everybody on their bullshit including me. Sometime they are right, sometime they are wrong. Most of time it in-between where it is a matter of opinion.

Your are right, most of the time it is in between but some stress their points as if they are absolute and in turn cast any alternative aside as trash. It is these that get the hackles up and turn a typically low-key individual, such as myself, to anger.

For example not a lot of people agree with my assertion that RPGs are about running a campaign first playing a set of rules second. That the rules should always reflect what the character can do in the setting not the other way around. Some vehemently argue against me about it, many are indifferent, some find it a useful insight.

It doesn't bother me because when it comes to other topics, the same cast of posters often align different. Which to me indicates that most (not all) are thinking the issues through and posting their honest opinions however contrary they may be. But there are exceptions and given time they are mocked incessantly because it obvious that they are NOT thinking the issues through and their opinions are anything but a honest expression of how they feel about the issue.

I can see where the limitations of the medium, written in this case and often further compromised by the annoyance of posting from a phone, can lead to misunderstandings, including some believing the one expressing their opinion isn't sincere or is operating from some other agenda. It doesn't mean that is the case however, especially when they openly deny it when accused.

As for you, over the course your posting you managed to illicit a common response that is negative. Moreso most have taken the time to explain, including myself, why they are negative about your posts. One choice is to decide that we are a bunch of dickweeds and you go off in a huff to some other forums. However I would submit that you really dig into the posting history of those involved and take note that many of us are published authors or bloggers within the hobby and industry. It not what we have some special authority but we have a known history of being involved.

If you dig into the posting history you will also find my repeated acknowledgements of those with a more varied and perhaps enlightening experience than mine. I have readily admitted my own limitations despite a lifetime of gaming. However, much of what we have discussed in these threads (related as they are they are not identical no matter what some might claim) is purely a matter of opinion and a first day novice has as much a right to his as a forty year grognard. Its certainly appropriate to point out why one has reached a counter opinion over years of gaming but it moves the argument into a very bad place when the name calling begins, accusations the opposition is a simpleton or worse voicing an opinion purely to foster conflict. At that point the exchange is just useless regardless of how valued each opinion might actually be.

Another choice, is to decide that yes after all I have something learn here. That maybe there is an actual point that you should listen too. Note that it is you posted several times of ISSUES you been having. People only do that when they are looking for solutions.

Note I have never said I was having any sort of issue in any of these threads. I have asked for opinions, explanation of how others do things. After 30+ years of gaming Im quite content with my style of GMing but I am curious -as I have said many times - about other styles as I have limited experience with other groups. Im not asking for help, cant recall ever having done so. Even my examples are of situations in which I contended with some element in the game, each time successfully accept one, ONE in which a new gamer didn't like the way I approached the damn Star Wars mine scenario. I might, correction, I HAVE used some of the advice given on this forum and I have readily reported that and thanked those for offering it but it hasn't change the fundamental way I approach my gaming. Similarly my own rants have undoubtedly had little effect on those arguing against me. It works both ways. Are they bull headed, unyielding, ignorant, trolls because they wouldn't listen to me?

Now you could be a advocate of a particular point of view. Certainly I do that when talk about campaign over rules. I know full well that most gamers look at the rules first, that the choice of rules is a HUGE personal preference to one's enjoyment of tabletop roleplaying.  But I advocate my point, but I strongly feel that many common complaints would better addressed or avoided if the stance was adopted of campaign first, rules second.

However you come across as oblivious to the bias in your posts. The uncharitable view is that you are trolling as form of entertainment. And before you focus on that statement in my point and get upset remember I am taking the time to write to you. And I giving you the reasons for why I am responding the way I am.

You say I come across that way but Ive had friends and associates read from these same posts and come away with an entirely different perspective wherein my responses have, at least initially, been very cordial and fair while others have attacked me without provocation. Ill admit that Im not expert when it comes to forums but I didn't even know what a f..ing Troll was until I was accused of being one. The very notion is ridiculous. I have far to busy a schedule to waste time arguing for no reason with strangers on the internet. I absolutely appreciate your taking the time to respond. I have voiced like appreciation to many others, including some of those like tenbones who has come at me pretty strongly from time to time. I only become upset when some asshat like pirate whats his face insists on making accusations based on his own perceptions of what he thinks I may or may not have meant in a post.

So stay or leave, that on you. But if you want the mocking to cease then start listening to what we are telling.

Listening is a given, Ive admitted readily that I 'get' where some are coming from, appreciate their perspective and have even put some of what they recommend to use. Listening however does not require agreement, no matter how impressive the resume or convincing the point of the one being debated. As it turns out I have modified my way of gaming considerably after joining this forum but nobody seems to notice the comments to that effect, or that some of my examples are intentionally left vague to encourage general discussion rather than critique of my games specifically. I mention a description of a field of flowers for God's sake and some blubbering dolt starts in about his vast experience as an outdoorsman? Really? Ill take whatever responsibility I am due for not communicating well I suppose but some of the responses to my posts have been simply inexcusable.

Holy formatting errors Batman!

Quote from: CRKrueger;942827Holy formatting errors Batman!

He's using bold/underline instead of breaking up the QUOTE block. Is there an easy way to break up quote blocks, BTW? I end up pressing the quote button twice and the using cut & paste on the middle ones to get an unquote-quote pair but it seems like a pain and it'd be nice if there were a button for that.

Quote from: rgrove0172;942816As it turns out I have modified my way of gaming considerably after joining this forum but nobody seems to notice the comments to that effect..  

Cool. What are some things you've done, and how did they turn out? (curious about it)

Quote from: Skarg;942834He's using bold/underline instead of breaking up the QUOTE block. Is there an easy way to break up quote blocks, BTW? I end up pressing the quote button twice and the using cut & paste on the middle ones to get an unquote-quote pair but it seems like a pain and it'd be nice if there were a button for that.

I know what he's doing, just making my eyes bleed.  No, there's no way to do it that I know of, other than cut and paste the QUOTE tags.

you know, I had this big response to Grove. I deleted. Cranebump has the right angle. I'll put my spin on it and pull a card from Black Vulmea's deck. Oh look it says -


"Fuck you. Show me."