Quote from: Abyssal MawI retract my insinuation! ...But my concern still stands.

That people could, in point of fact, become enamoured enough of calling RPGs art that they fuck up their play or the play of others?

Because I haven't actually seen that happen yet, - though I've seen a fair bit of time-wasting and pointless wankery along those lines, a lot of time and energy lost for no apparent gain in play value.

Or that almost everyone who feels it important to call RPGs art is almost certainly selling something, and may well be doing so dishonestly?

Because, well, that one I've seen.  Not every time, but enough to make me leery.

Quote from: Levi KornelsenThat people could, in point of fact, become enamoured enough of calling RPGs art that they fuck up their play or the play of others?

Because I haven't actually seen that happen yet, - though I've seen a fair bit of time-wasting and pointless wankery along those lines, a lot of time and energy lost for no apparent gain in play value.

Or that almost everyone who feels it important to call RPGs art is almost certainly selling something, and may well be doing so dishonestly?

Because, well, that one I've seen.  Not every time, but enough to make me leery.

I've certainly seen both, at least online. I do have the personal real-life tale of dealing with a couple who had been so traumatized by their dealings with a certain forgie GM that they simply couldn't settle on a game or even join a group without extensive interviews to make sure they weren't going to be.. I dunno.. kidnapped by teh Gamistz or something.

You haven't seen the phenomena of the spoiler/griefer? You haven't seen "Well, I can no longer enjoy gamism, so I set about sabotaging the game..." or "I was the only one who wasn't enjoying it anymore, so I started doing (fill in the blank) and then eventually the group asked me to leave...I CAN'T HELP IT IF MY TASTES HAVE BECOME SO REFINED!"

It's funny, and god knows I'm guilty of ridiculing it, but these people are ultimately defeating themselves.

Quote from: Abyssal MawYou haven't seen the phenomena of the spoiler/griefer?

Thanks be whatever-it-is that dwells beyond, not in person.  And many of the stories sound plainly exagerrated online.

But, then, in real life, I'm hugely tall, typically grinning, ridiculously boisterous, and willling to call "bullshit" at the drop of a hat.  I look, in fact, like some kind of frenetic muppet.

So, it's possible that I've met them, thought that they were just having a moment of asshole behaviour, and stunned them out of it.

Quote from: BrantaiThis thread is more entertaining than the actual debate.

Of course it is.   The debate is a pointless one.  There are assholes/swine in every hobby.

There isn't a group out to ruin/subvert our hobby, they only exist in Pundit's Paranoia.

I think The Pundit is digging himself deeper into a hole he isn't going to be able to get himself out of with this debate

My weekly group has always been art. It's even moreso now that we're playing that wonderfully enlightening White Wolf game: Exalted. We tell deep and meaningful stories of epic struggles and heartaches. Why just this last Friday we had a heartbroken ghost begging to be destroyed and the compassionate Solar telling him there had to be a better way. Anyone who says our sessions are just a game clearly doesn't understand roleplaying.

Can I have my funding now?

Signature in this thread is a classic forge swine:-

Quotehttp://forum.rpg.net/showthread.php?t=337760

1:Arrive
2:Tell everyone they are doing it wrong

Thats certainly how I first became aware of the hateful cunts.

Thanks for that link, Erik.  Kills me...just hilarious.

I saw that thread before.  That really is the first time I have seen anything quite so cult-y coming from that direction.  I've been on rpg.net for a couple years and I have seen a lot of fairly rigid positions from both sides of the issue, but never that kind of Moonie-esque, bland, positive assurance that this way was the right way.  I worry for that kid.

Which post does it start on?

I've been banned!  Wow.  Kind of cool.  I feel sort of tough.  So, can't answer your question but it's the guy called Sigialant or vigilant or something like that. His avatar is a little computer-generated yellow man with black hair.  He starts saying that the main limitation of CoC is that it doesn't allow you to tell stories.  And he sticks with it.  It's quite amazing how much he is missing the point and misreading his audience.  I used to get accosted by Moonies when I lived in the Bay Area and they were my age and looked kind of normal but then they would say really disturbing things that made it clear they had no idea what was going on.  Sad.

Welcome to the dark side.

BTW. Watch the sky!

Quote from: James McMurrayWhich post does it start on?

Its Signature:-

QuoteOne problem and this only concerns your group if their real goal is to create a story and just not win the adventure is that CoC is a traditional designed RPG.

What I mean by that is that the story (adventure) has already created by the GM before the role-playing session starts i.e. Story Before, and not Story Now (story is created by everyone during the role-playing session not just the GM). Plus BRP is designed to be a task resolution system and not a conflict resolution system, which makes it very hard to do Story Now, as it is the GM who decides the out come of conflicts not the players or the rules.

This is not to say you can't have fun with Coc, I still love the game but you have to appreciate what is can do and not do well because of its design.

Note the use of buzzwords - and the deflection of conversation away from the drawbacks of BRP as a system and on to forge bollocks following.

Thanks. Now that I reread the original link from you I see you already told me and I just didn't understand.

Thanks, that thread's a hoot!

Quote from: Erik BoielleSignature in this thread is a classic forge swine

[*looks*]

Hmm...

Signature. Registered Jan 2003. Only 86 posts.

Weird.

Started posting again after the rash of anti/pro GM threads that swept RPG.net. Possibly related.

Last known post was: Is GNS theory really an elitist theory?, which he/she started and never posted in again, though I could be mistaken as I didn't search all 96 pages.

Based on this and the specific wording Signature was using in their latest posts, my guess is that they're a Troll, and maybe even working against the 'Swine' by making them look bad.

Or...

Could be a puppet.  Could be someone who realised he wasn't going to get a huge audience with that approach, changed names, and tried not to be so pushy...

Or..

Speculation is hard to stop, ain't it?

EDIt: My point being that the defence to this kind of direct post/quote is to claim the person is somehow "not really a forge theory person" or some such. to which I say - you're kidding, right?  Anyone who takes umbrage with an idiot like that is supposed to do research to see how significant their role at the Forge is? C'mon man, we're all wasting enough time here as it is...