Quote from: Thanatos02Communicating over the net is so much tougher then just talking face to face, ya know? Like, I lay this shit out and it seems pretty clear, and then it's not.

I feel your pain, brother. Posting on webfora has made me question my communication skills. Very little seems to come across the way I intend it. I chalk it up to the limitations of the medium (even with the plethora of emoticons), combined with the fact that I'm probably spouting some shit from way out in left field to begin with. :pundit:

But hey, at least here you won't get banned over a simple misunderstanding.

How about Riddle of steel?

Quote from: Black FlagBut hey, at least here you won't get banned over a simple misunderstanding.

And that's why I'm here. Plus, even when I disagree with JimBob, Pundit, or anyone else in one thread I don't feel awkward about agreeing with them in another. I don't feel like I'm on unfriendly terms with anyone here, even if I become frustrated or irritated sometimes.

Quote from: ShewolfHow about Riddle of steel?

I hear about this a bunch, but don't know a thing about it. Now's as good a time as any to ask, "What is this game all about?"

Quote from: Black FlagSorry to be so long in replying, but I just moved and was w/o Internet.

To clarify, I recently have tended to be GM more than player, so therefore I naturally take a more holistic view of character-setting interaction. As a player (of a PC), I'm mostly interested in how my character interacts within the setting. Either case involves playing the game (and also preparing to play the game, in the former case). I've never just observed other people playing. I can't imagine that would be very enjoyable.

I'm not suggesting that RPGs are an academic activity (heaven forbid). However, I do recognize that my academic background probably does influence the way I think about everyday things. But I only tend to overthink things that are enjoyable and interesting, if that makes any sense.

OK, cool, this clarifies things for me immensely. Thank you.

I do understand the overthinking the parts that are enjoyable and interesting, and it makes sense.

QuoteNow, I went off on Pseudoephedrine because my perception of his posts where that I was getting a smarmy attitude from someone who has gotten an education yet lacks experience to properly use that education. I felt like I was getting some patronizing snark from someone who hasn't fully thought through what he was posting.

Then you thought, or felt, or mystically intuited or whatever wrongly. I know exactly how to properly use my education - to poke holes in ridiculous ideas like "It is overanalysing a game to be concerned about the attitudes it takes towards politics". Now I'm certainly mean and nasty in how I poke holes in those ridiculous ideas, but let's not confuse me being mean with me being pretentious (that is, pretending to be something I am not).

Of the pair of us, one of us thinks that thinking deeply is enjoyable and important. The other thinks that it's not fun, and not that useful. Which one of the two of us do you think is more likely to arrive at correct conclusions about, well, anything and everything? The guy who thinks alot, or the guy who doesn't?

Quote from: jeff37923OK, obviously I've struck a nerve here with you or else you wouldn't have pulled this pseudointellectual twat routine.

Yeah, actually. I take great offense from anti-intellectual cunts like you, you sebaceous dick scraping.

QuoteNow, tell me, since you say that the better we think something then the better we experience it. Does a mentally retarded person then not experience events just as deeply as a normal person?

What does this have to do with Black Flag thinking about RPGs?

QuoteOr does the fact that they are retarded make them somehow less human?

Nope! Nice try though. What's next, the Nazis? I hear those Nazis are bad. I'll bet you'll have this entire argument locked up if only you can figure out some resemblance between my argument, and whatever those bad dude Nazis said.

QuoteWhat about education? Take two people with the same IQ and mental abilities, one has a college degree and one has only graduated high school - which one experiences life more deeply and why?

Hypothetical abstractions don't experience life at all, so I hypothetically don't know which one of your hypothetical people has a more hypothetically satisfying hypothetical life filled with hypothetical experiences.

QuoteYou say that Black Flag doesn't want to play games that uncritically portray political configurations he considers abhorrent. What if the campaign goal of the game is to overthrow that political configuration? You know, Rebel against the Empire, like in Star Wars.

Well, I would ask him whether or not he likes those kinds of games. I certainly wouldn't tell him "You're thinking too much."

QuoteNow here's the kicker. I feel that you are a pretentious cretin whose self-aggrandizing has encompassed even the games that you play to the point that you have become the very example of what RPGPundit has called "swine".

Oh shit, I'm probably a fag, nigger, commie, deadbeat dad, welfare queen, kiddie-raper too! I heard that I cheated on my taxes, took the money to buy drugs and celebrated by punching out an orphan using a puppy taped to a half-brick! One time, I didn't stand during the national anthem! An old lady was crossing the street, and I stood there and didn't help her at all!

QuoteIn short, you may take your deconstruction of playing a game and shove it up your ass. There's a huge difference between analysis of a process and being actively involved in experiencing that process. In the former you are only observing and in the later you are the observed.

This is the funniest thing you've said yet.

Quote from: JimBobOzYou don't like kings. Fair enough. I don't like the fucking kender. But I don't pretend it's anything other than good old irrational unreasonable unfair personal taste.

That's where we disagree, mate. I'm of the opinion that tastes aren't irrational or private, though I don't deny that's a popular viewpoint held by many today. I think giving reasonable justifications for why we like things is pretty much how we sophisticate our tastes. The better the justifications, the more sophisticated our tastes.

That doesn't mean we all have to become anarchists, or even focus specifically on politics but it's important to have reasons why we like things, to evaluate those reasons as being either good or bad (which in turn help us to evaluate those things as good or bad), and to strive to constantly improve our reasons and the tastes they undergird, even if that means giving up something we thought might've been good at first, but realise upon reflection isn't actually very good.

Quote from: PseudoephedrineThen you thought, or felt, or mystically intuited or whatever wrongly. I know exactly how to properly use my education - to poke holes in ridiculous ideas like "It is overanalysing a game to be concerned about the attitudes it takes towards politics". Now I'm certainly mean and nasty in how I poke holes in those ridiculous ideas, but let's not confuse me being mean with me being pretentious (that is, pretending to be something I am not).

Of the pair of us, one of us thinks that thinking deeply is enjoyable and important. The other thinks that it's not fun, and not that useful. Which one of the two of us do you think is more likely to arrive at correct conclusions about, well, anything and everything? The guy who thinks alot, or the guy who doesn't?

I give you an A for the effort of trolling, but I've already said my thoughts on this. Do enjoy the sound of one hand clapping.

Quote from: Pierce InverarityI would go for Lem's Pilot Pirx stories. They're more like Warsaw Pact scifi than crazy Communist utopia: nothing works, stuff is always badly designed and breaks down, and part of the adventure is having it in spite of your own gear.

There's this great story of Pirx, then pilot of some kind of garbage-truck starship, finally meeting an alien ship but not being able to make contact or even report or record the incident.

I haven't read Lem's Pirx stories, actually (them and the Futurological Congress, to reveal the glaring gaps in my Lem knowledge). They sound a bit like his story "Eden" though, which has travelers crash landing on an incomprehensible planet about which they learn next to nothing.

Quote from: jeff37923I give you an A for the effort of trolling, but I've already said my thoughts on this. Do enjoy the sound of one hand clapping.

You had thoughts?

It's just that for things like rpgs, I've never seen a "reasonable justification" for some personal taste issue that wasn't really simply a "rationalisation."

I mean, the standard of thought and debate is not terribly fucking high, you know? Just look at RPGPundit and TonyLB abusing each-other in their Pistols thread.

We're talking about guys like Black Flag. First, he names himself after the anarchist flag. Then he uses it as his avatar. In case anyone is a spastic thalidomide baby and still doesn't get the point, he puts "Anarchist" as his tagline under the screen nick.

Now, if he were posting in a forum about politics or economics or something, fair enough. But this is a forum about roleplaying games. He's yet to tell us about his exciting experiences roleplaying in anarchist-themed campaigns. That would definitely be on-topic for "rpgs that say Yay! Humanity!" Is he really here for rpgs? Or just to preach? Or what?

It's not subtle, or smart, or a "reasonable justification" we're seeing here. Just "LOOK AT ME, I'M A REBEL, YEAH YEAH YEAH. And fuck your thread, bitch."

My campaigns in general, I try to make them all about people. k3w1pw0rz I find distract from that. That's not rational or reasonable, it's just what I like. It parallels my politics, but it isn't my politics. Part of saying "yay! humanity!" is not flopping your politics out there like a limp dick. Just you know, talking to people.

Sure mate, but the trick to getting out of the shitty state of thinking about RPGs is to keep on trying to raise the bar and to help folks start forming those reasonable justifications while kicking over shitty reasons whenever you find them.

For example, over in that thread about Iron Heroes and Arcana Evolved, I tried to do pretty much what I'm talking about. The guy asked "Why should I give a rat's left bollock for this Iron Heroes business" and I said "Well, because..." and gave some reasons. It seems to've gone well, in that plenty of folks have accepted those reasons as being pretty good ones to like Iron Heroes. Now, the reasons I gave aren't the only kind of good reasons, but I'm just trying to show that it's possible.

...and what did any of the above back & forth argument have to do with pro-humanity RPG settings?

 Just wondering.


- Ed C.

Sometimes, in order to answer a question properly, you have to answer several other questions as well, especially when the other questions deal with the method of how you answer the original question.

In this case, the role of thought and analysis in relation to RPGs was called into question, and its value to roleplaying and discussions about roleplaying was defended.

Quote from: PseudoephedrineSometimes, in order to answer a question properly, you have to answer several other questions as well, especially when the other questions deal with the method of how you answer the original question.

In this case, the role of thought and analysis in relation to RPGs was called into question, and its value to roleplaying and discussions about roleplaying was defended.

No, it was actually me getting pissed off at your condescending manner of posting and flaming you. Nothing more significant than that. If you want to believe that you just won a victory for "the role of thought and analysis in relation to RPGs" then you can, but its just ego-stroking.