I wonder if we can compare two ongoing kickstarters:

Thirsty Sword Lesbians: $242,018 NZD with 4,361 Backers and 14 days to go.

Worlds Without Number: $271,635 NZD with 3,581 Backers and 6 days to go.

So it appears as if there are more TSL backers but each individual backer is supporting less per backer ($55.49 per backer)

WWN backers on the other hand average $75.85 per backer

Quote from: jhkim on October 28, 2020, 07:01:56 PMI'll buy that there is advocacy in Blue Rose, but I didn't see anything in the original Blue Rose marketing that was about moral judgement of any other RPG players.

You may not have seen the TBP threads back in the day where I expressed my objections to a religion which taught traditional standards of chastity being explicitly set up as one of the setting's major antagonistic forces, and the one which, in fact, tended to come in for more personal hatred from many of the fans (Kern, after all, was just being what Big Evil Bads have to be). Let us say that not much sympathy for this perspective was gained. (And online discussions are part of how games are marketed.)

The problem is that this particular in-game issue is explicitly a real-world one as well. A game which sets up orcs as an intrinsically evil species can always defend itself by noting that orcs are not real, and any claim that they represent some real group the creator wants us to despise the same way is by definition a potentially inaccurate presumption. When two in-game cultures, one obviously meant for heroic protagonists and one obviously meant for, at best, considerably less-enlightened protagonists and more often antagonists, are set up in direct opposition over a real-world topic, and their positions are obvious echoes of real-world positions, and there is never any suggestion anywhere that the more heroic culture might be wrong in its position or that the antagonist might be right, that defense fails to hold water.

Like you, I generally don't bother caring what anyone else plays for their own amusement, but I don't think it can be denied that some products make it harder to defend one's like or dislike as mere personal taste, or aesthetic appreciation, than others. There's a reason everybody laughs at the claim that one only reads Playboy for the articles.

QuoteI don't think your description matches up with that. Your description made it sound like romantic fantasy was mainly about internal struggles and/or romance. As Blue Rose describes it, the difference is more that romantic fantasy protagonists still face external challenges, but they do so in the context of a growing circle and community.

It's a question of priority of emphasis, and of necessary vs. sufficient elements. Romantic fantasy can still be what it is if the external challenges take place almost conclusively off stage, but it can't be what it is if the internal struggles aren't examined in detail, or the relationships aren't at least as much of a time- and attention-occupier as the action or worldbuilding -- you still need at least some of the latter, but you absolutely cannot short-change the relationships, community or character-building, or you have something that looks like the chosen genre without actually evoking it much (q.v. the note above about CoC games not being the same experience as reading a Lovecraft story).

Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on October 29, 2020, 02:59:54 PM

Quote from: jhkim on October 28, 2020, 07:01:56 PMI'll buy that there is advocacy in Blue Rose, but I didn't see anything in the original Blue Rose marketing that was about moral judgement of any other RPG players.

You may not have seen the TBP threads back in the day where I expressed my objections to a religion which taught traditional standards of chastity being explicitly set up as one of the setting's major antagonistic forces, and the one which, in fact, tended to come in for more personal hatred from many of the fans (Kern, after all, was just being what Big Evil Bads have to be). Let us say that not much sympathy for this perspective was gained. (And online discussions are part of how games are marketed.)

The problem is that this particular in-game issue is explicitly a real-world one as well. A game which sets up orcs as an intrinsically evil species can always defend itself by noting that orcs are not real, and any claim that they represent some real group the creator wants us to despise the same way is by definition a potentially inaccurate presumption. When two in-game cultures, one obviously meant for heroic protagonists and one obviously meant for, at best, considerably less-enlightened protagonists and more often antagonists, are set up in direct opposition over a real-world topic, and their positions are obvious echoes of real-world positions, and there is never any suggestion anywhere that the more heroic culture might be wrong in its position or that the antagonist might be right, that defense fails to hold water.

So your claim is that you're *right* to attack Blue Rose players because of the fictional Jarzoni religion because it really does represent real-world liberalism, but liberal players are *wrong* to attack D&D players because of fictional orcs because they don't represent real-world conservatism.

I don't see this as "live and let live". Even if there are real-world parallels, it's still just a fucking game in both cases.

What you're trying to do is win a culture war over RPGs - because the other side is wrong, and you're right, and you want to prove it. I'm not arguing that you're wrong, but you can't claim that this is a live and let live approach. In this case, you're the one making real-world moral judgements of the other side based on the game they're playing.

Quote from: Shasarak on October 28, 2020, 07:35:40 PM
I wonder if we can compare two ongoing kickstarters:

Thirsty Sword Lesbians: $242,018 NZD with 4,361 Backers and 14 days to go.

Worlds Without Number: $271,635 NZD with 3,581 Backers and 6 days to go.

So it appears as if there are more TSL backers but each individual backer is supporting less per backer ($55.49 per backer)

WWN backers on the other hand average $75.85 per backer

The real comparison should be done 1 year after both kickstarters games have shipped.

Which one has the most people still playing it...

Quote from: Jaeger on October 29, 2020, 07:43:27 PMThe real comparison should be done 1 year after both kickstarters games have shipped.

Which one has the most people still playing it...

Haha, no one is going to play that lesbian shit, they're going to post pictures of them receiving the books (if they ever actually get them) and virtue signal as hard as possible. "We're patriots, and playing this game is just important as storming the sands of Iwo Jima in the name of equality" or some bullshit.

Quote from: jhkim on October 29, 2020, 04:47:57 PM

Quote from: Stephen Tannhauser on October 29, 2020, 02:59:54 PM

Quote from: jhkim on October 28, 2020, 07:01:56 PMI'll buy that there is advocacy in Blue Rose, but I didn't see anything in the original Blue Rose marketing that was about moral judgement of any other RPG players.

You may not have seen the TBP threads back in the day where I expressed my objections to a religion which taught traditional standards of chastity being explicitly set up as one of the setting's major antagonistic forces, and the one which, in fact, tended to come in for more personal hatred from many of the fans (Kern, after all, was just being what Big Evil Bads have to be). Let us say that not much sympathy for this perspective was gained. (And online discussions are part of how games are marketed.)

The problem is that this particular in-game issue is explicitly a real-world one as well. A game which sets up orcs as an intrinsically evil species can always defend itself by noting that orcs are not real, and any claim that they represent some real group the creator wants us to despise the same way is by definition a potentially inaccurate presumption. When two in-game cultures, one obviously meant for heroic protagonists and one obviously meant for, at best, considerably less-enlightened protagonists and more often antagonists, are set up in direct opposition over a real-world topic, and their positions are obvious echoes of real-world positions, and there is never any suggestion anywhere that the more heroic culture might be wrong in its position or that the antagonist might be right, that defense fails to hold water.

So your claim is that you're *right* to attack Blue Rose players because of the fictional Jarzoni religion because it really does represent real-world liberalism, but liberal players are *wrong* to attack D&D players because of fictional orcs because they don't represent real-world conservatism.

I don't see this as "live and let live". Even if there are real-world parallels, it's still just a fucking game in both cases.

What you're trying to do is win a culture war over RPGs - because the other side is wrong, and you're right, and you want to prove it. I'm not arguing that you're wrong, but you can't claim that this is a live and let live approach. In this case, you're the one making real-world moral judgements of the other side based on the game they're playing.

Greetings!

Jhkim, there is no "Live and Let Live" nonsense. That is nothing more than a naïve gummy bear to soothe the weak. In reality, and in the future, THERE IS ONLY WAR!

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

I vouch Shark joins the Shark Marines.

Quote from: Shasarak on October 28, 2020, 07:35:40 PM
I wonder if we can compare two ongoing kickstarters:

Thirsty Sword Lesbians: $242,018 NZD with 4,361 Backers and 14 days to go.

Worlds Without Number: $271,635 NZD with 3,581 Backers and 6 days to go.

So it appears as if there are more TSL backers but each individual backer is supporting less per backer ($55.49 per backer)

WWN backers on the other hand average $75.85 per backer

From experience with this stunt in numerous board game KS theres also this one to mull over...

Shill accounts. Using fake accounts or getting friends and family to back to serve as a false indicator that the game has some sort of clout.

Unlikely. Its probably more EH is just getting backers from its fanbase.

  I now want to be a naïve gummy bear who soothes the weak. (oh shit, on topic game talk tax!) Uhhh, yeah play an analgesic gummy bear... who is an enbi (non-binary), of course! Yeah, that's the ticket! 

Quote from: SHARK on October 29, 2020, 09:05:47 PM

Quote from: jhkim on October 29, 2020, 04:47:57 PM
What you're trying to do is win a culture war over RPGs - because the other side is wrong, and you're right, and you want to prove it. I'm not arguing that you're wrong, but you can't claim that this is a live and let live approach. In this case, you're the one making real-world moral judgements of the other side based on the game they're playing.

Jhkim, there is no "Live and Let Live" nonsense. That is nothing more than a naïve gummy bear to soothe the weak. In reality, and in the future, THERE IS ONLY WAR!

Culture wars exist in with wider world (especially in voting and in children's media). However, I don't think RPGs are in any way a useful medium for conveying liberal or conservative values. So they're not actually a functional battlefield.

So as I see it, you're trying to be manly and tough while attacking me with... a gummy bear. No matter how tough you talk, there is no trail of vanquished liberals groaning on the battlefield due to your attacks.

The only thing the RPG "war" is accomplishing is getting more people on both sides pissed off, outraged, and unhappy.

Quote from: jhkim on October 30, 2020, 02:10:34 PMSo as I see it, you're trying to be manly and tough while attacking me with... a gummy bear. No matter how tough you talk, there is no trail of vanquished liberals groaning on the battlefield due to your attacks.

Forget thirsty lesbians, someone needs to kickstart an rpg where the PCs are gun-toting gummy bears!

Quote from: jhkim on October 30, 2020, 02:10:34 PM

Quote from: SHARK on October 29, 2020, 09:05:47 PM

Quote from: jhkim on October 29, 2020, 04:47:57 PM
What you're trying to do is win a culture war over RPGs - because the other side is wrong, and you're right, and you want to prove it. I'm not arguing that you're wrong, but you can't claim that this is a live and let live approach. In this case, you're the one making real-world moral judgements of the other side based on the game they're playing.

Jhkim, there is no "Live and Let Live" nonsense. That is nothing more than a naïve gummy bear to soothe the weak. In reality, and in the future, THERE IS ONLY WAR!

Culture wars exist in with wider world (especially in voting and in children's media). However, I don't think RPGs are in any way a useful medium for conveying liberal or conservative values. So they're not actually a functional battlefield.

So as I see it, you're trying to be manly and tough while attacking me with... a gummy bear. No matter how tough you talk, there is no trail of vanquished liberals groaning on the battlefield due to your attacks.

The only thing the RPG "war" is accomplishing is getting more people on both sides pissed off, outraged, and unhappy.

Greetings!

*Sighing* (Shakes head, laughing). No, Jhkim. I'm not trying to be "manly and tough"--just an attempt at humour. Tipping the hat to a humorous allusion to Warhammer 40K--which I have been a longtime fan of the Warhammer universe going back to days playing a miniatures wargame called Space Marine.

And yeah, I like gummy bears, too. I thought it would be obvious I was being humorous and teasing you in a good natured manner.

No worries, Jhkim. Some people get me, and others don't. I understand.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: Dimitrios on October 30, 2020, 02:40:43 PM

Quote from: jhkim on October 30, 2020, 02:10:34 PMSo as I see it, you're trying to be manly and tough while attacking me with... a gummy bear. No matter how tough you talk, there is no trail of vanquished liberals groaning on the battlefield due to your attacks.

Forget thirsty lesbians, someone needs to kickstart an rpg where the PCs are gun-toting gummy bears!

Well there are some gummy bear board games and gummy chess and... er... nevermind.

Does the Gummi Bears RPG count?

Quote from: SHARK on October 30, 2020, 02:45:48 PM
*Sighing* (Shakes head, laughing). No, Jhkim. I'm not trying to be "manly and tough"--just an attempt at humour. Tipping the hat to a humorous allusion to Warhammer 40K--which I have been a longtime fan of the Warhammer universe going back to days playing a miniatures wargame called Space Marine.

And yeah, I like gummy bears, too. I thought it would be obvious I was being humorous and teasing you in a good natured manner.

No worries, Jhkim. Some people get me, and others don't. I understand.

Sorry, SHARK. You can be pretty intense sometimes in what I think is a serious fashion - but I should have picked out that one as humor.

Anyhow, it's all good. I like gummy bears too.

Quote from: jhkim on October 30, 2020, 03:06:24 PM
Sorry, SHARK. You can be pretty intense sometimes in what I think is a serious fashion - but I should have picked out that one as humor.

The  might have been a subtle clue!