Quote from: Seanchai;455592I don't know. You'd have to tell me as that's all you.

Seanchai

Oh, how soon then forget:

QuoteOriginally Posted by Seanchai  
If Edward releases a game, how would you know whether it's good or not unless gather some information about it?

-Seanchai

Quote from: Seanchai;455592I don't know. You'd have to tell me as that's all you.

Seanchai

Well, either Seanchai has me on ignore, or is simply willfully ignoring my posts, so I will respond to this for my own entertainment and for the dubious benefit to everyone else. My opinion is Seanchai should have stopped at...

Quote from: Seanchai;453159Because they never actually disliked the game. They disliked the author, the company, some ideology, etc.. This isn't about people overcoming a dislike of a game, it's about overcoming some stupid preconception. If the objections went like, "I don't like percentile systems. BRP is a percentile system, so I didn't think I'd like it. But I tried it and I did like it!," then we'd be talking about folks and games.

Seanchai

... because IMO that's the last post I've seen that had a valid point. Plus, the only point it did have was semantic in nature. I'm guessing most of us got what the Pundit was saying with both the OP and his post about how he thought the OP was vindicated by many of the responses up to that point, but Seanchai's point about it being our preconceptions we had in mind, not the game itself, when we "wanted" to dislike it was a valid one. After that it's been yet another clasic Seanchai troll, arguing for the sake of argument alone, as his point is silly, which Mr. G has done a fine job of pointing out. My response to his BS remark quoted initially above is...

Quote from: Seanchai;454211How does that happen? If all conditions pointing to crap could still result in a good game, shouldn't you be looking at all Edward's games, not just the ones you consider to be "regular" RPGs?

Seanchai

So here we have Seanchai coming right out and saying that if one's preconceptions could be wrong, shouldn't one investigate all games with the attribute that led to one's incorrect preconception in the first place. Yet when Mr. G posted...

Quote from: misterguignol;455587Then why this dogged insistence that we really need to check out each and every game Ron Edwards publishes?

Seanchia responded with the quote above, which I will repeat here...

Quote from: Seanchai;455592I don't know. You'd have to tell me as that's all you.

Seanchai

... despite the fact that this post directly contradicts the post I quoted above where Seanchai says...

Quote from: Seanchai;454211How does that happen? If all conditions pointing to crap could still result in a good game, shouldn't you be looking at all Edward's games, not just the ones you consider to be "regular" RPGs?

Seanchai

This is a response to Pundit, and everyone, including Seanchai, knows that Pundit has a great many objections to what Ron Edwards writes, whether it's a game or not. What Seanchai is clearly trying to convince us of is that even though Pundit can be reasonably sure that preconceptions he forms about anything Ron Edwards writes are going to be correct based on the great many things written by Ron Edwards that Pundit has already read, he should check out any and all games Ron Edwards writes in the off-chance it will be different enough, or contain enough of a magical synergy of elements that Pundit will end up liking it despite past experience. Yet when Mr. G points this out and remarks on what a silly expectation it is, Seanchai denies that it's what he is saying. Classic Seanchai troll. Based on this I think it's safe if we go back to ignoring him. Seanchai almost had a point there, I don't know about ya'all, but I was on the edge of my seat, breath held and all, but no.... nothing to see here folks.

Despite all this, sometimes our preconceptions are wrong, in the end, and so it's a nice , pleasant surprise when one happens on a game one fully expected to dislike and one finds out it's actually quite fun. One of mine was originally Blue Rose. There are some elements of the setting I still don't like, and when I played it I altered those quite a bit, but the precursor to the True20 system actually works quite well for being able to use the d20 system to create flexible and interesting characters. The magic system was also a nice departure from standard D&D. Even the setting, once tweaked, works with the system to create a very nice dark fantasy game.

Quote from: misterguignol;455595Oh, how soon then forget:

And that ("If Edward releases a game, how would you know whether it's good or not unless gather some information about it?") means a person should be forced to look at literally everything? Somehow, I'm starting to think that you're either misinterpreting quite a bit or aren't arguing in good faith.

Seanchai

Quote from: Seanchai;455673And that ("If Edward releases a game, how would you know whether it's good or not unless gather some information about it?") means a person should be forced to look at literally everything? Somehow, I'm starting to think that you're either misinterpreting quite a bit or aren't arguing in good faith.

Seanchai

Ahem:

QuoteIf all conditions pointing to crap could still result in a good game, shouldn't you be looking at all Edward's games, not just the ones you consider to be "regular" RPGs?

Seanchai

Quote from: misterguignol;455677Ahem: ["If all conditions pointing to crap could still result in a good game, shouldn't you be looking at all Edward's games, not just the ones you consider to be "regular" RPGs?]

Yes. Again, I'm not sure if you willingly misinterpreting what I've said or just misinterpreting it.

Remember, the context of the conversation is that we're discussing Pundit taking a look at Edward's new games, games just released. He says he'd look at a game if he heard it was a "regular RPG."

Thus I respond with the quote above. In other words, "all" doesn't refer to past games, literally every game, etc. - it refers to Pundit not separating them into categories as they come out and ignore one of said categories, him being open to investigating whatever Edwards released.

Moreover, when you asked why folks had to investigate literally everything and I responded that they don't, I thought you understood. You didn't ask clarifying questions, so...

Seanchai

After becoming increasingly disenchanted with a group full of people who like playing sneaky/support characters, I am desperately yearning for high-powered action. It is for that reason and an old-school 'feel' mixed with awesome artwork, that I am beginning to miss 4E D&D. I am tempted to go find a local shop somewhere once a week and try it out.

I didn't want to like Golden Heroes because Marvel Superheroes had come out and swept all before it, but after playing the Golden Heroes game I felt it had something - a British charm. Sure, we couldn't compete with the yanks for art, presentation and support, but I liked the game for what it was so much I run a long term PBEM with it now and before then played for the best part of a decade in two PBEMs with the system.

Am in the process of house ruling and 'fixing' it, but have adapted some of its rules to the DC Heroes system (the rounds/frames combat system) and it's working well so far.

Also didn't want to like Tunnels and Trolls. It came in a corgi paperback and never felt like a 'proper' rpg to me. Besides that, carrying around a sack of D6s was never practical. Now I realise that for PBEM games the combat system helps immensely by not dragging fights on for weeks. It also has the old school home grown feel, rather than the polished corporate product in shiny wrap sat in a box. I believe T&T went that way with 7th edition but all you ever needed was the corgi book with the spite rules and wiz tacked on.

There are loads of games I wanted to like, but thought were complete shit. Spacemaster I'm pointing at you. Yeah, you :mad:

About Memoir '44, I have to add to my comment above,

Quote from: Elliot Wilen;453017For sure. I can't say if I didn't want to like it, but I shied away from it for a while before friends pulled me in. And it's damn fun. I'm also more convinced than ever that I should develop a deck/rules to use with Battle Masters.

Actually, I'm moving back to a position which is more line with my prejudice. There are concepts there that might be worth implementing elsewhere, but the total package is starting to wear thin already. I may change my mind again, though.