Quote from: misterguignol;866745If ~games are technology that advances~ (lol) then Pathfinder is clearly old tech and only played out of nostalgia, right?

It was "old tech" before it ever was officially published.

Bad math. Bad design. But great production and support.

Let's not forget that Pathfinder's genesis was a direct reaction to WotC's creation of 4e for the sake of Paizo's existence. It happened to payoff.

The system is still bad. But fixable if you like constantly doing that kinda shit non-stop. I have stat-blocs for my Pathfinder game's NPC's when my PC's hit 15th level... that are *two* pages long. I think I have fucking nosebleed-drippings on them from staring at them too long...

In this conversation - I think there is a happy medium. I exist in the RPG-Game-O-Sphere quite comfortably knowing my brethren-in-dice love their OSR games. More power to them and their enjoyment. Not my cuppa. But as I am of that vintage - I'll never diss it either because the simplicity of the game is an understandable thing to really enjoy without all the extra frippery.

I cast a odd look at people who deny this or worse worship silly rules-as-the-game. I will cry foul-ball.

Quote from: aspiringlich;866838I was living in a monastery in the early aughts, so I guess I missed that phase of d20 creativity.

You must still live there then since OGL material continues to be published in large quantities today.  Either you have somehow failed to notice the huge amount of OGL material that has come out over the last 15-16 years or you are dismissing it all as not really creative.

Quote from: yosemitemike;866953You must still live there then since OGL material continues to be published in large quantities today.  Either you have somehow failed to notice the huge amount of OGL material that has come out over the last 15-16 years or you are dismissing it all as not really creative.

And you must have not have bothered to read the previous discussion, since I never even hinted at any such thing.

Quote from: aspiringlich;866838I was living in a monastery in the early aughts, so I guess I missed that phase of d20 creativity.

So either you missed all that material coming out or you don't count it as creativity.  

Quote from: aspiringlich;866958And you must have not have bothered to read the previous discussion, since I never even hinted at any such thing.

I guess it doesn't count as hinting if you just say something outright.  So, which is it?  Did you miss the explosion of OGL material or do you not count it as creativity for some reason?

Quote from: yosemitemike;866982So either you missed all that material coming out or you don't count it as creativity.  



I guess it doesn't count as hinting if you just say something outright.  So, which is it?  Did you miss the explosion of OGL material or do you not count it as creativity for some reason?

Context. First learn what that is and why it's important. Then figure out what the context of my statement was. Maybe then I'll point out just how ignorant you're coming across right now.

Quote from: aspiringlich;867020

Quote from: yosemitemike;866982So either you missed all that material coming out or you don't count it as creativity.


I guess it doesn't count as hinting if you just say something outright.  So, which is it?  Did you miss the explosion of OGL material or do you not count it as creativity for some reason?

Context. First learn what that is and why it's important. Then figure out what the context of my statement was. Maybe then I'll point out how just ignorant you're coming across right now.

:popcorn:

Quote from: Spinachcat;866766It's fair to say that majority of the OSR is focused on D&D Revivalism. However, there are some members who are breaking out other golden oldies as well.

I think the main thing is that other fandoms don't have such a clear and fierce 'school' division, if any, and where they do divide may be on quite different issues than the ones that are hot topics in D&D.

Indeed, I think the fans of most RPG brands are quite happy with them pretty much as they have always been. There's not such a large community around them, but neither are the few people wishing to share material scared of getting sued. Palladium I think stands as a notable exception.

From what I've seen of the Mongoose editions of RQ and Traveller, there are some pretty notable differences from the 1980s editions, but there's enough similarity across editions for most fans to just roll with whatever is on the table in a given campaign.

Hardcore Traveller fanatics have their "edition wars," but the brand pretty early became more strongly identified with the Galaxy of the Third Imperium setting. I think that's partly because the line from the start encompassed so many different kinds of game (including miniatures and board games).

RuneQuest from the start was associated with the world of Glorantha (with variations on the "Basic Role Playing" rules framework spun off for other subjects). However, the fans obsessed with canonical background lore seem mainly to have gravitated to Hero Quest, while the RQ rules have attracted more enthusiasts who are not so keen on Glorantha.

Quote from: aspiringlich;867020Context. First learn what that is and why it's important. Then figure out what the context of my statement was. Maybe then I'll point out just how ignorant you're coming across right now.

Talking vaguely about context but not bothering to explain the supposed context or how it would make the statement mean something other than what it says is a standard weasel tactic.  So is trying to put deflect and put the other person on the defensive with insults.

Quote from: yosemitemike;867140Talking vaguely about context but not bothering to explain the supposed context or how it would make the statement mean something other than what it says is a standard weasel tactic.  So is trying to put deflect and put the other person on the defensive with insults.

You could follow the links back to the original post. As I recall the context was plain and obvious to me at the time. Also as I recall, he was referring to the glut of D20 games and his post suggested that not all the D20 games published during the glut were novel or especially creative. The example was used as a contradiction of the idea that publishing lots of stuff was a guarantee of novelty or creativity. At least that's what I seem to recall about one post I quickly read in between lots of more important stuff I was doing a couple of days or more ago in some other time zone.

Quote from: Bren;867144You could follow the links back to the original post. As I recall the context was plain and obvious to me at the time. Also as I recall, he was referring to the glut of D20 games and his post suggested that not all the D20 games published during the glut were novel or especially creative. The example was used as a contradiction of the idea that publishing lots of stuff was a guarantee of novelty or creativity. At least that's what I seem to recall about one post I quickly read in between lots of more important stuff I was doing a couple of days or more ago in some other time zone.

I don't recall anyone suggesting that all of that material was creative in the first place.  I don't recall anyone saying anything about guarantees either.  However, if you have a large body of material being put out by a variety of publishers, odds are very good that there is some wheat among the chaff.  Pretending other wise and saying, "Creativity?  What creativity lol?" is just silly dick waving.

Quote from: yosemitemike;867148I don't recall anyone suggesting that all of that material was creative in the first place.  I don't recall anyone saying anything about guarantees either.  However, if you have a large body of material being put out by a variety of publishers, odds are very good that there is some wheat among the chaff.  Pretending other wise and saying, "Creativity?  What creativity lol?" is just silly dick waving.

So I rerad the original post. Sadly My recollection was faulty. Creativity was not the subject. Ubiquity was. I confuted AspiringLich's post with that of TristramEvans.

Why you continue to harp on the subject of creativity, which AspirigLich never mentioned escapes me. Perhaps you, like me, didn't remember the post you responded to or maybe you just responded to the wrong post. Perhaps you should reread that portion of the thread. Just click here to start reading.

Quote from: yosemitemike;867140Talking vaguely about context but not bothering to explain the supposed context or how it would make the statement mean something other than what it says is a standard weasel tactic.  So is trying to put deflect and put the other person on the defensive with insults.

I'm under no obligation to explain the context to you. There's a reason why previous posts in the thread aren't deleted: it's is so people can read them and thereby avoid making asses of themselves by jumping into the discussion without knowing what's already been said. If you're too damned lazy to do even that much, then don't be surprised at the insults you receive. They're deserved.

Quote from: aspiringlich;867150I'm under no obligation to explain the context to you.

Then I will consider that a rhetorical dodge and dismiss it as such.  Saying, "not my job to educate you" is another standard rhetorical dodge.  Say the exchange was reversed.

Other person: Lotta creative OSR stuff has come out in the last few years.
Me: Creative?  Musta missed that lol

How would people read that?  The obvious response would be that I had somehow missed all the stuff that came out or that I am dismissing it as not really creative for some reason.  The former is more credible for the OSR stuff since it isn't all that prominent on most store shelves.  It's not at all credible for OGL products which are everywhere and were even more prevalent back then.  I doubt excuses like talking vaguely about context or claiming I meant that it wasn't all creative would fly either.

So you are saying that the D20 license/Open Game License caused creative material to be released under them back in the early 2000s?  Yes?  No?  Don't respond to a claim that all of it was creative since no one made that claim in the first place.

Quote from: yosemitemike;867153Then I will consider that a rhetorical dodge and dismiss it as such.

Thus demonstrating that you are mentally sub-standard and not worth any more of my time. Good day sir.

Quote from: aspiringlich;867157Thus demonstrating that you are mentally sub-standard and not worth any more of my time. Good day sir.

There's another standard rhetorical dodge to check off.