Quote from: The Good Assyrian;533897For the record, I agree with OHT that you are not a troll.  I also think that calling people that reflexively diminishes the meaning of the word for the very real trolls we do have around here.

But I do believe that your pathological limitations make meaningful communication and discussion with you largely impossible. And since that is my reason for my being here (I can't speak to why you are here), that limits my interest in what you say greatly.  I am sure you can live with that, as can I.


-TGA

I am definitely in this camp. He doesn't bother me and I agree with a lot of what he is trying to say. But there's a language barrier that makes it impossible to have a real discussion.  Which pisses me off actually, because it shouldn't be that way.

Quote from: The Good Assyrian;533897For the record, I agree with OHT that you are not a troll.  I also think that calling people that reflexively diminishes the meaning of the word for the very real trolls we do have around here.

But I do believe that your pathological limitations make meaningful communication and discussion with you largely impossible. And since that is my reason for my being here (I can't speak to why you are here), that limits my interest in what you say greatly.  I am sure you can live with that, as can I.


-TGA

And I think that due to this "RPG.net marks everyone they don't agree with as trolls" meme, we are now afraid to call douches by their true names. In other words - we had somewhat completed the Circle of Spite, by having our own species of users we're afraid to call out on their bullshit. At least because of "fear", and I use that term very loosely, of branding people incorrectly and being like RPG.net, rather then fear of being banned and being like RPG.site.

PS - good to see you around posting again, TGA, and not in the Out of Chara- *coughs* Topic forums . Ever gonna come back to the 4e series?

Quote from: Marleycat;533905I am definitely in this camp. He doesn't bother me and I agree with a lot of what he is trying to say. But there's a language barrier that makes it impossible to have a real discussion.  Which pisses me off actually, because it shouldn't be that way.

So you agree that everyone who is "Rulings, not rules" and does not use a grid is a cheater, child and a bad GM? Because that's what his argumentation boils down to.

Quote from: Rincewind1;533906So you agree that everyone who is "Rulings, not rules" and does not use a grid is a cheater, child and a bad GM? Because that's what his argumentation boils down to.

No, that part of his view is bullshit but I don't see it as trolling rather than silly and nonsensical.  I believe in simulationist views but with a human element after that I'm off this train.

Quote from: Rincewind1;533906And I think that due to this "RPG.net marks everyone they don't agree with as trolls" meme, we are now afraid to call douches by their true names. In other words - we had somewhat completed the Circle of Spite, by having our own species of users we're afraid to call out on their bullshit. At least because of "fear", and I use that term very loosely, of branding people incorrectly and being like RPG.net, rather then fear of being banned and being like RPG.site.

PS - good to see you around posting again, TGA, and not in the Out of Chara- *coughs* Topic forums . Ever gonna come back to the 4e series?

It should be apparent that I am not afraid to call a spade, a spade.  Although I find gleichman's shitty behavior remarkably unproductive to the goals I have for being on this site, I can differentiate between that and purposeful trolling, which in my experience is for the pleasure of seeing others fight - the throwing of the hand grenade and watching the carnage ensue.  My big clue on trolls is when they start flame-bait threads and then disappear, only popping in when the flames die down. For all his faults, gleichman doesn't do that in my opinion.

And thanks for the kind words.  Real life stuff has a way of interfering with the time I can devote to posting, but it has been a good week for it.  Some friends are trying to rope me into another 4e game so there is hope yet for more posting on that topic.


-TGA

Quote from: The Good Assyrian;533922It should be apparent that I am not afraid to call a spade, a spade.  Although I find gleichman's shitty behavior remarkably unproductive to the goals I have for being on this site, I can differentiate between that and purposeful trolling, which in my experience is for the pleasure of seeing others fight - the throwing of the hand grenade and watching the carnage ensue.  My big clue on trolls is when they start flame-bait threads and then disappear, only popping in when the flames die down. For all his faults, gleichman doesn't do that in my opinion.

And thanks for the kind words.  Real life stuff has a way of interfering with the time I can devote to posting, but it has been a good week for it.  Some friends are trying to rope me into another 4e game so there is hope yet for more posting on that topic.


-TGA

There are various species of trolls - fanning the flames is not uncommon behaviour. I myself encountered more of the kind I describe, to be honest. But anyway. Good luck on your gaming .

Quote from: Rincewind1;533924There are various species of trolls - fanning the flames is not uncommon behaviour. I myself encountered more of the kind I describe, to be honest. But anyway. Good luck on your gaming .

Thanks!

Frankly, in the end whether you want to call shitty behavior trolling or something else, the fact remains that the best response is to not engage those who suffer from those limitations in their ability to conduct social interaction.  It is never profitable for you to do so, in the end.

-TGA

Quote from: The Good Assyrian;533926Thanks!

Frankly, in the end whether you want to call shitty behavior trolling or something else, the fact remains that the best response is to not engage those who suffer from those limitations in their ability to conduct social interaction.  It is never profitable for you to do so, in the end.

-TGA

True, true, but where'd I get all the free laughs from, then?

Quote from: misterguignol;533619Can you clear up what the original meaning was?  I find the hobby's jargon to be often impenetrable and contradictory, so that would be helpful.  (Don't even get me started on how "verisimilitude" gets used.)

The GNS borrowed the term from the GDS Threefold from rec.games.frp.advocacy on the Usenet.  See John Kim's reply for some details.

The context of that term and what it was intended to convey is that there was a debate over the game Theatrix, a diceless games designed to produce stories, and why it didn't work for people.  This led to a discussion about the contrast between running world-oriented games (where the GMs decisions are based on the setting as if it were a real place) and story-oriented games (where the GM's decisions were based on producing a story-like result).  Brian contributed to adding Game quality is a separate concern.  At one point, it was illustrated with a triangle where the three points were labeled "IC Experience", "Interactive Storytelling", and "Problem-Solving" which I think captures the gist of the interests that Simulation, Dramatism, and Gamism were intended to cover.  

What "IC Experience" means is "In Character Experience".  In other words, the motive for Simulation was to provide a satisfactory experience for a player looking at the game through their character's eyes rather than from a player-level perspective.  Thus the purpose of Simulation was to Simulate a plausible game world for the players to adventure in as their characters.  

In retrospect, I often think theory discussions would have gone better if we had stuck to "world-oriented" and "story-oriented" and added "challenge-oriented" or went with "IC Experience", "Interactive Storytelling", and "Problem-Solving".

Quote from: Halloween Jack;533584Simulation is about emulating genre and theme. Pendragon is an example of great simulation--concepts like Glory are an actual thing in the rules, and align the players' goals with what should be the characters' goals.

What does it mean to "simulate" a genre or theme?

Quote from: Halloween Jack;533584Nor can you emulate Sherlock Holmes without giving the PC some narrative control to say "I see from the red mud on your shoe that you must have come past the new construction on Wilmot Lane" and suchlike.

What does it mean to "simulate" Sherlock Holmes like that and what, exactly, are you emulating?  To simulate the experience of being Sherlock Holmes, you'd need to let the player actually solve the mystery using their knowledge and intelligence.  To simulate the experience of reading a Sherlock Holmes story, you'd need to surprise the players with an unexpected solution at the end.  Neither of those fit what you are describing.  So are you trying to simulate the experience of writing a Sherlock Holmes story?  If so, how is that role-playing or simulating the genre?

Quote from: One Horse Town;533869IME, trolls tend to stand back and admire their work. That isn't happening here.

It's quite easy to mistake bloody-mindessness and cleaving to ones beliefs in spite of almost universal disagreement, to trolling, but i don't think they are the same thing.

Logic is your liberator in this case.

I completely agree. If Gleichman is a troll, most poters here would too, under that definition.

Quote from: Imperator;534007I completely agree. If Gleichman is a troll, most poters here would too, under that definition.

I don't think Gleichman is a troll, I think he's someone with different tastes regarding the details of combat systems to me. I thoroughly agree with him on "if the rules aren't doing what you want them to do, find another system that does" - there is no inherent virtue in wasting time creating and testing your own fixes for a system that doesn't do what you want, if there's an alternative system that does do what you want. Do it because you like doing it, but admit to yourself that's your actual reason.

I don't think BT is a troll. I think he's a racist prick. There's a difference.

Quote from: John Morrow;533984What does it mean to "simulate" Sherlock Holmes like that and what, exactly, are you emulating?  To simulate the experience of being Sherlock Holmes, you'd need to let the player actually solve the mystery using their knowledge and intelligence.  To simulate the experience of reading a Sherlock Holmes story, you'd need to surprise the players with an unexpected solution at the end.  Neither of those fit what you are describing.  So are you trying to simulate the experience of writing a Sherlock Holmes story?  If so, how is that role-playing or simulating the genre?

While that's true, if you expect players to go into that much minutia to solve a case, it puts a huge burden on the GM (To develop and put forth that level of detail) and the player (To realise it's there, and to realise what to look for) - and to be blunt, most GM's and players aren't trained detectives, logisticians and mystery writers.

Which kinda leaves you at CSI-level mysteries, but that's fine because there's a lot of fun to be had there.

Of course, a thread is pretty much over once it's descended to talking about the poster and not the posts.

I'm sticking with my theory.

4e completely blasted the RPG landscape. Enthusiasm for RPGs went down all across the board, after the flagship of the hobby was turned into a miniatures boardgame.

I didn't play D&D until 3rd edition. Before that point, whatever D&D was doing had zero effect on my enthusiasm for the hobby or the games I was playing at the time.

Quote from: Halloween Jack;534116I didn't play D&D until 3rd edition. Before that point, whatever D&D was doing had zero effect on my enthusiasm for the hobby or the games I was playing at the time.

I don't doubt this. Your experience is your own. Though i am sure a lot of people who started with 3E still embraced a lot of the classic assumptions tha edition carried with it, and 4E was too far in the direction of board games for their tastes. I think people who started with 3.5 and later 3.5 releases may have had more ease with 4e. But my experience is most of the folks who like 4E had serious issues with every edition of D&D form basic to 3.5