# The Gaming Den

Welcome to the Gaming Den.

Skip to content

## [Screed]Business Administration Majors

Mundane & Pointless Stuff I Must Share: The Off Topic Forum

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply

- Print view

87 posts

- Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next

Korgan0
  Duke
  Posts: 2101
  Joined: Thu Mar 15, 2012 7:42 am

###

- Quote

Post by Korgan0 » Mon Oct 01, 2012 7:51 pm

> Maxus wrote:I don't.

Yeah, I have no idea how to program. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if a disproportionate number of RPGers have some kind of programming or engineering background.
Top

Ted the Flayer
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 846
  Joined: Tue Jan 31, 2012 3:24 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Ted the Flayer » Mon Oct 01, 2012 9:09 pm

I am more of a loser than a nerd. No matter how hard I try, it is never enough to get someone to teach me a skill. I am always trying to make things better, but I lack the talents to rise above my station.

> Prak Anima wrote:Um, Frank, I believe you're missing the fact that the game is glorified spank material/foreplay.

> Frank Trollman wrote:I don't think that is any excuse for a game to have bad mechanics.

Top

ModelCitizen
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 593
  Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 3:53 am

###

- Quote

Post by ModelCitizen » Mon Oct 01, 2012 9:27 pm

> Lago PARANOIA wrote: Long story short, I've gained a huge appreciation for more abstract languages and I kind of resent the implication that programmers who don't know the fiddly under-layers of low-level programming aren't good at their job. When I found out that Java didn't have pointers and had things like generics and automatic garbage collection, in the words of the AVGN I shit my pants. Literally, shit came out my ass and I rocketed through the roof.
> Java I/O sucks anus, though. And I still find it annoying that you don't actually manipulate strings despite the existence of a string object. For things like middleware, however, I can totes see where it got its reputation and market dominance.

The guy's saying that 12 course hours in Java and the rest in lower level languages produces better Java programmers than teaching all Java all the time. He's not saying Java is terrible and no one should use it.
Top

Emerald
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 565
  Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 9:18 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Emerald » Tue Oct 02, 2012 2:49 am

I'm not exactly the typical CS major, coursework-wise, since I went to a science and tech high school and so I went through Intro CS, AP CS (equivalent to CS 1 and 2 in most colleges), Artificial Intelligence, Computer Architecture, Comparative Languages, Parallel Programming, and Computational Physics courses in high school, capped off with a semester-long independent research project which in my case involved programming language and compiler design. We used Java in Intro and AP CS; mostly Python in AI, with a short introduction to Lisp at the end; C and x86 assembly in CompArch; more Lisp, more Python, PostScript, and a few others in CompLang; C++ and XMTC in Parallel; C for the graphical simulation part of CompPhys for OpenGL, Fortran for some of the numerical computing parts of it; and my independent research mostly used Yacc and Lex but there was some Perl thrown in too.
So I went into college as a second-semester sophomore with plenty of APs under my belt, and I really couldn't say how effective my college's courses were at teaching programming because I already had that background at that point. I can say that, when I tutored a bunch of CS classes, there seemed to be plenty of people who "just got it" and plenty who dropped out of the program, so it's probably fairly normal as CS major course layouts go.
Anyway, the actual class progression:

- CS 1: Was in C++, now it's in Python, because the folks in charge think CS 1 was driving people away due to being in a "hard language" and not because the professor who taught it was an inbred moron who should never have made tenure. It's your basic "how do I program?" course, loops, arrays, stuff like that.
- CS 2: Taught in C++, and it's all data structures, memory management, that sort of thing. No assembly yet, this is still Baby's First Programming Course level.
- Algorithms: The basic theoretical stuff. Binary and hex, boolean logic, graphs, modular arithmetic, order notation, circuit diagrams, etc.
- Models of Computation: All the rest of the theoretical stuff they think undergrads can handle. State machines, computability, lambda calculus, etc.
- Computer Organization: How a computer works, including circuits, scheduling, assembly, threading, security, etc. We had to do projects on Linux, Mac, BSD, and Windows systems (sometimes redoing the same project on multiple systems) and use all the APIs and such to get a feel of OS-specific libraries and quirks. This was the first class I actually took, and I hate the Windows-specific C stuff...reading it, looking up functions, everything--who the fucking fuck thought "HANDLE WINAPI CreateFile(LPCTSTR lpFileName, DWORD dwDesiredAccess, DWORD dwShareMode, LPSECURITY_ATTRIBUTES lpSecurityAttributes, DWORD dwCreationDisposition, DWORD dwFlagsAndAttributes, HANDLE hTemplateFile);" was anything remotely resembling a good method header?
- Programming Languages: Basically, introduces imperative programmers to logical, declarative, and functional programming.
- Software Design and Documentation: How to be a software engineer in the Real World. You do one project from start to finish and in the process learn design patterns, development methododies, UML, documentation best practices, and all the buzzwordy stuff you need to know to be a software engineer.

After that, you branch off into whatever areas of CS you want; I did networking and cryptography and then did a Master's in parallel computing, but they have everything from robotics and computer vision towards the hardware end of things to machine learning and computational linguistics towards the software end.
Top

Lago PARANOIA
  Invincible Overlord
  Posts: 10555
  Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

###

- Quote

Post by Lago PARANOIA » Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:47 pm

> ModelCitizen wrote:The guy's saying that 12 course hours in Java and the rest in lower level languages produces better Java programmers than teaching all Java all the time. He's not saying Java is terrible and no one should use it.

If you were doing a 4-year track that emphasized programming, about what proportion would you split things up?
Last edited by Lago PARANOIA on Tue Oct 02, 2012 1:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

> Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
> In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.

Top

name_here
  Prince
  Posts: 3346
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:55 pm

###

- Quote

Post by name_here » Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:17 pm

I wouldn't be surprised if it's a correlation not causation thing. Java has all sorts of features to make it easier to use. That means it's easier for lazy courses to teach in java, so it's not that java is bad for teaching but that bad teachers use it. You sure as hell can write recursion in java. It's not even hard.
I'm fairly early into CS, taking data structures and algorithms after AP CS. This is all exclusively in java at a top-tier computer science university. They have us implement searches and data structures instead of just using the java libraries.

> DSMatticus wrote:It's not just that everything you say is stupid, but that they are Gordian knots of stupid that leave me completely bewildered as to where to even begin. After hearing you speak Alexander the Great would stab you and triumphantly declare the puzzle solved.

Top

Lago PARANOIA
  Invincible Overlord
  Posts: 10555
  Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

###

- Quote

Post by Lago PARANOIA » Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:19 pm

This is a change of topic, but, why don't schools emphasize Discrete Math and Linear Algebra more? And not just for computer scientists and mathematicians, but I mean for like everyone.
Discrete Math is the most useful math course I've ever taken. Not just because I got a good grade in it, either. But because it gives you your first real look into what's going on in the world of math. Like what's REALLY going on, not just the formulas. Like before I did a proof for things like ordered triples and permutations and the binomial theorem they just existed as weird formulas that you recognize and use.
Same thing for Linear Algebra, though I think that you really need Discrete Math to grok it first -- otherwise a lot of the concepts will probably reduce to cookbooks. I took Linear Algebra before Discrete Math and I really regret it.
Best of all, good Discrete Math/Linear Algebra classes are usually designed so that people who only have a junior-high school level of mathematical ability can excel in it, too, if they don't shirk. Admittedly you'll hit a brick wall in what you can accomplish with Linear Algebra if you don't know differential equations and by extension calculus. But I am scratching my heads as why schools don't have a course dedicated to Discrete Math and requiring almost all students to take it.

> Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
> In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.

Top

Ancient History
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 12708
  Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:57 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Ancient History » Wed Oct 03, 2012 3:41 pm

The short answer is, because schools are bullshit. The slightly longer answer is that colleges have a finite number of courses they can require for a degree, many of them are set by rule, and adding anything else means bumping another course.
Case in point, when my professors were getting their bachelor's degrees in electrical engineering, most of them took 140-150 credit hours worth of courses, and included things I think are very important like Statics, Thermodynamics, and Partial Differential Equations. When I was getting my BSEE, we had about 120 credit hours, and up to a third of those were required non-engineering courses. The courses I mentioned were offered, but were not part of the normal EE course set - they were elective classes (and, in the case of PDE, graduate-level).
Which is why AP courses have really taken off these days - trying to get some of the legislated liberal arts stuff out of the way so kids can fill their schedules with more core coursework. I honestly think colleges and universities should have a "Zero Semester" the summer before the Fall Semester starts, where incoming freshman can get caught up on a couple of the basic courses that they should have fucking had in highschool like Pre-Calculus, English Composition I, etc.
Deep Cuts In A Lovecraftian Vein
Top

Maj
  Prince
  Posts: 4705
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: Shelton, Washington, USA

###

- Quote

Post by Maj » Wed Oct 03, 2012 4:58 pm

> Ancient History wrote:Case in point, when my professors were getting their bachelor's degrees in electrical engineering, most of them took 140-150 credit hours worth of courses, and included things I think are very important like Statics, Thermodynamics, and Partial Differential Equations. When I was getting my BSEE, we had about 120 credit hours, and up to a third of those were required non-engineering courses. The courses I mentioned were offered, but were not part of the normal EE course set - they were elective classes (and, in the case of PDE, graduate-level).

The schools that I've attended and/or spoken to alumni about seem to reiterate the stereotype that engineers live in a closet and don't have many interests outside of their field - which is why they have made more electives mandatory.
Top

Ancient History
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 12708
  Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:57 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Ancient History » Wed Oct 03, 2012 5:11 pm

They never saw my transcripts.
Deep Cuts In A Lovecraftian Vein
Top

Emerald
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 565
  Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 9:18 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Emerald » Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:13 pm

> Ancient History wrote:I honestly think colleges and universities should have a "Zero Semester" the summer before the Fall Semester starts, where incoming freshman can get caught up on a couple of the basic courses that they should have fucking had in highschool like Pre-Calculus, English Composition I, etc.

Wait, there are colleges out there that have enough students coming in without calculus knowledge that offering a Pre-Calculus course would be worthwhile? And not community college remedial-math courses, but honest-to-gods university-level courses?
I mean, I know I've spent most of my educational career in a "nerd school" bubble where everyone knows math pretty well, but really...mind = blown.
Top

Lago PARANOIA
  Invincible Overlord
  Posts: 10555
  Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

###

- Quote

Post by Lago PARANOIA » Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:33 pm

> Ancient History wrote:The short answer is, because schools are bullshit. The slightly longer answer is that colleges have a finite number of courses they can require for a degree, many of them are set by rule, and adding anything else means bumping another course.

This is just my opinion, but, unless you're specifically going to do something calculus-based in your degree plan most people would be better served intellectually and development-wise by a Discrete Math course than a calculus or even precalculus course.

> Emerald wrote:Wait, there are colleges out there that have enough students coming in without calculus knowledge that offering a Pre-Calculus course would be worthwhile? And not community college remedial-math courses, but honest-to-gods university-level courses?

Depends on the major. Even so, I needed to spent about 6 months before I took my first uni course brushing up on precalculus so I wouldn't get crushed in my major. I had a really underdeveloped math background up until college.

> Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
> In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.

Top

Ancient History
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 12708
  Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:57 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Ancient History » Wed Oct 03, 2012 9:48 pm

As an electrical engineering student, I took three semesters of calculus, two semesters of differential equations, a semester of partial differential equations, and various and sundry math courses including two semesters of statistics, discrete mathematics, linear algebra, etc. But then, EEs are only second to Math and Physics majors in the number of math courses they take. My art major friends were struggling with Math For Liberal Arts Majors, which involved things like the Russian Peasent's Method.
Long story short: yes, there is often a Precalc course for students that didn't take it in high school, or need the refresher.
Hell, in both of the high schools I attended, most students stopped after Trigonometry and never took Calculus.
Deep Cuts In A Lovecraftian Vein
Top

CatharzGodfoot
  King
  Posts: 5668
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: North Carolina

###

- Quote

Post by CatharzGodfoot » Wed Oct 03, 2012 10:53 pm

> Lago PARANOIA wrote:This is a change of topic, but, why don't schools emphasize Discrete Math and Linear Algebra more?

My school (the University of Minnesota) did. In fact, discrete math was the sole prerequisite of AI.
That said, every major could benefit from introductory discrete math and public speaking. But you've got to change the name "discrete math" to "logic". Linear algebra can be super useful, but it's too difficult for a lot of folks (and useless for others).
The law in its majestic equality forbids the rich as well as the poor from stealing bread, begging and sleeping under bridges.
-Anatole France
Mount Flamethrower on rear
Drive in reverse
Win Game.
-Josh Kablack
Top

ModelCitizen
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 593
  Joined: Fri Sep 23, 2011 3:53 am

###

- Quote

Post by ModelCitizen » Thu Oct 04, 2012 4:23 am

> CatharzGodfoot wrote: That said, every major could benefit from introductory discrete math and public speaking. But you've got to change the name "discrete math" to "logic". Linear algebra can be super useful, but it's too difficult for a lot of folks (and useless for others).

About public speaking classes: I get that better public speakers are more likely to find and keep jobs, but trying to undo students' genetic predispositions + years of conditioning in three credit hours just isn't going to work. Most public speaking classes are just participation grades - you can bump yourself from a B to an A by having a better voice or more pleasing mannerisms I guess, but I had to take like three of the fucking things and I never saw anyone fail unless they just straight-up stopped coming to class.* People just aren't comfortable with openly saying "you fail because the prof didn't like you," even though that's what a real public speaking class would have to grade you on.
*Edit: Ok, this isn't strictly true. A lot of students failed Professional Presentations for not formatting their slides the way the prof wanted (I know a guy who got a negative grade on his final project because the prof didn't like something in the slide header and marked off ten points per slide) but I never saw anyone fail based on social skills during their actual presentation.
Last edited by ModelCitizen on Thu Oct 04, 2012 4:38 am, edited 1 time in total.
Top

Maxus
  Overlord
  Posts: 7645
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Maxus » Thu Oct 04, 2012 4:39 am

I took a public speaking class.
On more than half the days, the professors were talking, and I swore to myself that, like, should I ever have cause to take it again, I was going to have a speech prepped and ready.
The topic would be, "I thought we were paying a three-digit amount in tuition to get better at public speaking, not listen to the teacher practice. I'm fair, since we do spend half the class actually speaking and critiquing the speeches of our peers, I only want half my money back."
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
Top

Koumei
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 13796
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: South Ausfailia

###

- Quote

Post by Koumei » Thu Oct 04, 2012 5:26 am

> Maj wrote:The schools that I've attended and/or spoken to alumni about seem to reiterate the stereotype that engineers live in a closet and don't have many interests outside of their field - which is why they have made more electives mandatory.

That's the least offensive of the stereotypes engineers have. I typed "Engineers are " into the Google bar, and these are the suggestions I got:
That's 6 negative, 4 positive.
If you type "engineers are the" (or indeed just "engineers are t") then it suggests "Engineers are the oompa loompas of science". Now I think that one is from Big Bang Theory, and enough viewers just had to google that to see if there was any evidence for this/to get the exact quote.
No wonder they're all right-wing terrorists, with the things people say about them :p

> Count Arioch the 28th wrote:There is NOTHING better than lesbians. Lesbians make everything better.

Top

Maxus
  Overlord
  Posts: 7645
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Maxus » Thu Oct 04, 2012 5:55 am

Well, there's a tendency among engineers to think that because pretty much any problem/thing features engineering, that engineers can therefore be expert on any problem.
Some of the more hilarious justifications for a biblical flood come from Engineers. One of the more hilarious ones is that before the Flood, the earth's crust was 10-km-thick-skin over a global kilometers-thick layer of water and the "Fountains of the deep" were turned loose when God cracked this skin and let pressure and physics do the rest.
Which would mean God knew that layer would be used and included it when making the world.
Which means God's an asshole.
Not that they carry their reasoning all the way to that last reasonable conclusion.
He jumps like a damned dragoon, and charges into battle fighting rather insane monsters with little more than his bare hands and rather nasty spell effects conjured up solely through knowledge and the local plantlife. He unerringly knows where his goal lies, he breathes underwater and is untroubled by space travel, seems to have no limits to his actual endurance and favors killing his enemies by driving both boots square into their skull. His agility is unmatched, and his strength legendary, able to fling about a turtle shell big enough to contain a man with enough force to barrel down a near endless path of unfortunates.
--The horror of Mario
Zak S, Zak Smith, Dndwithpornstars, Zak Sabbath. He is a terrible person and a hack at writing and art. His cultural contributions are less than Justin Bieber's, and he's a shitmuffin. Go go gadget Googlebomb!
Top

Koumei
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 13796
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm
  Location: South Ausfailia

###

- Quote

Post by Koumei » Thu Oct 04, 2012 8:14 am

> Maxus wrote:Well, there's a tendency among engineers to think that because pretty much any problem/thing features engineering, that engineers can therefore be expert on any problem.

What happens when people point out "So because everything operates within the rules of physics, Phycisits are experts on absolutely everything ever, going by your rules""?
I seem to recall that it's here on the Den where we say mean things about engineers in general (as opposed to specific engineers). I should probably keep my mouth shut until I have some kind of doctorate though.

> Count Arioch the 28th wrote:There is NOTHING better than lesbians. Lesbians make everything better.

Top

K
  King
  Posts: 6487
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by K » Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:10 am

Engineers aren't really respected because their job is essentially intellectual slave labor and in most cases they are interchangeable.
So when a corporation needs engineers, they just set X number on the project. None of them are expected to do anything revolutionary, so it doesn't even matter who they are.
Top

Ancient History
  Serious Badass
  Posts: 12708
  Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2010 12:57 pm

###

- Quote

Post by Ancient History » Thu Oct 04, 2012 10:33 am

Engineers are respected for the amount of shit they have to go through in school. But then we end up working for managers with BA degrees and wonder where the fuck the world went wrong.
Engineers come in all range of skill level, knowledge, and experience - they are not interchangeable, even on the corporate level. If a company sets X engineers on the project it is because they can charge for X engineers on a project. You can be damn sure that the managers of the important projects snag the good engineers.
Deep Cuts In A Lovecraftian Vein
Top

K
  King
  Posts: 6487
  Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2008 7:54 pm

###

- Quote

Post by K » Thu Oct 04, 2012 11:08 am

> Ancient History wrote: Engineers come in all range of skill level, knowledge, and experience - they are not interchangeable, even on the corporate level. If a company sets X engineers on the project it is because they can charge for X engineers on a project. You can be damn sure that the managers of the important projects snag the good engineers.

Corporations don't view engineers in the same way as project managers view them.
That being said, a lot of things that you'd expect to be benefits to engineers actually aren't. They age out much earlier than other intellectual jobs because you really can get a younger one who works twice as hard for half the pay to do the same job. Many end up unemployable at 50 even if they've kept up on the latest tech in their field.
Top

sabs
  Duke
  Posts: 2347
  Joined: Wed Dec 29, 2010 8:01 pm
  Location: Delaware

###

- Quote

Post by sabs » Thu Oct 04, 2012 12:54 pm

A good engineer has 3 important skills
1) a solid understanding of the field he's in.
ie: Software engineers know fucking math, and high principles of programming. Chemical Engineers know chemistry and math and economy of scale. Civil Engineers know math and physics. etc
2) Problem Solving skills
3) telepathy to understand the stupid shit the customer said, and turn it into something semi-viable.
The problem of course is that Old Engineers are actually worth their weight in gold, but someone thinks you can plop in a young turk with 2 years on the job and he'll catch all the fringe elements. Corporations tend to not respect engineers because corporations don't care about fringe issues, that's what lawyers are for.
Top

echoVanguard
  Knight-Baron
  Posts: 738
  Joined: Fri Apr 01, 2011 6:35 pm

###

- Quote

Post by echoVanguard » Thu Oct 04, 2012 2:24 pm

> Koumei wrote:What happens when people point out "So because everything operates within the rules of physics, Phycisits are experts on absolutely everything ever, going by your rules""?

Obligatory xkcd.
echo
Top

Lago PARANOIA
  Invincible Overlord
  Posts: 10555
  Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 3:00 am

###

- Quote

Post by Lago PARANOIA » Thu Oct 04, 2012 3:08 pm

...
Logician: Mathematics are just applied logic.
Philosopher: Logics are just applied philosophy.
Sociology: Sociology is just applied philosophy.
Psychologist: Sociology is just applied psychology.
And the circle-jerk continues.
Last edited by Lago PARANOIA on Thu Oct 04, 2012 3:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.

> Josh Kablack wrote:Your freedom to make rulings up on the fly is in direct conflict with my freedom to interact with an internally consistent narrative. Your freedom to run/play a game without needing to understand a complex rule system is in direct conflict with my freedom to play a character whose abilities and flaws function as I intended within that ruleset. Your freedom to add and change rules in the middle of the game is in direct conflict with my ability to understand that rules system before I decided whether or not to join your game.
> In short, your entire post is dismissive of not merely my intelligence, but my agency. And I don't mean agency as a player within one of your games, I mean my agency as a person. You do not want me to be informed when I make the fundamental decisions of deciding whether to join your game or buying your rules system.

Top
Post Reply

- Print view

Display:
Sort by:
Direction:

87 posts

- Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next

Return to “MPSIMS”

Jump to

- Main
- ↳ About the Gaming Den
- ↳ In My Humble Opinion...
- ↳ I Gave the Mouse a Cookie...
- ↳ In The Trenches
- ↳ It's My Own Invention...
- ↳ MPSIMS