The Gaming Den

Eagle, please don’t take this attention as an indication that I am targeting you for any special (mis)treatment. But several of your arguments have problems, on several levels, and I feel compelled to point them out to you.

Judging_Eagle wrote:Socky; If there's a volcano about to blow up and consume a city; would the people who point out that people will have to move in order to be safe be called "shit distrubers" or "doing good"?

This is laughably spurious. Folks are getting eviscerated here at the Den because they like to play 4E, and (usually) have weak arguments defending its problems and fallacies. YOU ARE NOT SAVING THEIR LIVES. 4E will not kill them with burning hot lava. The worst that will happen is that THEY WILL HAVE FUN. Trying to convince people that they are wrong to enjoy the game they have been playing is not a noble cause, like saving a village from a volcano. Your analogy is ridiculously flawed.

Judging_Eagle wrote:Also, yeah, racist. Any time you attack a person's name because you don't like the way that it sounds, you're making a statement about their descent. That's racism.

Also a completely flawed argument. To be prejudiced against someone because of their skin color or country or origin is wrong because that is something they cannot change. People change their names all the time. My grandmother’s name, for example, is Nicolazzi. If you chose to have negative feelings against her simply based on her name, someone could jump up and say “Aha! You are prejudiced against Italians!” - except for the fact that grandma is a full-blooded Norwegian. She is named Nicolazzi because of her second husband. It doesn’t track. My brother got married, and he changed his name to something brand new that he and his wife decided on. So if I make fun of his new name, how could I possibly be considered racist? It doesn’t even correspond to any known “race”. If I make fun of a name without any knowledge that it had a known association with a heritage, how can I be considered to be prejudiced against that heritage? That’s like Schrodinger’s Bigotry – I don’t know if you’re some certain kind of race, but if you are then I’m against it!

Besides the fact that your argument is utterly baseless, it’s also irresponsible. Every time you pull the “racist card” without reason, you detract from the incidences in which it is valid and justified. Do you really want to be known as “The Eagle who cried wolf”?

Judging_Eagle wrote:Frank uses his real name, he always has. Something you're obviously too scared to do. Me? I just keep this nick b/c it's how I now name most of my accounts on the interweebs. It's now out of date, but w/e, that's inertia.”

Oh, I see. I don’t use my real name because I’m too scared. You don’t use your real name because of blah blah blah. That is what is known as a double standard. My mommy taught me about double standards, and about the kind of people who use them. There is a word for those people. Let me give you a hint: it starts with “h”. And it ends with “ypocrite”. Besides which, this is the goddamn Internet! It is considered the Standard Operating Procedure to use a login which is NOT your real name, and the folks who do that are (besides being awfully brave) the EXCEPTION to the rule.

Your grandmother example doesn't actually help your point. Like, at all. It's more like noise than signal, really. You can make a racist attack targeted at a certain race against a person who doesn't belong to that race. Racist attacks against Italians, or their culture or language, are still racist attacks even if targeted against people who aren't themselves Italian, aren't part of Italian culture, and don't speak a word of Italian.

Okay, fair enough. The example I gave didn't make as much sense coming out of my mouth (so to speak) as it did in my head. It was only there, really, to bolster the rest of my point. Which was that I don't believe a snarky joke about someone's name can be considered racist, if the person delivering the joke was utterly unaware of any kind of association that name may have had to a specific race. I just gave the example to show that names do not necessarily correspond to appearances or backgrounds. Which further muddies any correlation that Eagle may have been trying to infer about my words with my intent.

...and I'm usually more noise than signal. That's just how the world sounds to these ears.

Wasn't PR supposed to leave?

I thought we weren't going to make sock-puppet jokes anymore.

-Crissa

Yeah, there's a fair amount of hyperbole about 4E around here. I mean come on, "using whatever means necessary"? It's not the fucking Necronomicon, it's just a game that isn't that good. It's not FATAL bad, or even as bad as a lot of systems out there.

Sapping players from 3E is unfortunate, but many of these people are either sick of 3E already or never knew it to begin with. If warned/shouted off 4E they'll probably go with another system entirely, which has no guarantee of being any better.

While the topic of things that irk around here has been opened, I find that the amount of Frank fellating that goes on disconcerting. I usually respect and value his contributions, even when I disagree with him and feel no shame in suggesting that he is one of the most insightful contributors here as well as the most prolific producer of material I'd actually use.

But seriously, having a sig that is essentially offering the man a reach around, in his own hang out, is at best sycophantic, and at worst feels like gang colors.

Can we just eat Robin's minstrels get on with it?

Does not a reach around imply you are already in said person's rear? Not the best crude metaphor you could manage to describe sycophants I s'pose.

Ice9 wrote:Yeah, there's a fair amount of hyperbole about 4E around here. I mean come on, "using whatever means necessary"? It's not the fucking Necronomicon, it's just a game that isn't that good. It's not FATAL bad, or even as bad as a lot of systems out there.

Sapping players from 3E is unfortunate, but many of these people are either sick of 3E already or never knew it to begin with. If warned/shouted off 4E they'll probably go with another system entirely, which has no guarantee of being any better.

Since it came out, the community as a whole has became significantly worse. Even the Den is not immune. The people it steals away are either the idiots we're better off without, or people that don't know any better and should be quickly saved. However it also draws in more idiots, while removing the worthwhile individuals. Therefore, the average lowers considerably.

PF does the same thing. And the fact both of these came out around the same time means the community has suffered considerably.

This is most apparent when optimizing games. Not optimizing for a game, but optimizing the games themselves. There are more suboptimal factors on players, therefore filling out a quality group is more difficult. In addition to all the usual idiots like Sundertards, you also have more idiots who think rogues outdamaging a fireball is what has been holding D&D back all these years and more idiots who think flailing for piddly shit for 20+ rounds is the way to go. And that's a lot of dumbfucks to avoid if you want functional games.

Koumei wrote:"No shit, EVERYONE loves my stuff. Your point?"

Your humilty is overwhelming. Or, wait, is it underwhelming? I can never keep those two straight.

clikml wrote:Does not a reach around imply you are already in said person's rear? Not the best crude metaphor you could manage to describe sycophants I s'pose.

And really, if someone was in my rear and DIDN'T at least offer a reach-around, I'd probably kick their ass.

Referring back to the original post and the question:

I agree with the points pointed out by PR. I was introduced the first week I started posting here everything that was on PR's list.

As for the title's question I feel about TGD much the same as I feel about most forums. I think there are a lot of good ideas here and that most people will inevitably speak differently online than they will off.

I was first introduced to TGD via a link to Frank and K's Tomes. It started getting me really thinking about the game world in ways that I had no reason to think in before. And I have truly learned a lot from being here.

I do find that there is a credible lack of respect for people's tastes here. Especially for those who simply like 4e and are interested in Pathfinder. I think it sucks that in the threads over the two things, posters seem to be unwilling to discuss anything positive about the games. I too don't like 4e but there are aspects about it that I do like and I have a respectful demeanor towards the game.

I was enthusiastic about PF before I came here but though my opinion of it has been significantly shattered I still hold a respect for what the game is and I think there are a number of salvageable mechanics there-in. I think people could stand to be a bit more accepting of people who just like 4e or whatever for their own reasons. As long as such admiration can be met with thoughtful criticism without hostility being aroused.

Understanding. That's what we need more of.

MGuy wrote:Understanding. That's what we need more of.

More understanding of Pathfinder and 4e is exactly why we do not like both.

posters seem to be unwilling to discuss anything positive about the games.

BS. We have threads specifically for discussing the actual positive elements.

Unfortunately, there just aren't a whole lot of said positive elements. And there are usually better examples of those elements from other sources.

I meant understanding of each other.

And oh. I did not know. In throughout my time here I haven't really seen one.

MGuy wrote:Referring back to the original post and the question:

I agree with the points pointed out by PR. I was introduced the first week I started posting here everything that was on PR's list.

As for the title's question I feel about TGD much the same as I feel about most forums. I think there are a lot of good ideas here and that most people will inevitably speak differently online than they will off.

I was first introduced to TGD via a link to Frank and K's Tomes. It started getting me really thinking about the game world in ways that I had no reason to think in before. And I have truly learned a lot from being here.

I do find that there is a credible lack of respect for people's tastes here. Especially for those who simply like 4e and are interested in Pathfinder. I think it sucks that in the threads over the two things, posters seem to be unwilling to discuss anything positive about the games. I too don't like 4e but there are aspects about it that I do like and I have a respectful demeanor towards the game.

I was enthusiastic about PF before I came here but though my opinion of it has been significantly shattered I still hold a respect for what the game is and I think there are a number of salvageable mechanics there-in. I think people could stand to be a bit more accepting of people who just like 4e or whatever for their own reasons. As long as such admiration can be met with thoughtful criticism without hostility being aroused.

Understanding. That's what we need more of.

This is essentially what I would have said, if I wasn't such a jackass. Thanks very much MDude, for being classier than I am (not that that's saying all that much, but take a compliment wherever you can get it, I always say).

Discussions tend toward the negative because that's human nature.

...However, I think it's good to aspire to fight that trend, yes.

-Crissa

Is this thread going to become a cry corner for people mad that their ideas aren't liked?

What do you mean "Become"?

People generally don't like my ideas. I'd say that over half of the things I think are good for the game or genre the majority of the board disagrees with. And the mechanics I've proposed, ho-boy, I'd say that most of the things I have proposed have been shot down pretty quickly.

Some of them are just taste issues (for example, I think resurrection should be an easily available thing in a high-lethality heroic fantasy game) but oftentimes I have ideas that are just bad--and the board is not shy to call me out on them.

So TGD calls most of your ideas shit; big fucken deal. Even guys like Josh and Keith don't get get a 50% approval rating for their ideas. Don't get worked up about it.

So is S. Puppet P. Robot pretending that he isn't posting here or not?

I probably shouldn't even dignify the ongoing insinuations with a response (especially since you'll make up your own minds and disregard whatever I say anyway), but what das fuck. For all his faults and strengths, it cannot be denied that Psychic Robo was both a button-pusher and a rabble-rouser. But I never pegged him as an idiot. Only an idiot would make a sock puppet and call it "Sock Puppet". That's just a trifle too obvious, and, shall we say, gauche?

Give us both a little more credit than that. Or don't - whatever.

How about a new topic. If you were to make a troll alt of yourself, what would you call it?

For some reason all I can think of is Wibbles. Or maybe some random leetspeak pretending to be some 13 year old who insists he's had 15 years experience DMing. Or possibly "Man Trollingfrank". That last one could really work.

For the record, I'm not trying to insinuate anything about Sock Puppet: I don't give a fuck. Its just the conversation seems to revolve around the point and this could be a humorous way to take the tangent. Gotta be better than reach-arounds.

Now I just need to check whether Wibbles is already taken, and quickly take it so someone doesn't pretend they're me.

I'd go with a simple "Peter". Mostly because I love Ender's Game more than I should.