grognards.txt - sandbox gamers are the John Galts of the RPG world

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > grognards.txt - sandbox gamers are the John Galts of the RPG world

«‹›67 »

FMguru: Sep 10, 2003; peed on;
sexually

Plague of Hats posted:

It's about what I expected!

Skarka is the best.

STUPID AUDIENCE MEAT! WHY CAN'T YOU JUST SHUT UP AND ACCEPT WHAT WE, THE EXALTED COLLEGE OF PROFESSIONAL GAME DESIGNERS, CHOOSE TO LADLE ONTO YOUR PLATES?!?

A question: If Skarka got frustrated enough to up and quite the game industry...how could we tell?

Grog tax!

---

OpenQuest 2 - a fan-made variant of early-1980s RuneQuest - is out! How does it look, grognard?

quote:

It f** screams Microsoft Word when I looked at the preview. It will not be the book to lure a newcomer (children) into the hobby. Such a shame. Makes me quite pissed off actually. This is not indi, but plain unprofessionalism.

quote:

Why? Basic aesthetics. Because it makes it look good ... and because it is not a math book. It must inspire.

Unprofessional? Seems like no QA to me. Failure to give fair judgment if it is on par with other works in the industry. And it is not fair - book that has been worked on for so much time should not make me feel ashamed to give as a Christmas present.

quote:

All right, overreacted a bit. It is a matter of preferences. I think it was the font or something that felt like from the "Papers and Paychecks" game - not a fantasy game. The layout kind of looks like a (heavy) wargame's rules.

A Non-Grognard posted:

Incidentally, the layout decisions were intended to be a homage to the old Avalon Hill RQ3 books.

quote:

That says a lot. I just wanted to say that the layout seemed like it is still the '80s, but as that has been the intention, I must say they nailed it. It must make some grongnards happy, but not kids from the 21. century. Am still getting the book, but just for myself at first. Once I get it, I try to evaluate if it is something that would inspire my cousin not to play xbox instead.

Why is this fan-made retrogame not superpolished to appeal to the twerkin' x-boxin' millenial youth demographic of today :qq:

I cannot give this game to my cousin it would make me burn with shame :qq:

# ? Nov 13, 2013 23:59

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 28, 2024 10:09

Nancy_Noxious: Apr 10, 2013; by Smythe

"I find personal goals more interesting than money when it comes to motivating characters. Money is the most generic reward possible."

"YOU NEUROTIC COMMIE!!1!":

quote:

The notion that money is 'impersonal' is one of those brainless anti-capitalist slogans I have no desire to engage. Money is a medium of exchange, your weird psychological associations with it don't make it anything else. Money is the axis of prductyion and the means for acquiring a lot of things people wont deal wiothout. The presumption that commerce is somehow banal and/or base is neurotic and far more tedious than book keeping.

# ? Nov 14, 2013 11:36

Saguaro PI: Mar 11, 2013; Totally legit tree

And ventures are far more survivable if people cooperate and specialize in their talents instead of looking around in terror at their comrades. People can and do cooperate in hostile situations, and where lots of money is involved. 'Greed' engenders far more cooperation than dischord in almost any civilized society because people can mutually benefit. You've applied broken game theory, like Hobbes, and come up with a fallacious result. Greed is the basis of most cooperation in human history. And yes, the pcs who ignore plothooks for loot are, like i said, treating it like Diablo. but theres nothing strange about greed as a motivation. Also, if you include Atlas Shrugged or Kain or Conan in modern fiction, loot is the most common motivation even if other ideological or non-pecuniary interests do fall in. I'd say the lack of profit-motive in many modern heroes is a function of silly ideology rather than realism or heroism. No reason Superman shouldn't be a trillionaire, he certainly earns it.

# ? Nov 14, 2013 12:31

That Old Tree: Jun 24, 2012; nah

quote:

Thanks to the OGL, 3e is STILL a major part of the hobby, rather than being consigned to the dustbin of history. This is terrible. The worst edition of the game ever put out is still going strong because people don't like changing game systems and there's a company ready, willing and able to cater to that desire.

Paizo is the antithesis of a good Steward of the hobby - rather than doing what's best for the hobby, they're minding their own bottom line and pumping out yet more drivel for 3e. WoTC's 5e looks bad, but at least they're putting out something slightly new.

All those other games you mentioned? There's no real gain to "the hobby". We'd be better off if people felt they needed to innovate their mechanics in more dimensions and craft their own content. Instead, everyone is going after the D&D demographic. pfui.

OGL. Worst ever decision for WoTC, worst decision ever for the hobby.

Edit: Oh, and no. Losing half in one fell swoop is better, because you're losing the half of your player base that hates change and thus will resist anything you do to grow the hobby over time, thus condemning the hobby to a slow, ignominious death.

Some pretty typical "3E is anti-gaming!"

# ? Nov 14, 2013 13:15

That Old Tree: Jun 24, 2012; nah

So I couldn't help myself and I visited the new Exalted forum on Onyx Path.

quote:

Lilun however is no example of child pornography, given she's something like 17. People just like to call it child pornography so they can pass out chastisements from a moral high ground, it being an incredible taboo, especially over the internet.

Oh, good.

# ? Nov 14, 2013 14:46

Shriven: Feb 16, 2012

Plague of Hats posted:

So I couldn't help myself and I visited the new Exalted forum on Onyx Path.

Oh, good.

Silly internet, overreacting to child pornography!

2008-style Edition War grog, fresh from RPG.net -

quote:

Exactly. I don't understand why a game as awesome as 4E can't thrive against a little healthy competition. It's not like Paizo burned down WOTC's corporate headquarters.

drat that Paizo for giving a people a choice instead of forcing them to march to the 4E jackboot!

Thank GOD for the OGL for precisely this reason. A version of D&D now has to succeed on its own merits rather just because WOTC decides to force feed us a new edition to boost their bottom line. And the same goes for Paizo too.

# ? Nov 14, 2013 16:03

Nyarai: Jul 19, 2012; Jenn here.

Plague of Hats posted:

[Lilun justification grog]

Yeah, creepy stuff like that made me super reticent to play Exalted. It was only after my friend said, "The errata pretends that whole chapter of the Infernals book doesn't exist," that I agreed to give the system a shot. It's fun as hell, and I'm glad that the publishers aren't catering to the weird, creepy crowd as much. (Though I imagine the probability of homebrewers importing her to 3E is approximately 1.)

Went for the easy grog that is SKR's post history.

SKR posted:

That's an easy question to answer. Here's the long answer:

* Paizo's business model was publishing D&D-compatible adventures.
* There weren't any copies of the 3.5 D&D Player's Handbook in stores any more.
* Paizo wasn't given much of a preview of the 4E rules or the license that would allow Paizo to publish 4E-compatible products, and deciding to publish supplements for an unfinished game and under a license you hadn't seen isn't a smart business plan.
* That license had severe restrictions that made it a poor choice for Paizo, most importantly (1) Wizards could update or change the license at any time, and Paizo's only option would be to accept the new terms or to stop using the license, and stopping would require Paizo to destroy remaining inventory published under the license, (2) Wizards could revoke the license at any time, requiring Paizo to destroy remaining inventory published under the license, and (3) the original version of the license forbade Paizo from publishing or selling 3E content, including remaining copies of 3E materials, which meant Paizo's backstock of 3E products would have to be thrown away.
* So Paizo was stuck between publishing adventures for 3.5, a game that new players couldn't start playing because there were no PHs in stores, or publishing adventures for 4E, a game that wasn't out yet (PF#1 published August 2007, PF announced March 2008, 4E published August 2008).
* So Paizo decided to take the 3.5 rules, update them, and publish the Pathfinder RPG, and immediately set about doing so (Beta published GenCon 2008, Core Rulebook published Gen Con 2009).
* So between March 2008 and July 2008, Jason worked his rear end off to get the 410 pages of the Beta written, edited, and typeset (there were many days where Erik had Jason work from home, because we couldn't spare the 30 minutes each way of his commute to the office). Compare that to a typical core line release, which is 256 pages, has 9 designer-months of development (3 designers x 3 months), and has 4�6 editor-months of editing (2�3 editors x 2 months).
* And then a massive playtest where 50,000 people downloaded and playtested it for a couple months.
* Then we took all of that information and created a 576-page Core Rulebook in about 4 months. And all the while we continued to publish monthly products for 3E, and made the switch over to PFRPG without knowing if we'd be able to maintain our barely-able-to-pay-bills level of sales, or if PFRPG sales would be better or worse. Fortunately, the answer was "better."
* But at no time during any part of this process did we have a spare week to sit down and review all the language in the book to make sure everything was synched up and perfectly clear (and it would take much longer than a week to get it done... more like months, plural). We worked evenings and weekends to get it done. One person on staff had a series of panic attack and briefly went blind because of all the stress from this project (I am not kidding).
The short answer: You weren't there. You don't understand what it was like, how much work was involved, the risk we were taking, and how we were already working ourselves to the bone to get it done. We did the best we could under extraordinarily problematic circumstances. Your suggestion that we should have "done it right" is insulting.

My point still stands: yes, the rules could be clearer. Yes, that's why the role of the GM is so important.

And if you don't like that answer, house rule it for your campaign. The GM is in charge of how the rules are implemented in the campaign. I'm saying We can't do all the work for you to make your game run perfectly smooth. There are always going to be times where the GM has to make a ruling because there are infinite possibilities in active gameplay, and you're going to read something differently than the designer or editor read it.

And if you don't like that answer, maybe you should just play a different game, because all of our working evenings and weekends isn't enough to satisfy you.

I think we're done discussing this magus topic, and the general topic of "why aren't things worded more clearly all the time?," and the topic of "if you knew it was a problem, why didn't you fix it?"

Thread closed.

Nyarai fucked around with this message at 17:20 on Nov 14, 2013

# ? Nov 14, 2013 16:36

Alien Rope Burn: Dec 5, 2004; _{I wanna be a saikyo HERO!}

Remember yellowdingo? Looks like he's still fighting the good fight.

yellowdingo posted:

A Petition to end Dungeons and Dragons Message of Bigotry

Dungeons and Dragons has been spreading a message of bigotry since it published the clarified rule book in the early eighties defining the human height limit. The problem was Humans were always more diverse than the limits on height that the Game defined as Human. Humans are not limited to four and a half feet tall to six and a half feet tall and those who are outside those heights are not monsters and freaks.

Sure D&D is a fantasy game about playing elves and dwarves and halflings and humans but those 'non-human' creatures are legends covering human bigotry toward those of extreme heights anyway. They are a remnant of the centuries of bigotry of humans toward height.

Help end this Bigotry.

The Petition: https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/pe...en-who/vNxRTJ2y

petitions.whitehouse.gov posted:

The petition you are trying to access has expired, because it failed to meet the signature threshold.

While you can't sign this petition, there may be other petitions on We the People on a similar issue that you'd like to add your name to. Or, you can create your own petition.

Bigotry won again. :saddowns:

# ? Nov 14, 2013 22:55

MizPiz: May 29, 2013; by Athanatos

Alien Rope Burn posted:

Remember yellowdingo? Looks like he's still fighting the good fight.

Bigotry won again.

As much as fantasy can be an enabler for bigotry (sometimes outright encouraging it), I don't see how height discrimination is actually a part of it. I can see how dwarves and halflings can be offensive to short people, but from what I understand the heights are given as averages. There's nothing preventing any of the races from being larger or smaller than the given limits other than people not considering it (or not being blatantly told every time height is brought up).

Grog tax:
From a 4chan thread about the new Necrons, pretty groggy in it's own right, but I think this tops it all:

quote:

>Post a tonne fluff explicitly mentioning building empire
>Point out that it says right on the back of the book
>Keeps asserting they're only trying to survive despite 90% of fluff being aggressive territorial dispute and their entire motif being phoenixes rising from the ashes

You're hopeless. You're being deliberately obstinate and trying to twist your own interpretation into canon while ignoring unequivocal evidence or trying to find ambiguity where there is none.

For context, he's trying to say that the main deal with the Necrons is practically a copy/paste of the Eldar's story. His evidence seems to be the existence of the Eldars as a playable race, being snide, and using big words.

# ? Nov 15, 2013 01:21

Slimnoid: Sep 6, 2012; Does that mean I don't get the job?

5e has one thing going for it.

quote:

4e was D&D for people who hate D&D. Now that WotC got that crap out of their system, I'm hoping they will actually release a game based upon 3e/2e, but some refinements.

quote:

Die 4e, die! Die the death, you unholy abomination!!!!

quote:

My impression is that 4e designers (probably through their own biases), thought that they would create a game that

a) emulated the MMO style of combat chains/rinse/repeat because "MMOs are super popular, let's cash in on that"

b) allowed you to play with crap players and DMs under the false belief that a ruleset could fix social problems

Needless to say, both of these are incredibly flawed design goals in the context of a TTRPG that is supposed to be the most played one out there (meaning not catering to niche players).

# ? Nov 15, 2013 01:43

Chaltab: Feb 16, 2011; So shocked someone got me an avatar!

Mike Mearls has said that 3.X is 'like doing boring math' and one of the other 4E developers said that if you ever used one of the craft or profession or perform skills in your game, 'then, frankly, your game wasn't any fun.'

The insults started coming from the marketing team, denigrating anyone who bought the stuff we bought from them as being broken or unfun or boring or 'too hard.' And then they tried to convince us that this new product they were pitching was the solution to all the stuff that ails us, stuff that they'd already sold us! Ballsy move.

But some of us didn't buy the 'you suck for trusting us, now trust us again and send us more money' marketing approach.

As someone who doesn't terribly care for some of the changes in 4E, I don't see any need for hyperbole like 'not roleplaying' (which is ludicrous, since we've 'role-played' during Star Fleet Battles, or singing along to Rock Band), or 'like Magic the Gathering' (which it is, in some respects, and that's not an insult, to be compared to a creative fantasy juggernaut and to note correlations between blue denial decks and controllers or red damage decks and strikers), or 'like World of Warcraft' (which it also is, and quite probably by design, so that it's easier to convert into an online form, which is only a plus, not a minus, and who at WotC / Hasbro wouldn't eat their first born child for Dungeons & Dragons to be as successful as WoW?). Such things don't count as 'insults' to me, because I've played Magic and I've played WoW and I don't need rules to role-play.

I'll probably play 4E at some point, perhaps at a convention, and I'll probably enjoy it for what it is. I've enjoyed GURPS (Fasntasy, Supers, Horror, Space, etc.), Villains & Vigilantes, Mutants & Masterminds, Aberrant, Trinity, Adventure!, Paranoia, Vampire: the Masquerade and three previous editions of D&D / AD&D in settings ranging from Greyhawk to the Forgotten Realms to Eberron to Kara-Tur to Al-Qadim to Dark Sun to Spelljammer, after all, so I'm pretty open-minded.

What I don't care for are the developers and fans of 4E telling me that I am a grognard, 'hater,' mindless, luddite, fascist (!), deluded, irrational, lying, boring fatbeard. I'm not 'on the side' of anyone who utters the words 'fanboi' either. Two gaming geeks insulting each other is as lame as listening to Star Wars fans arguing over whether or not Han shot first, or Pats and Yankees fans arguing about 'spygate.'

----

I, too, take offense at company talking up its new product by poking fun at its old product, because that's how mature adults act.

At least he's open to trying it some day.. :unsmith:

# ? Nov 15, 2013 06:21

That Old Tree: Jun 24, 2012; nah

help i can't stop going back

quote:

There are a lot of misrepresentations in RPG's and comics. From physical proportions (in both sexes) to physics (it's become natural to see stupid stuff and not lift an eyebrow).

My personal opinion is that all this "bikini witch topic" is as important as you or me let it be. I for one, consider that the exalted audience is intelligent and we are capable of using our criteria and not feel offended or mind controlled by something so simple.

Just as you can ignore the rules you find aweful. You are free of creating your own aesthetics for your characters. Just because the book shows illustrations, it doesn't mean you need to stick to that style and theme.

On one hand, to the game, I think all this discussion is a bit irrelevant and may be "harmful" to the new edition (expectations vs. reality).

On the other hand, this discussion isn't irrelevant in other contexts, like if we were discussing discrimination. But that would be more fitting in another forum. One that is not dedicated to a game.

This is my personal opinion, and I am in no way trying to convince anyone or actively asking to stop the discussion. These are my final words on the matter.

Sexual objectification in Exalted? I think we Exalted fans are smart enough just to ignore the problem. And is it really even a problem? I mean, it's not like it's racism or something!

# ? Nov 15, 2013 06:29

FMguru: Sep 10, 2003; peed on;
sexually

Somewhat tangential, but I thought there was something wonderfully groggy about this post from RPG.net (that led to a permaban)

quote:

And given how well-versed I am in the subject despite being self-taught (as I said, I can read reference grammars and scholarly articles with little trouble), I have no idea why you are denying my authority on the subject.

Respect mah (self-granted) authoritah!

# ? Nov 15, 2013 06:52

FMguru: Sep 10, 2003; peed on;
sexually

You know what this rapegame needs? MOAR SPACESHIPS.

quote:

I've been working on a conversion document to run the LotFP Carcosa campaign setting using Classic Traveller (the 3 Little Black Books). The basic idea is that the crew of the Free Trader Beowulf (you know, the one broadcasting the Mayday signal on the box?) crash lands on Carcosa...and from there it's all hexcrawl-y goodness as they try to survive the horrors that await them.

Here's a link to the conversion document I set up - I'm wondering if anyone who is familiar with LotFP / Basic D&D and Classic Traveller can let me know if I've overlooked anything or should change the way I'm handling some of the conversions.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...it?usp=sharing

The first couple of responses, naturally, agree that this is a GREAT IDEA.

# ? Nov 15, 2013 07:12

That Old Tree: Jun 24, 2012; nah

Holden Shearer, developer for Exalted posted:

Really weird to me that given a picture of a Exalt levitating into the air on wings made of daiklaves, a bunch of socially enlightened thinkers choose to define her by her breasts and gender.

Ah well. You'll get the full comic eventually.

# ? Nov 15, 2013 09:10

ProfessorCirno: Feb 17, 2011; The strongest! The smartest!
The rightest!

quote:

I am not a proponent of "realism counts for some classes, but not for others". Spellcasters get to break realism by "It is magic!". Fighter and rogue types get to break realism by, "I'm an action hero!" I think trying to impose "realism" as a restriction on some character types, but not others, does not seem like a realistic design goal.

I'm a proponent of magic being treated as an exception to the way the world works. "Supernatural" literally means above and beyond what is natural. I don't see that it matters which classes we're talking about; each individual mechanic ought to be judged on its own merits.

I also don't recall seeing the term "action hero" anywhere in my PHB. If I wanted an rpg that did that, I don't think D&D would be my choice.

# ? Nov 15, 2013 12:01

ProfessorCirno: Feb 17, 2011; The strongest! The smartest!
The rightest!

quote:

I am not a proponent of "realism counts for some classes, but not for others". Spellcasters get to break realism by "It is magic!". Fighter and rogue types get to break realism by, "I'm an action hero!" I think trying to impose "realism" as a restriction on some character types, but not others, does not seem like a realistic design goal.

I'd say for me to play the game it's an essential design goal. Why should I play a game that at every turn is busting my immersion because of weird unrealistic mechanics. 4e was unplayable for me because of these issues. As soon as the Rogue did a blinding barrage, my group was lost immersion wise.

A lot of debate has went on about mechanics as their relationship to the underlying world. It's probably only an issue for a particular segment and no one else cares. That segment though is not tiny. It may not be a majority if by caring you mean passionately. If you mean "just prefers" then I'd say you'd have a majority.

I kind of wish they'd push more things into feats. I know this is problematic but it would be nice if a DM could just hand out a list to his players stating the following ten feats are banned. Instead, if the game is playable, he'll end up having to write a small treatise explaining whats in and whats out. In some cases, the DM will likely have to create new rules to fill in the missing spots.

# ? Nov 15, 2013 12:01

That Old Tree: Jun 24, 2012; nah

quote:

And here we go... people need to stop asking less bikini witches in Exalted. It's one of those games that just... doesn't need that kind of discussion.

The cover for Malfeas is a half-naked dude all oiled up. The cover for Fair Folk book is also a half-naked man. I don't really remember any half-naked lady in any cover, right now. And no matter what you think, Ejava is a Dynast, that means she enjoys dressing half-naked during galas, she has had her share of allucinogens and has had more sex than most people in her world, in various and not always 'decent' ways. It is a sexually charged, sensual setting, but unlike most settings, armor is far less useful than 'magic'. A naked Solar could absorb more punishment than any Dragon-Blooded without Five Dragon Style.

You can argue about bikini witches in World of Warcraft, Tera Online, any of those. Exalted? Please. If there is one game that is pretty much up there in the equality (even if it's equality in debauchery and sexuality) that game is Exalted.

With the protagonists being butchers, mind-raping gods, it baffles me you worry about this issue.

People need to stop being so insecure and use their heads for a change.

# ? Nov 15, 2013 18:08

Ferrinus: Jun 19, 2003; i'm finding this quite easy, i guess in part because i'm a fast type but also because i have a coherent mental model of the world

Plague of Hats posted:

Sexual objectification in Exalted? I think we Exalted fans are smart enough just to ignore the problem. And is it really even a problem? I mean, it's not like it's racism or something!

Remember, there absolutely have to items and powers that work specifically in tandem with your player character loving someone, in game, or else Exalted will be too bland, anemic, and timid.

quote:

BRASSIERE OF EXCESSIVE FEMININITY (ARTIFACT �)

Many new asura have trouble coming to terms with their newfound ability to mold their own bodies. Surrounded by the exotic beauties of the demon realm and a culture where body modification is common if not expected, some try to emphasize what they know rather than immediately take on those unfamiliar aspects. Others simply have long-held complexes which they are finally able to resolve. Regardless of cause, many of them neglect to consider the side effects before using magic or surgery to increase the size of whatever dangling sexual bits they might have. As a result, the easiest way to identify a newly-Exalted Infernal is to listen for complaints of the weight.

While the men still wait cross-legged for relief, hell's women, including some demons recently, can acquire a brassiere of excessive femininity with relative ease to relieve their constant back pain. Every month, five days before the new moon, a particularly busty Lunar who calls herself Love's Last Hope enters Malfeas by way of a key to the infernal gates (Manual of Exalted Power � The Infernals, p.190) to sell these artifacts and take special orders. A prospective customer must find her location by word of mouth within the space of one day, for she never sells in the same location more than once and leaves immediately after her stock has emptied in the hopes that Luna will not spy her crossing the Endless Desert so frequently.

The core of this artifact is an incredibly fine web of moonsilver fibers upon which cotton, silk, or on rare occasions, a voice stolen by Berengiere, is woven. With the attunement of one mote, these fibers morph to perfectly fit the wearer, tightening or letting out the fabric as needed. As long as the wearer remains attuned, the moonsilver reacts to her body's movements, keeping her breasts from throwing her off-balance and taking the weight off of her spine, rendering her immune to any internal or external penalties resulting from the size of her bust.

Hope also makes a rarer soulsteel variant of this artifact, though acquiring the necessary material from her Abyssal Mate may take extra time. Saying it is comfortable would be an outright lie, as it provides its support through sheer rigidity rather than from flexibility. However, the natural cold of the material ensures that the wearer's nipples are always pert, and the appearance of the metal itself is used in some of the seamstress' gothic designs.

# ? Nov 15, 2013 18:38

AdjectiveNoun: Oct 11, 2012; Everything. Is. Fine.

I'm pretty sure the Brassiere thing was a joke/making fun of the artists who keep drawing bikini witches, considering the guy who posted it was quoting the "How to recognise a Bikini Witch" post earlier in that thread.

Grog Tax from the same thread:

quote:

Honestly, your comments can come from a place of hope, but they are exhaustive all the same. You have a problem with the body language and stance? That is reaching for it. Deep.

Women are depicted with little clothes like men are in Exalted. It is a setting like that. The thing is that while women with cocked hips are somewhat sexy and perceived as alluring, men are less sexualized that way by society. That woman is as sexualized as Ligier is, or Malfeas, or any of the ot her men who are out there, with their six packs, bulging muscles and oiled up bodies. You are just milking a discussion that has little place in Exalted, and while I am not in favor of censorship in any way, I am in favor of people thinking before they complain.

The setting is like that. For men, women, furries, pinionies, scalies, everything. It is sensual in nature.

When you keep feeding these discussions you just really burn the producers, writers and artists up, because if there is one thing that is more disheartening to an artist than no feedback on his work is people over-analyzing things that have no meaning and turning those into shitstorms.

Regular old 'drawings of men with bulging six packs are just sexually exploitative as cheesecake drawings of women' stuff.

# ? Nov 15, 2013 20:43

FMguru: Sep 10, 2003; peed on;
sexually

Hey, RPG.net, what do you say?

quote:

[Rant] Type alignment justified

Oh christ, not another alignment debate. Well maybe there's some good grog to mine...

quote:

Lately I see more and more experienced companies abandoning the beautiful easy to red justified alignment in favor of the more chaotic Flush left alignment.

The new Numenera books by Monte Cook is all Flush left
But more alarming so are the wizards new d&d Sundering Adventure line

These 2 companies to me for many years where the reference point in all things regarding easy reading and correct presentation of text

No matter if you like d&d 4 as a hole or not
or if you consider the text or pictures to be off high quality I think we can all agree the presentation of text +illustrations in D&D or SWSW are off the top quality.
I mean just look at the superb use of colors and shape to separate between chapters and sections.

as for Numenera it presented innovative new visualization that I hope will be adopted by more companies such as the colored keywords within the main body off the text that are reprinted at the borders in matching colors with a reference number attached � brilliant! No more page turning mid reading in a long index

But all of those good editing skills just pale if the main body of your text looks like unprofessional mess

Well that's out of my system

Thoughts?

* Just so we all know what we are talking about.
Here is a quick link that describes the different alignment options for a block of text

http://blog.anthonyjones.biz/2009/01...101-alignment/

** srry for any spelling mistakes not a native spekear

A groggy alignment rant, but not quite the sort of alignment rant I was expecting...

# ? Nov 15, 2013 21:06

That Old Tree: Jun 24, 2012; nah

Grogmas came early this year! :sassargh:

quote:

Well, the short version:

Once upon a time there was a hobby called roleplaying games, and it included games like Vampire, D&D, Traveller, and GURPs, and all was well with the world. Adults could play make believe and nobody looked at them crossways.

Then along came a fellow by the name of Ron Edwards, who decided that adults shouldn't be allowed to play make believe and were, to quote him, "brain damaged" to try. Presumably this was because he felt that playing make believe was not a fitting pastime for an adult, and/or he had a bad GM one time.

So what Ron did was he took a hypothesis, Gamer/Narrative/Simulationist which was self admittedly incomplete and in no way proven, intended to describe gamers, and he inexplicably applied it wholesale to game design. A bit like someone trying to apply personality types to cars.

Not to figure out which personality type liked which car type, but applying personality types to actual vehicles. That's not even an exaggeration.

Anyway, this was latched onto by various extreme leftist slacktivists and unpleasant antisocial types, who read and embraced the voluminous works he had written to enable this bizarre categorisation game (big hint folks, if it can't be explained in a short paragraph someone's trying to bullshit you).

These types basically rejected the concept of roleplaying, preferring instead to adopt a third person narrative approach. For example:

An RPG:
"I leap forward and kill the orc with my hammer"

A shared narrative game:
"Sir Perceval the Knight leaps forward and kills the orc with his hammer, before ten more orcs burst into the room wielding giant wobbly vegetables"

It's a far more detached and less personal experience, much like wargaming. The out of character further control over the setting world is really the finishing touch. Shared narrative games in the sense that they are currently used repudiate the notion of roleplaying.

Moving along, these lesser lights then decided to start some kind of a jihad across the interwebs, raining hatred in copious quantities upon all who disagreed with their ideology, and by this point it was in fact a political ideology (2004 onwards I guess). The old guard must die, all who deny the One Truth must be shamed and their livelihoods ruined, this was the catchcry, a bit like Microsoft's "embrace, extend, extinguish" strategy, or more accurately Trotskyist entryism.

The most recent symptom was the wikipedia edit raid which you yourself acidentally highlighted. Apparently RPGs are now shared narrative games.

Completely insane I think you'll agree.

Take a look back at earlier threads on rpgnet (pre 2004) and note the difference in tone and character between then and now. The hostile, toxic atmosphere that has recently been fostered is entirely the result of these idiots.

So eh that's the short version. As you can see, the use of the word "story" in connection to RPGs has almost no relevance to the way the shared narrative movement uses it, yet they continue to abuse it.

PS: I don't think anyone here is saying that shared narrative games are bad in and of themselves. They're simply saying that it's a different hobby, and should go be different in its own space. Part of what annoys people is the way that these types claim simultaneously to be doing something completely new and at the same time exactly the same as what came before. One among many, many cognitive dissonances, I assure you.

-A guy who is clearly familiar with narrative gaming and war gaming

quote:

Just as an addendum, and further evidence, many of these types openly and proudly admit they don't even game. It's just a vehicle for them to express their maladjustments and ideologies.

The general bilious vehemence of the group has also attracted other even less savoury types, like Andy Kitkowski, current operator of the story-games.com website who was heavily involved in the production of the game Maid, wherein one gets to seduce nine year old children. Or Vince Baker, last seen cheering wildly as his game Poisn'd resulted in a cabin boy being throat hosed.

Entertainingly I came across a prominent blog a while back which spoke glowingly of Baker's work - one of the commenters on the blog was a schoolteacher who swore she would teach his games to all the kids in her class.

You couldn't make this stuff up.

Seriously, storygamers are the worst. They are all totally cool with child rape simulators. And they don't even play them!

quote:

quote:
Don't bother. He's soapboxing.

Hey, the man asked why the word "story" in association with RPGs was a touchy subject, so he got the full unvarnished truth.

And that's without even going into groups like the so-called goons from somethingawful who started a thread called grognards.txt over there, wherein they quote people's posts from here. When there aren't enough quotable quotes, they send over trolls to stir things up.

Equal parts sad and pathetic maybe, but nonetheless deranged.

Those goons and their vile quoting us.

quote:

quote:
One wonder how much time you spend on that grognards.txt thread getting yourself all worked up.

Ah, I see.

None as it turns out. In fact an rpgnet mod, Ettin, one of said goons was actually quoting me in his sig for a while, on rpgnet, I assume as some sort of attempted intimidation. I didn't even become aware of the fact until someone told me, and by then he'd already been slapped down by his fellow mods, albeit "backstage".

Much merriment was had that day. But yes, I and most other people here remain blithely unaware.

quote:
Is this the general consensus on what a �Shared Narrative� game is, or just one of many personal definitions?

�Cause if this is �Shared Narrative�, then I sure as heck don�t play Shared Narrative style!
Oh yeah sure, there were some misunderstandings at the start but it's all cleared up now. Basically yeah, that's what shared narrative gaming is. It's about perspective and control over the setting, framing the game in terms of writing a story, much more of a literary tool. Most people have their own lines, but nobody's really argued against that definition. Now I've pointed that out of course someone inevitably will.

This is why looking at the dictionary definition of "story" and wondering why people are getting all wound up about it is a waste of time. People get annoyed because of that history I wrote, and the insane attacks upon RPGers perpetrated by said community, hence my characterisations of them as political in nature.

The edit-raid on wikipedia is the most recent I'm aware of.

Worth noting is that the community which appropriated the term "storygames" also includes other games in the parish, like Dungeon World, which calls itself a storygame but is to all intents and purposes a straight down the line RPG.

Just another offense to add to the endless list of Ettin's crimes.

Also, as we've established, storygames empower players to have narrative control over things other than an individual character. Not like Dungeon World, boy howdy!

quote:

quote:
I think pretty much all of us would agree with that. A living, breathing world where the PCs become aware of events happening without their intervention is cool. Its when there are pre-determined events set to happen WITH the PCs intervention that we have a problem.

Oh yeah, as Zak S memorably put it with regard to storygames which weren't really that narrative, specifically Luke Crane's Torchbearer, "Luke took these games where you can do anything and said, hey wouldn't it be great if you were limited to only being able to do a few things instead!", or words to that effect.

bears bears Bears Bears Bears Bears BEARS BEARS BEARS BEARS BEARS BEARS BEARS BEARS BEARS BEARS BEARS BEARS BEARS BEARS BEARS BEARS

quote:

quote:
There is a number of posters here, including the Pundit himself, who believe that "storygamers" are a group actively seeking to undermine the hobby. I don't share quite that view

Been reading wikipedia lately?

quote:

quote:
Case in point. I simply don't see storygaming= conspiracy, I don't think human beings work that way

Wikipedia works that way. If you've ever tried to edit it, you'd realise it takes a concerted and persistent effort by quite a few people to make any definitive changes. I know this because I've done it. Politics, endless hours of entertainment.

A shadowy, agenda-rific conspiracy of storygamers made a minor edit to Wikipedia. I know how this works because I have perpetrated conspiracies to change Wikipedia too!

or not posted:

Out of curiosity I used a tool at Wikipedia to see when the offending phrase "form of interactive and collaborative storytelling" was inserted. After tracing it back a bit, I found that it had earlier been "form of interactive and cooperative storytelling", with the first instance I could locate being 22 February 2004. The person who edited that bit in was, as far as I can tell, some kind of Goth. I'll speculate that he or she was a White Wolf player.

# ? Nov 16, 2013 06:05

That Old Tree: Jun 24, 2012; nah

quote:

Wait, wait, there are people who object to Lyta's picture in the corebook?

It's Lyta. She is a psychotic, genocidal mass-murderer who spends half her time killing people and the rest brainwashing Western tribes. She also happens to look like a teenager. She is supposed to be extremely disturbing, an effect which her drawing conveys very well - oh look, a "tee-hee"-ing anime girl giving a panty shot while standing in the middle of the dozens of corpses of the men she is slaughtering. Her sexualization isn't gratuitous, it's unsettling, and with good purpose. This is a woman whose life's dream is to design a set of giant mirrors that focus sunlight so she can burn Dynasts alive in sacrifice to the Unconquered Sun.

quote:

I mean, just to be clear: the archetype of the "evil vamp," the evil woman who presents herself in a sexualized manner for whatever reason the author can think of, is often (not always, but often) stupid and a blatant excuse to put more boobies in the author's work. Lyta isn't this. Lyta isn't that Warrior Within character in the Penny Arcade comic a few pages ago. Lyta is a murderer who does not generally sexualize herself, but has the trapping of a standard Anime character - a teenager shunned by her family, who Exalts as a Dawn Caste! Except she's completely insane. She is a detournement of some archetypes common in the works Exalted derives inspiration from - and as such, she is presented in a manner that twists the traditional manner in which such characters are presented. Would Lyta walk around dressed like the Lover Clad? No. She does not personally puts her sexuality on display, as far as I can tell from the fiction. But that's not what this illustration is about - it's about presenting her like a clich� Anime character - standing with her bow while the wind improbably lifts her absurd skirt - juxtaposed with the horror of her mass slaughter in contrast to that clich�. Because that's disturbing. And Lyta is disturbing.

I think her butt floss really brings home the tragedy of the situation.

# ? Nov 16, 2013 06:43

That Old Tree: Jun 24, 2012; nah

quote:

quote:
Do I really need to say that I have a right to criticize the art since that's exactly what I've been doing all this time? Have my actions not made that clear, or do you just think I believe I don't have a right but am doing it anyway?

"I have the right to criticize this" is not a line of attack. It is a fact. Under the laws of the country I live in and the terms of use for this site as I understand them, my right to criticize the art is absolute, so long as I take no criminal actions as part of my criticism nor attack any person rather than a product or action.

As long as you understand that this also applies to the making of the art, you're fine.

Just so we're clear, it's okay to like sexy ladies. Just so we're clear! This is an important point to bring up.

# ? Nov 16, 2013 08:39

Libertad!: Oct 30, 2013; You can have the last word, but I'll have the last laugh!

So Pathfinder officially banned the re-fluffing of game mechanics.

quote:

Claws and Talons: If I gain claw attacks, can I put those claw attacks on my feet?
If you are a bipedal creature (roughly humanoid-shaped, with two arms and two legs), your claws must go on your hands; you can not assign them to any other limb or body part.

If you are a quadruped (or have more than four legs), you can have claws on your feet. If you have claws on all of your feet, normally you can't use all of those claw attacks on your turn unless you have a special ability such as pounce or rake.

Talons are much like claws, but go on a creature's feet, usually a bipedal creature (especially a flying bipedal creature such as a giant eagle or harpy). An ability that grants you claw attacks cannot be used as if they were talon attacks (in other words, you can't "re-skin" the ability's game mechanics so you can use it on a different limb).

�Pathfinder Design Team, Wednesday

Whatever happened to the power of imagination?

Libertad! fucked around with this message at 23:27 on Nov 16, 2013

# ? Nov 16, 2013 23:21

MiltonSlavemasta: Feb 12, 2009; And the cats in the cradle and the silver spoon
Little boy blue and the man on the moon
"When you coming home, dad?"
"I don't know when
We'll get together then son you know we'll have a good time then."

anti-grog posted:

This is very sigh worthy. My biggest problems with the picture were the stance and body language. The reason I find this tiring is because it keeps happening over and over, even when we're told it will be happening LESS in this very game line. Look, I can't think of any of the other art I've had anything negative to say about it. That's good! But if you go "Well, they've been doing pretty good so far, we'll let this one slide." then you are doing artist and company a disservice, since there's a problem, they deserve to know. Critique can be a solid and strong way for us improve. I know this, I've gotten critique on art, and sometimes you want to bristle but it's SMART to take a step back and look at the comments and see if anything can be done along those lines... if not now, in the future.

Sigh worthy indeed.

Honestly, your comments can come from a place of hope, but they are exhaustive all the same. You have a problem with the body language and stance? That is reaching for it. Deep.

Women are depicted with little clothes like men are in Exalted. It is a setting like that. The thing is that while women with cocked hips are somewhat sexy and perceived as alluring, men are less sexualized that way by society. That woman is as sexualized as Ligier is, or Malfeas, or any of the ot her men who are out there, with their six packs, bulging muscles and oiled up bodies. You are just milking a discussion that has little place in Exalted, and while I am not in favor of censorship in any way, I am in favor of people thinking before they complain.

The setting is like that. For men, women, furries, pinionies, scalies, everything. It is sensual in nature.

When you keep feeding these discussions you just really burn the producers, writers and artists up, because if there is one thing that is more disheartening to an artist than no feedback on his work is people over-analyzing things that have no meaning and turning those into shitstorms.

# ? Nov 17, 2013 00:12

MiltonSlavemasta: Feb 12, 2009; And the cats in the cradle and the silver spoon
Little boy blue and the man on the moon
"When you coming home, dad?"
"I don't know when
We'll get together then son you know we'll have a good time then."

Women and men do not have the same bone structure or musculature. Their poses should -not- look alike. When you draw a picture it is often healthy to make some gestures and features more pronounced so people can see where you are going with them.

People want men and women to be drawn the same. They are not the same. There are plenty of men in poses you would find absurd in women. Lets try making a Malfeas-like cover of a girl clad in a loincloth and little else.

You guys would lose your minds.

But it is exactly what you are proposing.

# ? Nov 17, 2013 00:13

MiltonSlavemasta: Feb 12, 2009; And the cats in the cradle and the silver spoon
Little boy blue and the man on the moon
"When you coming home, dad?"
"I don't know when
We'll get together then son you know we'll have a good time then."

The default figure is a man. You know someone is a woman because they have boobs.

# ? Nov 17, 2013 00:13

MiltonSlavemasta: Feb 12, 2009; And the cats in the cradle and the silver spoon
Little boy blue and the man on the moon
"When you coming home, dad?"
"I don't know when
We'll get together then son you know we'll have a good time then."

anti-grog posted:

I don't want men and women to be drawn the same, I'm not sure where you're getting that. I'm saying my preference is for women who are drawn to look cool without being stupidly oversexualised, which really isn't hard! See for instance the three characters I mentioned in the post you quoted. They have pronounced features and gestures, without looking like blow up dolls. Or for instance, look at the picture haren coloured and posted earlier in this thread.

Does this character look like she was drawn the same as a man? I think she's fairly obviously female, without looking absurd. Do you think that poses like this, or Tepet Ejava's on the cover of CoCD: The Blessed Isle, or Janest and Novia's in the kickstarter updates are unreasonable?

I do not think they are unresonable at all.

But I am not complaining about their poses in the least here. Nor I am complaining about Ejava's.

My problem is that people who scream 'sexist!' or 'mysoginy!' and use the term blown up dolls usually think the other option is wrong. When it isn't. Men are drawn with bulging muscles and shirtless, roaring and doing 'I'm taking a dump' faces all the time. What is the problem with that? Does that represent the majority of our population? No. And yet, there is nothing wrong with that either.

If they ever draw Ejava like Ejava probably dressed when she went to her Realm orgies or feisty galas, people would throw a fit. Which I find troublesome. Women can be bad rear end, but they can't look sexy, or even sexual. That is my problem, and in Exalted it makes little sense. Everyone can look badass -and- sexy, given a change of airs or situation. Things are not always either or.

My point: You people are reaching for it. And it isn't there. Look somewhere else, not Exalted.

As for showing Exalted to a wide variety of people:

Don't. It contains senseless butchering, rape, mind-rape, bestiality, debauchery, drug use, power abuse, canibalism, baby-eating, demon summoning and worship... need I say more? And people think that once the perceived pandering is gone, the setting will be 'okay'. Come on.

# ? Nov 17, 2013 00:14

MiltonSlavemasta: Feb 12, 2009; And the cats in the cradle and the silver spoon
Little boy blue and the man on the moon
"When you coming home, dad?"
"I don't know when
We'll get together then son you know we'll have a good time then."

anti-grog posted:

I don't think that "the default figure is a man" is a good expectation.

Ok... if you see a silhouette at the end of a dark ally, do you automatically assign a sex to that figure? If you do, is that sex male?

IRL, I assign the male gender to unknown personages. Maybe that's because I'm a man (there are slightly more women in the world than men, so maybe it is an identification issue). I don't think it's unreasonable to extend this identification to fictional media. And even if this is not a good expectation, it is nevertheless a reasonable expectation as most men will assume an unknown personage is male. Hell, there's a trope about it to prove prevalence.

anti-grog 2 posted:

Does this character look like she was drawn the same as a man? I think she's fairly obviously female, without looking absurd. Do you think that poses like this, or Tepet Ejava's on the cover of CoCD: The Blessed Isle, or Janest and Novia's in the kickstarter updates are unreasonable?

anti-grog 3 posted:

Kateraine here is deliberately not conventionally attractive, but her design is such that even if she'd bound her chest flat, you'd still go "oh hey that's a girl." Jojo here is a kid, has not yet developed breasts, and is still obviously female. Loquacious is my deliberately-hard-to-tell character, but the exggerated feminimity still makes it quite obvious she's female.

The annoyance I have comes from when everyone is a Jen, and we don't see any Kateraines, or Jojos, or Loqs.

Argue among yourselves, and once you've decided which one of you is wrong, I'll argue with the winner. Because one of you is saying that pictures of sexy women is bad because we have pictures of non-sexy women and that proves that women don't need to be sexy; while the other one is saying that pictures of sexy women would be fine if only we had pictures of non-sexy women. Which is it?

anti-grog 2 posted:

http://www.samanthablackmon.net/notyourmamasgamer/?p=3299 I think this article states the difference between a shirtless male with bulging muscles and the female examples some people find objectionable more eloquently than I could.

Already debunked. See also the comments on that very webpage you linked to. The articles that say all men want to be muscle bound mini-Hulks are invariably written by women and are every bit as offensive as if I suggested that every woman wanted to have enormous boobs.

Some people like to complain for the sake of complaining. A picture of an imaginary girl with breasts in no way diminishes you as a person and brings enjoyment to a great many people. Let artists create art. If you don't like that art, feel free to say so but don't (and I'm looking at you anti-grog 1) pretend that other art doesn't exist and don't (and I'm looking at you anti-grog 2 and your Samatha Blackmon link) pretend that the art you do not like is part of a cosmic injustice.

# ? Nov 17, 2013 00:23

MiltonSlavemasta: Feb 12, 2009; And the cats in the cradle and the silver spoon
Little boy blue and the man on the moon
"When you coming home, dad?"
"I don't know when
We'll get together then son you know we'll have a good time then."

Currently what matters about a male character is how wide his biceps are and how cut his abs are.

Only wait, no, characters have characteristics beyond their physical image. As wrong as it is to judge someone by their use of a wheelchair, or the colour of their skin is as wrong as it is to say that all that matters about a female character is her bust size. An interesting character is not diminished by being smoking hot, and a boring character is not enhanced by being flat chested.

Characters (male and female) in Exalted wear a wide range of clothing.
Characters in Exalted have different body types.

If I made a thread complaining the characters weren't drawn sexy enough then you'd think I was insane.

If all the male characters in E3 were drawn in assless chaps, I'd enjoy it. I am not a drawing in an RPG book. If fictional characters wear assless chaps, that does not mean that I have to wear assless chaps.
If any of the characters in Exalted, male or female, are defined solely by how they look, rather than who they are, then I'd be outraged and disappointed.

If your complaint is more general than E3, the appropriate place to complain about it is not on an Exalted forum. But I've seen plenty of pictures of Wolverine and Conan bare chested in the snow (which is kinda insulting to Conan if you're read any of the books, Wolverine does pass out from exposure in the Weapon X comic - but he's topless in the snow again in the very next scene).

Comic book art is neither realistic nor a good model for how to live your life. You can't pick a car up by its bumper (it would break the bumper off - and you don't have super strength) but I don't see a ten page thread dedicated to that.

Now I feel very strongly about certain issues (such as censorship), and if given a soap box, I'll preach until that soap box is taken away from me. I get that you feel strongly about this, and your feelings are perfectly valid: we all have the right to be passionate about whatever we want to be passionate about. And if you want to educate other people, then that's a good thing. But, please, if we're going to discuss this here let's keep the "big" picture of Exalted Third Edition in mind and not get overly hung up on the little picture (of one image, taken out of context) or the super big picture (of all media ever). Of course we need to discuss the little picture, and of course we can't look at Exalted in a vacuum. But at this point the discussion is starting to take on the qualities of rants about how RPGs cause Satanic Murders rather than a discussion about comic book art.

Sexism: Just Like The Power Balance Between Splats

anti-grog posted:

I just think it's tacky, and am expressing my opinion that Exalted could do without it without losing anything important.

And you're entitled to that opinion. As you're not going to provide anything to replace this art with, however, I find myself asking not "will the game lose anything important by removing this art" but "will the game gain anything important by taking it out".

If you can satisfactorily answer that question, then I'd be less inclined to jump down your throat.

I don't think that Solar should sit on top of the Exalted heap, but I'm not the one saying that the Exalted devs should throw their work out of the window because it doesn't fit with my opinion of what their game should be like.

MiltonSlavemasta fucked around with this message at 00:29 on Nov 17, 2013

# ? Nov 17, 2013 00:26

That Old Tree: Jun 24, 2012; nah

quote:

quote:
While we're at it, can we please stop pretending that this: http://shechive.files.wordpress.com/...pg?w=500&h=665
is equivalent to this: http://th02.deviantart.net/fs7/PRE/f...n_by_Zubby.jpg

and that the latter is equivalent to this: http://th05.deviantart.net/fs70/PRE/...os-d47ybz3.jpg

Question.

Why do you keep using a picture that does not portray a human being as your example of male power fantasy? You might as well claim a tiger or golem is a male power fantasy*. Shouldn't you use a picture of Panther or something o.O

*You wouldn't be technically wrong, lots of people want to be golems or dragons or whatever as a power fantasy, but it's not very useful from a sexual vs sexualised perspective.

Basically just like a tiger:

P.S. In Exalted that is what a golem is.

# ? Nov 17, 2013 02:48

That Old Tree: Jun 24, 2012; nah

Thread title: [Exalted] Sex and Sexuality in Creation.

Tangent: Is it even possible to convince anyone of anything?

quote:

quote:
quote:
I just seem to have a more accurate view of the situation, I know I don't expect to persuade anyone, but its my moral duty to say the truth regardless of how many people reject it. people always reject the truth

If people always reject the truth, how come *you* know the truth? Why didn't you reject it, like people always do?

Neither am I, I have been speaking the truth throughout this thread and holding myself to my sense of honesty.

I have no patience for nitpicking and overly specific technical details, as well as the practice of word lawyering in some intention to twist what I say into something that it is not. I rebuke that question, as you clearly did not see I wasn't being literal with that always, and my respect for you is lessened a little because of it. please ask an actual question, because there are clearly some people who do see the truth, you just lost sight of that to unfairly extrapolate upon me a single word that is unimportant anyways.

"Well, I didn't mean literally everyone is dumb. I meant everyone else is dumb!"

# ? Nov 17, 2013 05:40

That Old Tree: Jun 24, 2012; nah

quote:

Weimann, full disclosure: that we were pretty close to agreement on those particular points to which I was speaking is something that I never seriously doubted.

Now, for a different statement for the thread at large. Several people have made the case that one reason bikini witches are bad is that it has driven away players, often from personal experience. I've not had that experience, myself, but I certainly do not doubt that you have. BUT: I don't think it's a helpful argument, really. I'll explain with an anecdote, but before I do, I just want to note that some who read it are going to assume that, because the specific situation I'm describing is relatively trivial, that I am trying to trivialize the bikini witch discussion. I AM NOT. Just because my example concerns something that is of very little real-world importance does not mean that I do not recognize that, for those for whom this issue is important, it can be VERY important. I would never hope to suggest otherwise, neither implicitly nor explicitly.

So I've had friends in the past that I have wanted to convince to play a game from another publisher. They were initially receptive to the idea, but then they saw that it used rules that primarily relied on d20 rolls, much like another quite famous game. This immediately turned them off to the idea, and no amount of cajoling or reassurance could change their minds.

Now some are going to point out that rules are certainly more integral to the game than art, and that players can enjoy a game despite the art, but not necessarily despite the rules. Absolutely true.

But both the rules and the art were put into place by someone. Someone made a decision about what they were going to include in their game book. If you criticize art choices, you are criticizing someone's decision about that art. If you criticize design choices, you're doing the same thing. My point is, saying, "But you could have chosen different art!" is, at its fundamental core of cores, equivalent to saying, "But you could have designed these rules a different way!" Both COULD have been done differently, but the people making the game didn't want/choose to do it differently.

So, what's my point? My point is that SO MANY people are going to read my example and think (or post), "That's just stupid, two totally different things." But if this is the art/rules that someone has chosen as the expression of their vision, criticizing one is like criticizing the other. And I'm not saying don't criticize it-- criticize away! I'm saying that because no one would go on a forum and say, "They shouldn't have used d20s in the rules, now my friends don't wanna play that, it should change," I'm not sure saying, "My friends were turned off by the art, now they don't wanna play that, it should change," makes any more sense.

But what about lost sales? Well, again, unless you have data to prove the amount of sales lost among your friends exceeds the amount of sales generated by bikini witches, or can at least convince a publisher that this would have been the case, then it's kinda spitting in the wind.

I'm really only saying this because I think there are valid arguments to be made. I don't really think this is one of them. I don't disagree that something needs to change, but then, I don't FULLY agree, either. And being in that position, I can let my mind slide far to the side that doesn't think anything needs to change, and then I see that, assuming any argument could ever budge me, this wouldn't be it.

TL;DR: Props to Weimann, recommendation to let the "my friends were turned off by the art" argument fall by the wayside.

a list of really similar arguments:

1. My players don't like the mechanics, I wish they were different.

2. My players don't like the art, I wish it weren't sexist.

# ? Nov 17, 2013 06:53

MiltonSlavemasta: Feb 12, 2009; And the cats in the cradle and the silver spoon
Little boy blue and the man on the moon
"When you coming home, dad?"
"I don't know when
We'll get together then son you know we'll have a good time then."

Exalted Story Hooks!

42. The PCs come across a kingdom of women. Their magic river gets them pregnant but they only give birth to daughters. They are...less than pleased...with their Lunar mistress who killed all the men to do this social experiment.

66. A girl who claims to be Luna is suffering a royal hangover and offers the PCs any favor (up to and including sexual favors, though the latter is more a HEAVY HINT she might want to do them) if they can get her the Periphet of the Bloody Mar'e

# ? Nov 17, 2013 07:05

ProfessorCirno: Feb 17, 2011; The strongest! The smartest!
The rightest!

Plague of Hats posted:

Just another offense to add to the endless list of Ettin's crimes.

Some fun facts about this dude: Ettin did the signature thing a year ago and he's still crying. He's still crying in part because, ever since then, he's constantly posted "BOY I SURE HOPE ETTIN DOESN'T PUT THIS I HIS SIG!" when he isn't posting "I DARE Ettin to post this in his sig!" It's odd that he does this, because, a year ago, when Ettin was being cheeky about it, he was claiming this was all a part of some master manipulation that he had set up to trick Ettin into quoting him because it was some grand humiliation somehow?

What I'm saying is that Ettin should start making sure you can't get his physical address online, because people at RPGSite are equal parts obsessed and psychopathic.

Grog tax: Did you know 5e is actually a WotC conspiracy to force us enjoy 4e mechanics? And that the developers are lying because they want to fool you into thinking people like it?

~*~

Whether you like "damage on a miss" or not, there is controversy that cannot be denied. It's more than just a few posters on an internet forum so people shouldn't try and downsize it. People have even been asking Mearls about in in twitter where we get the infamous answer of "It tested well". In my opinion, this is a very very vague answer and I believe it was done intentionally. This type of mechanic, and those like it, are trademarks of 4th edition and I believe the team, or it could be an individual, is trying to force it down people's throats whether they like it or not. I can tell you that mechanics like this make me want to walk away from the game because it will spawn more like minded mechanics into the game.

Playtests are something you have to be careful around because at the end of the day, we don't know how many people actually took part in it, nor do we know what their answers were.

# ? Nov 17, 2013 10:44

ProfessorCirno: Feb 17, 2011; The strongest! The smartest!
The rightest!

13th Age seems cool, but what about my immersion that's lost when I can't objectively state what a specific number rolled on my dice means? Why can't the game tell me what simulationist difference me rolling an odd as opposed to an even???

Yes. That is an argument.

~*~

I half like it. Mind you, I only half read it. But the half I read made me think that they kept some of the 4eisms that they shouldn't have.

For instance, as you gain levels, your attack rolls and defense rating go up automatically. And so do your hit points and the amount of damage you do. If they'd only increased one set or the other (sort of like how D&D Next's bounded accuracy only increases HP and damage), the system would feel smoother.

And they do tend to write out abilities more like 4e powers rather than actual narrative things that just need some game mechanics to model them. What exactly does it mean that you roll even vs. odd on an attack? (A left-handed swing vs. a right-handed one, perhaps?)

ProfessorCirno fucked around with this message at 14:09 on Nov 17, 2013

# ? Nov 17, 2013 14:01

ProfessorCirno: Feb 17, 2011; The strongest! The smartest!
The rightest!

Should D&D use pronouns other then "he?"

~*~

quote:

Sexism is bad. Some people are asking for a a change in writing style to be inclusive. Don't argue with them, just give it to them because Sexism is bad. There are better battles to fight over far more consequential things.

Really? We're not allowed to examine whether the gripe is legitimate? You can always find "some people" saying any old kind of wacky thing. Reduction ad absurdum: I say it's sexist that I don't have a pony. You are now required to give me a pony. If you don't you are sexist and a bad person.

# ? Nov 18, 2013 01:38

ProfessorCirno: Feb 17, 2011; The strongest! The smartest!
The rightest!

Whoh whoh whoh! I'm not edition warring. I just think...

~*~

certainly not trolling, as it was sincere. Edition warring, well...no, but I am glad you asked. I am expressing a real hate of certain directions in what is called D&D, yes, and the worst of it comes up in the tactical minis game we call 4E. But I don't hate that game unto itself, nor its graphic design, art, or useful RPG products in its line.

# ? Nov 18, 2013 02:13

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Apr 28, 2024 10:09

That Old Tree: Jun 24, 2012; nah

quote:

quote:
I'm discussing bikini witches. Just because I do not think the kickstarter character specifically is a bikini witch does not mean that bikini witches do not exist in Exalted art. They certainly do exist, and I am discussing them. Please stop ascribing motives like 'complaining for the sake of complaining' to me, I'm not questioning your motives here.

You've seen the Exalted 3rd Edition art? Wow! Please, share it with me, I've only seen the art previewed on the Kickstarter.

If I had known that you had already seen the E3 art and knew definitively what was included then I'd be far more inclined to listen to you.

I really feel that I can't discuss this with you until I've also seen the art, then you can cite the specific instances of Bikini Witchery that you know exist in E3, then I look forward to a well reasoned discussion.

quote:
In short:

-Exalted does not gain anything through blatant cheesecake rather than less over the top pictures
-Is cheesecake worth alienating potential new players? Will the lack of cheesecake cause people to not purchase Exalted?

-It gains over the top pictures: Exalted is about swords that are huge enough to make a Final Fantasy character blush; fantastic creatures and strange human races. These pictures are fun to look at. Punching people through a wall is fun. Big tits are fun.
-Is cheesecake worth alienating potential players? I'd say "yes". Exalted is a mature game that has adult themes. Exalted is also a high powered game that requires a high level of communication between players and storyteller. It's a mechanics heavy system that requires knowledge drawn from at least a massive corebook, if not careful study of a dozen supplements. If a player can't ask their ST "what's with all the boobs?" or if they can't be bothered to look through the Exalted line (or on the Onyx path forums) and see that both male and female characters get sexualised in Exalted because Exalted is a sexualised game then I can say in my opinion they won't make good Exalted fans. Exalted (as a franchise, rather than 3rd Edition) is full of stupid stuff because it's such a large game that's been going on for many years. There's lots of stuff in Exalted that is frankly stupid and I have to force myself to look past it. Because I can look past it, I enjoy Exalted. If someone can't look past cheesecake, how are they supposed to look past SoSD or MoEP:I or CoCD:M or MoEP:L? And if you remove everything that might be objectionable to someone somewhere in the name of political correctness, you'll end up taking away everything that makes Exalted Exalted. There will always be something in Exalted that someone won't like. If they can't suck it up, they should simply walk away. Don't ruin the game for the rest of us to force your issues.

As I said, I would still play Exalted even if there was no sexual content. But the comics (camel toe and all) have been historically useful to me for encouraging players to join games. They're attention grabbing. They're cool. They look good. Just because I won't throw my toys out of the pram if the pictures aren't spank material, doesn't mean that sexy boys and girls don't sell product.

# ? Nov 18, 2013 09:58

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > grognards.txt - sandbox gamers are the John Galts of the RPG world

«‹›67 »