tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post8327135742444679044..comments2024-03-19T16:24:23.777-07:00Comments on Playing D&D With Porn Stars: Some Excerpts From Pat Robertson's Recent Anti-Dungeons & Dragons RantZak Sabbathhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08812410680077034917noreply@blogger.comBlogger86125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-44928167776087801042013-07-19T10:08:55.402-07:002013-07-19T10:08:55.402-07:00You didn't offend me, you simply made a mistak...You didn't offend me, you simply made a mistake in public, so I am correcting you.Zak Sabbathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08812410680077034917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-18013285289414984012013-07-19T06:42:33.245-07:002013-07-19T06:42:33.245-07:00I'd prefer splitting hairs:
- wrong is when yo...I'd prefer splitting hairs:<br />- wrong is when you dislike pussycats because "they bark to the moon all night along",<br />- stupid is when you dislike pussycats "because the sky is blue".<br />But if you insist in putting both words into the same bag, I don't see the point of discussing it further.<br /><br />Zak S July 15 said being a hippy (by this definition) is _already_ wrong.<br /><br />Maybe. I have nothing against hippies, but they aren't my cup of tea either.<br /><br />Zak S July 15 said 'you are blaming Ry by things he didn't write.' No. I am not.<br /><br />I take it back. My apologies if I offended you. Since the OP in SG was hideously unclear, it's not a wonder that you read it one way and I read it another.<br />anonimous, emperador en el exiliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13204169087393199959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-78149265550889607482013-07-15T11:09:27.397-07:002013-07-15T11:09:27.397-07:00Ry is, as you say, at least doing something stupid...Ry is, as you say, at least doing something stupid AND is a hippy.<br /><br />And being a hippy (by this definition) is _already_ wrong.<br /><br />"So the source of Ry's worries is not D&D, but Ryhanna playing hitgirl. This is a family matter which should never have been broadcasted, and doesn't affect D&D at all. "<br /><br />That is: what he did was wrong. It is wrong to ask Story Games about this. It is the wrong choice. Ry admits this. <br /><br />So this thing you said, which a foolish mistake:<br />'you are blaming Ry by things he didn't write.'<br />No. I am not.Zak Sabbathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08812410680077034917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-57586770547645009052013-07-15T06:11:59.914-07:002013-07-15T06:11:59.914-07:00Zak S July 12 said the post is not mostly about Ry...Zak S July 12 said the post is not mostly about Ry complaining s/he'll be bored, it's about worrying about a Moral or Parenting Problem.<br /><br />The post can be read the two ways:<br />a) if you add the moral subtext, like Zak (and everybody else?) is doing, the post totally makes sense - but it is wrong and stupid.<br />b) if you throw away the moral subtext, like I am doing, the post totally makes sense - but it is stupid.<br /><br />For example, "I don't think it's okay to kill them because they're goblins" can mean:<br />a) "killing goblins it's not always OK", or just<br />b) "I dislike killing goblins without a reason" <br /><br />(Notice also that the word "Okay" can also be used without the moral baggage: "It's not okay to desecrate the desert because the wrath of the Crimson God will anihilate us", "its totally okay because otherwise the Steppe Riders will slay us anyway.")<br /><br />Possibly Zak is right. Moreover, possibly "I don't like the violence" is hippy-speak for "I want my daughter to stop beating the crap out of stuffed dolls but lack the guts to tell her". But "possibly" is not good enough for my standards. My point is: I WISH GRANTING Ry THE BENEFIT OF DOUBT - merely "stupid" is better than "wrong and stupid" at once. Because I'm a nice guy, or a devotee of Ockham's razor, or enjoy being obnobious, or don't gasp parenting, or whatever.<br />anonimous, emperador en el exiliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13204169087393199959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-43398659045674149512013-07-15T06:10:14.436-07:002013-07-15T06:10:14.436-07:00The original post abridged version [comments from ...The original post abridged version [comments from mine between square brackets]:<br /><br />a) Ry loves his daughter [let me call her "Ryhanna"]<br />b) Ryhanna wanna play D&D<br />c) Ry wanna play D&D with Ryhanna, but...<br />d) Ry is a hippy and<br />e) Ryhanna is metal <br />[so, what could possibly go right?]<br />f) Ry [foolishly] asks Story Games what to do<br />g) [made an stupid question, got twenty stupid answers]<br /><br />Zak S July 12 said -kindly answering my request- as for the OP, it looks like Ry hadn't played with Ry's daughter yet. <br /><br />I'm glad we both agree about this bit. Ryhanna still has not played D&D, but going by Ry's own words she is already revelling in (fictional) violence, power fantasy and teratocide like a seasoned power gamer.<br /><br />(Should I add? "...or like an average five-year older.")<br /><br />So the source of Ry's worries is not D&D, but Ryhanna playing hitgirl. This is a family matter which should never have been broadcasted, and doesn't affect D&D at all. <br /><br />Zak S July 12 said why even bring this up when discussing a _game of fictions_ unless Ry thinks that the game has something to do with it?<br /><br />There can be a thousand other reasons. Now it's my turn to play Sherlock. [My guess is: if Ryhanna was more of a Sansa and less of an Arya, Ry would have not problem in playing hippy-go-lucky Disneys & Dragons with her.<br /><br />More idle speculation from mine. The role played by D&D in Ry's concerns is: if they play the game together their respective tastes will eventually clash. Hippy meets metal, what could possibly go right? It's not just that Ry dislikes violence, is that being an spineless hippy he can't cope whith conflict. IOW, Ry is afraid of confronting his daughter. <br /><br />Which would explain why he prefers asking random strangers for advice -through the SG forum- rather than talking directly with her.]<br />anonimous, emperador en el exiliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13204169087393199959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-32296195062783446292013-07-12T09:26:21.135-07:002013-07-12T09:26:21.135-07:00This misses the point:
"
If somebody wants to...This misses the point:<br />"<br />If somebody wants to play bingo, the fact that bingo bores me to death is irrelevant.<br />If somebody wants to play bingo *together with me*, the fact that bingo bores me to death is *not* irrelevant.<br />"<br />The post is not mostly about Ry complaining s/he'll be bored, it's about worrying about a Moral or Parenting Problem. For example:<br />" I don't think _it's okay_ to kill them because they're goblins. "<br />"Okay" is the word he uses/<br />This theme of worrying about it as a child-rearing problem or moral teaching problem is the idea of the post, not Ry worrying s/he'll be bored by the game.<br /><br />"<br />I'm increasingly uncomfortable with the idea of someone who regularly prevails because they're violent,<br />"<br />+<br />Why even bring this up when discussing a _game of fictions_ unless Ry thinks that the game has something to do with it? (again: confusion of real and fake violeence)<br />+<br />The idea that this kind of fictional play is possibly _wrong_ for a child, rather than just not to Ry's taste is itself wrong and dumb.<br />"<br /> Yes, violence is a part of life. But I feel like there aren't enough influences in her life telling her to be skeptical of strong passions and easy answers. <br />"<br />Again: a rhetorical confusion of what's in the game's fiction with life advice. A common confusion among hippies.<br />_<br />As for the OP, it looks like Ry hadn't played with Ry's daughter yet when s/he wrote the piece. Zak Sabbathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08812410680077034917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-10407959977433839682013-07-12T06:11:25.775-07:002013-07-12T06:11:25.775-07:001st: Zak S July 8 said "Ry's taste is irr...1st: Zak S July 8 said "Ry's taste is irrelevant to what is good for his/her children".<br /><br />If somebody wants to play bingo, the fact that bingo bores me to death is irrelevant.<br />If somebody wants to play bingo *together with me*, the fact that bingo bores me to death is *not* irrelevant.<br /><br />Zak S July 8 said "I am, of course, addressing the post as written".<br /><br />That's fair. Now, just in case I'm misreading the OP, I have a question for you. Going by Ry's words, do you think that he wrote the original post:<br /><br />a) before playing D&D whith his daughter?, or<br />b) afterwards? anonimous, emperador en el exiliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13204169087393199959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-15471840614803229622013-07-08T10:28:21.658-07:002013-07-08T10:28:21.658-07:001st: Ry says he has a possible issue with D&D ...1st: Ry says he has a possible issue with D&D for his kid because he "doesn't like violence". This must mean either:<br />A) Ry has a problem with the fictional violence in D&D because Ry doesn't like real violence (this is stupid and wrong because they aren't connected)<br />B) Ry has a problem with the fictional violence in D&D (_for someone else_, not Ry) because Ry doesn't like fictional violence (this is stupid and wrong because Ry's taste is irrelevant to what is good for his/her children)<br />c) Ry thinks there is real violence in D&D (stupid and wrong because obviously inaccurate)<br /><br />Same for the concept of "other".<br /><br />In other words: Ry not only expresses dislike for the concepts--Ry _explicitly ties these dislikes to practical worries about D&D_ : this connection is all stupid and wrong.<br /><br />So you should apologize. I am, of course, addressing the post as written.<br /><br />2nd: Well I'm glad that's settled.Zak Sabbathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08812410680077034917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-3016977264378228142013-07-08T06:28:40.769-07:002013-07-08T06:28:40.769-07:002nd:
Oh, you meant that authors are people!!! Peop...2nd:<br />Oh, you meant that authors are people!!! People other than me!!! And have priorities of their own!!! <br />Took me the entire weekend, but eventually got it! A genius am I!<br /><br />From this starting point, it's obvious that an author's set of priorities won't always match mine. So a same work can be faulty from my perspective but excellent from its maker's -or somebody else's- POW. Or viceversa.<br /><br />Zak S July 4 said I am accusing you of a common crime of foolish arrogance.<br /><br />I declare myself guilty of the charges. On my defence, I must allege that: trying to figure out which are my own priorities -I don't know them beforehand- is hard enough for me (*) and takes all my brainpower. <br /><br />(* SIDENOTE: <br />v.gr. I disliked "The Matrix" beforehand, but kept me wondering for years until I discovered why <br />v.gr. I loved "The Lord of the Rings" at first sight, but I'm still not sure of what's the reason)<br /><br />Zak S July 4 said you have failed a simple test of human empathy. <br /><br />Indeed, I didn't discover that human beings have empathy until a few years ago. <br />anonimous, emperador en el exiliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13204169087393199959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-81158856898366728712013-07-08T06:25:31.298-07:002013-07-08T06:25:31.298-07:00This comment has been removed by the author.anonimous, emperador en el exiliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13204169087393199959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-50577454919967828892013-07-08T06:22:26.036-07:002013-07-08T06:22:26.036-07:001st:
I'd love to discuss these points whith y...1st: <br />I'd love to discuss these points whith you, but... <br />you are blaming Ry by things he didn't write.<br />(cfr. anonimous July 1 "looks like we are reading entirely different things into his post")<br /><br />Ry said "I don't like the violence", "I'm increasingly uncomfortable with the idea of someone who regularly prevails because they're violent",<br />Ry didn't say "I don't like fictional violence because of real violence".<br /><br />Ry said "I don't like the power fantasy", "I'm even less comfortable with the idea that violence makes us stronger",<br />Ry didn't say the D&D game is always about power fantasy.<br /><br />Ry said "I don't like the use of the concept of "others",<br />Ry didn't say the concept of "the other" as expressed in D&D has blah blah blah <br /><br />I am talking about the OP as Goblins Dad wrote it.<br />You are complaining about some twisted interpretation from your own.<br />(Is there a proper word for this? It must be some word for this. I'll call it "playing Sherlock".)<br /><br />Stop playing Sherlock, please - and focus in the actual post instead. <br />It's a mere matter of conflicting tastes: wannabe DM likes pears, wannabe player likes apples.<br />I gleefuly admit that Ry make a fool of himself by broadcasting this issue.<br />I won't admit that Ry or anybody else's tastes can be wrong.<br /><br />Does he love eating flailsnails or newborn babies or bullshit? He's totally right.<br />Does he hate eating flailsnails or newborn babies or bullshit? He's totally right.<br />Does he like anal raping me? He's totally right (but I want him no less than ten feet away from my asshole).<br />anonimous, emperador en el exiliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13204169087393199959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-83662507862575731352013-07-04T12:05:48.724-07:002013-07-04T12:05:48.724-07:001st: Ry is wrong to:
-associate D&D necessaril...1st: Ry is wrong to:<br />-associate D&D necessarily with "power fantasy"<br />-conflate his dislike of real violence with fictional violence<br />-assume the concept of "the other" as expressed in D&D has significant child rearing consequences he cannot overcome.<br />-ask Story Games what to do about it<br /><br />2nd: <br />"Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but you are acusing me of misjudging somebody else's work by unfairly comparing it with my own ideas, rather than with the ideas of the original autor. Did I get it right?"<br /><br />Close: I am accusing you of a common crime of foolish arrogance--<br />assuming your aesthetic needs are universal.<br /><br />You don't have to read ANYONE's mind to know that the sentence "This pizza chef is lazy/clumsy/lousy/cheap because they made a pizza with anchovies instead of pepperoni" is stupid.<br /><br />So you are making that mistake: the author who does not give you anchovies is not<br />lazy<br />clumsy<br />lousy<br />or<br />cheap<br />until and unless you make an effort to establish that these anchovies were part of that author's goal or were a universal aesthetic need that could be assumed to be part of any responsible author's goals.<br /><br />Since they aren't--since even a cursory examination of the lives and reports of other gamers reveals not ALL of them need the same kind of game supplement you do in order to have a fun game, you are simply proposing a foolish One True Wayism.<br /><br />You have failed a simple test of human empathy. Your Way is not The Only Way. The worst crime you can honestly and ethicallly accuse the author of is not being into the same stuff as you, artistically, which is not the same as lazy, clumsy, lousy, or cheap.Zak Sabbathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08812410680077034917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-50472715851880116852013-07-04T06:44:14.623-07:002013-07-04T06:44:14.623-07:00Zak S July 1 said you have confused A with B. Stop...Zak S July 1 said you have confused A with B. Stop doing that.<br /><br />Zak you are an artist, you have an idea in your head and work hard to express it.<br />Thus you can judge the result by comparing it with the original idea.<br /><br />I have access to the ending product, but I have not a clue of what's in your head besides of what you put on the table.<br />I lack of telepathy, how could I know?<br /><br />Now, correct me if I'm wrong, but you are acusing me of misjudging somebody else's work by unfairly comparing it with my own ideas, rather than with the ideas of the original autor. Did I get it right?<br />anonimous, emperador en el exiliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13204169087393199959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-74557715175746805552013-07-04T06:42:08.467-07:002013-07-04T06:42:08.467-07:00Zak S July 1 said even goblins dad admits that his...Zak S July 1 said even goblins dad admits that his concerns are "stupid" lower down on this very thread. <br /><br />Yes, I knew it, I have this thread stored in the hard drive (as well as the SG thread), and I've read both of them many times. But being wrong and being stupid is not the same thing. Let's suppose I wrote a post like:<br /><br />"Last night I buried my wife alive in my backyard. What should I do?"<br /><br />This post is patently stupid, because a) I'm broadcasting a domestic issue that I should keep to myself, and b) asking "what should I do" in the net is asking for rubbish.<br />And it also happens to be wrong, because an entirely different set of reasons: i) I'm not even married, ii) I've never been married and iii) I don't even have a backyard.<br /><br />In his OP at StoryGames, Ry declares: 'I don't like the violence, the power fantasy, or the use of the concept of "others".' I'm OK with violence, I love power fantasy, and the concept of "others" means that not everybody is me - a true which I forget too often. But the only way Ry could possibly be wrong is if he actually likes all the stuff he says to dislike.<br /><br />Or do you claim that there's something wrong about disliking violence, power fantasy and stuff?<br />anonimous, emperador en el exiliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13204169087393199959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-61783032316167858202013-07-01T10:58:12.172-07:002013-07-01T10:58:12.172-07:00You should not refer to:
"From now on ahead,...You should not refer to:<br /><br />"From now on ahead, I'll talk about <br />"poor writing", "clumsy writing", <br />"cheap writing", "lousy writing" <br />or even "crappy writing"."<br /><br />..in this context.<br /><br />It is none of those things.<br /><br />It is, again, "Not being interested in what Anonimous is interested in".<br /><br />You have confused an objective problem (the writer attempting to express something and failing--"bad writing") with a subjective problem (a writer not wanting to express something you wish that they wanted to express).<br /><br />Stop doing that.<br /><br />Also, goblins dad is wrong. Even goblins dad admits that his concerns are "stupid" lower down on this very thread. (see below)<br /><br />" I do worry about stupid stuff when it comes to my kids. "Zak Sabbathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08812410680077034917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-50818694596452193242013-07-01T06:37:01.701-07:002013-07-01T06:37:01.701-07:00anonimous June 25 already disowned the L-word
and ...anonimous June 25 already disowned the L-word<br />and apologized for anonimous June 17 using it.<br /><br />From now on ahead, I'll talk about <br />"poor writing", "clumsy writing", <br />"cheap writing", "lousy writing" <br />or even "crappy writing".<br /><br />But I'll never, never type "l*** writing" again.<br /><br />Zak S June 12 said "The Save The Goblins Dad is totally wrong".<br /><br />I still don't get how can "Goblins Dad" Ry be wrong.<br />Looks like we are reading entirely different things into his post.anonimous, emperador en el exiliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13204169087393199959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-26338493001102315052013-07-01T06:28:32.476-07:002013-07-01T06:28:32.476-07:00[IDIOM TIME]
Zak S June 27 wrote casual sex can e...[IDIOM TIME]<br /><br />Zak S June 27 wrote casual sex can easily fall under "unloving relationships".<br /><br />Yes, but marriage can easily fall under "unloving relationships" as well. <br />It's still not the same.<br /><br />OTOH, I must admit a bias of mine: I can't tell apart casual boners from love.<br /><br />[/IDIOM TIME]<br /><br />Since this discussion has drifted into a matter of idioms, <br />I can't win against a native speaker. <br />The time has come for me to give up.<br /><br />The quotes are from "moral-bankruptcy" Rafu and "core-mechanic" Rob. That's 2 guys. "Oh no casual sex!" are "lots-of-sex" Rob and "unloving-relationships" Callan. Rafu and Rob and Callan is 3 guys. <br /><br />So, Zak S April 18 was right. Zak wins. Jesse looses. anonimous looses.<br />My apologies for the annoyance and thanks for your precious time. <br />Thanks again for the links. anonimous, emperador en el exiliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13204169087393199959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-90027286858020947212013-06-27T10:16:20.172-07:002013-06-27T10:16:20.172-07:00casual sex can easily fall under "unloving re...casual sex can easily fall under "unloving relationships".<br /><br />so I'm right . You are still wrong.<br /><br />Oh, you want evidence that S-G designers are lunatics?<br />Easy as pie:<br /><br />http://www.story-games.com/forums/discussion/15862/history-of-gaming-confessions-of-a-dungeon-master/p1<br /><br />http://story-games.com/forums/discussion/11540/dd-with-porn-stars-and-canon-puncture/p1<br /><br />https://plus.google.com/117301572585814320386/posts/6qHf396vEhb<br />Zak Sabbathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08812410680077034917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-80940150564871491942013-06-27T10:10:18.462-07:002013-06-27T10:10:18.462-07:00You have comprehensively confused
"Not being...You have comprehensively confused <br />"Not being interested in what Anonimous is interested in"<br />with<br />"being lazy"<br />They are different things.Zak Sabbathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08812410680077034917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-28848184525086225102013-06-27T06:39:17.401-07:002013-06-27T06:39:17.401-07:00[IDIOCY TIME]
Callan's concerns are not reall...[IDIOCY TIME]<br /><br />Callan's concerns are not really my business, <br />neither was anonimous June 25 backing Callan up.<br />I have more serious concerns of my own,<br />which I won't discuss here.<br /><br />I don't know what do you mean by "helicopter parenting". <br />Neither I can see how could it be relevant.<br /><br />Zak S April 18 said "Oh no casual sex!"<br />Rob said lots of sex.<br />Callan said unloving relationships.<br />casual sex =/= lots of sex =/= unloving relationships =/= casual sex<br /><br />Zak S April 18 misquoted whoever he was quoting. <br />Zak S April 18 is still wrong. <br /><br />[IDIOCY TIME OVER]<br /><br />@Zak S June 17: I'm still looking forward for the evidence you kindly offered. <br />anonimous, emperador en el exiliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13204169087393199959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-54887936681547777342013-06-27T06:33:34.823-07:002013-06-27T06:33:34.823-07:00"A work of art (...) can't be good _at ev..."A work of art (...) can't be good _at everything_ because there isn't time and space enough."<br /><br />I don't ask it to be good, I ask it to be better than my own (you know: there's no need for a zebra to run faster than the lion, just faster than the next zebra). Since I suck _at everything_, there's no excuse for it to not better me _at everything_.<br /><br />"An author has a right to choose the things that will interest her." <br />Yes. And so has the audience. (v.gr. Lucas had a right to choose CGI before story, and I had a right to avoid "Star Wars" prequels like the plague.)<br /><br />"there are many millions of other things an adventure could concentrate on besides the problem of motivation."<br /><br />With _no motivation_, there's _no adventure_ for me. I've learned it the hard way: engaging in an adventure with a PC who lacks of motivation is a recipe for boredom. Now, you can play however you feel like; since I'm not in your RPG group, what you do at home is not my business.<br /><br />"There are many RPG groups which would be bored to tears if we had to stop and do the cliche thing of finding out the ghouls' motivations." <br /><br />Ghouls??? Are you pulling my leg? A ghoul prime motivation is raw flesh, this is a no-brainer (not pun intended). But, WTF have ghouls to do with the current discussion?<br /><br />"Assuming that this is _necessary_ to have a good adventure is _lazy thinking_"<br /><br />No, this is "design specs".anonimous, emperador en el exiliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13204169087393199959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-31114903917941138642013-06-25T11:10:54.024-07:002013-06-25T11:10:54.024-07:00"Unloving relationships" are not really ..."Unloving relationships" are not really Callan's business, that nosy ass hippie. Fuckbuddies are a fine and good. The other two things could be prevented by condoms, not by helicopter parenting.<br /><br />So, no, you are incorrect, again.<br />Zak Sabbathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08812410680077034917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-33329732725597096522013-06-25T11:06:56.946-07:002013-06-25T11:06:56.946-07:00@anonimous:
"Back to D&D, it's subpa...@anonimous:<br /><br />"Back to D&D, it's subpar writing when it's okay to kill Badguys because they're Badguys, when farmers are passive simpletons who can't help themselves "<br /><br />Incorrect.<br />A work of art can be interesting for an infinite number of reasons--it can expand and innovate in whatever direction the author likes.<br />HOWEVER, a corollary of this is that it cannot expand in _all directions simultaneously._<br />It can't be good _at everything_ because there isn't time and space enough.<br />An author has a right to choose the things that will interest them.<br />Shakespeare couldn't write realistic dialogue. This isn't "lazy writing"--it's an aesthetic decision to let go of _that_ and concentrate on _this_.<br />Taking time to _justify_ why it's ok to kill a monster is not an obligation of an adventure module or GM--there are many millions of other things an adventure could concentrate on besides the problem of motivation.<br /><br />There is a difference between "being lazy about (some aspect of a work anonimous finds interesting) " and "making something which expends it effort on )some aspect of the work anonimous finds interesting) "<br /><br />There are many RPG groups (mine very much included) which would be bored to tears (i.e. the experience would be worse) if we had to stop and do the cliche thing of finding out the ghouls' motivations. Assuming that this is _necessary_ to have a good adventure is _lazy thinking_ and would be _lazy GMing_. <br /><br />So: you are wrong again.Zak Sabbathhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08812410680077034917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-60695854798713530762013-06-25T06:52:46.961-07:002013-06-25T06:52:46.961-07:00[IDIOCY TIME]
Indeed, it would have been a nice d...[IDIOCY TIME]<br /><br />Indeed, it would have been a nice detail from Jesse April 18 to apologize when Zak S April 18 busted him.<br /><br />Zak S April 18 said if you add the "Oh no casual sex!" that's 3 guys. <br />anonimous June 17 said 'Rob said "lots of sex" not "casual sex".'<br />Zak S June 17 said 'Than doesn't make it _ANY BETTER_. In fact (...) is even worse.'<br /><br />Of course, it's tons of worse. It's blatantly stupid. Which makes it ABSOLUTELY HILARIOUS [cue crazened laughter]. Can't even type it with an straight face. It's almost a pity that one day later Rob rectified and apologized. But we are disgressing here.<br /><br />The point of anonimous June 17 was that Zak S April 18 commited a mistake. Going by Zak S June 17 rules, now he should admit it and apologize. (I'm not holding my breath.)<br /><br />Zak S June 17 said Callan backed Rob up on that. <br /><br />1. CHECH FIRST: Callan said "I think the concern is unloving relationships, STD's and unplanned pregnancy - not lots of sex." <br /><br />Callan is calling Rob down on his stupidity. Tell me, how does it back up Rob?<br /><br />2. ADMIT IT AND APOLOGIZE. Your turn, Zak. Not holding my breath, again.<br />3. REALIZE. Idem.<br /><br />Zak S June 17 said "lots of sex" (the best thing in the world)<br /><br />Long story made short: Yeah to this, but I prefer crapping. <br /><br />[IDIOCY TIME IS OVER]anonimous, emperador en el exiliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13204169087393199959noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2638993969706011706.post-13096542832810648842013-06-25T06:50:17.261-07:002013-06-25T06:50:17.261-07:00[COOL STUFF GOES FIRST]
Zak S June 17 said "...[COOL STUFF GOES FIRST]<br /><br />Zak S June 17 said "people on S-G say things like this completely morally bankrupt totally fucked insanity regularly and there are no social consequences to it. Nobody goes 'Hey, you're poisoning the conversation and should seek therapy'."<br /><br />You are making a good point. I lost any hope in society some years ago -nowadays it's me vs. the world-, but I can guess where do you come from. I declare you a winner. <br /><br />Zak S June 17 said "if you are questioning the conclusion that many many game designers and well-respected-within-that-community people on S-G hold opinions that mark them as lunatics, ask for that evidence and I will provide it." <br /><br />No longer questioning you. Evidence of lunacy is still welcome, thank you very much. Looking forward for it. <br /><br />[COLL STUFF ENDS HERE]<br />anonimous, emperador en el exiliohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13204169087393199959noreply@blogger.com