Quote from: Elliot WilenOkay, in the interest of actually providing some coolness that people can use, instead of crapiness to throw old shoes at, let me suggest a look at two of Chris's best posts:

Flag Framing
The Conflict Web

I suggest that, even though Chris often writes about in-game improv of a "button-pushing" sort that I'm not sure I care for, he's describing a perspective and tools that could be very useful at the level of scenario or campaign prep, even for the most mainstream type of gaming.

Yeah, those are both excellent.

As to whether they're original or not, I neither know nor care, they're useful which is far more important.

Careful, Eliot, embracing those essays is pretty much Exhibit A in my McCarthy Hearing on Swinedom. If you don't watch yourself, you may be called before committee to explain your whereabouts and activities on the first night of Gencon 2004.

Anyways, I find it ironic that the last time I tried to participate in a discussionof this kind of issue, I was told that I hadn't experienced what I SAID i HAD: "You haven't read Ron Edwards' essays and forum posts because if you had you'd agree with me!" Sothere's probably not much I can do here.

Flag Framing and Conflict Webs were the first Chris Chinn things I read, and they were awesome and useful. After that I poked around and found that ugly, ugly diagram. i thought it was interesting, but more on that later.

Then I found his rants to the effect that dressing up as Drow was irredeemably racist and offensive. He even spent some time arguing the point with a black woman (Lisa Padol, I believe).

That was where I got off the Chris Chinn boat. The very idea was ridiculous. And I seewhere people are getting that victim-mentality impression, having read stuff like that. But it didn't make me think "Oh, he said these things thatare dumb and reactionary and divisive, therefore I must not value anything he says, ever." Chris Chinn is a guy. He has his moments. Somethimes I think he's awesome, and sometimes I think he's full of shit. In this respect he's much like many people that I actuallyknow personally (unlike Chris), and am proud to count as dear friends.

But silly me, why am I even commenting, when we have those on hand who can see into the secret heart of Forgers:

Quote from: Abyssal MawThat stuff is there to lure people in so he can sell his fringe advocacy, race-baiting, and assorted victim nonsense.

:rolleyes:

Anyway, about the diagram and accompanying prose:

I'm not for a minute going to try to say anyone might be right, wrong or sideways about whether the setiments are an accurate picutre of the majority of gamers. Or whether this represents hate/bile/contempt on Chris Chinn's part. But consider: What if, just if, someone came to Deep in the Game or the Forge or wherever, and read descriptions of gaming like this, and instead of saying "Oh my God, what hateful bullshit! My gaming isn't like that at ALL!" what if instead, they said "Oh my God! This is exactly the kind of shit I've been going through in X years of gaming! Someone's seen the same problems,and maybe has some sort of useful analysis and solution!"

That person exists. Me, for one.

My gaming hasn't been at the far extreme of the dysfunction spectrum, but it's generally been somewhere downthe scale. Things have changed over the years with personal maturing andmembership changes, sometimes for the better, but still, the problems exist. Stuff like Chris' writing has helped me identify what's happening with me and my friends and work at positive solutions.

So can anyone maybe, just maybe see a non-hateful side to this? Maybe?

Peace,
-Joel

No, Joel. I don't believe it's productive to stir up shit between this place and The Forge. In fact given that he is local to me I would like to be able to meet Chris in a game room and not have a bunch of ideological flamewars acting as baggage on our interaction.

But I also think that apologia for crap are also crap.

Give up the reflex to defend the Forge tribe, and judge statements and theories on their merits.

Quote from: MelinglorSo can anyone maybe, just maybe see a non-hateful side to this? Maybe?

What, the diagram?

Sure.  It's a picture of one brand of stupid to avoid.

I'm sure that there are games like that out there.  I had a couple of sessions that sort-of fit that picture early on in my run as a gamer - where we played happy-nice despite the suckage of a game.  In both cases, we killed the games with excuses, learned from our mistakes, and tried different things thereafter.

Man wants other people not to get stuck in that mold.  Good on him.

Man also thinks that most gamers are stuck in the mold most of the time, and are in denial about it.  There's nothing hateful about that.  Silly, yes, to my mind.  Hateful, no.

Probably a frustrating position to maintain.

Quote from: MelinglorSo can anyone maybe, just maybe see a non-hateful side to this?

Do you make the same request of the people on The Forge that talk trash about other people's style of play?  (That is by no means everyone who identifies with The Forge so this probably doesn't mean you if you are reading this.)

There is something that a lot of even very smart people don't seem to understand.  You don't have to be smart to detect someone else's contempt for you.  So if you look down on people, they'll figure it out.  Once they figure it out, the normal response to contempt is contempt in return.

Watch the movie Searching For Bobby Fischer.  Contempt for one's opposition is one of the themes of the movie.

Quote from: Levi KornelsenWhat, the diagram?

Sure.  It's a picture of one brand of stupid to avoid.

I'm sure that there are games like that out there.  I had a couple of sessions that sort-of fit that picture early on in my run as a gamer - where we played happy-nice despite the suckage of a game.  In both cases, we killed the games with excuses, learned from our mistakes, and tried different things thereafter.

Man wants other people not to get stuck in that mold.  Good on him.

Man also thinks that most gamers are stuck in the mold most of the time, and are in denial about it.  There's nothing hateful about that.  Silly, yes, to my mind.  Hateful, no.

Probably a frustrating position to maintain.

Levi, this is a very clear-headed analysis. Would that others could see it.

Quote from: Levi KornelsenMan wants other people not to get stuck in that mold.  Good on him.

Man also thinks -

Your manner of speech leads me to believe that you have been watching Firefly again, as might be seen from a perusal of the show's quotes. Also it can be seen that you really want to be Captain Mal. I can't conjure up no reason against that desire.

Is wanting to be Captain Mal "broken play"?

Quote from: JimBobOzIs wanting to be Captain Mal "broken play"?

If so, I'll be having a terrible time at the Firefly one-shot LARP we have going next month.

But I'll pretend that it was great, so that's okay.

:haw:

Quote from: Levi KornelsenMan wants other people not to get stuck in that mold.  Good on him.

Man also thinks that most gamers are stuck in the mold most of the time, and are in denial about it.  There's nothing hateful about that.  Silly, yes, to my mind.  Hateful, no.

I was focusing more on the first part. The second part, well, as I said I'm not interested in whether it's true of "most gamers", or whether he's saying it's "most gamers." What I'm interested in is that it happens to some gamers, and that to varying degrees at various times, one of the "some" has been me.

See, when people rant and rave around here about how fucking ridiculous it is to paint gaming this way, I feel pretty marginalized. Not like, crushed or wounded or anything; I'll be fine, thanks. But it's wearing to see one's own experience railed against as if it doesn't happen, or doesn't happen in sufficient quantity to be relevant, especially after finding confirmation somewhere else that yes, it does happen to other people, and there are folks toiling to find processes to alleviate it. I guess I'm just trying to point out that there's more than one way to view something like this. Others are reading it (the diagram's wonky, I'm concentrating more on the text) and saying "how dare he describe gamer dysfunction!" and I'm looking at it going "Whoa, brutally honest description of gamer dysfunction."

Elliot: It doesn't seem to me that I'm the one stirring upshit. Or has the thread up to now been a paragon of cordial and reasoned debate in a spirit of intellectual honesty?

As for "defending the Forge tribe," what's a guy to do? I am trying to"judge theories and poinions on their merits." Am I just automatically supposed to disagree with someone just because they're "from" the Forge, whatever that means? I read and judged Chris Chinn on his merits, and made my determination. Sorry I didn't arrive at the locally prevalent conclusion.

John: I've honestly not been in a Forge discussion that I can remember, where people showed contempt for others' style of play. I know people are gonna throw shit at me now, but that's the God's-honest truth. In my experience, discourse at the Forge is focused on discussing what works for play in that instance and that group, unburdened by the baggage of "right ways to play." That's the reception that I've gotten over there. So again: what's a guy to do?

Peace,
-Joel

Quote from: MelinglorWhat I'm interested in is that it happens to some gamers, and that to varying degrees at various times, one of the "some" has been me.

See, that's ass.

But you could, y'know, just say that nice and plain-like:

"I feel like my group maintains their ideal of what our gaming is to the detriment of actual play, by talking as is our play had reached the ideal even when it plainly hasn't.  Sometimes the actual play isn't even all that fun, but I feel like I need to go along to get along."

And even the plain-thinking, anti-theory crowd will pitch in with questions and suggestions.  If they're objecting to the funny clothes, and thus not helping with the problem, just put it in different clothes.

QuoteJohn: I've honestly not been in a Forge discussion that I can remember, where people showed contempt for others' style of play.

God you must be thick.

Joel, you seem to have misunderstood my last message. I'll spell it out for  you.

JimBob's post at the beginning of this thread was a sort of troll for people who reflexively defend The Forge. Bad JimBob.

But he hooked you. Bad you.

As to the value of the diagram itself: no, it's wrong, period. The key is the giant emphasis on "GM Fiat". There's nothing there except contempt for a particular type of game mechanic, caricatured as a kind of tyranny of the GM. The people at the table are responsible for the cycle of dysfunction, because they're too dumb or something to be honest with each other.

In Forge-type games that use "conflict resolution" or whatever, there's just as much of an opportunity for people to go along to get along, lie about their experiences to themselves and each other, and be miserable. All that's really happened is that these games have created a culture with a set of identifying signs so that people can find the type of game and, by the game, the type of people who like the same stuff they do.

Aside from that, what some people (including Chris, good on him, but it's not the main focus of the diagram) have done is say, "If you're not having fun, stop what you're doing, think about it, and talk about it."

Quote from: MelinglorI was focusing more on the first part. The second part, well, as I said I'm not interested in whether it's true of "most gamers", or whether he's saying it's "most gamers." What I'm interested in is that it happens to some gamers, and that to varying degrees at various times, one of the "some" has been me.

See, when people rant and rave around here about how fucking ridiculous it is to paint gaming this way, I feel pretty marginalized. Not like, crushed or wounded or anything; I'll be fine, thanks. But it's wearing to see one's own experience railed against as if it doesn't happen, or doesn't happen in sufficient quantity to be relevant, especially after finding confirmation somewhere else that yes, it does happen to other people, and there are folks toiling to find processes to alleviate it.

Well, you see, there's the problem.  You see Chris' description of dysfunction and it resonates with you.  That's fine and good.  

But then you see Chris' further claim that most games are dysfunctional.  This also resonates with you, but that doesn't make it true.  And it doesn't make it a reasonable claim.  

Just because in your personal experience, most games are dysfunctional, that doesn't mean that over the whole hobby, most games are dysfunctional.  And objecting to the claim that most games are dysfunctional over the whole hobby is not the same thing as objecting to the claim that most games are dysfunctional in your experience -- and it's not invalidating your experience.  It's just pointing out the limits of your experience.  

EDIT:  It's just pointing out that your experience is not our experience.  It's just pointing out that your experience is not necessarily the experience of the hobby as a whole.  Because if Chris said "some bad games I have played in are like this, maybe some bad games you've played in are like this, too"...I don't think you'd see much objection.  But that's not what he said.  And if you want to defend what he said, then you've got to engage with the entirety of what he actually said, and not just the part of what he said that spoke to your personal experience.  You can't just pretend he didn't say "most games are dysfunctional like this", because he did say, and it's a pretty signficant claim.  

--

Now, try and look at Chris' post for just a minute from the perspective of someone who's had a long history of mostly-functional gaming:  Chris is telling you that your games have mostly been not fun, that you have lied to yourself to make yourself believe that they are fun, and that Chris has all the answers to make you really have fun.  Now, do you see how that is offensive?

EDITED AGAIN TO ADD:  It seems like what you want to say is something along the lines of "I found this piece of his useful to me personally, but I don't stand by his claims about its wider applicability."  Well, then, you should just come out and say that.  Stand by the bits of his post that you want to stand by, but don't stand by the bits that you don't want to stand by.  Like Elliot said, don't get backed into that corner.  Because if you just claim "that's a good description of dysfunction I've seen a lot of," I don't think you'll see nearly so many people object.  But when you buy in to the claim that this is widespread in the hobby, and the implicit claim that Chris' favorite style of gaming is the magic solution...that changes the whole nature of the discussion.

Quote from: Levi KornelsenIf so, I'll be having a terrible time at the Firefly one-shot LARP we have going next month.

But I'll pretend that it was great, so that's okay.

:haw:

JOY!

-Marco

Lee Short nails it. It's not the "describing gamer dysfunction" part that I find to be indicative of shithead. He can describe until the cows come home. I don't care. But the idea that he attributes it is plain moronic.