Quote from: deadDMwalking;1104487Your Join Date is listed as 2006.  

That's a 2 followed by two digits (2) which divide into (6) three times, so that is clearly a coded 23.  

I'm on to you Mistwell.  

The SJW finds a dogwhistle. :rolleyes:

This is Jeff's lack of surprise. :rolleyes:

Quote from: jeff37923;1104496The SJW finds a dogwhistle. :rolleyes:

This is Jeff's lack of surprise. :rolleyes:

LOL I am a Social Justice Warrior now? Or DeadDMWalking? I just wanted to track your insanity.

Quote from: Mistwell;1104501LOL I am a Social Justice Warrior now? Or DeadDMWalking? I just wanted to track your insanity.

No, you are the WotC shill and he is the SJW. Know your roles!

Quote from: jeff37923;1104509No, you are the WotC shill and he is the SJW. Know your roles!

Sorry mang, you're right. I will try to do better next time.

Quote from: Mistwell;1104514Sorry mang, you're right. I will try to do better next time.

You gotta admit, WotC has been going overboard in showing how woke they are. It is like they are trying to outdo Paizo.

Quote from: Omega;1104394We know that various WOTC staff have an agenda. Because they cant keep their mouths shut.

I think the demarcation point was the raindow ampersand in Mearl's social media.  

Quote from: Omega;1104394How much of that agenda is in Strahd is hard to say past what they tell you at the start and whats in the adventure proper, which is only two entries that I know of. I'll have to dig out the module and see if Escher is the same NPC I am thinking of.

Escher is on page 70.

Quote from: Mistwell;1104454Oh, there's "been talk". Oh now it's all clear. Hear that everyone, "there's been talk" so it "must be true!"

So you are saying the WOTC staff who have said these things didnt really say these things?

Quote from: Zalman;1103632I haven't watched the final episode of Dark Crystal yet (not spoilers please!), but through the first nine episodes I recall seeing only 1 couple, and of course they are gay. For those not too good at math, that's 100% of the relationships in the show.

I only watched one episode, so I don't think I can spoil anything for you, but there was a straight couple, Rian and Mira. (OK, maybe I should watch that episode again in case I wasn't paying enough attention.)

Quote from: jhkim;1103819I don't have the Essentials Kit, so I'm not sure how they handle it there. But D&D has never had much semblance of feudalism. I mentioned the government of the Village of Hommlet before. I had thought that it wasn't defined, but when I checked this morning, it turns out I was wrong. The government is defined as follows:



How succession works isn't defined, but it is implied that seniority is important for the council members. This isn't terrible, but it isn't particularly feudal - and seems just as modernist as declaring successors rather than having them by birth descent (which has happened in many cases in history).

It seems pretty standard for D&D that rulers are the highest level characters, no matter their origin; if their child ends up inheriting, it's because they also achieved a high level (perhaps from the support of being given lots of magic items). Player characters rarely have anyone with significant authority over them, and the NPCs never seem surprised or confused by this quality of PCs, which I wouldn't expect if it were feudalism.

Quote from: rawma;1105027I only watched one episode, so I don't think I can spoil anything for you, but there was a straight couple, Rian and Mira. (OK, maybe I should watch that episode again in case I wasn't paying enough attention.)

Rian and Mira demonstrated implied romantic interest, granted. Perhaps it's me that needs to re-watch but I don't recall them ever becoming a full-fledged couple, or so much as holding hands much less kissing. As far as I can tell, the only demonstrably successful couple was the aforementioned gay one.

Someone else mentioned the ratio of homosexual relationships in our video world was found to be 3 in 10. It's hard (for me) not to be curious as to why the ratio in our fiction is so much higher than that in real life.

Quote from: Zalman;1105136Someone else mentioned the ratio of homosexual relationships in our video world was found to be 3 in 10. It's hard (for me) not to be curious as to why the ratio in our fiction is so much higher than that in real life.

Why would expect ratios in fiction to even vaguely resemble real life? Stories focus on interesting events, and tend to highlight the exceptional or the different. And while changes in those ratios may reflect broader cultural shifts, they can just as easily be fads among writers.

Which is precisely why this looks like it's intentional pandering to that fad.

Quote from: Pat;1105140Why would expect ratios in fiction to even vaguely resemble real life? Stories focus on interesting events, and tend to highlight the exceptional or the different. And while changes in those ratios may reflect broader cultural shifts, they can just as easily be fads among writers.

Sure, homosexuality being a "fad" among writers who find it personally "interesting" is one explanation for the difference. Is that what you personally believe? That 3/10 writers are personally fascinated with homosexuality? I believe that if writers were into homosexuality, then they'd be writing about it, rather than just inserting it arbitrarily.

As to fiction resembling real life even "vaguely" ... that's a non-sequitur: we always expect the details of a fictional story that aren't integral to the story being told to be realistic. That's how we can tell which parts are fiction. We expect that the Fellowship of the Ring to be able to march across the land without floating away because we expect gravity to work the same way that it does in real life. If gravity doesn't work the same way in that piece of fiction, we expect an explanation.

Quote from: Zalman;1105199Sure, homosexuality being a "fad" among writers who find it personally "interesting" is one explanation for the difference. Is that what you personally believe? That 3/10 writers are personally fascinated with homosexuality? I believe that if writers were into homosexuality, then they'd be writing about it, rather than just inserting it arbitrarily.

As to fiction resembling real life even "vaguely" ... that's a non-sequitur: we always expect the details of a fictional story that aren't integral to the story being told to be realistic. That's how we can tell which parts are fiction. We expect that the Fellowship of the Ring to be able to march across the land without floating away because we expect gravity to work the same way that it does in real life. If gravity doesn't work the same way in that piece of fiction, we expect an explanation.

Let's stop, and step back a bit. I can't really address your specific conclusions, because your arguments are based on a false premise.

We absolutely do not expect the details of fiction to be realistic. We do demand verisimilitude in some things, but only in certain very narrow and very specific areas, and those areas vary by person. More importantly, verisimilitude isn't reality, it's a sleight of hand, a deception, designed to trick our brains. When the details of fiction are closely examined, for example when transcripts of actual conversations are compared to the dialog in successful stories, the elements from the stories bear very little resemblance to reality. In fact, it's the elements from reality that often seems fake or unrealistic. That's because fiction is a set of devices designed to fools our minds into accepting the alternate reality of a story, and it fulls exploits the way the human mind fills in gaps, recognizes and completes patterns, demands moral outcomes, identifies with stories and characters, and engages memory. Storytelling techniques are closer to dream logic, and use cues like genre conventions or perceived social pressure to guide our reactions, and then build in underlying themes and other connections to bind it into a coherent piece. We're not just willing to overlook gaps and outrageous inconsistencies, we're entirely blind to their existence because our minds fills over any holes and stamps down any proud nails, and this occurs at below the level of conscious thought.

Quote from: Zalman;1105199As to fiction resembling real life even "vaguely" ... that's a non-sequitur: we always expect the details of a fictional story that aren't integral to the story being told to be realistic. That's how we can tell which parts are fiction. We expect that the Fellowship of the Ring to be able to march across the land without floating away because we expect gravity to work the same way that it does in real life. If gravity doesn't work the same way in that piece of fiction, we expect an explanation.

There are a ton of things in fiction that aren't like in real life. Like how in romantic comedies, everyone is ridiculously good-looking and even poor people have beautiful houses. And they can find parking right by where they're going. Or basically anything in an action movie.

If the percentage of LGBT people needs to match real life in on-screen relationships, what about the percentage of overweight people? Also, shouldn't the ratio of older women to younger women match real life?

I don't mean to dismiss any of these. There are a lot of misconceptions that people get from watching television and movies, and to a lesser degree books. It can be a problem, because unfortunately people spend a huge amount of time watching films and TV, and it can skew their perceptions. On the other hand, one can go too far in demanding realism in fiction.

And here I am starting reading through the Tomb of Annihilation module and what have we here near the beginning? Yep. A guy who wants the PCs to help save his husband.

And again it is just... there... a total throw-away insertion like the others so far. There may be more in the module but I suspect like in Ravenloft and Essentials it will be only one or two at best.

And again my feeling is not that the presence is bad. It is that the presence feels so totally meaningless.