Quote from: Cole;414954But perhaps something along these lines?

Hilarious

Quote from: jeff37923;414964Just because Levi can encourage cross-forum shenanigans outside of RPGnet does not excuse that. Since when he is at RPGnet he has used his Mod position to punish those who have behaved in a similar manner, I believe it would behoove him to maintain higher standards when he is outside of RPGnet. Otherwise, he is being a hypocrite.

Except for the part I didn't read that on Levi's post over there at SG. Again, it can be a misreading on my part because English is not my native language, but what I read is: "You could do it, it could be fun, but it surely would be worthless and stupid."

Quote from: gleichman;415029Interesting idea, a sort of returning to one's youth and doing it right this time perhaps. A fantasy for a fantasy game as it were.

Thanks, that's actually a rather cool insight.

I think that could be an explanation: you can't revive the experience, because a significant part of it was you being young, but you can go back and apply what you know now to get the best of those games and see more clearly their strong points. That is what I'm getting from the OSR, at least.

Quote from: RPGPundit;415035Actually, now, Ron Edwards has finally admitted that there was a war, so that old argument is going to have to be rewritten by all you historical revisionists out there.

Ron Edwards is lying just as you do. He saying that there is a war doesn't make it any truer than when you say it. It's still false.

QuoteBut they also have no influence in what is going on at the design level; that vast majority are purely consumers.

They vote with their wallets. Most important vote, I think. And as they can buy games from any publisher, there seems to be little of a war, as people are not taking sides.

QuoteRight... which is why the newest edition of D&D has a cover that is an absolute exact copy of a version of D&D that came out almost 30 years ago, right?
Now, I'm not saying that JRients or Raggi or the rest were actually directly responsible for that, or that I was, but that it represents the overall direction that gaming is going in, manifested AND given momentum by things like my writing and the OSR as a movement.

Again, it could be that, but they didn't need to do it to get a lot of people switching to 4e, and again, no one knows the direction gaming is taking unless 20 years have passed and you can really get some perspective.

QuoteI was wondering where you were days ago, when all the other pundit-haters came along to weep bitter tears and cry about how irrelevant I am again.  Geez, man, you're way behind, what happened? Thanks though, I'll consider your bitter tears my delicious cake after the meal.

I knew you would be happy, glad to oblige. I've been here all the time, actually, and I have posted several times in this and other threads, saying how much fun is all this. And I'm having insane amounts of fun with all this drama, because this kind of things never fail to deliver. Given that I know that your online persona is quite fake and that you run this show just for the blog hits and whatnot, I take these things as they are, harmless fun. And your over-the-top histrionic performance is fun. I really thank you for the entertaining effort.

Now, if you get off thinking that I (or any other person) really spend time and energy hating you, suit yourself. Why I would harm myself hating a guy for being an Internet clown is beyond me, but narcissism usually feeds on that and, again, this is all very harmless and changes nothing. So if you want to rail against the Pundit haters, feel free to use me as an example.23

Actually, you show a very selective memory: I agree with you as much (if not more) than I disagree with you. And when I disagree, it is usually on this specific topic, meaning your imaginary war and the amount of influence you wrongly attribute to the Internet scene. Your online persona is a narcissistic clown and I enjoy making fun of that kind of people. I respect your real you, probablly you are a cool guy and we could game together: that is why, for example, I think that spreading your real identity against your wishes is a bad thing to do. Your privacy should be respected. Your online persona can be mocked to hell, for all I care.

Quote from: Cole;415044I have to say I can scarcely blame you. Maybe Imperator can adopt her?

I feel honored, and I would definitely use the avatar on special ocasions at least. What the heck, you can email me the pic and I'll use it. Your effort should not be wasted My email address is on my profile, I think. If not, I can PM it to you.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;415152He's not tried to change the culture of the place except to make it more restrictive. Far from adjusting to the existing culture, he's tried to make it a more distilled version of what it already is.

So what? That is, at best, an RPG.net problem, worthy of spending an iota of energy here. It's irrelevant.

I read and post stuff at RPG.net. I browse the RPG forums, and the videogame forum. I never, ever, go to Tangency. Why should I? There's nothing there for me, and I find the place to be a disgusting cesspool. But it is a private cesspool, so their owners are entitled to do whatever they want. I don't like it there, so I don't go there to fight FOR FREEDOM OF SPEECH. There are more interesting things to do, like observing the lint on my pockets.

Quote from: gleichman;415077Fair enough.

But really, if not for Pundit trashing RPGNet every chance he gets- I doubt the issue would have even come up. By defending theRPGsite- you're defending Pundit and his actions by extension.

I don't know about you- but I'd be more concerned about that then I am about post of Levi's I've read.

Really? Man, I'm thinking you're giving all this shit way more weight than it deserves.

Quote from: Levi Kornelsen;415082When I got here, I was getting ready to laugh at the kind of large flaming argument I'm used to arriving here in the middle of.

When a bunch of people suddenly got calm and reasonable at me, I was kind of baffled.  But, y'know, whatever; I ran into the guy I expected to see fighting elsewhere, and had a word with him to let him know what he was getting into.

Then Pseudo dared me to just go look at the forum, fairly and as it actually is, I was a little dismayed, and felt crappy about insulting the place purely based on the huge fights I've been in and the short threads I've been disappointed by.

At the same time, there have been all these comments that I was trying to incite Teataine to come over here for the fight that I, yes, would have enjoyed, but absolutely wanted him to avoid, because it'd end up sucking for him.  This, over a post I originally thought had been all clever and shit, while giving a guy good advice about keeping away.  And that was a good case on the insults; so I apologized.  But incitement?  Pfft; I was warning him off; that's silly.

Now, someone who, while he doesn't like me, has been square with me for years, and has no horse in the race, tells me that, no, the regulars are right, it really does look like I was trying to get him to come here?

...Bah.

Honestly, based on this post, I believe you, for what that's worth. Meh, Levi isn't nor even has to be a saint. Fuck it, I even get what he's saying about RPG.net vs. here, I wouldn't write and post the shit on FB that I do here. I still think RPG.net's policies are pathetic, and that they would benefit greatly from loosening up a bunch, if not all the way to where we are here. Still, they have their thing, they like their thing, they're perfectly within their rights to do their thing there.

Quote from: gleichman;415090Nicely said.

But completely wrong I'm afraid. What would you think of a family the maintained the home and safety for the actions of a mass murderer because they liked having a roof over their heads.

RPGPundit is the face of theRPGPundit- you're (all of you) are background noise and enablers.

Seriously? Lighten up brother. You're coming across just like the Pundit here, ironically.

Quote from: gleichman;415108It seems that the idea of one person's rep reflecting upon those who stand alongside him is out of this audience's experience. Therefore the reach for something that would maybe (highly unlikely I admit) shock them into considering a new thought.

That fact it was neccessary is really sad if you think about it.

That it's produced denial and no reflection at all is even more sad. People don't like mirrors being held up to themselves, so I expected nothing else. But it's the tought that counts.

I think I've said all there is to be said now. I've completed my LotRO farming now in any case. Anyone who needs to contact me can find me at my blog.

Ah, I'm remembering the old gleichman here. Anyway, yeah, lighten up. Consider this, it may just be you who is wrong rather than everyone else. Something to consider.

Oh, and what lotro server ya on? I got toons on Brandywine and Windfola, fun game.

Quote from: Imperator;415161I think that could be an explanation: you can't revive the experience, because a significant part of it was you being young, but you can go back and apply what you know now to get the best of those games and see more clearly their strong points. That is what I'm getting from the OSR, at least.

Exactly.

Quote from: Pseudoephedrine;414180I don't hate the Forge, but I do think its theory is bad, and pernicious by actively misleading aspiring game designers about what they can do to make their games better. The emphasis on "coherence" as a virtue is empirically untrue when we look at the kinds of RPGs that are most popular, and is theoretically dubious when analysed.

100% agreed.

QuoteFor example, the Riddle of Steel may be very interesting mechanically with its spiritual attributes, but it is nearly unplayable in practice since it relies heavily on tables which require fairly extensive cross-referencing by multiple players near-simultaneously. Without multiple copies of the book, or player-created cheat-sheets, or something like that, the game is incredibly difficult to play and the "fast" combat promised slows to a halt.

In this regard, The Riddle of Steel is like Rolemaster, playing without copies of the damage charts is a pain, but if you photocopy them and give copies to the players, it becomes a breeze. If you're interested, you can find a PDF with the damage charts here.

The thing is, The Riddle of Steel is not much of a forgie game, it's an RPG designed independently of the Forge that Ron Edwards happened to like. Some of the GM advice it gives would be considered heresy by the forgies.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;415152Far from adjusting to the existing culture, he's tried to make it a more distilled version of what it already is.

And?

I like what RPGnet is.  It's not a universal platform for everything I like to do online, but that doesn't really hit me as a serious complaint.  Helping refine it at the things it is good at - holding and containing civil conversation of a long list of types - strikes me as a pure good.

The factory floor manager doesn't try to turn his gym into a better factory, nor his factory into a better gym.  He tries to turn his factory into a better factory.

You despise the site management, hold a hefty chunk of the posters there in contempt, and aren't willing to go with the way it works.  Your call.  But don't expect me to agree with those judgements.

Rpg.net is nothing like civil. People who are "in" members are not only allowed, but encouraged to levy really quite atrocious accusations against anyone and everyone who has anything to say about anything. That's why despite being a communist who lets absolutely everyone use any of my writings for absolutely anything, with or without attribution, I nonetheless put my foot down: on rpg.net, and rpg.net alone. My copyrights still apply there, because the people of rpg.net, the moderator staff especially, are douchebags.

My announcement of that was Here. And nothing that any user or operator of rpg.net has done or said since has weakened my resolve on that matter. The sheer unwelcomingness of that place is both astounding and offensive.

-Frank

I was amazed by one moderator's "fingerwagging":

"The person you are talking about (the post criticized something the dude had said/done) is a member of this forum. So, according to the terms of use, you are not allowed to say bad things about him".

What does this mean, uh? That you can "badmouth" anyone who ISN'T a member of their forums - and thus he/she cannot neither answer nor even know about the accusations?

Unreal.

Quote from: Imperator;415161I feel honored, and I would definitely use the avatar on special ocasions at least. What the heck, you can email me the pic and I'll use it. Your effort should not be wasted My email address is on my profile, I think. If not, I can PM it to you.

Haha...I would recommend the standard, no pipe, "Queen Elizabeth with a Mustache" slightly upthread, just to avoid confusion

Quote from: Cole;415193Haha...I would recommend the standard, no pipe, "Queen Elizabeth with a Mustache" slightly upthread, just to avoid confusion

Well said! Please. send it to me.

Quote from: FrankTrollman;415184My announcement of that was Here. And nothing that any user or operator of rpg.net has done or said since has weakened my resolve on that matter. The sheer unwelcomingness of that place is both astounding and offensive.

-Frank

OMG! You're not banned from RPGnet, Frank? I thought you were.

Quote from: Kyle Aaron;415152Careful, Dan. I was actually banned for that. It was... Keshu? Some name like that. He said, "I don't consider myself a gamer."
In another thread, someone mentioned Monte Cook, he said, "Who's that? Never heard of him."
I replied, "Of course not, only gamers would have heard of Monte Cook."
And that was that, I was permabanned. Saying someone's not a gamer is a personal attack. So Nina might permaban you now.

I seriously doubt that, but I'm past caring now. It's not like I'd be missing that much anymore. Most of the folks I'd miss talking to are already #rpgnet regulars, and the rest I can't really chat with on the forums due to the social and rules restrictions in Tangency Open.

And besides, I'm just immodest enough to think that my banning would cause a minor uproar that would be fun to watch.

Quote from: Reckall;415192I was amazed by one moderator's "fingerwagging":

"The person you are talking about (the post criticized something the dude had said/done) is a member of this forum. So, according to the terms of use, you are not allowed to say bad things about him".

What does this mean, uh? That you can "badmouth" anyone who ISN'T a member of their forums - and thus he/she cannot neither answer nor even know about the accusations?

And yet there's a whole thread devoted to mocking a guy who is a member of the forums, because he said he no longer wanted to be part of the forums.

The basic rule is, you can't badmouth other posters, except when you can, or unless you're Old Geezer.