Crusaders will crusade.

I'm not a big fan of role playing games that do not use dice at all, personally.
One reason I never could really get into Amber, despite the all the raves surrounding its existence.

Quote from: BWA;416530Hey, good one! Why is one Gygaxian preference considered merely a common tool, but another Gygaxian preference considered holy writ?

I assume we will NOT hear a rational explanation from Pundit. Just flat statements uncorroborated by anything at all.

"And the Lord came unto them, and saw that they were playing GM-less. And lo he was sorely wroth, and smote them, and made the waters to rise over their cities and cover the earth. And lo the Lord sayeth unto them 'For whosoever challenges the distribution of authority in role-playing games is wicked in my sight, and shall be as ashes unto all eternity." (Ephesisans, 5:27)

Just why the fuck are you here exactly?

Nonsense. The structure of RPGs is not like that because it was the "holy word of gygax", again, if that was the case we'd all still be playing oD&D.
The structure of RPGs was the basic structure inherent in the first RPGs, and the issue is "can you take x away from that without changing the fundamental way RPGs function in terms of creating emulation and immersion"?
You can take away memorized spells, hex maps, dungeons, or even dice without fundamentally changing what RPGs do; you can NOT take away GMs, or the division of GM and Player roles, without fundamentally changing what RPGs do.

RPGpundit

Quote from: One Horse Town;416537Just why the fuck are you here exactly?

Starting to sound like just for shits and giggles.

Quote from: Benoist;416534I'm not a big fan of role playing games that do not use dice at all, personally.

I like dice. I accept that if your game calls for a randomizing element, cards or coins would work just as well. But I wouldn't be as happy about it.

Although the more games I play with only d6s, the more I like that. It feels more elegant.

Quote from: One Horse Town;416537Just why the fuck are you here exactly?

Because talking and/or arguing about RPGs on the internet is fun? And RPGnet is too exhausting? Also, not everyone here gets their knickers in a wad when you disagree with them.

Quote from: CRKrueger;416548Starting to sound like just for shits and giggles.

Is there a another reason to post on a message forum?

Quote from: BWA;416549Because talking and/or arguing about RPGs on the internet is fun? And RPGnet is too exhausting? Also, not everyone here gets their knickers in a wad when you disagree with them.

I notice when i called you on your bullshit upthread, you conveniently ignored it and moved on to other targets.

Elliot had you pegged ages ago and Krueger speaks truth. Shits and giggles it is then.

Quote from: RPGPundit;416538The structure of RPGs was the basic structure inherent in the first RPGs...

Right. Page 9 of the AD&D DMG: "As the DM, the tools of your trade are dice..." We can find earlier or more quotes if you like, but that structure clearly included using dice.

So pick - which do you love more, your conceptions about what makes an RPG an RPG or Amber?

Seanchai

Quote from: Seanchai;416552Right. Page 9 of the AD&D DMG: "As the DM, the tools of your trade are dice..." We can find earlier or more quotes if you like, but that structure clearly included using dice.

So pick - which do you love more, your conceptions about what makes an RPG an RPG or Amber?

Seanchai

I know you're pissed at Pundit for the banning thing, but there's better stuff to try and nail him on then this stupid crap.  You trying to get banned again via stalking to prove your point?  

Quote from: One Horse Town;416551Elliot had you pegged ages ago and Krueger speaks truth. Shits and giggles it is then.

Quote from: CRKrueger;416556I know you're pissed at Pundit for the banning thing, but there's better stuff to try and nail him on then this stupid crap.  You trying to get banned again via stalking to prove your point?

I thought this was the RPG forum where people took positions, made strong statements and then duked it out. "Speak your mind here without fear!"

So what's with all the fretting and talk of banning? Has RPGsite lost its mettle?

Take a cue from Pundit. When he doesn't agree with you, he calls you a traitor and a hater-of-fun and spouts some crazy paranoid bullshit. He doesn't fuss about how you shouldn't be here if you don't like the same games as him. He goes big.

Quote from: BWA;416562I thought this was the RPG forum where people took positions, made strong statements and then duked it out. "Speak your mind here without fear!"

So what's with all the fretting and talk of banning? Has RPGsite lost its mettle?

Take a cue from Pundit. When he doesn't agree with you, he calls you a traitor and a hater-of-fun and spouts some crazy paranoid bullshit. He doesn't fuss about how you shouldn't be here if you don't like the same games as him. He goes big.

What strong statements?  Pundit is claiming the GM/player relationship is fundamental to the emulation of a world, which allows setting and character immersion to take place.  The argument to that is...
Pundit likes Amber (which does have a GM/player relationship)
Amber uses cards not dice
D&D used dice
Therefore if Amber is an RPG, then so must be games without the GM/player relationship.

Ummm no.  Seanchai is arguing for the sake of arguing, because him and Pundit aren't playing nice right now, as are you when you dodge the fundamental points or arguments and make strawmen based on false analogies.

Quote from: CRKrueger;416564Pundit is claiming the GM/player relationship is fundamental to the emulation of a world, which allows setting and character immersion to take place.  The argument to that is...

Okay. There we go. Something to talk about.

That's a great summary of that particular school of thought. Way more coherent than Pundit's dictatorial blithering too.

Two assumptions in your statement I'd like to hear more about:

1. Why is that relationship fundamental? What does the GM provide that cannot be provided by another player, in a game with a different distribution of authority?
 
2. If a character is the primary tool with which an RPG player engages the game and the fictional world (which I'll certainly accept), why is immersion into that character's mindset the ONLY appropriate way to play?

I'm not being bitchy. I want to hear your answers. I freely admit that I don't have any great truths I'm attached to, I just know my own gaming experiences.

Quote from: CRKrueger;416556I know you're pissed at Pundit for the banning thing, but there's better stuff to try and nail him on then this stupid crap.

No, actually, this is pretty good crap. I think the number of folks who will agree that dice aren't part of the fundamental structure of the first RPGs is going to be shockingly low.

The idea of GM as ultimate authority is intrinsic to RPGs, according to Pundit, because that's the paradigm the first RPGs set up. Fine. But when push comes to shove, does he really believe that?

Seanchai

Quote from: BWA;416562I thought this was the RPG forum where people took positions, made strong statements and then duked it out. "Speak your mind here without fear!"

So what's with all the fretting and talk of banning? Has RPGsite lost its mettle?

Take a cue from Pundit. When he doesn't agree with you, he calls you a traitor and a hater-of-fun and spouts some crazy paranoid bullshit. He doesn't fuss about how you shouldn't be here if you don't like the same games as him. He goes big.

"I notice when i called you on your bullshit upthread, you conveniently ignored it and moved on to other targets."

Well?