A serious proposal.

droog · October 01, 2007, 07:54:08 PM

Quote from: Kyle AaronHe won't even discuss his ideas with his supporters anymore, having closed his Theory subforum - why would he discuss his ideas with his detractors?

Kyle, discussion of the BM goes on in Actual Play all the time.

Pierce Inverarity · October 01, 2007, 08:46:00 PM

Quote from: droogKyle, discussion of the BM goes on in Actual Play all the time.

In Poison'd actual play it's usually BDSM though. Hurr, hurr.

Kyle Aaron · October 01, 2007, 09:01:39 PM

Quote from: droogKyle, discussion of the BM goes on in Actual Play all the time.

"You had fun, therefore you are playing Narr," and "You didn't have fun, therefore you don't understand TBM" does not count as "discussion" in the sense that I meant it.

You will find me trying out Burning Wheel, HeroQuest, and at the same time, Forward! To Adventure. I have played Sorcerer and Dogs, and still have my copy of AD&D from my first year of gaming in 1983. So I think it's fair to say that I'm impartial and open-minded about things in terms of the Swine Wars (such as they are). I don't see a similar open-mindedness in either Ron, or Mirror Ron. Though Mirror Ron, to his credit, will leave alone discussions of things he thinks are crazy. That is, though he's crazy, he is at least willing to live and let live.

droog · October 01, 2007, 09:02:56 PM

Quote from: Kyle Aaron"You had fun, therefore you are playing Narr," and "You didn't have fun, therefore you don't understand TBM" does not count as "discussion" in the sense that I meant it.

That's simply not how it goes.

RPGPundit · October 01, 2007, 09:49:11 PM

Kyle is a joke, who couldn't debate his way out of a wet paper bag. He has no business criticizing anyone's debate skills, much less mine. Thus, the idea that he'd have any business actually moderating a debate is patently absurd.

Edwards is a coward and a control freak, who has set up his forum as his own little cultish-kingdom specifically so he never has to be in a situation where he isn't in absolute control of the conversation.
So the very idea he'd debate here is absurd.

RPGPundit

Kyle Aaron · October 01, 2007, 10:48:59 PM

Quote from: RPGPunditKyle is a joke, who couldn't debate his way out of a wet paper bag. He has no business criticizing anyone's debate skills, much less mine.

Is that a challenge, Humperdinck?

RPGPundit · October 01, 2007, 10:59:37 PM

Quote from: Kyle AaronIs that a challenge, Humperdinck?

A challenge for what? What the fuck would I have any interest in debating you about? Your cheetoh-centered game theory? Your d4-d4 system?

I mean come on, really...

RPGPundit

droog · October 01, 2007, 11:06:54 PM

How about "Why my ideas about RPing are the best"?

jeff37923 · October 01, 2007, 11:30:41 PM

Quote from: Pierce InverarityIn Poison'd actual play it's usually BDSM though. Hurr, hurr.

Now there's a slur against BDSM if there ever was one.

Koltar · October 02, 2007, 12:15:37 AM

Quote from: jeff37923Now there's a slur against BDSM if there ever was one.

Seconded.

Compared to Poison'd - BDSM is a wholesome and life-affirming activity .

- Ed C.

droog · October 02, 2007, 12:57:53 AM

You're hanging with a pretty smart crowd here, Pierce.

David Johansen · October 02, 2007, 01:05:43 AM

So...wait...If I play up and inflate my disdain for a game, not that I can think of one I'd do that to or anything, because I think it's funny and don't really care too much if anyone else does, that makes me dishonest?

Or, if my web persona is...somewhat less devout than I actually am because it prevents the reoccurance of the massive flamewars of my youth...I'm dishonest?

Bloody hell! I knew I was getting it right! Hot Damn!

Anthrobot · October 02, 2007, 02:31:53 AM

Quote from: droogI doubt you'll get RE here, though I could be wrong. But Kyle is nowhere near a neutral arbiter.

I agree, its a long shot about RE coming here. Theres no such thing as a neutral arbiter. I think Kyle is intelligent and free minded enough to be able to act as an arbiter though.
I could also suggest Erick Wujcik as a possible arbiter, as he has an essay over at the Forge (on diceless roleplaying) and is obviously welcome here. But it depends on wether he would wish to take that role.

Anthrobot · October 02, 2007, 02:34:59 AM

Quote from: HinterWeltWhy the hell would Ron want to debate with an imaginary character? Isn't that what role-playing is for? I mean, seriously, why would anyone want to discuss anything with a caricature?

Besides, whatever the response Edwards made, he would be accused of being evasive if he did not agree with Pundit. It is his MO now.

Bill

There is a real person behind the Pundit mask. The arbiter would be the judge of wether a reply is a sufficiently good answer to a question.

Anthrobot · October 02, 2007, 02:36:55 AM

Quote from: McrowWell, I think it would be fun to observe but I fail to see what it would accomplish.

For a start it would give us the other side of the argument. We get Pundit's rants but not RE's replies. It would also force both parties to prove certain allegations they have made.