This is a site for discussing roleplaying games. Have fun doing so, but there is one major rule: do not discuss political issues that aren't directly and uniquely related to the subject of the thread and about gaming. While this site is dedicated to free speech, the following will not be tolerated: devolving a thread into unrelated political discussion, sockpuppeting (using multiple and/or bogus accounts), disrupting topics without contributing to them, and posting images that could get someone fired in the workplace (an external link is OK, but clearly mark it as Not Safe For Work, or NSFW). If you receive a warning, please take it seriously and either move on to another topic or steer the discussion back to its original RPG-related theme.

Author Topic: Are we seeing the end of combat?  (Read 15821 times)

GeekyBugle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7399
  • Now even more Toxic
Re: Are we seeing the end of combat?
« Reply #15 on: October 18, 2021, 09:15:06 PM »
This business of politicizing gaming in the southpaw direction, such that all monsters must be individuals capable of free will and, so, of any alignment, has implications beyond just erasing the trope of irredeemably evil races. It also attacks the central pillar of virtually all RPGs, which is combat.

Combat is the central pillar of virtually all RPGs? Says who? Where's the evidence to back this up?

Every RPG I've ever looked at has a big combat section. I have yet to find one that doesn’t. Care to submit some?

Nice try, nope, combat is an important part of the game but not (and I quote) "THE CENTRAL PILLAR OF ALL TTRPGS!tm" Every RPG I've ever looked at has a big magic section. I have yet to find one that doesn't. Care to sunmit one?

I'm of course mocking you, by your argument lots of things could be "THE CENTRAL PILLAR OF ALL TTRPGS!tm"

Quote
Combat is cheap drama, and, in my experience, no games deal much or at all with the psychological scars and trauma that real life combat inflicts on its participants. Game combat, therefore, trains people to think in terms of violence as a valid solution to many of life's problems (or most, in the typical game milieu), as free of psychic consequence, and as intrinsically fun.

Bolding mine. Care to provide evidence for this extraordinary claim? Remember that extraordinary clai9ms require extraordinary evidence. I want to see a longitudinal study spawning several countries and years with ACTUAL gamers that proves this assertion, so far the only such study (about video games mind you) says you're talking BS.

What RPGs do you know of that don’t have a large combat section? What psychic consequences are there for characters in D&D combat? What players of RPGs include combat while holding their nose? If it’s not meant to be fun why do games feature it?

What RPGs do you know about that don't have a large magic section? What spiritual consecuences are there for characters on D&D for dabling in magic? What players of RPGs include magic while holding their nose? If it's not meant to be fun why do games feature it?

First of all you were talking about "Game combat, therefore, trains people to think in terms of violence as a valid solution to many of life's problems (or most, in the typical game milieu), as free of psychic consequence,[/b" Not PCs.

Second what if it's fun? Does Minecraft train you to be an architect that builds with big cubes of diamond?

Quote
Could this "woke" business therefore be the harbinger of the end of combat as cheap drama? Must all games then be sensitive to just how powerful getting into a fight is, with its ugly consequences of trauma, confusion, and murder, and, so, knock down this central pillar? If so, what will hold up the roof?

Remove the scare quotes, it is woke cultists promoting this changes.

Bolding mine. What!? Can you differentiate between make believe and reality? No one gets PTSD from RPG combat, because the only real individuals involved are humans in the real world, and if YOU want to role play such things in YOUR table by all means feel free to do so. But leave us out of your feverish dreams.

I’m referring to characters, not players. And, the context here is that wokies will continue to pull the thread that undoes everything that makes D&D enjoyable, in the name of their sensibilities and political agenda. See if they don't.
"Game combat, therefore, trains people to think in terms of violence as a valid solution to many of life's problems (or most, in the typical game milieu), as free of psychic consequence,[/b" No you weren't, you were talking about people, after all who has fun with an RPG? Or do you often play inception type games where the PC's are playing an RPG?

Your argument is the same as the ones made by Jack Thompson and Anita Sarkesian. "Games teach people to... "

Please do provide scientific evidence of your assertion.

Quote from: Rhedyn

Here is why this forum tends to be so stupid. Many people here think Joe Biden is "The Left", when he is actually Far Right and every US republican is just an idiot.

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

― George Orwell

HappyDaze

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • H
  • Posts: 5337
Re: Are we seeing the end of combat?
« Reply #16 on: October 18, 2021, 09:31:40 PM »
Game combat, therefore, trains people to think in terms of violence as a valid solution to many of life's problems (or most, in the typical game milieu), as free of psychic consequence, and as intrinsically fun.

I utterly disagree with this conclusion.
Then we must FIGHT!

HappyDaze

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • H
  • Posts: 5337
Re: Are we seeing the end of combat?
« Reply #17 on: October 18, 2021, 09:34:50 PM »
This business of politicizing gaming in the southpaw direction, such that all monsters must be individuals capable of free will

If the monsters freely will to test their warhammers on your skull, violence will erupt fast.

The only game, in my knowledge, where if you enter combat you have already lost is Call of Cthulhu.
Many Star Trek challenges can fall into "if you enter combat, you've already lost" but then again many of them can be solved through combat. It can be tricky to tell them apart.

HappyDaze

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • H
  • Posts: 5337
Re: Are we seeing the end of combat?
« Reply #18 on: October 18, 2021, 09:38:13 PM »
This business of politicizing gaming in the southpaw direction, such that all monsters must be individuals capable of free will and, so, of any alignment, has implications beyond just erasing the trope of irredeemably evil races. It also attacks the central pillar of virtually all RPGs, which is combat.

Combat is the central pillar of virtually all RPGs? Says who? Where's the evidence to back this up?

Every RPG I've ever looked at has a big combat section. I have yet to find one that doesn’t. Care to submit some?

Nice try, nope, combat is an important part of the game but not (and I quote) "THE CENTRAL PILLAR OF ALL TTRPGS!tm" Every RPG I've ever looked at has a big magic section. I have yet to find one that doesn't. Care to sunmit one?

I'm of course mocking you, by your argument lots of things could be "THE CENTRAL PILLAR OF ALL TTRPGS!tm"

Quote
Combat is cheap drama, and, in my experience, no games deal much or at all with the psychological scars and trauma that real life combat inflicts on its participants. Game combat, therefore, trains people to think in terms of violence as a valid solution to many of life's problems (or most, in the typical game milieu), as free of psychic consequence, and as intrinsically fun.

Bolding mine. Care to provide evidence for this extraordinary claim? Remember that extraordinary clai9ms require extraordinary evidence. I want to see a longitudinal study spawning several countries and years with ACTUAL gamers that proves this assertion, so far the only such study (about video games mind you) says you're talking BS.

What RPGs do you know of that don’t have a large combat section? What psychic consequences are there for characters in D&D combat? What players of RPGs include combat while holding their nose? If it’s not meant to be fun why do games feature it?

What RPGs do you know about that don't have a large magic section? What spiritual consecuences are there for characters on D&D for dabling in magic? What players of RPGs include magic while holding their nose? If it's not meant to be fun why do games feature it?

First of all you were talking about "Game combat, therefore, trains people to think in terms of violence as a valid solution to many of life's problems (or most, in the typical game milieu), as free of psychic consequence,[/b" Not PCs.

Second what if it's fun? Does Minecraft train you to be an architect that builds with big cubes of diamond?

Quote
Could this "woke" business therefore be the harbinger of the end of combat as cheap drama? Must all games then be sensitive to just how powerful getting into a fight is, with its ugly consequences of trauma, confusion, and murder, and, so, knock down this central pillar? If so, what will hold up the roof?

Remove the scare quotes, it is woke cultists promoting this changes.

Bolding mine. What!? Can you differentiate between make believe and reality? No one gets PTSD from RPG combat, because the only real individuals involved are humans in the real world, and if YOU want to role play such things in YOUR table by all means feel free to do so. But leave us out of your feverish dreams.

I’m referring to characters, not players. And, the context here is that wokies will continue to pull the thread that undoes everything that makes D&D enjoyable, in the name of their sensibilities and political agenda. See if they don't.
"Game combat, therefore, trains people to think in terms of violence as a valid solution to many of life's problems (or most, in the typical game milieu), as free of psychic consequence,[/b" No you weren't, you were talking about people, after all who has fun with an RPG? Or do you often play inception type games where the PC's are playing an RPG?

Your argument is the same as the ones made by Jack Thompson and Anita Sarkesian. "Games teach people to... "

Please do provide scientific evidence of your assertion.
Cyberpunk doesn't have a huge magic section. Conan 2d20 has a magic section, but it's not huge. Star Trek Adventures doesn't have a magic section. Conspiracy X 2.0 has a small magic section, but nothing huge. But all of these games have robust combat mechanics.

Ratman_tf

  • Alt-Reich Shitlord
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8330
Re: Are we seeing the end of combat?
« Reply #19 on: October 18, 2021, 10:04:33 PM »
Game combat, therefore, trains people to think in terms of violence as a valid solution to many of life's problems (or most, in the typical game milieu), as free of psychic consequence, and as intrinsically fun.

I utterly disagree with this conclusion.

Well, perhaps you'd like to expand on your disagreement.

I'm being charitable and assuming you mean only in game attitude.
Even then, I think you're putting the cart before the horse. I think combat and conflict are a desired "fun" that RPGs include because they are a fun part of the game.
D&D notoriously arose from the Chainmail tabletop wargame. It's roots are in war and conflict as game, an idea as old as Chess and Go and Checkers.
I do not think RPGs "train" anyone to think in that manner. I think they express an attitude already present.

Now, that doesn't mean every conflict should be resolved with a combat. Many solutions in D&D involve negotiation or problem solving. Many adventures portray conflict and war as undesirable, and a last resort, from the POV of the characters. Sometimes it's played simply as a beer & pretzels dungeon crawl. Sometimes as super serious RP.



The notion of an exclusionary and hostile RPG community is a fever dream of zealots who view all social dynamics through a narrow keyhole of structural oppression.
-Haffrung

BoxCrayonTales

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • B
  • Posts: 3313
Re: Are we seeing the end of combat?
« Reply #20 on: October 18, 2021, 10:09:19 PM »
I think RPG combat has always been pretty unwieldy due to overcomplicated design. I think that RPGs have overwhelmingly relied on violence to solve problems, as opposed to any other kind of conflict resolution. I think it's pretty weird that combat is typically the most detailed part of RPG rules, but there are never similarly complicated rules for non-violent conflict resolution (e.g. the much maligned social combat, mental combat, etc).

It's almost like RPGs developed as an outgrowth of wargames and still have yet to shed those inherited assumptions despite it long since ceasing to matter.

Hmm...

Oh wait, you're talking about the wokies? In that case, I have nothing to contribute.

Neoplatonist1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
Re: Are we seeing the end of combat?
« Reply #21 on: October 18, 2021, 10:35:42 PM »
This business of politicizing gaming in the southpaw direction, such that all monsters must be individuals capable of free will and, so, of any alignment, has implications beyond just erasing the trope of irredeemably evil races. It also attacks the central pillar of virtually all RPGs, which is combat.

Combat is the central pillar of virtually all RPGs? Says who? Where's the evidence to back this up?

Every RPG I've ever looked at has a big combat section. I have yet to find one that doesn’t. Care to submit some?

Nice try, nope, combat is an important part of the game but not (and I quote) "THE CENTRAL PILLAR OF ALL TTRPGS!tm" Every RPG I've ever looked at has a big magic section. I have yet to find one that doesn't. Care to sunmit one?

I'm of course mocking you, by your argument lots of things could be "THE CENTRAL PILLAR OF ALL TTRPGS!tm"

Millennium’s End

Top Secret

Traveller

Aftermath

Twilight: 2000

Robotech

I’m sure there are more. So, I’ve answered your question, will you answer mine: can you name any RPG that doesn’t feature a chapter dedicated to combat?

Quote
Quote
Combat is cheap drama, and, in my experience, no games deal much or at all with the psychological scars and trauma that real life combat inflicts on its participants. Game combat, therefore, trains people to think in terms of violence as a valid solution to many of life's problems (or most, in the typical game milieu), as free of psychic consequence, and as intrinsically fun.

Bolding mine. Care to provide evidence for this extraordinary claim? Remember that extraordinary clai9ms require extraordinary evidence. I want to see a longitudinal study spawning several countries and years with ACTUAL gamers that proves this assertion, so far the only such study (about video games mind you) says you're talking BS.

What RPGs do you know of that don’t have a large combat section? What psychic consequences are there for characters in D&D combat? What players of RPGs include combat while holding their nose? If it’s not meant to be fun why do games feature it?

What RPGs do you know about that don't have a large magic section? What spiritual consecuences are there for characters on D&D for dabling in magic? What players of RPGs include magic while holding their nose? If it's not meant to be fun why do games feature it?

See above. No, not much in the way of spiritual consequences for magic, either. And what is magic commonly for in D&D?—fighting monsters with sleep spells, magic missiles, fireballs, etc. Find me an RPG cover featuring magic that isn’t used for a combat. The message is that magic isn’t psychologically dangerous, it’s just fun. Magical combat is fun. Magical violence is fun. So, please answer my questions: What RPGs lack a chapter on combat, and supply realistic psychic consequences for combat?


Quote
First of all you were talking about "Game combat, therefore, trains people to think in terms of violence as a valid solution to many of life's problems (or most, in the typical game milieu), as free of psychic consequence,[/b" Not PCs.

Yes, that’s right. It does train people to think that way, even if other things (such as personal experience) train them otherwise. The game’s characters don’t necessarily find violence fun, but the players certainly do find portrayals of violence fun or they’d eschew such violence in their games. And, this violence is free of psychic consequences for the characters and is often portrayed as the most thrilling, easiest, or inevitable option for resolving conflicts.

Quote
Second what if it's fun? Does Minecraft train you to be an architect that builds with big cubes of diamond?

How realistically portrayed is Minecraft?

Quote
Quote
Could this "woke" business therefore be the harbinger of the end of combat as cheap drama? Must all games then be sensitive to just how powerful getting into a fight is, with its ugly consequences of trauma, confusion, and murder, and, so, knock down this central pillar? If so, what will hold up the roof?

Remove the scare quotes, it is woke cultists promoting this changes.

Bolding mine. What!? Can you differentiate between make believe and reality? No one gets PTSD from RPG combat, because the only real individuals involved are humans in the real world, and if YOU want to role play such things in YOUR table by all means feel free to do so. But leave us out of your feverish dreams.

I’m referring to characters, not players. And, the context here is that wokies will continue to pull the thread that undoes everything that makes D&D enjoyable, in the name of their sensibilities and political agenda. See if they don't.
"Game combat, therefore, trains people to think in terms of violence as a valid solution to many of life's problems (or most, in the typical game milieu), as free of psychic consequence,[/b" No you weren't, you were talking about people, after all who has fun with an RPG? Or do you often play inception type games where the PC's are playing an RPG?

In my third paragraph I’m referring to characters being realistically affected by violence, not players. (But, isn't the point of roleplaying trying to get inside the head of your character?) And, the context here is that wokies will continue to pull the thread that undoes much, if not everything, that makes D&D enjoyable, in the name of their sensibilities and political agenda. See if they don't.

Quote
Your argument is the same as the ones made by Jack Thompson and Anita Sarkesian. "Games teach people to... "

Please do provide scientific evidence of your assertion.

Scientific evidence for what? That if you eat sweets while watching a public execution you’ll be reinforcing sweets=beheading=fun in your mind? I think you’re spirited but you’re not clueless. I think that is what the wokies are going to do, is use my argument to shred gaming as we know it. See if they don’t.

Neoplatonist1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 169
Re: Are we seeing the end of combat?
« Reply #22 on: October 18, 2021, 10:40:07 PM »
Game combat, therefore, trains people to think in terms of violence as a valid solution to many of life's problems (or most, in the typical game milieu), as free of psychic consequence, and as intrinsically fun.

I utterly disagree with this conclusion.

Well, perhaps you'd like to expand on your disagreement.

I'm being charitable and assuming you mean only in game attitude.
Even then, I think you're putting the cart before the horse. I think combat and conflict are a desired "fun" that RPGs include because they are a fun part of the game.
D&D notoriously arose from the Chainmail tabletop wargame. It's roots are in war and conflict as game, an idea as old as Chess and Go and Checkers.
I do not think RPGs "train" anyone to think in that manner. I think they express an attitude already present.

Now, that doesn't mean every conflict should be resolved with a combat. Many solutions in D&D involve negotiation or problem solving. Many adventures portray conflict and war as undesirable, and a last resort, from the POV of the characters. Sometimes it's played simply as a beer & pretzels dungeon crawl. Sometimes as super serious RP.

Chess trains the mind to engage and persevere and logically crush your opponent, does it not? Why would RPGs be different? What you do trains you to do what you do.

GeekyBugle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7399
  • Now even more Toxic
Re: Are we seeing the end of combat?
« Reply #23 on: October 18, 2021, 11:07:51 PM »
This business of politicizing gaming in the southpaw direction, such that all monsters must be individuals capable of free will and, so, of any alignment, has implications beyond just erasing the trope of irredeemably evil races. It also attacks the central pillar of virtually all RPGs, which is combat.

Combat is the central pillar of virtually all RPGs? Says who? Where's the evidence to back this up?

Every RPG I've ever looked at has a big combat section. I have yet to find one that doesn’t. Care to submit some?

Nice try, nope, combat is an important part of the game but not (and I quote) "THE CENTRAL PILLAR OF ALL TTRPGS!tm" Every RPG I've ever looked at has a big magic section. I have yet to find one that doesn't. Care to sunmit one?

I'm of course mocking you, by your argument lots of things could be "THE CENTRAL PILLAR OF ALL TTRPGS!tm"

Millennium’s End

Top Secret

Traveller

Aftermath

Twilight: 2000

Robotech

I’m sure there are more. So, I’ve answered your question, will you answer mine: can you name any RPG that doesn’t feature a chapter dedicated to combat?


So you answered to me mocking you...

Quote
Quote
Combat is cheap drama, and, in my experience, no games deal much or at all with the psychological scars and trauma that real life combat inflicts on its participants. Game combat, therefore, trains people to think in terms of violence as a valid solution to many of life's problems (or most, in the typical game milieu), as free of psychic consequence, and as intrinsically fun.

Bolding mine. Care to provide evidence for this extraordinary claim? Remember that extraordinary clai9ms require extraordinary evidence. I want to see a longitudinal study spawning several countries and years with ACTUAL gamers that proves this assertion, so far the only such study (about video games mind you) says you're talking BS.

What RPGs do you know of that don’t have a large combat section? What psychic consequences are there for characters in D&D combat? What players of RPGs include combat while holding their nose? If it’s not meant to be fun why do games feature it?

What RPGs do you know about that don't have a large magic section? What spiritual consecuences are there for characters on D&D for dabling in magic? What players of RPGs include magic while holding their nose? If it's not meant to be fun why do games feature it?

See above. No, not much in the way of spiritual consequences for magic, either. And what is magic commonly for in D&D?—fighting monsters with sleep spells, magic missiles, fireballs, etc. Find me an RPG cover featuring magic that isn’t used for a combat. The message is that magic isn’t psychologically dangerous, it’s just fun. Magical combat is fun. Magical violence is fun. So, please answer my questions: What RPGs lack a chapter on combat, and supply realistic psychic consequences for combat?

What for? You backtrack about you speaking about characters and revert to the players, next you'll do it the other way around. Provide scientific evidence that RPGs train real people to solve things by using violence IRL.

Quote
First of all you were talking about "Game combat, therefore, trains people to think in terms of violence as a valid solution to many of life's problems (or most, in the typical game milieu), as free of psychic consequence,[/b" Not PCs.

Yes, that’s right. It does train people to think that way, even if other things (such as personal experience) train them otherwise. The game’s characters don’t necessarily find violence fun, but the players certainly do find portrayals of violence fun or they’d eschew such violence in their games. And, this violence is free of psychic consequences for the characters and is often portrayed as the most thrilling, easiest, or inevitable option for resolving conflicts.

See? You're back to the Thompson/Sarkesian argument which has been proven false:

https://gizmodo.com/science-finds-once-again-that-violent-video-games-dont-1823811169

So if YOU are asserting that TTRPGs are different and they do what you claim it falls on you to prove your assertion not on me to prove it flase.

Quote
Second what if it's fun? Does Minecraft train you to be an architect that builds with big cubes of diamond?

How realistically portrayed is Minecraft?

How realistically do I portray a TTRPG in my head? This has shit to do with your argument, it's just you trying to change the discussion to a different topic, provide scientific evidence of your claim that TTRPGs make people solve things with violence or shut the fuck up.

Quote
Quote
Could this "woke" business therefore be the harbinger of the end of combat as cheap drama? Must all games then be sensitive to just how powerful getting into a fight is, with its ugly consequences of trauma, confusion, and murder, and, so, knock down this central pillar? If so, what will hold up the roof?

Remove the scare quotes, it is woke cultists promoting this changes.

Bolding mine. What!? Can you differentiate between make believe and reality? No one gets PTSD from RPG combat, because the only real individuals involved are humans in the real world, and if YOU want to role play such things in YOUR table by all means feel free to do so. But leave us out of your feverish dreams.

I’m referring to characters, not players. And, the context here is that wokies will continue to pull the thread that undoes everything that makes D&D enjoyable, in the name of their sensibilities and political agenda. See if they don't.
"Game combat, therefore, trains people to think in terms of violence as a valid solution to many of life's problems (or most, in the typical game milieu), as free of psychic consequence,[/b" No you weren't, you were talking about people, after all who has fun with an RPG? Or do you often play inception type games where the PC's are playing an RPG?

In my third paragraph I’m referring to characters being realistically affected by violence, not players. (But, isn't the point of roleplaying trying to get inside the head of your character?) And, the context here is that wokies will continue to pull the thread that undoes much, if not everything, that makes D&D enjoyable, in the name of their sensibilities and political agenda. See if they don't.

And now you're back to claiming you were talking about PCs, who cares what you think PCs are trained for in the game world? It has exactly zero effect on the real world.

Quote
Your argument is the same as the ones made by Jack Thompson and Anita Sarkesian. "Games teach people to... "

Please do provide scientific evidence of your assertion.

Scientific evidence for what? That if you eat sweets while watching a public execution you’ll be reinforcing sweets=beheading=fun in your mind? I think you’re spirited but you’re not clueless. I think that is what the wokies are going to do, is use my argument to shred gaming as we know it. See if they don’t.

Nice false equivalence, real world with real people vs game world with game believe "people". By your logic it should also train people to solve things with magic, like in curing/travelling by magic. But that's BS just like your claim that TTRPGs make players violent.

That TTRPGs make players start solving things with violence.

In case you want to pretend you didn't see the link I'll provide it again here:

https://gizmodo.com/science-finds-once-again-that-violent-video-games-dont-1823811169

And in case you don't want to click there here's the study:

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-018-0031-7


Now prove them wrong or shut the fuck up. You claim you're worried about the wokies, YOU'RE here doing their work by claiming that TTRPGs make players violent.
Quote from: Rhedyn

Here is why this forum tends to be so stupid. Many people here think Joe Biden is "The Left", when he is actually Far Right and every US republican is just an idiot.

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

― George Orwell

Donahue82

  • Newbie
  • *
  • D
  • Posts: 7
Re: Are we seeing the end of combat?
« Reply #24 on: October 18, 2021, 11:19:52 PM »
Savage Worlds
16 pages for combat rules
about 20 pages (probably less if you take out art) for "Magic"

Out of a book that is 212 pages approx (according to pdf); so figure about 20% of book is for the brutish, violent, excessively masculine arts of combat?

You either need Drama or Conflict to make things interesting. While I enjoy reading slice of life manga, it doesn't really sound that fun to play and quite frankly we need less Drama in the world not more. Especially since most civilized societies have worked very hard to make violence into a wholly bad thing.

While most games are meant about being heroes, heroic, or at least not a bad guy. Murder-hoboing, which is generally considered a bad thing, and killing bandits that are preying upon merchants and peasants just trying to live are vastly different types of violence and context.

The fact of the matter is that people can sleep safely at home because there are other people who are prepared to do violence on their behalf.
“Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and their freedoms”
“When you vote, you are exercising political authority, you're using force. And force, my friends, is violence. The supreme authority from which all other authorities are derived.”








Ratman_tf

  • Alt-Reich Shitlord
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8330
Re: Are we seeing the end of combat?
« Reply #25 on: October 18, 2021, 11:26:37 PM »
Game combat, therefore, trains people to think in terms of violence as a valid solution to many of life's problems (or most, in the typical game milieu), as free of psychic consequence, and as intrinsically fun.

I utterly disagree with this conclusion.

Well, perhaps you'd like to expand on your disagreement.

I'm being charitable and assuming you mean only in game attitude.
Even then, I think you're putting the cart before the horse. I think combat and conflict are a desired "fun" that RPGs include because they are a fun part of the game.
D&D notoriously arose from the Chainmail tabletop wargame. It's roots are in war and conflict as game, an idea as old as Chess and Go and Checkers.
I do not think RPGs "train" anyone to think in that manner. I think they express an attitude already present.

Now, that doesn't mean every conflict should be resolved with a combat. Many solutions in D&D involve negotiation or problem solving. Many adventures portray conflict and war as undesirable, and a last resort, from the POV of the characters. Sometimes it's played simply as a beer & pretzels dungeon crawl. Sometimes as super serious RP.

Chess trains the mind to engage and persevere and logically crush your opponent, does it not?

Chess teaches many things. Getting good at chess involves learning to think and plan many steps ahead of the current board state. And to have an understanding of your opponent, to imagine what they will do in response to your moves.
And it also teaches (hopefully) good sportsmanship. You can't get good at chess unless you play many games. You won't get invited back to play if you are a poor sport.
And it also teaches tactics and strategy, in a very abstracted manner.

Quote
Why would RPGs be different? What you do trains you to do what you do.

But do you do what you do when you did what you did to me?
The notion of an exclusionary and hostile RPG community is a fever dream of zealots who view all social dynamics through a narrow keyhole of structural oppression.
-Haffrung

GeekyBugle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7399
  • Now even more Toxic
Re: Are we seeing the end of combat?
« Reply #26 on: October 18, 2021, 11:30:57 PM »

Game combat, therefore, trains people to think in terms of violence as a valid solution to many of life's problems (or most, in the typical game milieu), as free of psychic consequence, and as intrinsically fun.

I utterly disagree with this conclusion.

Well, perhaps you'd like to expand on your disagreement.

I'm being charitable and assuming you mean only in game attitude.
Even then, I think you're putting the cart before the horse. I think combat and conflict are a desired "fun" that RPGs include because they are a fun part of the game.
D&D notoriously arose from the Chainmail tabletop wargame. It's roots are in war and conflict as game, an idea as old as Chess and Go and Checkers.
I do not think RPGs "train" anyone to think in that manner. I think they express an attitude already present.

Now, that doesn't mean every conflict should be resolved with a combat. Many solutions in D&D involve negotiation or problem solving. Many adventures portray conflict and war as undesirable, and a last resort, from the POV of the characters. Sometimes it's played simply as a beer & pretzels dungeon crawl. Sometimes as super serious RP.

Chess trains the mind to engage and persevere and logically crush your opponent, does it not?
Why would RPGs be different? What you do trains you to do what you do.

Again no, you have ZERO evidence that TTRPGs make players violent.

While I do have evidence that games don't make you violent.

Provide scientific evidence of your assertions, because sience isn't intuitive and plenty of times it is counter intuitive.

https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-018-0031-7

https://gizmodo.com/science-finds-once-again-that-violent-video-games-dont-1823811169
Quote from: Rhedyn

Here is why this forum tends to be so stupid. Many people here think Joe Biden is "The Left", when he is actually Far Right and every US republican is just an idiot.

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

― George Orwell

Ratman_tf

  • Alt-Reich Shitlord
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 8330
Re: Are we seeing the end of combat?
« Reply #27 on: October 18, 2021, 11:49:20 PM »


The notion of an exclusionary and hostile RPG community is a fever dream of zealots who view all social dynamics through a narrow keyhole of structural oppression.
-Haffrung

GeekyBugle

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7399
  • Now even more Toxic
Re: Are we seeing the end of combat?
« Reply #28 on: October 18, 2021, 11:52:08 PM »


That's exactly it.

While he claims to be working to stop the wokies he's in reality doing their work by making wild assertions and trying to see how many ppl here buy into his unsubstantiated BS.
Quote from: Rhedyn

Here is why this forum tends to be so stupid. Many people here think Joe Biden is "The Left", when he is actually Far Right and every US republican is just an idiot.

“During times of universal deceit, telling the truth becomes a revolutionary act.”

― George Orwell

SHARK

  • The Great Shark Hope
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5040
Re: Are we seeing the end of combat?
« Reply #29 on: October 19, 2021, 12:11:27 AM »


That's exactly it.

While he claims to be working to stop the wokies he's in reality doing their work by making wild assertions and trying to see how many ppl here buy into his unsubstantiated BS.

Greetings!

BLACK LEAF!!!! *Laughing* I loved that comic thingy! Fucking hilarious!

Yes, violence in gaming is *good*! Lots of genocide, ethnic cleansing, conquering the fucking Orcs. Plunder, gaining gold and magic items. Yes, violence is an excellent problem solver. When every problem can be seen as a nail, a Hammer is the best tool for the job. Who wants to play in a campaign where everyone is expected to be a sniveling, soy-filled pussy? Talk, and beg, and get on your knees. That's what women do--and weak pussies. Men, true men, are warriors in spirit, and always ready for violence. ;D

The old Roman philosopher Vegetius said, "Those who desire peace, should prepare for war". In all the world, many peoples and many nations possessed many different talents and skills. The Romans however, built their great empire by a constant mastery of war.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK
"It is the Marine Corps that will strip away the façade so easily confused with self. It is the Corps that will offer the pain needed to buy the truth. And at last, each will own the privilege of looking inside himself  to discover what truly resides there. Comfort is an illusion. A false security b