Quote from: Mr. GC;587815Someone that deliberately chooses to focus on things that are not and cannot be relevant is a basket weaver. The term has since involved to include a specific subset of player that refuses to learn how to play the game effectively and insists everyone be as ineffective as them.

"I must win D&D!!"

QuoteYou can identify these many different ways. Here is a non exhaustive list:

The player blames the DM for anything bad that happens to their character even though the problem is that their character just isn't capable of preventing bad things from happening to them.

And continues to do so years later, constantly whining that Vintage Games are terrible because the don't have the rules structure for preventing DMs from touching their character inappropriately.

QuoteThe player complains when their allies are able to successfully do something that they are not and insists this is unfair.

They assume this is due to the other players cheating or having an 'in' with the DM and not realizing it's because the others are better players that learned from their previous mistakes; said player refuses to learn how to be a better player and gravitates towards rules-heavy games they can lawyer into oblivion.

QuoteThe DM will not allow any player to be more relevant than the Fighter, or any weak class (and as the Fighter is entirely irrelevant, so too is the entire party).

These kinds of player also tend to make things up whole cloth, or regurgiquote stuff written by others, ignoring plain evidence where they are wrong and almost always mistaken about a number of facets.

QuoteIn and out of the game, the person pointedly avoids saying anything of substance. Classics include pretending things are equally valid when they are not, "There are no worthless classes only worthless players" and many other variants that can all be summarized as a standard basket weaver dodge since if forced to say something concrete they will be wrong 100% of the time.

They utterly fail to understand what the word 'irony' means, setting up an infinite loop of Ironybouros without realizing it.  Also, they are shitty players.

QuoteThe player complains when their character is easily killed by something they should have easily been able to handle.

Which ends up being the eternal whining about how the DM touched their character; this mostly results from putting a 3hp Thief on the front lines in the mistaken belief the DM won't let the anything happen to the party because they are there to succeed and get a ribbon for showing up.

QuoteThe character is flat out incapable of doing whatever it is they are supposed to do and when this is pointed out to them their response is to try and claim the DM will protect them... which reminds me of that Ignoratio song.

Small typo: in that first sentence, swap out 'player' for 'character'.

QuoteThe easiest identifier though is to simply look for a situation in which the player is not very good at doing something.

Which is pretty much everything with this half dozen strong cohort.  Example:  Maths.

QuoteThe ones that learn how to get better at it are good players.
The ones that accept they suck at it and move on are not basket weavers.
The ones that blame everyone but themselves for this? Basket weaver.

Interesting, because your new definition has nothing to do with the original definition you completely agreed with.

QuoteBecause the basket weaver stance is inherently inconsistent, incoherent, and often contradictory (as the basket weaver still wants to succeed and win D&D, despite having no actual ability to do so)...

Lookit that!  You do know what irony means.

QuoteIf you can catch this early it's very easy to fix... generally after the first or second time at most they'll realize something is wrong and take steps to fix the problem.

Yes, you kick out the player that is being a douchebag about trying to win D&D and bitching that another player took some skill points in cooking.

QuoteIf not... if they've been enabled a while, it will take much longer to correct their bad habits and bad play. It is still very possible though.

I have direct evidence in a half dozen cases where it is, in fact, not possible.

Quote from: jibbajibba;587904Not sure what a stormwind falacy is to be honest but in RL optimistation is very very very uncommon. I also don't get the reference to 2006? Was that when you started gaming?

He doesn't know what a Stormwind fallacy is either; Mistborn thinks that someone who holds a substantially different opinion is employing a strawman argument.

For everyone;'s edification, here's a succinct definition of The Stormwind Fallacy.

http://www.loremaster.org/content.php/146-The-Stormwind-Fallacy

For the most part I agree with it, but the funny thing is that Mistborn/GC actually epitomizes the fallacy in his view that if a character isn't optimized, it's bad roleplaying. It's also , as is stated in the page, aconcursive part of the rollplay vs roleplay debate that Mistborn or his clone derided several pages ago. There's irony for you.

Where the stormwind fallacy failsis that equates optimization with combat ability. A Thief is not optimized by having the best possible hand to hand combat skills, but by being the stealthiest, sneakiest, and perceptive character they can be. An rpg character in general is optimized by providing the most fun to the player and group, not by being able to kill or hoard treasure the best. A Call of Cthulhu investigator, for example, who maxes out their combat skills is not optimized for the game they are going to be playing in, just as a D&d Paladin with the best possible Thac0 is not optimized for a game that's focused on court intrigue, diplomacy between nations, or exploration.

In other words, a munchkin is still a munchkin, even if they cite random internet game theory terms.

Quote from: StormBringer;587907"I must win D&D!!"

QuoteHello ladies. Look at your party. Now back to me. Now back at your party. Now back to me. Sadly, they aren't me. But if they stopped buffing each other to death and started playing smartly they could win D&D like me. Look down. Up. Where are you? You're on a boat! With the group your group could win like! What's in your hand? Back at me. I have it. It's the rulebooks filled with all the good spells. Look again. The rulebooks are now diamonds! Anything is possible when your party kills the enemies and not each other. I'm on a Cauchemar.

QuoteAnd continues to do so years later, constantly whining that Vintage Games are terrible because the don't have the rules structure for preventing DMs from touching their character inappropriately.

The rulebooks themselves touch my character inappropriately.

QuoteThey assume this is due to the other players cheating or having an 'in' with the DM and not realizing it's because the others are better players that learned from their previous mistakes; said player refuses to learn how to be a better player and gravitates towards rules-heavy games they can lawyer into oblivion.

Better player = blow DM, or otherwise subject yourself to subjective bullshit. Um yeah. No.

QuoteThey utterly fail to understand what the word 'irony' means, setting up an infinite loop of Ironybouros without realizing it.  Also, they are shitty players.

Come at me Ironybringer.

QuoteWhich ends up being the eternal whining about how the DM touched their character; this mostly results from putting a 3hp Thief on the front lines in the mistaken belief the DM won't let the anything happen to the party because they are there to succeed and get a ribbon for showing up.

No good player thinks a thief can handle anything except dying horribly and possibly taking their party with them if they actually trust the guy, but nice try.

The rest of your fail is unsalvagable, so I won't attempt to try. Your Truenamer will be deployed shortly though.

Quote from: StormBringer;587907"I must win D&D!!"


And continues to do so years later, constantly whining that Vintage Games are terrible because the don't have the rules structure for preventing DMs from touching their character inappropriately.


I have direct evidence in a half dozen cases where it is, in fact, not possible.

Actually.... there is a slight break here.
To make a truely weak character you need a system which allows you to customise and optimise.
A vintage game like AD&D doesn't allow you to customise therefore you can't really make a weak character. Even more true in OD&D where there is so little differentiation. You might argue that some classes are weak, which is a whole other discussion, but a character with 6 9's for stats is almost identical to one with 6 14's and not so different to one with 6 15s.

To make a truly hopeless character, one with +20 basket weaving for example, you need a system like Gurps or 3.5 D&D where you have a lot of options.

Basket Weaving (or a similar course) was the elective course one took in the last semester of high school to guarantee maintaining a high GPA. It was considered a course that was impossible to fail, and even amongst the engineering and science elite was a popular course to take during that last semester of school. There was no homework. No tests. Just time spent making cool looking grass baskets. It was also a course that was popular with the stoners, for obvious reasons.

I really didn't hear about the use of the term in gaming until after the 2nd edition (with skills) was released. It originally referred to a skill that was included in the game that was really effectively useless for the player, but one which on character generation you could roll up, and would take up a useful skills slot.

Basket Weaving type skills drove char-ops optimizer type gamers batshit insane because it co-opted their favorite "perfect" characters builds.

Quote from: jibbajibba;587904Not sure what a stormwind falacy is to be honest but in RL optimistation is very very very uncommon. I also don't get the reference to 2006? Was that when you started gaming?

Quote from: Tempest StormwindThe Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy
Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa.

Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game.

Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse roleplayer if he optimizes, and vice versa.
Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically roleplayed better than an optimized one, and vice versa.

Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's   gameplay. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules   and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result.   Roleplaying deals with how well a player can act in character and behave   as if he was someone else.
A person can act while  understanding the rules, and can build something  powerful while still  handling an effective character. There is nothing  in the game --  mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you  participate in the  other.

Claiming that an optimizer cannot roleplay (or  is participating in a  playstyle that isn't supportive of roleplaying)  because he is an  optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind  Fallacy.

This was posted in 2006 btw. This is another one of those long settled topics.

I'm no longer surprised to see this sort of ancient bullshit peddled on these forums.

You haven't updated your games since 2000 and you haven't updated your arguments either

Quote from: The Traveller;587865I'm not sure why everyone is so down on basket weaving, its pretty useful. When you get down to it, basket weaving isn't just about making baskets, its about taking natural materials like leaves rushes and reeds, sticks and branches, and shaping them into a useful form. Tell Ray Mears that's a useless skill.

As GM I'd give leeway when using it to encompass building fences, roofing, impromptu shelters, even canoes or wicker shields, and by god baskets when you need a basket.

This is part of where the creative imagination of the players comes into play.

Here is a major part of the issue I just want to highlight. There are a couple of things here I wanna draw attention to:

1) There is nothing inherently "wrong" with basket weaving or having a profession in general. It is logical, thematic, and helps verisimilitude because in any functioning world there are mundane necessities and luxuries people spend money and time on producing and enjoying.

2)The problem is not that such a thing exists but that we are (at least as far as DnD is concerned) not at all hampered by not having these kind of skills and are only perhaps marginally aided by having them because in most cases having the ability to weave a basket is never going to come up even in a minor way in a campaign.

3) This problem gets worse when you take into account that learning how to basket weave directly takes away from your ability to do other, more important, and more useful skills. In point buy games basket weaving would cost much less than other,much more useful skills or abilities.

4) Basket weaving is known to be a weaker option and that can breed resentment for people not wanting to be handicapped by someone in the group choosing a domestic skill that in no way helps the group. This is exponentially worse if the person's entire character is based around it. Making characters that can't actually do anything significant to aid the adventure can be looked at as disruptive.

5) This issue is often times propagated when people put themselves into camps instead of looking at the issue in a sensible way. Some GMs will wholesale accept basket weaving antics and actually encourage them by forcibly stretching the campaign to involve the skill or stretching what the skill can actually do. Other camps will just wholly deny the same, claiming that people who do it are subhuman or being disruptive.

All these things can be solved at the design stage by either not making basket weaving a thing you can ever choose to do, making it so attempting to do it is something the GM has total control of and getting it doesn't cost you any significant resources, or by making it cost something different then what more significant abilities cost.

Quote from: jibbajibba;587889Interesting because in real life Basket Weaving like Pottery is a critical skill for human development. Baskets and pots allow you to store excess and that allows for the development of wealth which leads to everything from capitalist exploitation of the working class to professional soldiers.

To houses with basements to exploit the new capacity for food storage, to a politician/advocate class with spare time enough to develop the ad hominem fallacy, to communication through a wire, to the invention of games open-ended enough to allow for both competitive and cooperative play, to the precarious standing of modern-day masculinity as technology makes muscle mass and patriarchy irrelevant leaving only impotent, hormonal aggressiveness.

Quote from: TristramEvans;587909For everyone;'s edification, here's a succinct definition of The Stormwind Fallacy.

http://www.loremaster.org/content.php/146-The-Stormwind-Fallacy

For the most part I agree with it, but the funny thing is that Mistborn/GC actually epitomizes the fallacy in his view that if a character isn't optimized, it's bad roleplaying. It's also , as is stated in the page, aconcursive part of the rollplay vs roleplay debate that Mistborn or his clone derided several pages ago. There's irony for you.

Cool, thanks.

I am definitely a Drama queen But I totally understand rules and how they effect the game world.
Now I think the falacy as described above has 2 really weak points.
i) Old school D&D wasn't about roleplaying. It was much more RPG as a sport. Just read through descriptions of play by folk liek Old Geezer. Players didn't make sub-optimal choices for roleplay reasons. Gygax himsef thought that at the end of the AD&D era the game had shifted too much to the role play and not enough game.
ii) Optimisation is not an inherent result of their being rules. The rules describe how the universe works. They establish a framework. Within that framework an invidiual PC is unlikely to optimise. Its really hard to go to the gym every day and train. Its dull boring and repetative most people are really bad at doing that , likewise its really hard to spend 14 hours a day in a magic lab or praying ot practising pick pocket skills. There is a reason why in films the bit where Batman or Rocky trains to be a hero is done is a montage of cut scenes.
Some people can do it, more people can focus on whatever they currently are doing (my misses is always on task and never has downtime), the majority of people waste time, reading, snoozing in an armchair listening to vivaldi, watching x-factor, trying to get laid, posting crap on RPG forums etc etc.

I have no problem playing a fighter with 14 Str and 16 Int. Its actually pretty intersting to try it out.

Quote from: Lord Mistborn;587914This was posted in 2006 btw. This is another one of those long settled topics.

I'm no longer surprised to see this sort of ancient bullshit peddled on these forums.

You haven't updated your games since 2000 and you haven't updated your arguments either

Who settled it?

You might be right about the games thing

I didn't lay out an argument I laid out an opinion.

You see this is how it works.

A preference is something like "Mistborn sounds like someone I would hate to play an RPG with"

An argument runs more like "We can dedude from his comments that Misborn has a very narrow social circle. He probably lives alone, gets very little exercise and lives on junk food. In order to compensate for his own lack of self worth he posts on internet forums adopting a high minded dismissive attitude to all other posters on his chosen topics. He believes this makes him seem impressive to other whilst in reality it only serves to make him appear socially inept and graceless. "

Now also note I use an ad hominem argument, something that specificially attacks the individual rather than the points they have made. I very, very rarely do this as I think its counter productive to any sort of discussion but I note it is your prefered method of debate so I am attempting to accommodate you.

Quote from: jibbajibba;587912Actually.... there is a slight break here.
To make a truely weak character you need a system which allows you to customise and optimise.
A vintage game like AD&D doesn't allow you to customise therefore you can't really make a weak character. Even more true in OD&D where there is so little differentiation. You might argue that some classes are weak, which is a whole other discussion, but a character with 6 9's for stats is almost identical to one with 6 14's and not so different to one with 6 15s.

To make a truly hopeless character, one with +20 basket weaving for example, you need a system like Gurps or 3.5 D&D where you have a lot of options.

Good points.  And honestly, I think this is one of the major pitfalls of mixing skill systems in with class/level systems.  The skills tend to overshadow the class abilities, and because skills are customizable where class abilities generally aren't, optimizing skills becomes the mini-game.  Since it has its own rewards, it tends to start overtaking other parts of the game for some groups and/or players.

Well, apparently being a "basket weaver" is not only about liking a particular play style. It's a life style, and it says something about you being a horrible person in everything you do, too...

Quote from: Mr. GC

Quote from: Lago PARANOIA

Quote from: FrankTrollmanThe Basketweaver contingent are the people who use the fact that their characters are suboptimal as a shibboleth. The ones who act as if flaws in the rules and their characters marks some sort of moral virtue. The kinds of people who fap to the groupthink at TheRPGSite or Paizo's forums.

What do you think is the overlap between basket weavers and austerity advocates? It seems to me that people who both attach a moral purity to suffering and frame completely irrelevant tasks or activities in terms of a morality play won't just restrict this framing to a tiny collection of weird activities.

While I don't know what you are talking about I do know that the basket weaver mentality manifests itself outside of gameplay as well. It's clearly more a life style than a play style. Likewise, optimization is a life style (people used to approaching games in the most efficient manners also will look for ways to live their lives better).

This is because thought patterns aren't something you just turn on and off.

So remember folks: the games you like and the play styles you prefer say something about your morals and your being in life in general. This is not just about you liking this or that game, or preferring to play this or that way. This is about your mental well being, whether you suffer from brain damage, and ultimately, whether you are a good or bad person.

Quote from: Benoist;587926Well, apparently being a "basket weaver" is not only about liking a particular play style. It's a life style, and it says something about you being a horrible person in everything you do, too...

So remember folks: the games you like and the play styles you prefer say something about your morals and your being in life in general. This is not just about you liking this or that game, or preferring to play this or that way. This is about your mental well being, whether you suffer from brain damage, and ultimately, whether you are a good or bad person.

Well as a pro-basket weaver... of course the games you prefer and the way you play them reflect who you are and how you live your life.

To people who write on internet forums about games, games are important so the games we choose and the way we play are definitely mirrors of who we are and how we live the rest of your life.

I would be very happy to be known as a person through how I play games and how I treat the people I play with and even those I talk with about the hobby on internet forums.

Quote from: jibbajibba;587912A vintage game like AD&D doesn't allow you to customise

I really could have sworn that you were one of the people claiming that picking equipment and NWPs in AD&D was Character Optimization in the ludicrous attempt to state that CharOp as 3e knows it was always with us, even back in the shadows of history.

I guess I'm remembering wrong...or maybe the Denner Romance is over now that they've stopped just making fun of Ben's playstyle and now include yours as well.