Quote from: jeff37923;689390Very cool logo. Do you have a source? Does the source have more cool logos?

I have no idea, I found it via the ancient art of Google Image Search, but here's the original as it took me 5 seconds to find it.

http://saki-blackwing.deviantart.com/art/ouroboros-17479771

Quote from: Rincewind1;689384Well I for one don't like that you're complaining about him complaining about people complaining about people that like things they don't like.

I do like that you don't like that he's complaining about that guy complaining about people complaining about people that like things they don't like.

c-c-c-combo breakerrrr...!

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;689383I agree too many people complain about things they don't like here. But your posts also seem to be complaints about things you don't like.

Ok let me expand on this. (though I'll admit than in retrospect I've done a lot of complaing about posts that I dislike) Let's for a minute have a serious discussion about feels.

We all have things we like and things we dislike and when we encounter people who like this we dislike we often get angry and defensive. Doubly so if it's a thing we dislike especially strongly. The thing is it doesn't seem like people here are dealing with those feeling in a healthy way. People here have this warped idea that 3e and 4e don't merely like/engage with RPGs in was they dislike but rather are some monolithic block of generically evil subhumans who are gleefully ruining the hobby forever. They invent elaborate conspiracy theories about how say the term "Magic Tea Party" is a [strike]communist[/strike]munchkin plot to [STRIKE]sap and impureify our precious bodily fluids[/STRIKE] get rid of GM rulings. Or that the 3e designers were secretly emulating MTG by including elaborate system mastery puzzles. To be honest it's all kind of off putting.

Quote from: gamerGoyf;689360That is specifically what I'm not saying hence my accusation of greedy reductionism -_-

My point was that "Magical Tea Party" is an essential and undeniable part RPGs. No one is arguing for the removal of Magic Tea Party as an element of RPGs the impossibility of such a thing is intuitively obvious to everyone with a brain. However we are all in agreement that rules can potentially be and improvement from MTP. At least I assume so given we all play RPGs with at least some rules ^_^

What you call "magical tea party", is what normal people call "role playing". So, yes, I agree role playing is an essential part of roleplaying games. The phrase "magic tea party" arose among minmaxers and char-op fanatics (aka Denners) to disparage players who want to Roleplay and aren't interested in rules lawyering and look at the game from any perspective besides focusing exclusively on the rules. So you're being contradictory when you complain about people complaining about how other people have fun, as that's exactly what you're doing. Hence posters dropping by to tell you to stop acting like an ass. There was a big giant thread here a little while back all about MTP, you might be beholden to google it.

And no, I highly doubt anyone here believes that rules " can be an improvement" over roleplaying, in the same way salt isnt an improvement over steak. Wrong message board for that, most posters here are old school, old school inclined, or like Mistwell, old school converted.

Quote from: TristramEvans;689404The phrase "magic tea party" arose among minmaxers and chariot fanatics (aka Denners) to disparage players who want to Roleplay and aren't interested in rules lawyering and looking at the game from any perspective besides focusing exclusively on the rules.

No that isn't actually what it means, I asked them and that's not the definition they gave. Heck that thread featured Frank Trollman singing the praises of MTP.

Quote from: TristramEvans;689404And no, I highly doubt anyone here believes that rules " can be an improvement over roleplaying. Wrong message board for that, most posters here are old school, old school inclined, or like Mistwell, old school converted.

So you believe we should get rid of attack rolls and have whether or not you hit the monsters be up the DM :?

Quote from: gamerGoyf;689403Ok let me expand on this. (though I'll admit than in retrospect I've done a lot of complaing about posts that I dislike) Let's for a minute have a serious discussion about feels.

We all have things we like and things we dislike and when we encounter people who like this we dislike we often get angry and defensive. Doubly so if it's a thing we dislike especially strongly. The thing is it doesn't seem like people here are dealing with those feeling in a healthy way. People here have this warped idea that 3e and 4e don't merely like/engage with RPGs in was they dislike but rather are some monolithic block of generically evil subhumans who are gleefully ruining the hobby forever. They invent elaborate conspiracy theories about how say the term "Magic Tea Party" is a [strike]communist[/strike]munchkin plot to [STRIKE]sap and impureify our precious bodily fluids[/STRIKE] get rid of GM rulings. Or that the 3e designers were secretly emulating MTG by including elaborate system mastery puzzles. To be honest it's all kind of off putting.

Can we have a conversation about games instead of 'feels'.  I'm having enough trouble following the attempt at English.
"People here have this warped idea that 3e and 4e don't merely like/engage with RPGs in was they dislike but rather are some monolithic block of generically evil subhumans who are gleefully ruining the hobby forever"

Of course, we all have these moments.  And I think the response you are getting would be off-putting, though I think you misdiagnose the reason.  Let's go back to your feelings on how the GM should interpret rules, and adjudicate roleplay, or character actions that are outside the exact ones described on a character sheet.

Quote from: gamerGoyf;689405No that isn't actually what it means, I asked them and that's not the definition they gave. Heck that thread featured Frank Trollman singing the praises of MTP.


So you believe we should get rid of attack rolls and have whether or not you hit the monsters be up the DM :?

Hmm.. Our excluded middle seems to have gone missing again.  You seem to confuse a continuum for a duality easily, based on an admittedly small sample (most of your posts on this thread).

Quote from: gamerGoyf;689405No that isn't actually what it means, I asked them and that's not the definition they gave. Heck that thread featured Frank Trollman singing the praises of MTP.

Of course it's not the definition THEY gave. :rolleyes: How could THEY?

QuoteSo you believe we should get rid of attack rolls and have whether or not you hit the monsters be up the DM :?

Will you ever stop beating your wife?

There's nothing like calling your interlocutors a bunch of unhealthy, unstable, delusional  and fascistic nazi people with a hard-on for eugenics and conspiracy theories to kickstart a "serious conversation" between gentlemen.

Quote from: gamerGoyf;689403Ok let me expand on this. (though I'll admit than in retrospect I've done a lot of complaing about posts that I dislike) Let's for a minute have a serious discussion about feels.

We all have things we like and things we dislike and when we encounter people who like this we dislike we often get angry and defensive. Doubly so if it's a thing we dislike especially strongly. The thing is it doesn't seem like people here are dealing with those feeling in a healthy way. People here have this warped idea that 3e and 4e don't merely like/engage with RPGs in was they dislike but rather are some monolithic block of generically evil subhumans who are gleefully ruining the hobby forever. They invent elaborate conspiracy theories about how say the term "Magic Tea Party" is a [strike]communist[/strike]munchkin plot to [STRIKE]sap and impureify our precious bodily fluids[/STRIKE] get rid of GM rulings. Or that the 3e designers were secretly emulating MTG by including elaborate system mastery puzzles. To be honest it's all kind of off putting.

Again all I am seeing is more posting about things you don't like.

Quote from: gamerGoyf;689403We all have things we like and things we dislike and when we encounter people who like this we dislike we often get angry and defensive. Doubly so if it's a thing we dislike especially strongly. The thing is it doesn't seem like people here are dealing with those feeling in a healthy way. People here have this warped idea that 3e and 4e don't merely like/engage with RPGs in was they dislike but rather are some monolithic block of generically evil subhumans who are gleefully ruining the hobby forever. They invent elaborate conspiracy theories about how say the term "Magic Tea Party" is a [strike]communist[/strike]munchkin plot to [STRIKE]sap and impureify our precious bodily fluids[/STRIKE] get rid of GM rulings. Or that the 3e designers were secretly emulating MTG by including elaborate system mastery puzzles. To be honest it's all kind of off putting.

I think you'll find the old-school posters on this board are comfortable with more scope for rules in their games than the char op crunch-masters are with DM rulings. So which stance is more dogmatic?

And that's why people here get their backs up about the denners and system-wanks; their approach to RPGs regard GM judgement as an annoyance or inconvenience. They're chasing the dream of a system that runs entirely by rules, so that someone sitting at home by himself studying those rules can master the game and WIN the goddamn thing without some capricious GM interfering.

Is that paragraph above a polemic exaggeration? Sure. But those ideas are really out there in the RPG world. They shape the expectations of new gamers, and they have a big influence on how games are designed and marketed.

There are people here who actually play 3E and 4E, and people who like crunchy systems. But you're not going to talk any people here out of the belief that the capacity for improvisation in a game with a GM who has authority to exercise his judgement is the essential element that makes RPGs what they are.

Quote from: TristramEvans;689409Will you ever stop beating your wife?

Don't be coy you made an absurd statement, I merely extended it to it's logical conclusion. I'm sure you don't actually believe that every rule ever is harmful to roleplaying.

Quote from: BedrockBrendan;689411Again all I am seeing is more posting about things you don't like.

Well I'll cop to not liking when people make hateful statements about broad groups of people I may or may not be a part of.

Edit

Quote from: Haffrung;689414I think you'll find the old-school posters on this board are comfortable with more scope for rules in their games than the char op crunch-masters are with DM rulings. So which stance is more dogmatic?

I'm sure the "char op crunch masters" are perfectly comfortable with the many DM rulings their games require as well.

Quote from: Haffrung;689414And that's why people here get their backs up about the denners and system-wanks; their approach to RPGs regard GM judgement as an annoyance or inconvenience. They're chasing the dream of a system that runs entirely by rules, so that someone sitting at home by himself studying those rules can master the game and WIN the goddamn thing without some capricious GM interfering.

Is that paragraph above a polemic exaggeration? Sure. But those ideas are really out there in the RPG world. They shape the expectations of new gamers, and they have a big influence on how games are designed and marketed.

Yes it's a polemic exaggeration, there are people who want more crunch in their RPGs than you would personally like, and that's really all there is to say on the matter.

Quote from: Haffrung;689414There are people here who actually play 3E and 4E, and people who like crunchy systems. But you're not going to talk any people here out of the belief that the capacity for improvisation in a game with a GM who has authority to exercise his judgement is the essential element that makes RPGs what they are.

No, no, one is arguing for that. People are arguing about what is the ideal balance between "crunch" and "improvisation".

Quote from: gamerGoyf;689403Let's for a minute have a serious discussion about feels.

We all have things we like and things we dislike and when we encounter people who like this we dislike we often get angry and defensive. Doubly so if it's a thing we dislike especially strongly. The thing is it doesn't seem like people here are dealing with those feeling in a healthy way.

I will engage you in this discussion of yours as soon as you show some credentials telling me and everyone else here on this forum that you are certified professional in psychological counselling.

Otherwise, you are just another nitwit who has stepped out of a Psych 101 classroom convinced he now is the next Carl Jung.

Quote from: jeff37923;689421I will engage you in this discussion of yours as soon as you show some credentials telling me and everyone else here on this forum that you are certified professional in psychological counselling.

Otherwise, you are just another nitwit who has stepped out of a Psych 101 classroom convinced he now is the next Carl Jung.

So you feel the fact many people on this site are convinced that there is a vast conspiracy among other RPG fans to ruin the game for them personally is completely unproblematic.

Quote from: gamerGoyf;689424So you feel the fact many people on this site are convinced that there is a vast conspiracy among other RPG fans to ruin the game for them personally is completely unproblematic.

When compared to your approach about discussing our feelings? When compared to your complaint that people on this board are not dealing with their feelings in an appropriate manner?

You come on this forum and act like an irritating pimple and then wonder why people want to pop you?