Quote from: Skywalker;758695Which has what to do with me being OSR Taliban as MarleyCat accused? Perhaps, you should reread over the link again. I set it out as simply as possible. I assume (but without any real surprise) that this means that you are backing out of the retraction you promised?

you went into "OSR Taliban" mode when you went from rational criticism to "I know it's going to be horrible and a disaster because WotC (rather than compare 5e basic to other similarly complex games), and showing my buddy my free PDF is too much of a hassle and I don't want to break the law". That is, it wasn't criticism of 5e, but morphed into any reason you could find to complain about it, even if those reasons are monumentally stupid.  There's a reason you got so many responses like you did in that thread.. To say your excuses are weak sauce is the understatement of the year

Quote from: Simlasa;758700Nope, because even taken at face value, what Jeff said was not 'flipping out'... he wasn't castigating entire groups of people on here, telling them to 'fuck off' or 'shut up!'... it was just an (inaccurate) opinion about the Starter set... that could have been talked about rather then just attacking his character.

I shouldn't be shocked that you're completely turning a blind eye and ignoring anything that contradicts you, since you just got done doing it a minute ago.  I will give you this though, you've got the Bill O'Reilly tactic down.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;758704I shouldn't be shocked that you're completely turning a blind eye and ignoring anything that contradicts you, since you just got done doing it a minute ago.

You seem to define 'flipping out' as anyone saying anything you don't agree with, No?
What do you mean by 'flipping out' then?
To me it's when people start getting personal with their insults, rather than sticking to the actual argument... even if some folks are 'wrong'.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;758703you went into "OSR Taliban" mode when you went from rational criticism to "I know it's going to be horrible and a disaster because WotC (rather than compare 5e basic to other similarly complex games), and showing my buddy my free PDF is too much of a hassle and I don't want to break the law".

RPGPundit's definition of OSR Taliban is:

QuoteIt does refer to that extremist wing of the OSR (fortunately now in a diminishing minority, but who a few years back seemed to be main movers of the OSR's ideas and 'gatekeepers' for it) who engage in "old school extremism", who only want to play the original editions or precise clones, who deride any mechanic created after a certain date (the date varies, and they get into contests of "who is more old school" by competing as to what cutoff date they use).  They often claim to seek some kind of UR-D&D by looking at long-lost notes of Gygax or Arneson's.  In short, the guys who think that if you are using anything in RPGs made after 1983, or 81, or 79, or 74 (or sometimes even earlier!) then you are "betraying old school".  These are the people who just wanted the OSR to be a long string of identical "clone" games after another, and reject any innovation whatsoever.

How does my concerns over errata management have anything in common with that definition?

The term OSR Taliban is being applied to those who just disagree with any element of 5e, as was accused by CRKrueger, and to which you promised a retraction if you were shown posts of such. Not only that, you have just done exactly what you claimed isn't happening by accusing me of going into OSR Taliban mode over that point, proving CRKrueger right.

Quote from: Simlasa;758706You seem to define 'flipping out' as anyone saying anything you don't agree with, No?
What do you mean by 'flipping out' then?
To me it's when people start getting personal with their insults, rather than sticking to the actual argument... even if some folks are 'wrong'.

and your position is that Jeff never got insulting?

point proven

Quote from: Sacrosanct;758708and your position is that Jeff never got insulting?

Nope, I never said that. Only that what he said about chargen being the focus of the game was NOT an insult OR flipping out... just wrong (the way he said it).
What I did see was a bunch of people who were enthusiastic about 5e quickly go on attack mode an anyone expressing ANY doubt... or expressing opinions based on some earlier playtest... or just saying 'hmmm... don't like the sounds of that'. Suddenly you, Marleycat and Trenchriron were hurling poo at them...
That's what I saw first and what set me off most... not any potential 'issue' with the, as yet non-existant, rules.
In comparison Jeff, Skywalker and others have seemed fairly calm. I didn't see any of them telling people to 'shut up'.

you said Jeff never "flipped out", defining flipping out as someone who gets personal and insulting.  And now you're shifting the goal posts?

Jesus.  You people wonder why the trolls at SA grognards.txt love this site.  You guys are the gift that just keeps on giving

Quote from: JRT;758669I think you're making a few assumptions.  First of all, this is not just based on my experiences with the Alehouse and elsewhere, it's based on observing the behavior on several different forums over the last 10 years.  

The main thing I notice in regards to the "hate" is one hypocritical rule I see on many of the forums--nobody can make fun of the games the forum is dedicated to, but you are allowed to blast, belittle, etc., the "enemy game".  To me, that seems wrong, especially if you're trying to lead by example--and if you started an exclusive community to do that, why engage it the same behavior.  I have yet to see a forum dedicated to classic gaming where the rules would be applied equally (don't bash anybody's game, keep it civil, etc.)

It could just be a magnification of on-line personas where I think in real life most of the people are probably a lot nicer than they come across.  But still, I don't think it reflects very well on the hobby.

(And to be clear, even people who don't get enjoyment out of the act of tabletop gaming can enjoy it in other ways, and making fun of them for that is, to me, akin of making fun of a homosexual person because he doesn't have sex "the right way".  Unless you are debating the act of gaming, there are other things both people can debate and have common interest, since even the gamers read the books, appreciate the art, etc.)

Really.  You equate someone's choice of RPGs to something like a person's sexuality in regards to something that should receive only positive reinforcement.

See, I don't have even close to that level of shit wrapped up in what game I play, or you play (read, whatever).

If I go on a Seahawks fan forum, I'm not going to find a lot of positive discussion about other football teams.  And it doesn't bother me if a 49ers fan gets butt-hurt about it.  Or the reverse.

RPGs are no different; they're a game.

As for the OP, meh.  It's not as if I've played 1E for 25 years because of lack of options to satisfy the desperate need for innovations I didn't feel.  Although I do find it somewhat amusing that in coming up with his definition, two actually very distinct groups of old-school gamers that don't overlap very much are all jumbled together.  So I'm not sure if he even really understands the general population of which he speaks except on the most superficial level.

But apparently the group most like OP (the OSR tinkerers/rediscoverers)aren't interested in where he wants to lead them - into nouveau-old 5E.  

And the other group (the hide-bound close cloners) never needed what he wants to sell them.  

So really, its kind of brilliant to make a sort of gaming boogeymen out of them for anyone that varies between "I think I've heard of them before" and "those pricks rejected my bona fides".  All you have to do to show you're not one of those folks is buy 5e (or Arrows of Indra, I suppose) and talk about it on OP's forum.  

Voila; screed at 11.

Quote from: Sacrosanct;758712you said Jeff never "flipped out", defining flipping out as someone who gets personal and insulting.

I didn't say he 'never' flipped out... just that the quote you used was not an example of such... wasn't insulting... and neither was the thing I said (both of us were annoyed by the Starter, not 5e itself).
Jeff may well have crossed over into insulting nonsense at some point, I haven't bothered to go back and look... but I don't recall him spewing forth the way some have.
I'm just saying the first big hunks of poo I saw flung, which put me into ARGUE mode, were from the folks who seemed to be boosters for the new game... and that that sort of thing ultimately works against the cause of promoting a game.

It's like Pundit's plan worked and has sucked us all in to his delusional vortex.

Quote from: Skywalker;758695Which has what to do with me being OSR Taliban as MarleyCat accused? Perhaps, you should reread over your link again:



I set it out as simply as possible for you. I assume (but without any real surprise) that this means that you are backing out of the retraction you promised?

What do you think?  Keep on him though, the logical contortions he's gonna use will be fun to see.
:popcorn:

At this point not only is he going to the mattresses over every single perceived criticism of 5e but also every perceived criticism of every 5e supporter's argument.  You could prove him wrong ten times, it doesn't matter, he'll try to weasel his way out of it because that would prove I said something right.

Quote from: Armchair Gamer;758553To be honest, with all the design team's talk about "story" and the inclusion of things like Ideals, Flaws and Bonds (and now the Renown/affiliation mechanic for Organized Play at least), I'm surprised I haven't seen more OSR hostility to 5E as 'storygaming', 'railroading', 'new school disguised as old school', 'swine gaming' and the like. But then, this forum is the closest I dare tread to an OSR stronghold.

I brought this up previously and interestingly no ones picked up on it yet. Yeah, they have been tossing around terms like storytelling and and such.

But like for example their mention of Living Rules or even Basic/Starter. What WOTC means may not be what anyone else thinks it means. So we just end up sitting back and waiting to see what the fuck Mearls and co really meant.

Im waiting for him to describe Keep on the Borderlands as an MMO at this point.

Quote from: Skywalker;758682This is MarleyCat's accusation (in the second post on this thread) that I am part of the OSR Taliban for the comments I made in this thread: http://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?t=29829



I clearly don't fit into RPGPundit's definition of OSR Taliban as detailed here:



So, the only basis for MarleyCat's accusation seems to be that I am disagreeing with 5e.

That's correct your issue isn't the game itself but that WotC's in charge. More importantly it was a jab at Pundit for being Pundit...he keeps the boredom away.

@CK, You are a jewel.

Quote from: Omega;758722I brought this up previously and interestingly no ones picked up on it yet. Yeah, they have been tossing around terms like storytelling and and such.

But like for example their mention of Living Rules or even Basic/Starter. What WOTC means may not be what anyone else thinks it means. So we just end up sitting back and waiting to see what the fuck Mearls and co really meant.

Im waiting for him to describe Keep on the Borderlands as an MMO at this point.

I did but I run and play NWoD so it's a selling point to me IF I feel like using it because it's 1 option among hundreds or thousands for 5e.

Quote from: Simlasa;758706You seem to define 'flipping out' as anyone saying anything you don't agree with, No?
What do you mean by 'flipping out' then?
To me it's when people start getting personal with their insults, rather than sticking to the actual argument... even if some folks are 'wrong'.

No it's when you bring up non-issues about a Free PDF like Skywalker helps me understand your motives or more specifically your actual axe to grind isn't against 5e so I call your shit after explaining 5e is configurable and give simple solid houserules to invalidate the direct attacks against 5e. While also actually keeping up with what people in the know say while playing.. Not theorycrafting or over analyzing out of context tweets.

What really pisses me off is that NONE of you get what WotC is attempting. When did it ever become 5avior to get that they are attempting to to do D&D/AD&D like before but with D&D being 100% compatible with AD&D while AD&D is configurable by modern standards or a  FantasyCraft for all editions much like an organized 2e? And as a bonus D&D is FREE!!!

Quote from: CRKrueger;758628So what you have on the one hand is guys like Jmal trying to divine the old school experience and people rallying around that, then you have the guys hating and talking about stuff they have zero experience with, just echoing purple prose.

You see this over at BGG too with board gamers. People who vocally and often snidely deride certain types of gaming. Because someone told them they should. Not because they actually played the game and didnt like it. That sort of snobbery really irks me to no end.

Hell we've had people here declaring their desdain for the game - who DID NOT EVEN LOOK AT THE PLAYTEST!!!