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.
The message boards have been upgraded. Please log in to your existing account by clicking here. It will ask twice, so that it can properly update your password and login information. If it has trouble recognizing your password, click the 'Forgot your password?' link to reset it with a new password sent to your email address on file.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Ratman_tf

Pages: 1 ... 389 390 [391] 392 393 ... 403
I think the split between Pathfinder and 4th ed was pretty important here. For the first time, a previous edition of D&D was in print and available for sale while the next edition was running. While before some grognard might clutch their old edition and snarl at the new fangled hotness, this was a situation where the masses of players had a purchasing choice for a current game, instead of playing "some old game".

And I suspect this might have been part of the inspiration for the OSR. The grognards in this case didn't have to clutch their old edition it was still a living game. So they went back even further. Researching why they prefered their older editions. An interesting bit of self-examination that was incredibly healthy for the hobby.

I think there will always be a place for the industry. Having a common ruleset has it's advantages, in finding new players and integrating them. Production values are important too. I like a nice bit of art or a well done map. I also think that an imaginative set of rules or a fresh take on an old set of rules can set a GM thinking out of their own box. DCC and SWN are great examples of those. But I think the 4th ed/Pathfinder/OGL/OSR split disrupted the status-quo enough to show that the hobby doesn't need the industry as much as the companies think they do.

If the big companies want to stay relevant, they need to see what the hobbyists are interested in , and that requires a hobbyist mindset, and not a corporate mindset. Not in the trenches imagining up rules for how to slay dragons. I think Next/5th is a stumbling baby step in that direction.

Quote from: TristramEvans;814508
ust goes back to my opinion that the roleplaying hobby doesn't need the roleplaying industry. Even if I didnt create my own games at this point, I could easily game for the rest of my life just on the material produced by independent other gamers, most of which they're perfectly happy to put online for free jut out of love for the hobby. D&D is a gateway drug, sure, but it doesn't match up with actual gamers introducing other people to gaming. The hobby could do just fine without it.

I agree. We get a few big fish like WOTC or GW on the wargaming side, but the only thing stopping me from playing 2nd edition, or Dungeon Crawl Classics is my ability to persuade my group. :D
I think there's an event horizon coming where a tipping point of people re-discover that they don't need to play Dungeons & Dragons(tm) to role-play. The OSR seems to be the tip of that iceberg.

If big companies want to stay relevant in the hobby, they're probably going to have to pay attention to the online presense, find out what people are sharing, copy it and put some polish on the product.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;814436
I wonder if Apple or Google is better. Anyone else know anything about those?

I'm currently working a temp contract at Google. It's a sad revolving door situation where they bring in batches of temps, work them for two years, and then chuck them out. It's not hideous, but it is that kind of yukky atmosphere where I know I'm likely to leave in a few months, so why bother caring past that...

If someone wants to dislike a game, let's say just to pick a random example, Jame's #gamergate card game. That's fine. I dislike a ton of stuff.
But I think this shows the inevitable politicizing, and the pressures towards RightThink. It was a game that didn't portray GG as evil, baby munching monsters and antis as blameless heroes. And that just can't be borne.

This shit has already been said about the SJW issue. One can't have a discussion about the finer points of morality or responsibility, or freedom with someone who wants to reduce everything down to "muh-soggy-knees!".

One Horse Town, I appreciate that you want to keep the topic on gaming, but I don't think we can ignore the 800lb gorillia in the room when it keeps jumping on the table and beating it's chest when these events go down...

Quote from: Nexus;814390
That's not an uncommon reaction for large sociopolitical groups so I can't lay it at totally at Feminism's feet.

Oh, I don't either. Insert buzzwords and catchphrases like "in group preference" and "tribalism" here.
My issue is that criticism of feminism seems to be allowed as long as one accepts that feminism itself is correct on some fundamental level, and they'll drag out the silly dictionary definition of feminism to "prove" it. Like some dogmatic axiom that the idea of feminism is sacrosanct.

Quote from: Nexus;814337
Its funny, I've seen that basic accusation tossed at different schools of feminism at others for years too. Its definitely not a monolithic movement.

Yes and no. Individual feminists might have different ideas about things like intersectionality or prostitution, but have someone, especially a woman decide they don't want to be a feminist, and they close ranks like a phallanx. And then start throwing dictionaries around.

Quote from: TristramEvans;814220
By ignore, I don't mean "allow to get into a position of authority". I ignore Sarah Palin too.

I'm seriously curious what your approach would be in that case. Because it's the kind of thing that's been on my mind a lot since the Atheism Plus kerfuffle.

I don't want to censor people or create echo chambers myself, but this SJW-faux-progressive crowd seem to have a pretty strong track record of getting into positions of authority and remaking social spaces to their liking.

Quote from: TristramEvans;814210

I thought the most important point made in the whole broadcast is the that really the best way to deal with people like Sarkeesian and Wu is to not pay them any attention.

Ignoring them only makes it worse. That's how we got here in the first place. That's how turned into such a shithole. Pay attention, and they claim harassment, ignore them, and they keep expanding.

Quote from: S'mon;814182 - I thought this was pretty interesting.

I liked it. It was good to get Desborough's side of the story. I wonder if Zak and/or Mandy might consider going on the show. They seem to have some interesting things to say about the PC moral brigade.

The RPGPundit's Own Forum / Related to the X-card
« on: February 02, 2015, 03:21:53 PM »
It seems to me that there are more healthy and productive ways to deal with issues at the table than these passive-aggressive X-Card things.
If someone took me aside during or after an adventure and said they were uncomfortable with a topic being used in a scenario, I might consider it. Might. Depends on the topic and the argument.
If someone flipped me an X-Card, I'd probably laugh at them.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;812722

Thank you. This is pretty much what I was looking for Snowman, et al to answer. I was ignorant of this aspect of the Arab slave trade. My understanding was that they had slaves of many "races". Maybe what you quote is common knowledge, but I sure never heard of it, so thank you for educating me.

No prob. I got interested in the Arab slave trade via the Janissaries and the taking of christian slaves by the Ottoman Empire, so the arab slave practices sprung to mind.
I'm no historian either, my knowledge is purely layman google-fu and youtube documentaries and such.

Only if one takes the "other blacks who resemble them" as generalizing all black skinned people, then I guess a person could make the point that dehumanizing large, unrelated groups of people on the basis of their skin color alone  goes back to the Arab slave trade. However, one can very well read that as referring to a particular group of people who happen to be black.

Personally, I find the mechanics of dehumanizing others more interesting than specifically who got dehumanized. In a detached "How do these things happen." way, of course.
I don't find the dehumanization of black people any more or less deplorable than the dehumanizing of people by religon or region. It's all dehumanization in order to polarize people and justify atrocity. And noting that there were strong anti-slavery sentiments in the US, I think casting "white people" as the architechts of racial slavery to be a bit hyperbolistic.

Quote from: ArrozConLeche;812625
I'm no historian, but I've never heard of any tribe or civilization that discriminated and dehumanized others on the basis of their skin color prior to the "white race."

Religion, nationality, and ethnicity sure. Skin color? No.

"...the moral characteristics found in their mentality are close to the instinctive characteristics found naturally in animals."

"As for the Zanj, they are people of black color, flat noses, kinky hair, and little understanding or intelligence"

"We know that the Zanj (blacks) are the least intelligent and the least discerning of mankind, and the least capable of understanding the consequences of their actions."

Quote from: TristramEvans;812653
Wasnt there another broadcast of Honey Badger tonite? Did anyone catch it yet?

I think the next episode about TTRPGs is tomorrow. Yeah, today was about tv/movies, specifically Firefly, Farscape and Guardians of the Galaxy.

Quote from: Ladybird;812522
I once had an argument with a young lady who insisted that, if there were only women in the world, they wouldn't compete in any way for partners.

I can't even snark, that's so divorced from reality.

Quote from: Nexus;812513
That reminds me of a recent discussion on how a Matriarchal society can e gender egalitarian but a Patriarchal society is automatically sexist.

Alison Tieman writes a webcomic called Xenospora where she tinkers around with ideas of a patriarchy and a matriarchy.

In one of the recent podcasts, she mentions that this is a second attempt. Her first attempt was a straight genderswap of men with women in western society. She said the result was an alien race where the males were so vile that they became unwriteable for her.
I'm pretty curious to see her first attempt.

Pages: 1 ... 389 390 [391] 392 393 ... 403