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.
NOTICE: Some online security services are reporting that information for a limited number of users from this site is for sale on the "dark web." As of right now, there is no direct evidence of this, but change your password just to be safe.

Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
I actually am playing in a Godbound discord server. It's okay, haven't gotten into combat yet.
I like its default setting more then Exalted(I find Kevins settings write for PC interaction much more then White Wolf), and I in theory like the Words as a power structure. But I have found the combat to not work super well and you need creative PCs and a good GM to manage its worldbuilding elements.

yeah, i don't like THAC0.

I have an irrational attachment to THACO from Baldur’s Gate, Planescape Torment, and Icewind Dale. Also, because its affiliate, AC, was a central part of my first truly codified TTRPG experience, D&D 4e. (Don’t pity me! I can see it in your eyes!)

That said, even I will admit that accuracy tends to be swingy and predicated more on random chance than strategy, skill, and sometimes even build. Which to be fair, randomness can also make outcomes more exciting and less inevitable.

Though I feel it also means that attacks are less meaningful when they land, because if they can land more randomly and build is less of a reliable defense, you have to rely on abstractions like HP more than say injury rolls if you still want combat to happen a lot and the PCs to win a lot. Which can alienate players from the outcome of any one roll or the like.

Exalted and other storytelling system dice pools tend to lessen the effects of chance over build and tactics, in my opinion. That said, I’m still a THACO and AC fan when push comes to shove. It’s an elegant single-roll system. And they’re on top for a reason, arguably.
2
The RPGPundit's Own Forum / Re: Biden's Cascade of Failure!
« Last post by Ghostmaker on Today at 05:22:38 PM »
You can declare 'the Navy vets should run the nuke program'. The problem is who's running the Navy vets?

Bureaucrats. Lawyers. Activists. Shills. People who roll out Chernobyl, Fukushima, and Three Mile Island every time someone raises the prospect of nuclear power. No matter how good the design, no matter how safe, it's never, ever safe enough.

And if something goes wrong, they'll fuckin' lie to you.
3
I actually am playing in a Godbound discord server. It's okay, haven't gotten into combat yet.
I like its default setting more then Exalted(I find Kevins settings write for PC interaction much more then White Wolf), and I in theory like the Words as a power structure. But I have found the combat to not work super well and you need creative PCs and a good GM to manage its worldbuilding elements.

yeah, i don't like THAC0.
4
The RPGPundit's Own Forum / Re: Biden's Cascade of Failure!
« Last post by Pat on Today at 05:16:29 PM »
Everybody's flipping out about the "liberal world order" quote, but that's literally what they've been describing it as since at least the end of WW2. It's not a conspiracy theory, it's not a secret, it's just the set of institutions and policies designed to ensure peace and spread liberal principles of democracy and free trade, including the UN, the World Bank, the IMF, and the GATT now WTO.

There are certainly adverse and even sinister consequences, but there are also positive ones. The core institution is the UN, and by creating a forum where countries can vent their grievances and where they regularly just sit down and talk, it defuses tensions, reduces mistakes, and humanizes the opposition. It generally promotes free trade by providing a set of standards and a means of resolving disputes. This has interlinked world economies, which again reduces conflicts, because hurting your trade partners hurts you. That's been a major plus, because while there's been a lot of smaller and internal wars, there haven't been any of the global conflagrations that marked the first half of the 20th century.

Of course the negative effects are also becoming apparent. By linking the world economies, they've become more vulnerable to failures anywhere, and economic downturns and shortages sweep the world with little impedance. By giving more power to the supernational institutions, there's been a centralization of power in vast unelected entities with murky accountability. With the diminishment of religion in many of the leading states, there's been a tendency to transfer that sentiment to national ideals and ideologies, including the idea of a unified world order, which has sacralized these institutions. Which of course if absurd, because they represent all countries, which leads to inevitable and natural absurdities like putting China and Iran on human rights commissions. Treating the Wesphalian nation-state and thus the existing national borders as sovereign and sacrosanct has led to innumerable ethnic conflicts, because the post-colonial and post-World War borders were drawn as straight lines on a map by people thousands of miles away, ignoring the peoples and geographies, and thus severing or uniting unnaturally. It's also created a global class of elites, educated in the same universities and sharing many of the same ideals, who socialize with each other and move around the world freely, and who have become ever more distant from the people they supposedly represent, and from the unique local needs of distinct areas.

While that concept of classical liberal principles as the *ideal* is true, the fact remains that all of the entities involved are corrupted beyond redemption because they've attracted corruptible people. 

When you have people who sit on interlocking corporate boards who are also tied to NGO and supranational entities where they collude with similar other people, it's a problem.  We should not have allowed a Bill Gates to have any relationship with the UN or Peter Daszak while buying up farmland in the upper Midwest at the same time as Chinese entities are doing the same.  We should not have allowed the Biden crime family to sit on UKR energy board or broker deals with China.

When you have oligarchs influencing foreign sovereign nations, it all turns to shit.
Those aren't classical liberal principles. Classical liberalism fears the state, wants strong constitutional protections, believes in checks and balances, and sees elections as primarily a mechanism for throwing the corrupt out of power, because power always corrupts. It supports local autonomy, small states, secession, sound money, federalism, and heavily armed populaces. It supports the primary of the individual.

Liberal in the sense of the "liberal world order" is more post-FDR American liberalism. This is the Brain Trust twist on liberalism, informed by European ideals of collectivism and socialism, and American progressivism. The idea that history is an inevitable upward arc, and the belief that all problems are fixable by sufficiently educated and intelligent people, with all the pseudo-religious consequentialism that entails. It is strongly in favor of powerful governments, centralized control, endless meddling, massive social programs, fiat currency and fiscal and monetary dictates, and supernational organizations with teeth. It is a utopian vision, with the technocrat replacing Plato's philosopher kings.

Classical liberalism ran into some problems in the post ww2 era. Nuclear weapons changed the world. It was foreseeable that nations could be utterly destroyed quickly within tge dominf few decades. This mandated a much stronger military with nuclear deterrent capacity, which mandated a strong central authority to maintain nuclear security.

Also globalization made a unified government for America necessary as we could not have each state deciding how to deal with foreign governments. Now that foreign nations could pose a more dangerous threat faster than before again, a centralized power was needed more than ever before.

Also globalization and automation changed socioeconomic dynamics heavily. With unemployment caused by both you needed social liberalism to deal with the changing dynamics.

The definition of liberalism has had to evolve in the post ww2 reality.
You got the timing wrong, liberalism changed in the first two decades of the 20th century, not in the 40s. You see early examples in Wilson's League of Nations, and it flowered after the Great Depression.

And none of that "mandates" anything. It was just an excuse for accruing more power to a central state. And the driver wasn't nukes, but the horror of WW2. The US is somewhat insulated, by its late entry, lack of any real invasion of its homeland, and two big oceans. But it hit Europe and the conquered nations hard, and caused both a crisis of confidence and a sense of shame, which drove them to seek safely in international institutions and to delegate the hard choices to the US military complex.

Liberalism, in the classic sense, is long dead. The US Constitution then Lincoln killed it. It only survives in mutated forms in things like modern libertarianism. The progressive statist false-liberalism of the also long dead version Democratic party, of which Bill Maher is a late vestige, combined utopian progressivism as exemplified by Teddy Roosevelt and the later Brain Trust of his distant cousin, with grassroots unionism and populism, and took advantage of every crisis to grow.
5
The RPGPundit's Own Forum / Re: Biden's Cascade of Failure!
« Last post by Shasarak on Today at 05:12:31 PM »
Everything you need to know about the UN can be summed up by the fact that China can sit on the Human Rights Council.

The UN stopped as many wars as the League of Nations did.
6
The RPGPundit's Own Forum / Re: Biden's Cascade of Failure!
« Last post by Battlemaster on Today at 04:48:33 PM »
Everybody's flipping out about the "liberal world order" quote, but that's literally what they've been describing it as since at least the end of WW2. It's not a conspiracy theory, it's not a secret, it's just the set of institutions and policies designed to ensure peace and spread liberal principles of democracy and free trade, including the UN, the World Bank, the IMF, and the GATT now WTO.

There are certainly adverse and even sinister consequences, but there are also positive ones. The core institution is the UN, and by creating a forum where countries can vent their grievances and where they regularly just sit down and talk, it defuses tensions, reduces mistakes, and humanizes the opposition. It generally promotes free trade by providing a set of standards and a means of resolving disputes. This has interlinked world economies, which again reduces conflicts, because hurting your trade partners hurts you. That's been a major plus, because while there's been a lot of smaller and internal wars, there haven't been any of the global conflagrations that marked the first half of the 20th century.

Of course the negative effects are also becoming apparent. By linking the world economies, they've become more vulnerable to failures anywhere, and economic downturns and shortages sweep the world with little impedance. By giving more power to the supernational institutions, there's been a centralization of power in vast unelected entities with murky accountability. With the diminishment of religion in many of the leading states, there's been a tendency to transfer that sentiment to national ideals and ideologies, including the idea of a unified world order, which has sacralized these institutions. Which of course if absurd, because they represent all countries, which leads to inevitable and natural absurdities like putting China and Iran on human rights commissions. Treating the Wesphalian nation-state and thus the existing national borders as sovereign and sacrosanct has led to innumerable ethnic conflicts, because the post-colonial and post-World War borders were drawn as straight lines on a map by people thousands of miles away, ignoring the peoples and geographies, and thus severing or uniting unnaturally. It's also created a global class of elites, educated in the same universities and sharing many of the same ideals, who socialize with each other and move around the world freely, and who have become ever more distant from the people they supposedly represent, and from the unique local needs of distinct areas.

While that concept of classical liberal principles as the *ideal* is true, the fact remains that all of the entities involved are corrupted beyond redemption because they've attracted corruptible people. 

When you have people who sit on interlocking corporate boards who are also tied to NGO and supranational entities where they collude with similar other people, it's a problem.  We should not have allowed a Bill Gates to have any relationship with the UN or Peter Daszak while buying up farmland in the upper Midwest at the same time as Chinese entities are doing the same.  We should not have allowed the Biden crime family to sit on UKR energy board or broker deals with China.

When you have oligarchs influencing foreign sovereign nations, it all turns to shit.
Those aren't classical liberal principles. Classical liberalism fears the state, wants strong constitutional protections, believes in checks and balances, and sees elections as primarily a mechanism for throwing the corrupt out of power, because power always corrupts. It supports local autonomy, small states, secession, sound money, federalism, and heavily armed populaces. It supports the primary of the individual.

Liberal in the sense of the "liberal world order" is more post-FDR American liberalism. This is the Brain Trust twist on liberalism, informed by European ideals of collectivism and socialism, and American progressivism. The idea that history is an inevitable upward arc, and the belief that all problems are fixable by sufficiently educated and intelligent people, with all the pseudo-religious consequentialism that entails. It is strongly in favor of powerful governments, centralized control, endless meddling, massive social programs, fiat currency and fiscal and monetary dictates, and supernational organizations with teeth. It is a utopian vision, with the technocrat replacing Plato's philosopher kings.

Classical liberalism ran into some problems in the post ww2 era. Nuclear weapons changed the world. It was foreseeable that nations could be utterly destroyed quickly within tge dominf few decades. This mandated a much stronger military with nuclear deterrent capacity, which mandated a strong central authority to maintain nuclear security.

Also globalization made a unified government for America necessary as we could not have each state deciding how to deal with foreign governments. Now that foreign nations could pose a more dangerous threat faster than before again, a centralized power was needed more than ever before.

Also globalization and automation changed socioeconomic dynamics heavily. With unemployment caused by both you needed social liberalism to deal with the changing dynamics.

The definition of liberalism has had to evolve in the post ww2 reality.
7
The RPGPundit's Own Forum / Re: Biden's Cascade of Failure!
« Last post by Battlemaster on Today at 04:37:43 PM »
Pat, your above post is one of the best I have yet to see on this site. It addressed a major  issue fairly, comprehensively, accurately and concisely in an unbaised tone and rational manner. Reason is not dead here yet.

It's easy to praise a post when you agree with it.

It helps you to agree with a post when the poster makes a cogent point in a fair and reasonable, non offensive tone.   8)
8
The RPGPundit's Own Forum / Re: Biden's Cascade of Failure!
« Last post by Ratman_tf on Today at 04:34:34 PM »
Pat, your above post is one of the best I have yet to see on this site. It addressed a major  issue fairly, comprehensively, accurately and concisely in an unbaised tone and rational manner. Reason is not dead here yet.

It's easy to praise a post when you agree with it.
9
I actually am playing in a Godbound discord server. It's okay, haven't gotten into combat yet.
I like its default setting more then Exalted(I find Kevins settings write for PC interaction much more then White Wolf), and I in theory like the Words as a power structure. But I have found the combat to not work super well and you need creative PCs and a good GM to manage its worldbuilding elements.
10
heard of that, am reading now

Yeah, Keychain of Creation in my opinion perfectly executes what Exalted wants to be in my opinion. Outside of ending prematurely on a cliffhanger.  :'(

Have you tried playing Godbound? My experiences where mixed.

I actually am playing in a Godbound discord server. It's okay, haven't gotten into combat yet.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10