Quote from: ChristopherKubasik;1029763As a specific point, as I mentioned in this post upthread, The Pund made a statement in his review about how the game works that is utterly contradicted by the actual text in the actual game. Now, the fact that Pund simply makes up statements about games that are flat out wrong is one his hallmarks, so it's not really worth arguing with him about this stuff. But he literally made a statement about how the game plays that is the exact opposite of how the game plays. Anyone who reads the review should be made aware of that. His point is wholly inaccurate.

First, I don't see how a google search about a jeep key that won't turn has anything to do with this thread.

Second, what you posted did not actually contradict what I said. Players are able to edit out parts of the world. Your paragraph didn't actually contradict that; in fact the example provided (a sudden loose brick in a cell) is exactly proof of what I'm talking about.

Quote from: RPGPundit;1030959There's nothing in the book that struck me as if it was tongue-in-cheek. What kind of examples do you have to suggest that?? It seemed like it was written totally straightforward.

Of course, if it was tongue-in-cheek, a mockery of S&S rather than straight S&S, that would just make it WORSE.

It's not tongue-in-cheek as in "mocking the genre". It's tongue-in-cheek as in, "written in a joking tone". Thus, it makes sense you shouldn't take everything the author says literally.
(You know, the contrary of some White Wolf products, which have a self-aggrandizing tone and seem to expect you to follow on the sometimes daft advice inside. I think you can name some of those;)?)

As for examples, you quoted some in your review, you just misconstrued them as serious. The part about calling your players "accountants" is one of them. Do you really need more?

And how many? Because I found a couple of less elaborate "wink, wink" examples, mostly ones that provoked my "no fuck, Sherlock" reaction, just browsing the descriptions of a few Careers. Then I randomly opened on a page, and it was p. 56 where I found this paragraph.
"If you want backpacks full of adventuring gear, a weapon for every occasion, three spare suits of armour and a pack animal to carry it all around, then play another game. If all you want is a breechclout and a sturdy blade, play on!"
If anyone reads the whole page - this is under "starting gear" - I don't know how anyone could miss that this is a playstyle advice presented in a tongue-in-cheek manner, not a "you're unfit for this game you already bought" statement.

Come on, I call people in this thread who've read BoL, show of hands - did anyone miss that the above is a joke:D?

It's a joke, agreed. I think it's pretty clear the author's tone is unserious.

I have heard people say the exact same thing in deadly seriousness. I have heard Forge fans of Narrativism say that with total seriousness. So why would I necessarily assume that in this case he's just joshing, and not showing a pretty standard Forgist contempt for D&D-style games?

Quote from: RPGPundit;1032370I have heard people say the exact same thing in deadly seriousness. I have heard Forge fans of Narrativism say that with total seriousness. So why would I necessarily assume that in this case he's just joshing, and not showing a pretty standard Forgist contempt for D&D-style games?

Because the author also wrote other D&D-derived games, maybe? Because it's wrong to presume while writing a review?

... Plus the author has no evident ties to the Forge nor links to the Indie publishers, maybe?

Quote from: RPGPundit;1032370I have heard people say the exact same thing in deadly seriousness.

Are you sure you understood them right;)?

QuoteI have heard Forge fans of Narrativism say that with total seriousness.

I would ask you the same. But frankly, I don't care whether they were serious:).

QuoteSo why would I necessarily assume that in this case he's just joshing, and not showing a pretty standard Forgist contempt for D&D-style games?

Because it's not a Forge-related game? Because the author was joking in so many parts of the text most people got this part is a joke, too?
Have your pick:D!

Quote from: AsenRG;1030979It's not tongue-in-cheek as in "mocking the genre". It's tongue-in-cheek as in, "written in a joking tone". Thus, it makes sense you shouldn't take everything the author says literally.
(You know, the contrary of some White Wolf products, which have a self-aggrandizing tone and seem to expect you to follow on the sometimes daft advice inside. I think you can name some of those;)?)

As for examples, you quoted some in your review, you just misconstrued them as serious. The part about calling your players "accountants" is one of them. Do you really need more?

And how many? Because I found a couple of less elaborate "wink, wink" examples, mostly ones that provoked my "no fuck, Sherlock" reaction, just browsing the descriptions of a few Careers. Then I randomly opened on a page, and it was p. 56 where I found this paragraph.
"If you want backpacks full of adventuring gear, a weapon for every occasion, three spare suits of armour and a pack animal to carry it all around, then play another game. If all you want is a breechclout and a sturdy blade, play on!"
If anyone reads the whole page - this is under "starting gear" - I don't know how anyone could miss that this is a playstyle advice presented in a tongue-in-cheek manner, not a "you're unfit for this game you already bought" statement.

Come on, I call people in this thread who've read BoL, show of hands - did anyone miss that the above is a joke:D?

as an accountant that games with accountant we do not think it's lighted hearted to mistakenly refer to players as "accountants". And for the author of the book he better be careful if he ever gets audited and this slight against our profession gets out.

Quote from: AsenRG;1032463Are you sure you understood them right;)?


I would ask you the same. But frankly, I don't care whether they were serious:).


Because it's not a Forge-related game? Because the author was joking in so many parts of the text most people got this part is a joke, too?
Have your pick:D!

Pundit in this thread:

[video=youtube;Q27YiPRiewg]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q27YiPRiewg[/youtube]

Quote from: RPGPundit;1032370I have heard people say the exact same thing in deadly seriousness. I have heard Forge fans of Narrativism say that with total seriousness. So why would I necessarily assume that in this case he's just joshing, and not showing a pretty standard Forgist contempt for D&D-style games?

It does get difficult when parody is not as ridiculous as reality.

I personally found this review really helpful since it was followed with snark from the author himself. I appreciate just how frank everyone is around here.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1032694It does get difficult when parody is not as ridiculous as reality.

True, that:D!

But personally, I'd expect Pundit to admit he did trip in the review. Yes, he's not known for humility, but my impression is that he does admit to being wrong when it happens;).

Quote from: Rhedyn;1032694I personally found this review really helpful since it was followed with snark from the author himself.

Not a "snark". However, this is a snark.

Sorry for the mistake in the link. It was supposed to go back to this post.

As for whether the example from that post -- taken from the BoL Rules -- "edits out parts of the world" as the pundy suggests... What can I say? It doesn't. The example has the player building on details already present, not removing anything.

Further, the quoted text makes it plain that the Hero Point cannot be used to "edit out parts of the world" as a Hero Point can only be used "Where the narrative of a scene has not clearly defined..." Only something that is clearly defined can be "edited out" of a game world. And the rules make it clear that the Hero Point can only be used to alter things that are not yet defined.

That's not editing out or changing what has been already established. It is the player building on what is already there. ("I'm in a cell made of stones, right? I'm going to look around and find one I might be able to pry out of the wall.")

If someone doesn't like that in an RPG THAT's fine. But one should be able to state accurately what the rule says and does, as well as the limits the rule imposes on use.