Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Don't Throw 5e Away Because of Hasbro
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="The Scythian" data-source="post: 9245367" data-attributes="member: 6875986"><p>The shorter version of what you're saying is that business owners should watch out for their employees. Not a single person in this thread has disagreed with that at any point.</p><p></p><p>I asked you what specific, concrete steps licensees could have taken to prepare for the possibility that WotC might attempt to dissolve the OGL. You are unable to provide any. (Edit: Ulorian has since answered this question when asked by someone else, but it was true at the time I composed this post.)</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So, you have no evidence for your repeated claim that WotC, Hasbro, or whoever was somehow saddled with a license that they believed was harming them, and you can't identify how that happened.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So, you can't identify any fact or facts that I would see differently if I wasn't supposedly in pain. You can't explain how considering the motivation you've claimed might change my view of the facts of the case. And you can't say how what I'm advocating (simply stated, that contracts are good and parties should not attempt to renege on them) is going to cause problems.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I never said that you said anything about letting a party in a contract get away with reneging on that contract. I did say, accurately, that you claimed the solution I am advocating would cause problems down the line. My solution is that parties to a contract should not attempt to renege on that contract. I asked you to explain how that would cause problems. Pretty simple question. The fact that you tried to turn it into an attack on me is... well, at this point not surprising, but it is illuminating.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I have not the slightest problem with hyperbole. As I said, clearly and in plain English, I was just surprised that you were engaged in it. The reason I was surprised is that you acted offended when Mamba employed far milder hyperbole in the past, and attempted to insinuate that he was a bad person for doing it.</p><p></p><p>So, okay. Throughout this thread, you've been getting a lot of little digs in at people, often presented in a way calculated to make you look reasonable and the other person look unreasonable. At one point, you claimed you wanted to opt out of your conversation with Mamba, on the grounds that he was too hot under the collar. Later, you tried to insinuate that he was a bad person for daring to use mild hyperbole to highlight a flaw in one of your arguments, which isn't some kind of underhanded thing. In your very next post to him, you accused him of trolling. (That behavior probably goes back further than that, though. That's just when I noticed it.)</p><p></p><p>(<strong>Note:</strong> As I was editing this, you responded to Mamba in exactly the same way I am calling out here! I literally laughed out loud.)</p><p></p><p>When I got involved in the discussion, you initially seemed respectful. But eventually, you started to respond in similar ways to me. I thought maybe it was because I speculated that you were trolling, but I decided to remain respectful and tried to move on. But then your posts started getting kind of weird. For example, you started asserting that I was somehow hurt and that was clouding my vision and making a lot of incorrect assumptions about what was going on in my head.</p><p></p><p>The other night, when I saw your <em><strong>Lord of the Flies</strong></em> post, it gave me pause. I thought about the situation from your point of view. For the most part, the OGL sub-discussion has basically been you versus almost everybody else who has entered it. I thought maybe you were a little overwhelmed and frustrated, so I tried to reset the tone of the discussion. I restated my questions, and presented them in a respectful, no pressure fashion.</p><p></p><p>Your response was positively <em>dripping</em> with condescension, and you doubled down on playing armchair psychologist.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm probably missing some examples, but that should get my point across.</p><p></p><p>So, to address things that I probably shouldn't need to address:</p><p></p><p>When I point out that you're using loaded language, or adopting a lecturing tone, or being condescending, it's not because you've hurt me (you're giving yourself way too much credit there), or my vision is clouded, or because my emotions are getting the best of me, or because I think you're a threat to mankind. It's because you've used loaded language, or adopted a lecturing tone, or you're being condescending.</p><p></p><p>This is part of a larger pattern with you. You accuse me of misunderstanding you because my emotions are in the way or whatever you decide at that moment, but you accuse others of misunderstanding you a <em>lot</em>, too. You've accused Mamba of misunderstanding you. You've accused Morrus of misunderstanding you. I'm pretty sure if I got back through your posts in the thread, I'll find other examples.</p><p></p><p>There's a saying where I'm from: If you run into a bad driver on the way to work, well, you ran into a bad driver. However, if everyone you run into on the way to work is a bad driver, then <em>you</em> are probably the bad driver.</p><p></p><p>This is kind of like that. If you find yourself typing "you're misunderstanding me" over and over, the problem might not be that other people are dummies who can't understand you, that their view is clouded by emotions, or that they simply don't like you. It might be that you're not expressing yourself very well, or that your positions are weak, or that your arguments are unpersuasive, or that you're wrong on the facts, or something else entirely.</p><p></p><p>But, like I said, there's a pattern. It seems like whenever an argument is going against you, it's always the other person's fault. They're misunderstanding you, or they're trying to incite anger, or they're being irrational, or they're engaged in something underhanded by using hyperbole. Every single time you've decided to announce your departure from a conversation in this thread, you've <em>always</em> put it on the other person. They're too heated to continue, or it's <em><strong>Lord of the Flies</strong></em>, or whatever.</p><p></p><p>I don't know if you're engaging in conversations here in good faith or bad faith, and I'm not going to speculate on that. However, I would appreciate it if you would stop with the condescension, the armchair psychology, and the little digs at myself and others. It's a matter of basic respect.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="The Scythian, post: 9245367, member: 6875986"] The shorter version of what you're saying is that business owners should watch out for their employees. Not a single person in this thread has disagreed with that at any point. I asked you what specific, concrete steps licensees could have taken to prepare for the possibility that WotC might attempt to dissolve the OGL. You are unable to provide any. (Edit: Ulorian has since answered this question when asked by someone else, but it was true at the time I composed this post.) So, you have no evidence for your repeated claim that WotC, Hasbro, or whoever was somehow saddled with a license that they believed was harming them, and you can't identify how that happened. So, you can't identify any fact or facts that I would see differently if I wasn't supposedly in pain. You can't explain how considering the motivation you've claimed might change my view of the facts of the case. And you can't say how what I'm advocating (simply stated, that contracts are good and parties should not attempt to renege on them) is going to cause problems. I never said that you said anything about letting a party in a contract get away with reneging on that contract. I did say, accurately, that you claimed the solution I am advocating would cause problems down the line. My solution is that parties to a contract should not attempt to renege on that contract. I asked you to explain how that would cause problems. Pretty simple question. The fact that you tried to turn it into an attack on me is... well, at this point not surprising, but it is illuminating. I have not the slightest problem with hyperbole. As I said, clearly and in plain English, I was just surprised that you were engaged in it. The reason I was surprised is that you acted offended when Mamba employed far milder hyperbole in the past, and attempted to insinuate that he was a bad person for doing it. So, okay. Throughout this thread, you've been getting a lot of little digs in at people, often presented in a way calculated to make you look reasonable and the other person look unreasonable. At one point, you claimed you wanted to opt out of your conversation with Mamba, on the grounds that he was too hot under the collar. Later, you tried to insinuate that he was a bad person for daring to use mild hyperbole to highlight a flaw in one of your arguments, which isn't some kind of underhanded thing. In your very next post to him, you accused him of trolling. (That behavior probably goes back further than that, though. That's just when I noticed it.) ([B]Note:[/B] As I was editing this, you responded to Mamba in exactly the same way I am calling out here! I literally laughed out loud.) When I got involved in the discussion, you initially seemed respectful. But eventually, you started to respond in similar ways to me. I thought maybe it was because I speculated that you were trolling, but I decided to remain respectful and tried to move on. But then your posts started getting kind of weird. For example, you started asserting that I was somehow hurt and that was clouding my vision and making a lot of incorrect assumptions about what was going on in my head. The other night, when I saw your [I][B]Lord of the Flies[/B][/I] post, it gave me pause. I thought about the situation from your point of view. For the most part, the OGL sub-discussion has basically been you versus almost everybody else who has entered it. I thought maybe you were a little overwhelmed and frustrated, so I tried to reset the tone of the discussion. I restated my questions, and presented them in a respectful, no pressure fashion. Your response was positively [I]dripping[/I] with condescension, and you doubled down on playing armchair psychologist. I'm probably missing some examples, but that should get my point across. So, to address things that I probably shouldn't need to address: When I point out that you're using loaded language, or adopting a lecturing tone, or being condescending, it's not because you've hurt me (you're giving yourself way too much credit there), or my vision is clouded, or because my emotions are getting the best of me, or because I think you're a threat to mankind. It's because you've used loaded language, or adopted a lecturing tone, or you're being condescending. This is part of a larger pattern with you. You accuse me of misunderstanding you because my emotions are in the way or whatever you decide at that moment, but you accuse others of misunderstanding you a [I]lot[/I], too. You've accused Mamba of misunderstanding you. You've accused Morrus of misunderstanding you. I'm pretty sure if I got back through your posts in the thread, I'll find other examples. There's a saying where I'm from: If you run into a bad driver on the way to work, well, you ran into a bad driver. However, if everyone you run into on the way to work is a bad driver, then [I]you[/I] are probably the bad driver. This is kind of like that. If you find yourself typing "you're misunderstanding me" over and over, the problem might not be that other people are dummies who can't understand you, that their view is clouded by emotions, or that they simply don't like you. It might be that you're not expressing yourself very well, or that your positions are weak, or that your arguments are unpersuasive, or that you're wrong on the facts, or something else entirely. But, like I said, there's a pattern. It seems like whenever an argument is going against you, it's always the other person's fault. They're misunderstanding you, or they're trying to incite anger, or they're being irrational, or they're engaged in something underhanded by using hyperbole. Every single time you've decided to announce your departure from a conversation in this thread, you've [I]always[/I] put it on the other person. They're too heated to continue, or it's [I][B]Lord of the Flies[/B][/I], or whatever. I don't know if you're engaging in conversations here in good faith or bad faith, and I'm not going to speculate on that. However, I would appreciate it if you would stop with the condescension, the armchair psychology, and the little digs at myself and others. It's a matter of basic respect. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Don't Throw 5e Away Because of Hasbro
Top