D&D 5E D&D Promises to Make the Game More Queer

[FrogReaver]

Sorry, I was a bit behind in the thread...

I am also sorry to see Hemlock go. And I think that even though I strongly believe that [MENTION=56324]tombowings[/MENTION] was wrong, some people were pretty sloppy in how they presented his arguments/position and extrapolated it into something it wasn't.

That's my opinion too but all that matters on this now is what Morrus believes.

 

[Lanliss]

I think it's against the rules now to give a reply to this... at least if one disagrees with it. If one agrees it appears ya'll can high 5 each other all you want.

Really? I read the rule as simply saying not to discard any such posts as "ideology" or "propaganda". Nothing says you can't have a reasonable discussion about different opinions.

 

[Nagol]

Really? I read the rule as simply saying not to discard any such posts as "ideology" or "propaganda". Nothing says you can't have a reasonable discussion about different opinions.

You may want to read the directive again: "You MAY NOT USE the terms "agenda", "ideology", or "propaganda" or "politics" in relation to the inclusion of people slightly different to you in gaming products." It's not that posts cannot be dismissive of other posts; posts cannot impute those ideas on the gaming products or the creators thereof.

 

[Zardnaar]

I generally avoid things like this but may as well put in my 2 cp.


Generally most people do not seem to care that much what 2 consenting adults get up to. I have had gay and lesbian players in my games doesn't really bother me. I don't really want to see it though at least to a certain degree. WotC had their 1st gay character IIRC back in 2002 with Faiths and Pantheons.

Its when it starts getting shoved down peoples throats though is where you get a certain amount of push back on it. For example I liked a TV show called Sense8 and it had a transexual women and a gay guy in it. I quite liked his storyline as he was in the closest in Mexico and was an actor in heart throb type roles. Season 1 was great. Season 2 they went a bit over the top with it though (and was fairly predictable) and I did not like the season that much although perhaps the overall writing/storyline went to crap as well.

Also had a gay player back in the 2E days. He did not tell me he was gay until he left town and said his good byes and was vaguely surprised when I told him we already knew. If they want to tell me thats fine, if they don't that is fine as well although in general I don't want to know the details of someones sex life.

 

[FrogReaver]

Really? I read the rule as simply saying not to discard any such posts as "ideology" or "propaganda". Nothing says you can't have a reasonable discussion about different opinions.

Well actually, IF that reasonable discussion would include "the terms "agenda", "ideology", "politics", or "propaganda" in relation to the inclusion of people slightly different to you in gaming products" then we cannot have that discussion here.

 

[Lanliss]

Well actually, IF that reasonable discussion would include "the terms "agenda", "ideology", "politics", or "propaganda" in relation to the inclusion of people slightly different to you in gaming products" then we cannot have that discussion here.

If you are to the point where you are calling your debate partners position "propaganda", I think you are past the point of reasonable discussion.

 

[Morrus]

D&D Promises to Make the Game More Queer

Its when it starts getting shoved down peoples throats though is where you get a certain amount of push back on it.

Oh, man. The “shoved down my throat” line? *That* line?

 

[Mallus]

Well actually, IF that reasonable discussion would include "the terms "agenda", "ideology", "politics", or "propaganda" in relation to the inclusion of people slightly different to you in gaming products" then we cannot have that discussion here.

Consider the following:

Imagine a story about a Jewish character, written from a Jewish perspective by a Jewish author. For the hell of it, imagine that it is both neurotic and funny, though that's terribly cliched. Now imagine some random goy reads it and makes the following comments:

"It was okay but it was Jew propaganda."

"I don't mind reading about Jews, except for the Jew ideology."

"I felt like it was normalizing Jews."

How do those comments read to you? (note my use of the Oblique Godwin...).

 

[FrogReaver]

If you are to the point where you are calling your debate partners position "propaganda", I think you are past the point of reasonable discussion.

The rule isn't about calling your debate partners position propaganda. Though there is probably a different rule for that....

The new rule is that: "You MAY NOT use the terms "agenda", "ideology", "politics", or "propaganda" in relation to the inclusion of people slightly different to you in gaming products".

For example, if a gay character is included you cannot discuss that you think it was due to an "agenda", "ideology", "politics" or "propaganda".

 

[FrogReaver]

Consider the following:

Imagine a story about a Jewish character, written from a Jewish perspective by a Jewish author. For the hell of it, imagine that it is both neurotic and funny, though that's terribly cliched. Now imagine some random goy reads it and makes the following comments:

"It was okay but it felt like Jew propaganda."

"I don't mind reading about Jews, except when you get a lot of Jew ideology."

"I felt like it was normalizing Jews."

How does those comments read to you? (note my use of the Oblique Godwin...).

Do I actually have liberty to answer the questions or is this a bait and ban?