D&D General Story Now, Skilled Play, and Elephants

[Ovinomancer]

I'm not sure how much I trust your expertise given that you tried to convince us that KoB was best compared to Fiasco rather than an RPG in that conversation.

Sorry, KoB is what, again? And Fiasco is an RPG, so...? I mean, I can't, in any circumstance, imagine I would ever say Fiasco is not an RPG.

EDIT: Do you mean Kids on Bikes? I did say it was more towards Fiasco, in that it has more conch passing kinds of play, but they're both very much RPGs.

But, let's say I'm 100% wrong about Kids on Bikes. How does that, ever, make you more correct about what I think about RPGs or that I think that Story Now games are perfect for everything? This is a very strange argument -- you've essentially listed a bunch of crap takes that are not at all what people actually argued, and now are saying I can't be trusted to my own opinions because you disliked (and have again misrepresented) a different argument about a specific game?

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

Sorry, KoB is what, again? And Fiasco is an RPG, so...? I mean, I can't, in any circumstance, imagine I would ever say Fiasco is not an RPG.

EDIT: Do you mean Kids on Bikes? I did say it was more towards Fiasco, in that it has more conch passing kinds of play, but they're both very much RPGs.

But, let's say I'm 100% wrong about Kids on Bikes. How does that, ever, make you more correct about what I think about RPGs or that I think that Story Now games are perfect for everything? This is a very strange argument -- you've essentially listed a bunch of crap takes that are not at all what people actually argued, and now are saying I can't be trusted to my own opinions because you disliked (and have again misrepresented) a different argument about a specific game?

Dude I didn't actually say a word about you in the first place, the discussion in that thread went way past my last interaction with you, you're picking this one all on your own. I'm not interested in continuing this with you.

 

[Ovinomancer]

Well, I got a notification that The-Magic-Sword had quoted me, but I guess he then blocked me because I can't see it.

 

[Hriston]

Well, I got a notification that The-Magic-Sword had quoted me, but I guess he then blocked me because I can't see it.

Yeah, I guess they did that weird thing where they replied and then blocked so as to get the last word.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

More like I realized after I typed it and posted that my prior experience with them was already stressful enough to warrant it, and this time they popped off completely unsolicited as if I'd personally insulted them so... I just ended it. No need to indulge their desire to pick a fight.

 

[overgeeked]

Yes, the out-of-combat is as important as combat, and needs at least the same rules weight.

I agree and disagree. Out-of-combat is as important as combat, yes. But the mechanical weight of combat should be reduced to that of out-of-combat. OOC should not be ratcheted up in mechanical weight to match combat. That would be atrocious. Combat should be as loose and light as non-combat. Though it would be grand if there was more actual support and advice for non-combat stuff. Though adding more rules is over-hyped.

 

[Aldarc]

I'm not sure how much I trust your expertise given that you tried to convince us that KoB was best compared to Fiasco rather than an RPG in that conversation.

More like I realized after I typed it and posted that my prior experience with them was already stressful enough to warrant it, and this time they popped off completely unsolicited as if I'd personally insulted them so... I just ended it. No need to indulge their desire to pick a fight.

To be fair, your original post does come across as a passive-aggressive ad hominem attack against a group of regular posters. You may not be dragging their names through the mud, but when you allude to them, it does seem that your post does intend on dragging them through the mud. I would also agree with @Ovinomancer that your assessment of the intent of these posters is not entirely accurate or generous.

 

[The-Magic-Sword]

To be fair, your original post does come across as a passive-aggressive ad hominem attack against a group of regular posters. You may not be dragging their names through the mud, but when you allude to them, it does seem that your post does intend on dragging them through the mud. I would also agree with @Ovinomancer that your assessment of the intent of these posters is not entirely accurate or generous.

The multi-page interrogation of my group's Masks play in a predatory hunt for material to be used to invalidate my position rightfully burned away the generosity, and I don't appreciate the attempt at coaching me on my assesment of their misbehavior-- my ability to understand and react to it should not be within your locus of control.

 

[clearstream]

I think the OP is missing a point, trying to connect with survival instinct of player is hardly impossible. A player will never die by a bad choice or a bad roll. Its character will!
At best player can be light up in challenge instinct, instinct for competition but survival is pretty odd.
Fear is also pretty hard to seriously be generated into players, do we really feel fear with a dice in a hand and chips in the other!

This rather mistakes my intent. I am talking about the subliminal concern or worry TTRPGers might have regards the future validity of their pursuit in the face of CRPGs. My OP is (intended to be) silent on any fear players might have in connection with their characters.

 

[clearstream]

Apologies, I definitely wasn’t trying to be mean. Mostly I find it amusing to refer to Forge jargon as waffles, as opposed to “waffle.” I don’t actually have any issue with the jargon itself.

NP it also rather badly mistakes the intent of my OP. I am not propounding any Forge theories. I'm observing the recent high profile of certain concepts here and questioning if there might not be a commonality to them - a driving worry - that might inform 6e design goals?