I think that “misuse of the medium” is going too far. I do think that they are different games with different goals and discussing it in the same breath can be misleading.
^2
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Unpopular opinions go here
- Thread starter Whizbang Dustyboots
- Start date
- Status
^2
Jd Smith1
Hero
Nah. Its just a social custom.
Jd Smith1
Hero
No, it isn't. It is impolite to say 'move like you have a purpose, retail-monkey'.
So we say 'how's it going' without eye contact or any visible interest, they replay 'Fine. How about you?' and life rolls on.
MGibster
Legend
I am about to nerd out here at a level that I can only hope causes Snarf to say, "Damn, son. You really need to tone it down."
As far as I can tell, the idea of Starfleet being anything other than a military organization originated after the original series stopped production. In the original series, Kirk refers to himself as a soldier, there's an episode literally called "Court Martial," there's the rank system and organization you point out, and most importantly it's Starfleet who prosecutes wars on behalf of the Federation. Nobody watching "Errand of Mercy," "Arena," or "Balance of Terror" in the 1960s ever thought Starfleet was anything other than a military organization.
Despite the disappointing box office return of Star Trek the Motion Picture, Paramount gave the greenlight to a sequel but they did not want Gene Roddenberry in charge. They didn't use Roddenberry's script which involved the crew of the Enterprise going back in time to the 1960s to foil a plot by time traveling Klingons. So they made Roddenberry a consultant so they could put him out of the way without pissing off Trekkies. Roddenberry hated the script for Wrath of Kahn beliving it to be too militaristic in tone. There is some speculation that Roddenberry was the one who leaked details of Spock's death to the public out of spite.
It wasn't until The Next Generation that the idea that Starfleet wasn't a military organization was floated. In 1991's 2nd season episode "Peak Performance," the Enterprise is assigned to a training exercise as part of Starfleet's effort to figure out how to handle the new Borg threat. From the very beginning, Picard and Riker consider it a waste of time as the captain says, "Starfleet is not a military organization, its purpose is exploration." Keep in mind that just a few episodes earlier the Enterprise got their rear end handed to them by the Borg losing several crewmembers in the process only surviving because Q interfered.
And ever since then there's been an insistance that Starfleet wasn't really a military. Nevermind the whole Dominon War arc on Deep Space 9. I remember Nichelle Nichols insited Starfleet wasn't a military organization, they were more on par with the U.S. Coast Guard. I guess she didn't know the USCG was one of the braches of the United States Armed Services same as the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines. The remake of Wrath of Khan has a scene where Scotty rhetorically asks Kirk if "they were a military now?" Yes! Yes you are! You've got an admiral that's about to start a war. You're a military.
I don't care if Starfleet's main job is exploration, science, and diplomacy. They're also the organization that defends the Federation and is the one that fights the wars that need to be fought. That makes them a military.
Jd Smith1
Hero
Only if you've never been in the military.
MGibster
Legend
I was listening to the Freakanomics podcast a few weeks back and the guest was a Norwegian whaler. All the humorous banter that the host threw at his guest just bounced off the dude. The host would ask a question in a joking manner and the whaler would just answer it in a clear straightfoward manner.
MGibster
Legend
Next you're going to tell me Lieutenant Commander McHale, Sergeant Snorkel, and Ensign Pulver weren't in the military!
Hey, I saw these! Makes me think of the nuTSR thread…
I suspected as much since the end of your post seemed to be saying the opposite of the beginning, to me, but I thought I'd try........
That's what I got out of this:
Sorry I misunderstood. What were you trying to say, there?
That theres a difference between the interactivity of roleplay and interactivity of a game; this does not mean they cannot occur simultaneously or that its a zero sum between the two.
What it does mean is that they are two different artistic mediums being used simultaneously, and as such they need to be approached from a perspective of multimedia.
If you're not using both mediums to their strengths, the result is going to be lackluster. This means you also have to be conscious of transmedia adaptation when you cross the two. What works in roleplay doesn't always work in games, and vice versa.
Hence, why social mechanics always, always, always fail. You can't gamify talking without breaking the ability of roleplay to leverage it for something interesting.
And going in the other direction, this is what I was getting at by relating the issue of dissatisfaction if Im told to just "pretend" to be a Ranger.
I can roleplay a Ranger all day long. I can't play a Ranger unless the game allows that choice to have a real meaning.
And that specific example, to be clear, is also very interrelated with the specific issue of a Ranger's mechanical identity. I personally solved that conundrum in my own game by inventing an identity wholesale as a stealth and healing oriented AOE Martial with a thematic bent towards the use of Nature as a shield, which taken together will deliver a unique range of playstyles that will, first and foremost, be fun as hell, but also not be something anyone can dismissively say is just a Fighter.
- Status
