Unpopular opinions go here

[overgeeked]

If you don't recognize the imperial "we" when you hear it, man, I don't know what to tell you.

You’re not royalty, so…

 

[Micah Sweet]

It is artificial, but then, that describes almost any method of character gen, and there's only a limited number of schemes for assigning characteristics.

Rolling sure feel more immersive to me.

 

[pemerton]

Michael Moorcock's "Epic Pooh" essay criticizing Tolkien and C.S. Lewis for their underlying English conservatism was much closer on the mark than I think people are eager to admit due to their fondness of these works. I also think that his "Epic Pooh" essay could easily be applied to a lot of fantasy out there that hews towards the conservative an idyll, such as its sympathetic concerns with "rightful monarchs" rather than questioning whether monarchies are problematic power structures.

It's also a critique of their literary style.

I'm a great admirer of JRRT, but what Moorcock is getting is, in my view, unarguably a feature of the work. I think a similar sort of criticism could be applied to Star Wars.

 

[Maxperson]

Oh man, and don't even get me started on Rumpelstiltskin.

Is he good? Is he bad? Is he neither? Yes, yes he is.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Rolling sure feel more immersive to me.

That's because you're willing to take whatever the dice give you. Since I'm usually going in with some idea what I want to do, all it does is get in the way of that to me.

 

[Thomas Shey]

You’re not royalty, so…

Fine. If you want to be soggy, "we" sure describes a lot of people's attitude toward it, even if its not yours, so "we" is still legitimate.

 

[Micah Sweet]

That's because you're willing to take whatever the dice give you. Since I'm usually going in with some idea what I want to do, all it does is get in the way of that to me.

Yeah, I don't like to go into a game knowing what I want to play. I know a lot of people do though. Have fun!

 

[Emberashh]

Hang on - so by "social mechanics" you don't mean mechanics for resolving imaginary social interactions between imaginary people, but rather mechanics for structuring the conversation between actual people playing a game. So the D&D combat mechanics would be an example. They may have their flaws, but it seems a bit harsh to say that they don't work!

Are you being facetious or do you genuinely believe that is what Im referring to?

Its much easier to just ask questions if you don't know what Im talking about, rather than making snarky comments that don't even tell me if you understood.

 

[Lanefan]

Yeah, I don't like to go into a game knowing what I want to play. I know a lot of people do though. Have fun!

For me, I'll usually have a vague idea of what I want to play but if the dice don't co-operate then so be it; that idea gets shelved for later and I come up with something based on what I rolled.

 

[pemerton]

Are you being facetious or do you genuinely believe that is what Im referring to?

Here is a direct quote of you: "I am referring to trying to make the actual conversation between you, the actual, real life human person and another actual, real life human person, a structured, rule enforced thing".

This is what the combat rules in D&D do - they set up a structure of turns, and thus of who can say what when about what the various characters in the scene are doing, and also who can say what when about whether they are alive or dead, winning or losing, etc.

If you meant something else, then by all means explain!