Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8375687" data-attributes="member: 6801228">So, somehow, you have encountered war in the game, that in no way ever resemebles or references any part of war in the real world. No one ever dies I suppose? The soldiers all come home perfectly healthy. The invading force never destroys anything of value. People never lose their land. Or do all those things happen? Things which are direct references and connections to the reality of war. I mean, you are basically saying you have somehow figured out how to simulate war without talking about or having any connection to war. Which, I'm sorry, is impossible. You can't do it. Now, if your point is that you have never ran a war that simulated the real war of Vietnam, including the locations and accurate casualities... well I'd say that is obvious, but if you've ever had a group local to an area ambush foreigners or take them out with traps... you've certainly got a connection to the Vietnam war.No, we don't have deep philosophical discussions on every aspect of the game. But we do at least acknowledge that murder is a thing that happens in real life. We don't need to state it, but we know it happens. Heck, we've had PCs and NPCs talk about self-defense. Running a murder mystery, we've had to interview witnesses and talk about guilt and motive. These are connections to real aspects of murder and discussions of good and evil. The things that you are saying you don't have. "Connection" doesn't mean "1 for 1, the exact same thing, people who die in the game die in real life" it means you can draw a line between ideas and concepts in the game to the reality of the world. The vizier killed the king to take over the throne? That happens in real life. Discussing that plot has a connection to what we understand of political assassination in the real world. It informs the discussion. Especially when we realize the princess is still alive, because he wants to marry her to legitimize his claim. Again, that is connected to our understanding of real world politicsThen why are people saying we are taking away their ability to play against archetype? What is the objection then?Even literally using your exact words isn't good enough to show that I am engaging in good faith? I'd ask you what I possibly misunderstood in using your exact words, twice, and showing exactly how my point flows from yours, but you will continue to refuse to talk about it, because I don't agree with you, and therefore I must either be unable to understand you or willfully ignoring you. Can't be that I have a different perspective, that would mean you have to engage in a conversation where you could be wrong.</blockquote>

Verification