Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kinematics" data-source="post: 8065282" data-attributes="member: 6932123">I keep writing up and discarding replies, first to [USER=7025508]@Crimson Longinus[/USER], and now to you.  The main problem is that the argument that you're making does not match the argument that I am making. The terms are not being used in the same way, so the arguments are not being made about the same things.First: I am referring to the mechanic that I have called Culture.  I have called it culture because it broke off from the idea of separating portions of the current rules on races, and particularly subraces, and it felt like a reasonable label for the mechanic.  It's not the same as the general idea of culture in the modern world, especially casual usage, even though it has broad similarities. (The third point better elaborates on this.)Second: I have already stated these same points in previous posts, trying to make sure that people understand the very narrow scope that I am using this term in. Since it seems to constantly be misused in false equivalencies, perhaps relabel it Mechanic C. Remove the associations with casual modern use of the term 'culture', and perhaps it will be easier to grasp.Third: My most recent post tried to be explicitly clear that society and community and Culture (or Mechanic C) are different things. Roman senators were generally not raised under an Agrarian Mechanic C, even if they lived in an agrarian society.  A society is made up of multiple communities, and communities are made up of multiple Cultures.  That they share similar descriptors does not mean that they are the same thing.  Perhaps it's best understood in that named cultures (eg: American culture, Silicon Valley culture, etc) are actually a conglomerate of cultures, and that Mechanic C is more about teasing out the specific underlying cultures that a conglomerate culture is composed of.Fourth: I have not personally advocated for attribute bonuses within Mechanic C, as that was not the primary purpose of the proposed mechanic. In fact, it interferes with the discussion of the real issues the mechanic is intended to address (as seen with the current arguments about that).  If you want to discuss the Culture Mechanic/Mechanic C that I proposed (as opposed to other mechanics described as 'culture' that others may have proposed), please leave the attribute aspect out of it.Fifth: The Silicon Valley example: Merely living or working in Silicon Valley (taxi drivers, fast food workers, etc) does not make you part of Silicon Valley's culture.  Once again, people are conflating culture with "where you live" or "where you work".  And even Silicon Valley culture isn't really a match for Mechanic C.  Rather, it would perhaps be a location that contains a notable component of a certain Intelligentsia of Mechanic C (I don't have a more refined descriptor for it offhand).</blockquote>

Verification