Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 3672003" data-attributes="member: 18280">Is that mod talking, or person who disagrees talking?  Because I assume the second, and will respond accordingly.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" />I disagree.Not only is it a strawman, but rather than simply dismiss your argument, as you claim, I pointed out why it was a strawman through reductio ad absurdum.  Also, as I am sure you know, because an argument is often used, that is no evidence that it is a good argument, or that it should not be dismissed out of hand, especially once it has been often answered.I would be curious to know how you draw the conclusion that I "assume that we're all nasty little liars out to win a point" though.  How does my statement that your point doesn't convince turn you into a "nasty little liar"?  This is the "wrongbadfun" gambit using different terminology, and again isn't a valid argument.  Because I disagree with your conclusions, it doesn't mean that I think you are lying about the experiences from which you draw those conclusions.  Merely that I think that the conclusions you have drawn from those experiences are, in this case, wrong.  I have certainly drawn enough wrong conclusions from actual events to be able to state, without feat of begin wrong, that such a thing is possible.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Nor is the "my experience is that we played rpgs more like wargames" a valid argument about either the possibility of what you could do, or even (to be fair) the comparitive possibilities of your earlier rpg experiences vs. computer games.....unless, as said before, you suggest that a group of people sitting down with D&D rulebooks and a published module that like to run the combat rules strictly as written are unable to adapt to unforseen ideas and plans during the course of the game.   Or, conversely, that group sits down and allows no option for action outside the RAW, allows no non-preordained dialogue to affect the action, and allows no solution to problems that was not already written into the module....in other words, if the DM runs the game as a computer game.If that is what you are saying, please say so clearly.Finally, the reason I have repeatedly brought up Madden Football vs. real football, and Monopoly as a role-playing game is because I believe that the best chance to successfully convey my view (if not convince the reader) is to cause that reader to first determine what limitations to the term "RPG" exist for him, and then compare and contrast them to the topic at hand.  Where a given compare & contrast contains a statement that seems to me equivilent to "In the case of Madden Football, it is not football because X =/= Y, but in the case of computer games, they are RPGs although X =/= Y" I am bound to point out the inconsistency in that position.YMMV, of course.RC</blockquote>

Verification