Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
In defence of Grognardism
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Thomas Shey" data-source="post: 8398003" data-attributes="member: 7026617"><p>I'm not requiring you to prove a negative, but a positive: that people are capable of reliably maintaining neutrality and keeping a good enough grasp on a wide variety real world actions that they can judge them fairly.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>At what point did I say "100% biased"? That'd be the strong claim if I did.</p><p></p><p>But I didn't. I said everyone contains biases, misunderstandings and other things that prevent them from being a truly neutral and accurate arbiter. You could have argued that isn't strictly necessary (as it isn't in the case you're presenting there), but you didn't; you wanted to argue it wasn't true, because the degree of fairness required when you're both being an arbiter and being the person doing part of the opposition, as a typical RPG GM does, is a considerably higher bar.</p><p></p><p>The real issues is that there's a fair number of people who think there are benefits to a more ruling-oriented playstyle that gets lost as that gets diminished. They have a right to that view; there are circumstances that can even support it. But they don't get to take it as a given, and trying to claim there's never or rarely any problems that can come up with that only makes no sense, and people don't get to just assume it as a default premise as is often the case with some old-school approaches.</p><p></p><p>So yeah, be as outraged as you want about this, but I don't think I'm the one making an extreme claim here.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Thomas Shey, post: 8398003, member: 7026617"] I'm not requiring you to prove a negative, but a positive: that people are capable of reliably maintaining neutrality and keeping a good enough grasp on a wide variety real world actions that they can judge them fairly. At what point did I say "100% biased"? That'd be the strong claim if I did. But I didn't. I said everyone contains biases, misunderstandings and other things that prevent them from being a truly neutral and accurate arbiter. You could have argued that isn't strictly necessary (as it isn't in the case you're presenting there), but you didn't; you wanted to argue it wasn't true, because the degree of fairness required when you're both being an arbiter and being the person doing part of the opposition, as a typical RPG GM does, is a considerably higher bar. The real issues is that there's a fair number of people who think there are benefits to a more ruling-oriented playstyle that gets lost as that gets diminished. They have a right to that view; there are circumstances that can even support it. But they don't get to take it as a given, and trying to claim there's never or rarely any problems that can come up with that only makes no sense, and people don't get to just assume it as a default premise as is often the case with some old-school approaches. So yeah, be as outraged as you want about this, but I don't think I'm the one making an extreme claim here. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
In defence of Grognardism
Top