MtG, D&D and Me TITLE NAME EDIT-The thread where Joe apparently offends everyone

[Primal]

I didn't write this to express a any great truths about anything. There is not a point I am trying to establish as right, just and true. Just writing out my point of view on something which, as with all points of view, are completely subjective and are usually based on nothing but the experiences and perceptions of the person possessing that point of view. I figured I'd throw it out there, and people might be interested, might not, or it might start an interesting discussion, or it might not. It's not meant to insult or antagonize, nor do I hold any ill will towards anyone. I mostly wrote it to help me organize and express a lot of thoughts I had on a few things the last couple weeks. Hence it's rambling nature, loosely tied together.

Everything evolves and changes. I'm just trying to get out my thoughts on where I come from, and point out why I like certain things and dislike others, and express my ideas as to why others may like certain things and dislike what I like.

Wow, Joe, that brought back a lot of memories... I had pretty much a similar childhood, and we seem to emphasize same things in my group (character immersion, history, depth of the setting and NPCs etc.). You expressed all that very well, and I must say that I really connect with your writing and viewpoints; the only thing I disagree with is some points about 3E (specifically how it "codified" a lot of stuff we had houseruled anyway -- we thought *most* rules were an improvement over AD&D, but then again we mostly used 3.0 stuff only).

I thought your post was very insightful and filled with nostalgia (in a good way). Maybe it's because our lives and experiences (based on what you wrote) seem very similar, and we belong to the same age group? Anyway, I enjoyed reading it!

 

[Keefe the Thief]

May I suggest playing chess to your players? Some people find it restrictive not to say "offensive" that the designation of pieces carry narrative implications, but you can toss these aside quite easily.
.

Of of course! Because we like the space we get in D&D to reflavour powers and fill them with descriptions and our own interpretation... playing chess is ideal... not.

 

[mlund]

The only thing that really caught my attention in this threat was the idea that young people have suddenly abandoned non-fiction books in a disturbing fashion.

Frankly, I think the traditional non-fiction book isn't all it is cracked up to be. Looking at the terrible quality of screening that goes into academic text books and some peer-reviewed scientific journals I don't think having a 500-page hard-cover on a shelf somewhere is any assurance of quality research or the impartial delivery of facts. Most non-fiction content is still subject to "spin" by the author. Without a narrative and some prejudicial conclusions large works on non-fiction fail to compel readers. They wind up as reference texts.

Meanwhile the sorts of narrative non-fiction that make sales for popular consumption represent too much investment by the reader. It prejudices the reader to accept the positions asserted by the author because of the feelings of foolishness that would accompany realizing you just wasted $40 and 600 pages of reading on something akin to what sticks to the bottom of a can of cat litter. The idea of spending that time and money to become less informed is appalling, is it not?

The same thing plays out with so many terribly executed courses in history and social sciences at colleges and universities as well. The level of investment and social programming encourages dogmatism rather than critical thought and dissent.

Having more compact delivery of details (sans narrative, padded page counts, and expensive prices) cuts down on the level of investment without cutting into the body of factual knowledge. With less resources devoted to a single source or opinion that consumer has more resources available to "get a second opinion" on the topic at hand.

All that said, the same sort of single-channel "learning" with poor quality control can occur when people just try to grab everything in sound-bites off of a place like Wikipedia.org too.

- Marty Lund

 

[Remathilis]

They also gave way to New Kids On The Block, Spice Girls, and the Pussycat Dolls.

You could say that an experienced gamer criticising the new D&D is like a crusty old rocker gurning at Tool for not being Led Zeppelin, but could also say that it's like an experienced muso panning manufactured pop bands for churning out shallow rubbish with short-term appeal.

AD&D gave us D&D 3e and 4e, but it also spawned Palladium, MERPS and F.A.T.A.L.

Derivative work always pales in comparison to the original.

 

[Lars Porsenna]

Yes they exist. Online. How many can you find in "hobby" stores next to RPGs, CCGs, and board/card games? No, if you find those minis in a store, it is more likely a cross-over train/model shop these days. That was what I was talking about.

Flames of War can be found in many hobby and gaming shops. In fact, 2 out of 3 gaming shops in my area carry FoW figures. There was a shop that closed up (not due to carrying historicals, but due to gross mismanagement) that carried Foundry and Old Glory.

The reason most gaming stores do not carry historicals is worthy of its own thread.

Damon.

 

[Mournblade94]

And please: if you want to use academic literature to support your argument, CITE. Otherwise, don´t mention.

I had no argument. I merely said that "kids these days" learn differently than they did "back then". If you don't believe me do your own verification.

In this case there is no need to cite because it literally IS all over the psychological and educational literature.

I cite when I am writing papers, not when I am posting. No one cares enough on posts.

 

[Mournblade94]

Thanks, Joe. Like I said last time, it's really enjoyable to read about you. Not least because, over and above the connect, when you develop these narratives you'rs are extremely well written. I mean - damn, WotC actually pays Shelly Mazzanoble to create such fictions for part of their customer base (I let you guess which part that is - it's certainly not women, because they find her implied stereotyping of women offensive, more often than not). And Shelly's prose sucks, never mind that she's got nothing to TELL. Whereas you do.

Geez, All I know is I read two of Mezzanobles stories and they are much more fit for People magazine than a game magazine. Her articles contributed nothing to Dragon except maybe to get it on the Oprah reading list. I think they messed up the target audience a bit with that one.

DOn't know if she's still in dragon.

 

[Twowolves]

Exactly.

I'm not saying my opinions are right. Just that they're my opinions. Just like rectums, everyone's got one. I accept mine in all its irrationality and crotchity-ness.

You've got an irrational and crotchity rectum??? Oh man, I'm so sorry!


(Then again, mine is in my crotch-al area, so I guess it's not that uncommon. Sucks about the irrational bit though. Maybe there is an ointment for that.)

 

[Ariosto]

On historical games: If I were still living in Portland, Oregon, then I could go to the place formerly called Military Corner (which apparently is still in business under another name). And Powell's Books *sigh* ... but I digress!

Locally, though, I would have to travel to another city and its Hobbytown USA to find Flames of War and some 1/72 plastic figures for other periods. I doubt that I would find much else along that line, whether board games such as Napoleon's Triumph or 15mm figurines.

 

[joethelawyer]

The only thing that really caught my attention in this threat was the idea that young people have suddenly abandoned non-fiction books in a disturbing fashion.

Frankly, I think the traditional non-fiction book isn't all it is cracked up to be. Looking at the terrible quality of screening that goes into academic text books and some peer-reviewed scientific journals I don't think having a 500-page hard-cover on a shelf somewhere is any assurance of quality research or the impartial delivery of facts. Most non-fiction content is still subject to "spin" by the author. Without a narrative and some prejudicial conclusions large works on non-fiction fail to compel readers. They wind up as reference texts.

Meanwhile the sorts of narrative non-fiction that make sales for popular consumption represent too much investment by the reader. It prejudices the reader to accept the positions asserted by the author because of the feelings of foolishness that would accompany realizing you just wasted $40 and 600 pages of reading on something akin to what sticks to the bottom of a can of cat litter. The idea of spending that time and money to become less informed is appalling, is it not?

The same thing plays out with so many terribly executed courses in history and social sciences at colleges and universities as well. The level of investment and social programming encourages dogmatism rather than critical thought and dissent.

Having more compact delivery of details (sans narrative, padded page counts, and expensive prices) cuts down on the level of investment without cutting into the body of factual knowledge. With less resources devoted to a single source or opinion that consumer has more resources available to "get a second opinion" on the topic at hand.

All that said, the same sort of single-channel "learning" with poor quality control can occur when people just try to grab everything in sound-bites off of a place like Wikipedia.org too.

- Marty Lund

It is disturbing. I just read an article related to this today. A professor wrote something called The commencement speech you'll never hear. In it he says:


[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Well, I believe that the humanities have failed you also, especially in regards to ethics and morality. More specifically, those of us who teach English have ignored your urgent needs to write better. I have taught long enough (fifty years) to observe a steady decline in the writing skills of almost all students at virtually every level of the educational system—but especially during the past decade or so of grade inflation and feel-good philosophies promoted by educators to nurture students’ self-esteem.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Remarkably, almost all of you who are graduating today—no matter what your major—will complete your degree with a B+ grade point average or higher. At some institutions, and in some disciplines, rarely is a grade below an A- given to any student who completes a course. And yet surveys indicate that many of you do little or no work outside of the classroom, assuming that you do attend classes.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]Were you truly challenged by your higher education? Did you write papers that asked you to grapple with ideas and not simply borrow from the Internet? Did your professors carefully read your papers and challenge you with their comments?[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]What I am suggesting is that your professors rarely gave you the grades you deserved but, instead, enabled most of you to assume that you are hard-working original thinkers, brilliant students who were deeply immersed in the disciplines they supposedly taught you.[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]
[/SIZE][/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][SIZE=-1]So this is where you find yourself today: with a stunning grade point average from a first-rate institution, an impressive résumé (because of all your carefully chosen extra-curricular activities and internships), heavily in debt, and with few prospects for a high-paying job.[/SIZE][/FONT]

The whole article is over here.
Charles R. Larson: The Commencement Address You'll Never Hear