Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9675370" data-attributes="member: 6790260">No.Because, again, you keep defaulting to obviously ridiculous things, rather than having even the slightest consideration for the possibility of something that isn't what you prepared for, but isn't radically against it either. It is the obviously-ridiculous nature of the examples that is the problem. You are pretending that the ONLY possible way someone could disagree with you is for them to be obviously ridiculous--meaning, any disagreement I might raise, any at all, is going to be written off as though it were asking to play Stormtroopers or Japanese traders.For example: What if I want to play a black man?Black men were, of course, quite uncommon in northern Europe during the &quot;Viking age&quot; in our real-world history--but, if you are being truly scrupulous about &quot;historical Viking&quot; stuff, some &quot;blackamoor&quot; men did in fact come to northern Europe. We have few to no relevant records from the &quot;Viking age&quot; as typically defined (roughly 800-1050) to give us hard numbers, unfortunately. But we do know that there were actual populations of African peoples in England by the 1300s, and that Chrétien de Troyes, writing the Arthurian romances (and adding such important characters as Launcelot, the Original Character Do Not Steal), included tales of black or mixed-race characters only one century after the &quot;Viking age&quot; (ca. 1160), meaning he expected the French courtiers of his day to be quite comfortable with the presence of non-white characters.I'm not saying this is actually something I would do (TBH I probably wouldn't simply because I prefer more fantastical and/or science-fictional premises for games), but it is a much more reasonable thing. Rather than portraying all possible dissent as being equivalent to &quot;a bohemian catgirl ninja in [a] historical Viking game&quot;, which is precisely what your responses did. There are two and only two options: perfect obedience, OR trying to play &quot;a bohemian catgirl ninja in [a] historical Viking game&quot;.But remember folks, I'm the one who ascribes extreme positions to others. No traditional-GM-role advocate would ever do that to anyone.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9675370, member: 6790260"] No. Because, again, you keep defaulting to [B]obviously ridiculous things[/B], rather than having even the [I]slightest[/I] consideration for the possibility of something that isn't what you prepared for, but isn't radically against it either. It is the obviously-ridiculous nature of the examples that is the problem. You are pretending that the ONLY possible way someone could disagree with you is for them to be obviously ridiculous--meaning, any disagreement I might raise, any at all, is going to be written off [B]as though it were[/B] asking to play Stormtroopers or Japanese traders. For example: What if I want to play a black man? Black men were, of course, quite uncommon in northern Europe during the "Viking age" in our real-world history--but, if you are being truly scrupulous about "historical Viking" stuff, [I]some "blackamoor" men did in fact come to northern Europe[/I]. We have few to no relevant records from the "Viking age" as typically defined (roughly 800-1050) to give us hard numbers, unfortunately. But we do know that there were actual populations of African peoples in England by the 1300s, and that Chrétien de Troyes, writing the Arthurian romances (and adding such important characters as Launcelot, [I]the[/I] Original Character Do Not Steal), included tales of black or mixed-race characters only one century after the "Viking age" (ca. 1160), meaning he expected the French courtiers of his day to be quite comfortable with the presence of non-white characters. I'm not saying this is actually something I would do (TBH I probably wouldn't simply because I prefer more fantastical and/or science-fictional premises for games), but it is a much more reasonable thing. Rather than portraying all possible dissent as being [I]equivalent to[/I] "a bohemian catgirl ninja in [a] historical Viking game", which is precisely what your responses did. There are two and only two options: perfect obedience, OR trying to play "a bohemian catgirl ninja in [a] historical Viking game". But remember folks, I'm the one who ascribes extreme positions to others. No traditional-GM-role advocate would [I]ever[/I] do that to [I]anyone[/I]. [/QUOTE]

Verification