Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
[rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.
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="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9711744" data-attributes="member: 6790260"><p>I do not understand why the other children would care about the first child presenting their special, personal-to-them toy. (Call the first child Sam for convenience.) If everyone already has their own comparable toy, why are they seeking out this one specific toy for interaction?</p><p></p><p>More importantly, how can this be an analogy for what is going on with GMing a game? That was part of my analysis here--that you were using this as a demonstration of what is going on with GMing, where it is <em>patently not true</em> that every participant has a more-or-less equivalent toy. More or less, you clearly constructed this to be an analogy in order to fold back conclusions from it to the original case. But now you are introducing elements which make a sharp disanalogy; so while I might potentially grant some of these conclusions (I haven't thought about them much), such granting would be not very productive, because they're situations utterly distinct from the situation we were discussing previously.</p><p></p><p>If you invent a situation where Sam isn't in any way special from any other participant, where every person has a comparable toy and thus is genuinely an equal within the space, I don't understand why the children would have any desire (let alone need) to use Sam's toy specifically, nor how they would not automatically be entered into a relationship of complete equals, because friend Alex (to invent another rnadom child's name) also has a toy, which Sam is obliged to completely respect in every fashion and neither can nor will take any action which Alex thinks would harm that toy. Such a reciprocal relationship of equals certainly isn't going to involve absolute power. It's also not going to have <em>any</em> bearing on the "traditional GM" concept.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9711744, member: 6790260"] I do not understand why the other children would care about the first child presenting their special, personal-to-them toy. (Call the first child Sam for convenience.) If everyone already has their own comparable toy, why are they seeking out this one specific toy for interaction? More importantly, how can this be an analogy for what is going on with GMing a game? That was part of my analysis here--that you were using this as a demonstration of what is going on with GMing, where it is [I]patently not true[/I] that every participant has a more-or-less equivalent toy. More or less, you clearly constructed this to be an analogy in order to fold back conclusions from it to the original case. But now you are introducing elements which make a sharp disanalogy; so while I might potentially grant some of these conclusions (I haven't thought about them much), such granting would be not very productive, because they're situations utterly distinct from the situation we were discussing previously. If you invent a situation where Sam isn't in any way special from any other participant, where every person has a comparable toy and thus is genuinely an equal within the space, I don't understand why the children would have any desire (let alone need) to use Sam's toy specifically, nor how they would not automatically be entered into a relationship of complete equals, because friend Alex (to invent another rnadom child's name) also has a toy, which Sam is obliged to completely respect in every fashion and neither can nor will take any action which Alex thinks would harm that toy. Such a reciprocal relationship of equals certainly isn't going to involve absolute power. It's also not going to have [I]any[/I] bearing on the "traditional GM" concept. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
[rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.
Top