Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 9229087" data-attributes="member: 6696971">I didn't tag you on purpose (I used your post as a quote for the prior post and you expressed annoyance at that after I requested not to be engaged with further on the subject).The only way I'm interested is if your response leads with "ok, yes, I see what you're saying that GM's right to veto action declarations based on the GM's pre-prepped story/extrapolation of setting has nothing to do with negotiating the system-correct scaling of stakes for a given conflict in Dogs in the Vineyard...and yes, that is the governing, historical context of "say no" in every ENW conversation ever (the right for a GM to veto action declarations based on the GM's pre-prepped story/extrapolation of setting)...so shoehorning that into this situation doesn't make sense."If you're going to try to dispute the above by eliminating the fundamental, extremely meaningful to the process and experience of play, distinctions between those two concepts, ramming them together into a homogenous blob of "negotiating stakes for a given conflict in DitV is basically the same as a GM action declaration veto in AD&D because the GM's story demands that NPC001 lives until plot point x or because the GM's conception of causality or extrapolations of setting diverge from the player's"...well, feel free to say your piece...but I'm not going to involve myself with even a moment spent on a back-and-forth on that.I suspect that response incenses you because you feel like I'm telling you what to do or whatever.  So be it.  I have to make it as clear as possible that I cannot express how unsalvageable I perceive this conversation to be and I'm not going to waste time on perpetuating it.  I'll write what I wrote above as an attempt to correct the record...but I'm not going to spend time on the kind of (what looks to me to be either absolutely rudderless or morbidly partisan) back-and-forth that this thread represents.I have no one on block, I have never reported a single post/soul on this message board (nor any other).  But you may want to really consider blocking me at this point because you clearly think I'm being "atypically unreasonable" (contrast with your "you're typically reasonable" to me upthread) and/or that its actually me acting on partisan, motivated reasoning in this thread.  I personally don't think you and I have a future that involves constructive communication.EDIT- <To Everyone> The amount of brand new, out-of-nowhere, jargon that has been reflexively accepted (without a sniff of either hand wringing or protest about exclusionary, ivory tower, x/y/z) in this thread while I've been absolutely bitched at incessantly about jargon the last 7 years...think about how that looks.</blockquote>

Verification