What happened to the story?

Berandor said:
I am tackling your argument
No, you are not. You're taking a part of it and twisting it for your own purposes.

My argument is: While I can create story myself, I still want good books to help me. (It's not even an argument. Just a comment indicating that I'd welcome such books but that they're not a very high priority for me.)

The argument you are attacking is: I can create story myself so I don't need books.

See the difference?


I take exception to you putting words in my mouth by taking part of what I said out of context, misinterpreting it in a way that's helpful for your agenda, attacking the resulting strawman, and continuing to call it my argument even after being called upon it. Twice.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Berandor said:
To clarify: I'm talking about the "I can do story myself" part of your post, not the "I'd like to see more story books" part.
Yeah. You don't really read my post, take part of it out of context, and ascribe to that part an entirely different reasoning so you can pre-emptively rant against something else. While still addressing me, and still calling it my argument after being called on it.

That's... still neither polite nor honest.
 

MonsterMash said:
Phil,

that link isn't working for me.

Damn! We had someone update the Ronin Arts site recently and he seems to have deleted all of the downloads. Damn!

EDIT: Whew. The guy just moved everything under a temp directory -- I've moved the downloads back where they belong and everything should work now.
 

Darkness said:
No, you are not. You're taking a part of it and twisting it for your own purposes.

My argument is: While I can create story myself, I still want good books to help me.)
Well, I'm sorry, but I just now understood what you were getting at. By differentiating between "argument" and "position", I wanted to take what you wrote, seperate it from your, well, argument as a whole, so to speak, and use it out of context. As you can probably see in this post as well, I am having a little problem how to phrase that.

I did *not* want to argue your point as a whole. You were just the first to write "I can do story myself", that's why I took your post and referred to it. If you hadn't written it, I would have said "Before someone comes in claiming he can make the rules himself,..."

Yes, I used what you wrote to write about a less differentiated point. That's because in this thread, you were the one to bring it up (tangentially), and I could neither point to someone else nor pretend nobody had brought it up.
(It's not even an argument. Just a comment indicating that I'd welcome such books but that they're not a very high priority for me.)
Which is fine.
 

Darkness said:
Yeah. You don't really read my post, take part of it out of context, and ascribe to that part an entirely different reasoning so you can pre-emptively rant against something else. While still addressing me, and still calling it my argument after being called on it.

That's... still neither polite nor honest.
As I wrote above, it was a misunderstanding on my part of what you were railing against. I didn't want to seem impolite that way. Though I read your post just fine.

Look, I don't want to argue with you. I'll edit my posts beforehand.
 

What happened to the story...

Gamers grew older and didn't need their hands held anymore and a shrinking market for adventurers, where most stories grew out of, diminished?

I guess I don't see the problem. We do have a storyhour after all.

Slavelords of Cydonia is dripping with story elements. Beyond Countless Doorways, Planar Factions, City State of the Invincible Overlord... maybe too recent... how about Hollowfaust, Mitrhil, Tome and Blood (I once used the necromancer's guild there to good effect), or any of the dozens of adventuers there.

The story is not dead. It's just not in general. Well, outside of maybe Psion's River of Worlds thread...
 


unfortunately, the mechanics of the game have gotten in the way of story.

so describing the cool move of a swordmaster slicing his way thru one opponent and into the next has been shortened to cleave. it is just boring to read now and the image it paints doesn't match the original concept.

half the time new DMs are left trying to describe it and just fall flat. so they just restate the obvious rule mechanic.

DM: You cleave.
Player: zzzzzzzZZZZzzz
 


Remove ads

Top