Snoweel
First Post
If there is a correllation, which is not something that I believe, then there is only a correllation because it's easier to be that kind of poor GM in a grim and gritty world. The two complement each other in some ways.
However, that in no way means that poor GMing and grim and gritty worlds go hand in hand
That's exactly what it means.
If there's a correlation (and I believe we agree that whether or not there is a correlation is a matter of opinion) then the two by necessity go hand in hand.
and misidentifying the problem as the tone of the game rather than poor DMing remains just as much a problem.
I would argue that attempting to establish the two as unrelated is the real problem here.
Correllation, contrary to what you imply, does not mean causality.
I am in no way implying that the one is the cause of the other, and your stating so appears to be a convenient strawman.
Correllation could exist for any number of reasons that have nothing to do with causality.
Wrong.
If there is a correlation then there is an underlying cause somewhere.
And for the record; I'm still speaking hypothetically. I don't even believe that correllation exists.
Fair enough. Even though I do believe there is an obvious correlation I am also speaking hypothetically.
Incorrect. Or perhaps more accurately - insufficiently proven. Correlation alone does not imply causation.
See above.
I never used the term 'causation'. What I did say, however, is that if there is a correlation then there is a problem.
That is, if there is a correlation between grim-and-dark play and poor GMing then grim-and-dark play is problematic.
Consider - lots, perhaps most, people who have lung cancer have spent a lot of time with butane lighters in their pockets. Definite correlation. But do butane lighters cause cancer? No.
Although I am a professional analyst I still thank you for your parable about correlation. You're like some kind of modern day geek Messiah.
For the record, I smoke and do not have lung cancer. Neither do any of my friends who smoke (as far as I know).
In my anecdotal experience then there is no correlation between smoking and lung cancer is there?
However it appears that close to 100% of us take far too many breaks, according to our non-smoking colleagues.
There is no proof of causality here but it is clear that the correlation means that smoking is clearly problematic.
And interestingly, I may be the only smoker I know who believes that smoking does impact on work performance. In keeping with the parable theme, all the others seem to firmly believe that "their players love playing in their dark-and-gritty campaign".