« first day (3058 days earlier)      last day (306 days later) » 
00:00 - 18:0018:00 - 00:00

Ben
12:17 AM
@BESW Had my first game of LLKoM last night. The cards really do make everything so much smoother! We had 3 games in 20 minutes, including set up and pack up
 
hey there @nitsua60
 
Ben
And the "target the player with the most cards" works well in terms of player balance. We had one game where 2 of us had 4 cards, the other one had 3. He ended up winning lol
 
@Shalvenay Well, this Sunday isn't going to work. There's going to be a memorial service for my grandmother. She passed some time ago but it took some time to come up in rotation.
 
@Glazius awwww :/ one week delay workable?
 
Ben
@Glazius Sorry to hear about that :(
 
12:35 AM
@Shalvenay So far. We'll see if the family had anything else planned for months but told me the week of.
 
@Ben Awesome! Did you run into any confusion, or bits that seemed tedious or needlessly complex?
 
@Ben It's been multiple years. I'm not sure how this is only happening now.
 
Ben
@BESW A couple of the rules about manoeuvring the extra d6 against targets with more cards than you are something I still need to get used to, but I'd have to say that bringing focus to the roleplay of it... I did play without the Collateral Damage part, and we skimmed over the naming and creature descriptions, which made it a bit "you roll, then I roll, now you roll"
 
Hmm.
What if the cards read, for example, "when you describe using your BITEY TEETH in an attack, add +1d6 to the attack"?
 
Ben
@Glazius Oh well... haha you've caught me out. Haven't dealt with a situation like this before...
@BESW That could be good :D
Even adding a section about "describe your monster", maybe on the naming section after all the "mega- and -zoid parts
 
12:42 AM
@Ben With that in mind--how did the text size/legibility feel?
@Ben Also, how many players?
Sounds like three?
 
Ben
@BESW It was good. The instructions for the turns/rules were perhaps a little small? But it wasn't illegible. Just my reading abilities haha
Yeah, only 3. I printed out 4 copies of everything
 
I'm thinking maybe I should just make the rules/turns a single full-size page.
 
Ben
so we had 24 head, body, and special cards
 
The "rules on cards" idea is a bit forced.
 
Ben
Maybe just a pamphlet?
A5, folds in half. That's plenty of space, can blow the text up a little bit, and allows for a little more elaboration with the "description" part?
Also - I printed out the "playmats" on actual card - works well. But one of the cards had a sticky note attached to it, which I didn't realise. So now I need to glues that down because it has half of the "body" place card printed over the top hahaha
 
12:53 AM
I really want to suggest to this querent that they look into systems designed for one-on-one play, like Cthulhu Confidential.
There's a LOT of problems with transferring a multiplayer system to singleplayer play, because there are buffers and mitigations that get lost in the process. Games like Cthulhu Confidential think about the differences and create systems to avoid those pitfalls.
 
@BESW yeah, some systems simply can't do that :P and even those that can require forethought
 
For example, one of the things that question talks about is how if you die, the game ends, because there's no group continuity for a new PC to join.
In CC when your Investigator takes a lethal effect, like being shot, they get a card that says they're dying, and will die at the end of the current adventure unless they manage to get the lethal effect mitigated before then--which is often difficult even if you're not on a tight time schedule to solve the mystery and save other lives.
And CC is derived from Gumshoe, so it's got that "don't roll dice if the result would kill the story, just say that the thing happens which needs to happen" philosophy.
 
Ben
From what I can see the player is upset by the low rolls. If anything, I reckon just replace the dice. It won't really have an effect on the overall statistics , but a new dice can allow for a new perspective
Works for me. "This one is rolling bad tonight - I'm going to use this one instead"
 
Or switch to a game like Fate where there's more emphasis on character competence over big random swings of the dice.
Sounds to me like the player is envisioning their character as an awesome video hero who succeeds most of the time, while D&Dlikes tend to think a 50/50 hit/miss ratio is desirable.
There are games which match that expectation better.
 
Ben
@BESW Potentially. That's a pretty common misconception.
 
1:06 AM
hey there @Rubiksmoose
 
Ben
There's been a few questions about that before, hasn't there?
 
@Shalvenay howdy!
 
@Rubiksmoose what's up?
 
@Shalvenay not much, just creating my character for the short adventure starting on friday. 5e.
you?
 
@Rubiksmoose trying to find lore on Elven bonding rites in Faerun and failing miserably
 
1:10 AM
@Rubiksmoose Whatcha makin
 
@Shalvenay wish I could help I don't even know what bonding rites are lol
@V2Blast a warforged alchemist
 
@Rubiksmoose wedding, IOW :)
 
I'm decently excited for it actually
 
(the reason I'm after lore on this is because I'm RPing the officiant)
 
@Shalvenay ohhhhh that makes a lot of sense. I should have guessed that lol
 
Ben
1:11 AM
@Rubiksmoose Please tell me they fire alchemy vials out of an arm-mounted cannon
 
The world is Pratchett-esque so we aren't playing in eberron or anything. Should be interesting. I think the flavor fits really nicely
@Ben OMG they do now.
That is such a good idea I'm stealing it so hard.
 
Ben
:D
 
2:04 AM
I once had an NPC artificer who grafted warforged items onto his living body. It didn't always work out well, but it was great for surprising the PCs with unexpected abilities and immunities.
I specifically designed him for a group where some PCs were really min/maxed and others were... not.
So he'd graft items that broke whatever extremely powerful combos they'd hit him with during the previous confrontation, without making him too generally powerful that the other PCs couldn't hit him.
 
Ben
2:18 AM
Nice
 
A good example is, there was a grapple-monster who keyed off touch attacks and could kill most things near the party's level with a single full-round attack, and a monk who was... a monk in 3.5, and not even optimized as a monk.
If I boosted the NPCs' touch AC to reduce the grappler's effectiveness, their regular AC would skyrocket and the monk would never land a hit.
So I grafted a freedom of movement item onto the NPC.
(By using warforged grafts instead of, like, just a ring of freedom of movement, I could add powerful effects without dropping out-of-level-range loot)
 
Grafts can't be looted?
 
Sure they can.
But they can only be used by warforged, or people who have sunk a LOT of characterbuilding resources specifically into using them.
 
I'm pretty sure you have to know a way-out-of-the-way spell to pull that stunt as a PC.
@MikeQ: If I'm in the world, beware of trinkets that you don't know what they do, especially if you got them off my character.
 
2:35 AM
But I get the point though. Make future encounters challenging by nudging the players to change strategies, rather than just making the all-around numbers bigger
 
Nov 12 '15 at 11:47, by BESW
In another game, the party achieved a great victory over the villain's squad of henchmen and acquired a ring that let the henchmen communicate with the villain. They offered the villain a perfect opportunity by having a PC put on the ring... and so the villain read his mind and learned all their plans.
 
lol
 
@MikeQ Over time I'm less and less interested in game systems where progress is shown by numbers getting bigger.
 
And if luck is the primary factor of success, then reducing the probability of success doesn't necessarily make a challenge more difficult
 
MikeQ is wise.
 
2:43 AM
@BESW saaaaaaame
 
@Joshua Shhh don't let anyone know
 
/me drops a tuning fork with a long sigil sequence engraved on it.
 
hey there @Joshua
 
Hey.
@Shalvenay: My friend is going to try to get some video of his DM's reaction to the neutronium bomb. I wonder if I can talk him into posting it to youtube.
 
@Joshua LOL
@Joshua on a more...down-to-terra-firma approach, you wouldn't happen to be familiar with Faerunian elf lore, I take it?
 
2:50 AM
Forgotten realms? I stayed out.
 
ah
 
@Shalvenay Do you think it might be a stackable question? Something about how elf marriage rites work in the forgotten realms?
 
@MikeQ that's what I'm kinda on the fence about, even
 
shrug most of my questions got upvoted.
 
2:53 AM
If there's official material on it, it's answerable to Stack guidelines.
So yeah, Stackable.
 
on one hand, it sounds like a decent question, with at least some criteria for judging answers (detail, how closely it ties to official material)
on the other hand, I have no idea if there is any official lore material that touches on this
 
(If there's not official material, then it's unanswerable but still Stackable, or a good answer would show there's no material and then offer experience-based alternatives.)
Stackability doesn't mean it's answerable.
 
@BESW yes -- someone who's RPed this stuff before would be able to give a good answer on this I reckon
even if there's a lore-shortage
 
Stackability means the answers, if they exist, could be judged and voted on according to Stack guidelines.
Jun 28 '18 at 1:47, by BESW
if stackable(Lego)=0, then stackable(any)=0
 
2:56 AM
Stealth ping? I got bonked at while the window was on screen.
 
@BESW yeah -- detail/experience/sourcing I think are the criteria here
@Joshua reply
 
3:24 AM
@Joshua that's happened to me too, I think it's specifically when someone directly replies to something you said (I think that's what Shalv is also saying)
 
it probably is. half the chat controls don't show up for me.
 
Ben
Or when autocorrect misspells your name like @Minimal
 
3:56 AM
@Ben I swear you did this one on porpoise
 
4:07 AM
No one's gonna bite that one huh? Ok then
XD
 
Ben
@trogdor It has happened. Lol
 
Lol
@Joshua oh that looks like hell on,... Mushroom kingdom
 
If you want hell I have a tuning fork for you.
Anybody want a spellbook of summon scone?
 
Ben
4:24 AM
 
4:41 AM
nom
 
@Ben lol that's from DBZ Abridged right?
I found it far more enjoyable than the show proper
 
Ben
@trogdor Yes haha
Exactly. Cant wait fir the next season
 
Ben
5:11 AM
@V2Blast @MikeQ fixed it lol
 
 
1 hour later…
 
1 hour later…
8:07 AM
[ SmokeDetector | MS ] Blacklisted website in body, potentially bad ns for domain in body, potentially bad keyword in body (101): Furthermore, we all recognise the sky-high charges that by ninijuck on rpg.SE (@doppelgreener)
 
what is this place
is everyone ded here?
 
@RithikKapoor: Welcome!
It's 3 am EST, so I assume most people are asleep.
 
8:35 AM
Morning
in Tavern on the Meta on Meta Stack Exchange Chat, 24 mins ago, by Shadow Wizard
Idea for RPG.SE swag! https://www.amazon.com/dp/B017V0MMIE
 
 
2 hours later…
10:15 AM
Europe here o/ it's about noon but this time I'm actually working so I'm not that active
@RithikKapoor But no, most of us aren't really dead
 
 
2 hours later…
12:31 PM
@Sdjz Thanks for the edit to my alcohol answer! That's convenient :)
 
morning
 
Hiya
 
@MikeQ you changed your avatar, it's going to take me forever to recognize that
 
It was inevitable
 
morning
 
12:48 PM
lessning
 
12:59 PM
:P
(took me a bit)
Also had to reboot my computer because it is poo
 
1:23 PM
@BESW thank you
 
 
2 hours later…
3:06 PM
quiet chat day
 
@Rubiksmoose do you write code for your work?
 
@ColinGross Not as part of my primary duties. I am an engineer. Though I do develop tools sometimes which I code myself (matlab, visual basic, and macros mainly)
 
Gotcha. Was reading an article about astronomers having to learn to code or get left in the dust.
 
Luckily I've been coding since I figured out you could program graphing calculators in middle school lol
@goodguy5 quiet stack day all around I'd say.
 
fair enough
 
3:21 PM
Quiet is good. Means nobody is having issues, right? Just warmly snuggled at home crawling through dungeons without edge cases.
 
@ColinGross I wish I could be warmly snuggled anywhere lol
 
Or it means people aren't answering existing questions.
 
I've been upvoting all the non-dnd questions I see recently.
 
@vicky_molokh I must say I couldn't even begin to answer your most recent one.
I wonder if it is a bit too broad actually, but as game design is not my expertise I'll let other users sort it out.
 
@ColinGross I mean, even our undergraduate linguists are getting taught some intros to coding these days.
 
3:23 PM
@ColinGross I try to do that as well whenever possible.
 
@Anaphory which is funny because a bunch of the algorithms used in genetics back in the day where taken from the field of linguistics.
 
@Rubiksmoose If questions were easy, I wouldn't ask others to help with them.
 
@vicky_molokh well there is a difference between "broad" and "difficult"
 
You want to synthesize what the original transcript of the Canterbury Tales was? That's neat... i'll just yoink that and figure out the sequence of the common ancestor to some genes.
 
Also, I would say 'fundamental' or 'abstract' rather than 'broad' - these are not the same, and also that's a common characteristic of system-agnostic and design-philosophy questions.
 
3:26 PM
I don't think i could even answer the premise of the question which is "what are some game design decisions?"
 
@vicky_molokh Like I said, I was just musing. This is not an area of expertise for me so I'm leaving it alone (not voting on it or anything)
 
@ColinGross Yes, and now genetics stuff is swapping back into linguistics, and no-one really knows whether they are appropriate or not.
 
@vicky_molokh to be fair, a lot of system agnostic question have serious issues IMO including being too broad some of the time.
But that is painting with a broad stroke and certainly does not apply to all of them
 
System-agnostic questions tend to look beyond the specific implementation, and try to examine deeper, abstracter principles. But people aren't all good at abstraction.
 
@Anaphory Dunno.. not sure what the equivalent parameter in linguistics would be for stuff like net charge or gc content.
 
3:30 PM
> This is not an area of expertise for me so I'm leaving it alone (not voting on it or anything)
I may be seeing things, but I do get the impression that many similar questions get closed by people who are not experts on abstractions and fundamentals.
 
@ColinGross Exactly. That's kind of the problem.
No-one does.
 
@vicky_molokh I'm not sure I'd say that people aren't good at abstraction, but I would say that most system-agnostic questions require a lot more experience and expertise than system-specific ones (even though the answers to them tend to just be "here is what I learned from playing D&D")
 
@Rubiksmoose They certainly benefit from a wider experience of systems.
 
@Rubiksmoose Which is better than what I learned from monopoly or risk.
 
@vicky_molokh Well I'm not even sure what an expert in abstractions and fundamentals would even look like, but I can tell you that recognizing when a question needs to be closed or not is a skill and art in and of itself.
@ColinGross hah!
Often the issue is that people try to make something an agnostic question when the system is actually important.
That is the most common problem I have seen with SA questions
 
3:35 PM
@vicky_molokh In their heyday, that wasn't really the case. A more accurate description would be "We're playing a really typical DnD game but hey since we can get an answer that works for ANY system why not :)"
That still occurs from time to time but not really as... egregiously as I recall. Although memories tend to exaggerate things
 
man.... There was an answer I commented on a while (less than 2 weeks) ago that had some flaws and I wanted to give the answerer a chance to revise it, but I can't recall it well enough.....
oh! I can look up my own comments
 
> Often the issue is that people try to make something an agnostic question when the system is actually important.
Perhaps. Personally I've seen the opposite, with GNSist arguments that no, even pure roleplaying questions must be only examined in a rollplaying context.
 
The choice to do that wasn't really driven by some greater understanding, but rather the lack of understanding that other systems aren't just reskinned DnD.
 
@vicky_molokh GNSist?
 
@vicky_molokh A positioning emphasizing system for combat would be more like a table top game rather than an RPG, no? Like warhammer 40k where hits are distributed to different locations and positioning and distance heavily weighs on accuracy and damage.
 
3:38 PM
@Rubiksmoose Gamist-Narrativist-Simulationist worldview.
 
@vicky_molokh The two are intertwined. Many, and I'd argue most, systems have their rules engineered to serve as a foundation for a certain kind of narrative. The "rollplaying", to use the cliché, is an integral instrument of roleplaying in those systems.
 
> A positioning emphasizing system for combat would be more like a table top game rather than an RPG, no?
Maybe, though I'm not sure, because the wargames I've seen were 'moderate' on the scale of positioning importance IME.
 
DnD 4e is relatively positional, and most people would classify it as an RPG
Although I'm not sure if it's as positional as Vicky'd like
 
@kviiri like with flanking?
 
@kviiri That assumes that the party makes roleplaying subordinate to the system, instead of, say, looking for what makes sense in the internal logic of the world and then applying the system to mechanise that.
 
3:40 PM
@vicky_molokh Ah. Well I disagree with that argument. 95% of the questions we get about roleplaying here should have a system involved.
 
@ColinGross Yes, but that's just the tip of the iceberg
 
> Although I'm not sure if it's as positional as Vicky'd like
I don't know. I tried AD&D2e and D20 Modern (which is the 3-3½e era). I largely gave up on D&D very soon for reasons unrelated to the positioning question.
 
@vicky_molokh Why does either have to be subordinate?
 
@kviiri It doesn't have to, but it's a possibility.
 
@kviiri I thought there were a lot of conditions that could apply, but not many dealing with the relative location and facing of combatants. Also, don't attacks of OP and the 5' step serve as pressures to limit movement in combat?
 
3:42 PM
@vicky_molokh Side note: if you hover over a chat message and click the arrow to the far right, you reply to that message. You can also hover and click the dropdown arrow to the left and click "reply to this message". That way you don't have to quote everything back :)
 
@ColinGross Not with facing (4e doesn't have that) but with location, many
 
@vicky_molokh Was it because you stepped on a d4. I could imagine that as a reason.
@kviiri So flanking. What else with relative location?
 
@vicky_molokh Either way, the system is instrumental in understanding how role-playing is set up and the expectations and mechanics surrounding it (if any)
 
@ColinGross Oh where do I start. I don't like level systems, I don't like class systems, I didn't like the skill implementation in 2e, I don't like 'Vancian' magic . . .
Err, the arrows, they do nothing!
 
@vicky_molokh Want to play Ars Magica?
@vicky_molokh You'll shoot your eye out, kid!
 
3:44 PM
Haven't and probably not really, but played the MtA twice.
 
@vicky_molokh they do! if you hover over your message it shows what message you are replying to.
 
@vicky_molokh The arrow on your message worked for me.
 
It doesn't quote the message so it requires an extra click for finding the context.
 
@vicky_molokh Ah, I see your point, yeah, that's a frustration ...
 
@vicky_molokh You just hover over to see what is being replied to. No quoting or clicking necessary.
 
3:46 PM
@ColinGross Many, many class powers. Eg. Rangers have a bonus when they're the closest (or tied) combatant on their side against the target. Warlords have powers that grant actions to allies, or eg. allow every ally adjacent to a certain enemy to attack them
Defender classes have powers gimping nearby enemies, AoE powers are more plentiful than in other editions
Stuff like that
 
@vicky_molokh Just a thought on your question-this site attracts a lot of players, but not as many designers. Your question looks to me like an interesting design question, but I think the number of people who can provide an answer is pretty small so you may want to be patient with getting an answer. It may take a few days before someone with the right credentials happens upon it, and wants to answer.
 
@kviiri Okay. That still falls into the run up to something and hit it category of @vicky_molokh's question. Not a lot of positioning beyond either be next to the enemy or shoot at them.
 
> Either way, the system is instrumental in understanding how role-playing is set up and the expectations and mechanics surrounding it (if any)
That still implies that you treat the system as primary in such matters.
 
@vicky_molokh Nope, just that they are interlocked.
 
Tapping into game design secrets is a little like tapping into proprietary info for design on patented products. Some people prefer not to share what they know.
 
3:48 PM
> you may want to be patient with getting an answer
Oh, that's OK.
I just commented in general back then.
 
@vicky_molokh The reason I dislike the "subordination" and "rollplay vs roleplay" lingo is, my usual process is that I either pick a genre first and look for a system that facilitates that genre, or find a cool system for a certain genre and decide to run a game in that genre to use it. The rules support the desired roleplaying experience, whichever comes first
 
don't we have an answer/question about racial features and their relative values?
 
I have an ambivalent view on the lingo. I'm usually the one who is accused of viewing things through the prism of a system all the time, and it's very odd for me to be on the defensive in this discussion, fighting for my right to view a topic or ask a question from a logic- and/or roleplaying-primary position.
But it's a relatively easily understood shorthand so I tend to fall back to using it in quick-paced discussions.
 
Vicky, years ago I played a board game that was about dog fighting in WW I. Positioning in that game mattered a lot in terms of trying to get a kill. A lot of the Board games Avalon hill produced in the 60's and 70's rewarded maneuver/flanking, positioning your units, to exploit terrain and to make the combat resolution roll come out more favorably.
 
My gaming experience is shaped primarily by two systems, classic WoD and GURPS, and currently trying to take in some FATE experience (been studying it in theory for a while, started playing recently). And a thing that seems to be true of all three is that veteran GMs tend to not be bound by what the system says, but rather adjust the system to whatever is appropriate, such as by flipping optional rule switches, deciding when to use or not use a given mechanic etc.
Maybe that's an unthinkable attitude in other gaming circles. @kviiri
 
3:57 PM
Sniper, an SSI game that I played some in the 1970's, required the players to use line of sight and positioning to get advantageous engagements.
 
@KorvinStarmast I'm not entirely sure the 1970's existed.
 
@vicky_molokh What you just described is how I played D&D for the first five years it existed. Each DM turned on and off various optional rules in the books, and (as they came out) stuff published in Strat Review and Dragon. Heck, we had guys importing Gamma World and Metamorphisis Alpha stuff into D&D, and boot hill stuff also.
 
@vicky_molokh I think it matters which systems you come from. If you play some ostensibly generic system like GURPS (or as DnD is often played, by virtue of being "the only RPG system" for many people) it's understandable that one finds themselves fighting an uphill struggle trying to reconcile mechanics with the story
 
I wouldn't describe it as an uphill battle.
Well, maybe with WoD somewhat.
 
@ColinGross The Rolling Stones put out an album about them, called Sucking in the Seventies‌​. I still have that album on vinyl.
 
4:00 PM
But rarely with others, if at all.
 
@KorvinStarmast I recently purchased a turn table to play records again. I hadn't mucked about with speaker wire in a long time and forgot that it pushes enough voltage to give you a bit of a shock.
 
@vicky_molokh One of my DM's pulled in a bunch of Chivalry and Sorcery stuff into his D&D game. He's the same guy who ran our C&S campaign before it finally went dormant.
 
Also to be clear: I'm fine with Forge/Forge-influenced people/views existing, but I'm not comfortable when they enforce their worldview as the only acceptable one and shut down other perspectives.
 
@ColinGross I still have my Carver amps and my Klipsch La Scala Speakers.
 
@KorvinStarmast Some capacitors never die.
 
4:03 PM
@vicky_molokh Aaah, feeling the Forgite love oozing from your comment. 8^D
 
@vicky_molokh what's a Forge person?
 
@ColinGross Someone who thinks I'm literally brain damaged if I don't follow their views, as I have recently discovered.
 
@vicky_molokh That doesn't seem very nice.
 
I'd rather be called such things than have my questions closed by Forgites! ^_^
 
@vicky_molokh Would you like us to close it instead? We can do that if you like.
 
4:06 PM
How do I know you're not secretly one of THEM? ^_^
 
It's like how @Rubiksmoose comes in and asks for downvotes to "preserve the balance" or somesuch. Seems odd, but hey, he's good people.
 
Just in order to avoid misconceptions, should I unpack anything of the above half-joking explanations?
 
@vicky_molokh Is it a secret club?! I have always wanted to be in one of those. Or is it a double top secret one where I don't even get to know I'm a member.... because that doesn't seem nearly as fun. However, as long as I get a decoder pin I'll drink my Ovaltine to be in on it.
@vicky_molokh I do hate unpacking. What are you going to do with all the abstractions and boxes when you're done!?!
 
@vicky_molokh I am pretty sure that Boot Hill is no longer in my possession; we played a little of that and I recall modifiers for cover being useful - we replayed the gunfight at the OK Corral with that system - but I didn't play it enough to say how that system would relate to your question.
 
@ColinGross Say... does Rubiks have purple skin and a big crazy chin and a really ostentatious glove?
 
4:09 PM
@vicky_molokh If a system has mechanics for flanking, or measuring lines, or otherwise comparing the relative positions of things, would that be relevant to your question?
 
@SirCinnamon I thought he had six colors and antlers. Probably got that way by drinking some water from the river.
 
@ColinGross Yeah I'm basically the Thanos of RPG.se :P
 
@vicky_molokh Thanks. That's useful context.
 
@MikeQ Maybe. I know somewargames do, and some RPG systems too (thus the GURPS reference to mêlée having some importance of positioning).
 
4:11 PM
@vicky_molokh I was only recently made aware of Forge stuff by a question here. Very interesting and I'm not a fan lol
 
Well, maybe not a fan of the events, but you seem to be rather sympathetic to their views on system primacy.
 
@SirCinnamon ah shoot not only did I miss the joke (didn't read back) I also outed myself. Where is the "snap" button around here?
@vicky_molokh Nope, not at all.
 
@Rubiksmoose Delete half of all questions so new ones dont have to be duplicates
 
@vicky_molokh Are you referring to the mantra of "system matters" from Forge?
 
@KorvinStarmast Yes, I've seen it chanted here a few times.
 
4:15 PM
@vicky_molokh Fwiw, I apologize if anything I've said has come across as forcing things down people's throats, but as moderators here sometimes we have to do that in order to keep order and quality around here. And of course, disagreement is welcome and common. But the mechanisms of this site often force us into conflict about how to deal with these things.
 
@vicky_molokh Hmmm... I find this Ron Edwards person uncompelling. Non-peer reviewed. No minimal example code to paste and run. No statistics nor even nice looking figures. The Big Model mentioned does not have a bang. Would really have liked to see at least a shebang at the start of it.
 
@vicky_molokh I don't think that's a carry over Forge-ism, though I have seen it referred to with the Forge context. I think that is a Stackism about keeping questions within scope. (and what "in scope" means seems to vary by user). I am on board with your frustration with how often some questions with a broader applicability get closed or bumped around.
 
@KorvinStarmast Like fist bumped? Like Big Hero 6?
 
I view a game as an inextricable combination of setting/expectations/rules/role-play/etc. Each part feeds into the other parts and changes them. Most of the time, you can't dissect one part and look at it outside the context of the rest of the parts. It just so happens that "system" is the name that all those parts together are generally called. When really it is but one part of a mechanism.
 
@ColinGross If I may quote Michael Stipe "Oh no, I've said too much - I haven't said enough" and I'll leave it there.
 
4:18 PM
@Rubiksmoose Wait... we cant' dissect one part? What am I going to do with all this formaldehyde then?! I installed a floor drain in my basement already!
 
@ColinGross I hear its great with whiskey
Really keeps you young inside.
 
@Rubiksmoose As I said, it's not about the 'coming across', but about the Foregeite view on systems becoming a de facto criterion of answer shutdowns. I mentally half-joked to myself that if this goes on, I'll be forced to resort to asking Freeform questions, as that's the closest choice of system that would get answers close to system-agnostic ones.
 
@Rubiksmoose that's afterward. Literally.
 
@KorvinStarmast If someone follows the same philosophy while calling it by a different name, does it matter much?
 
@vicky_molokh I like that clever hack. Ask using a system that is close to system-agnostic. #Lifehack #stackhack
 
4:20 PM
@vicky_molokh Well it is a criterion here. Not every question needs a system, but questions that are deemed to need a system need to have one specified or are put on hold.
2
 
@vicky_molokh Naming is important... and tough to do. Nobody wants to eat a South American Toothfish... but many people love Chilean Seabass
 
Such a hack is a symptom of things not working well in the stack though. It's like a person asking an Informatics question, and getting bombarded by insistences to name a programming language.
> but questions that are deemed to need a system need to have one specified or are put on hold.
Thing is, people who follow the Edwarsian views on the role of the system seem more prone to seeing questions as requiring a system than those who don't follow it.
 
@vicky_molokh OOooo... I do like watching those holy wars. Let's go poke the python2.7 vs 3 crowds and see if they fight. /S
 
@ColinGross Not sure if missing the point.
 
@vicky_molokh I'm totally not missing the point, but if I can't be absurd or set up a pun for later.... it's like, what's the point.
 
4:22 PM
@vicky_molokh How can you possibly know who here follows "Edwardsian views" or not?
 
@MarkWells We wear badges.
 
@vicky_molokh which is why we have voting mechanisms and meta in place to allow people who disagree to voice that. I'm not entirely sure what all the naming conventions are about but please refrain from assuming or lumping my views in with any particular group.
 
@MarkWells By seeing when people demonstrate Edwarsian reasoning for an action or worldview.
 
Because I'll happily go on a crusade against Forgeites, just as soon as we've mopped up all the people who start answers with "RAW,"
 
@Rubiksmoose To elaborate, my reaction was specifically to people voicing such views.
@MarkWells Heh.
 
4:25 PM
But you don't have to be a Forgeite to notice that different game systems facilitate different games.
 
@MarkWells hah! well I won't go down easily. ;)
 
@MarkWells And where is that written?
 
Joking aside though, it is convenient nomenclature at times, though I dislike having to use it.
 
@Rubiksmoose You're already downtown basically. It's like a short bus ride. Campus Martius is right there!
 
@MarkWells You don't, but the degree of absolutism of holding those views can vary.
 
4:27 PM
@Rubiksmoose It's almost like language is capable of encompassing very abstract ideas, but packaging it into labels tends to overgeneralize and oversimplify, which creates friction when people try to discuss the same terms but have different interpretations of what those terms mean
2
 
@MikeQ [mind blown]
 
@vicky_molokh It matters because of why: Stackism's reasons are different from Forge's reason. Well, that's how I see the distinction.
 
Aaand, going offline.
 
@vicky_molokh Please don't go there, I am seeing a pigeonholing in progress. Just a thought.
 
I didn't realize we had an "ism". What is "Stackism" in this context?
 
4:30 PM
Let the 2.x heathens burn in holy fire
python burnHeathens
 
What did I miss?!
 
@GreySage So let them Go to Rust?
 
@MarkWells I've got the other two ammo boxes out in the HMMV, you need more?
 
@KorvinStarmast Indeed. I must say that I have very little context for Forge stuff, but we have to do things around here for practical reasons that have very little to do with our personal philosophies on game design.
 
@goodguy5 We hit a forge with holy fire and this Edward guy showed up. Everyone was throwing shade, instead of kung fu fighting. In the end, we're not allowed to cut up dissect systems for ..... errr... science?
 
4:32 PM
@ColinGross Does that mean we're Team Jacob?
 
hurray?
 
@MikeQ In the context of my back and forth with Vicky, it is the "what game system are you asking about, closed until you clarify" that was in play. So I called that a Stackism.
 
@MikeQ I see what you did there, and I'm downvoting all of your chat messages for the rest of the day.
 
@ColinGross hey that's (apparently) my job!
or is to to keep balance? I've lost track of the joke
 
@ColinGross For health reasons, I recommend that you downvote all of my chat messages
 
4:34 PM
XD
 
@KorvinStarmast Stackism: the quest for system clarification
 
@ColinGross @vicky_molokh My broad brush view on the Forge was a case of people spending a lot of time trying to pick the fly feces out of the pepper.
 
@Rubiksmoose Does that make you the chosen one? Are you the "kill all the sith" chosen one or the "kill all the jedi" chosen one?
 
So to make sure I fit in with the Team Jacob wave, someone please clarify: Are we at war with the Forge worlds because of GNS theory?
 
@GreySage "Why not both" was never more appropriate.
 
4:37 PM
@GreySage I think I'm the snappy one. But maybe they were just talking about how I dress.
(which nobody would ever say about the way I dress)
 
@Rubiksmoose I think your dresses are just fine if not a bit retro.
 
@ColinGross If anything I think I would go with a skirt personally.
 
As someone who's mentioned GNS theory here a few times, and doesn't entirely hate it, I'd like to know whether it's an unkosher topic for chat. Is there a verdict?
 
Do we have kosher topics for chat? Is there halachat?
 
Not sure. Certainly some things get more heated here than others
But usually they are just shunted to slinter chats rather than "banned" entirely
 
4:54 PM
@MarkWells I can't braid, so maybe something more wry
 
@ColinGross I hear Rye also goes great with formaldehyde
 
@Rubiksmoose Whatever cures your hangovers.
 
@MikeQ If you want my opinion, and really who wouldn't?, bring it up and see what happens. Worst case, we all learn that we're still angry about GNS theory.
 
@MarkWells [sharpens pitchfork]
 
5:07 PM
@goodguy5 hahaha perfect.
 
5:47 PM
@MarkWells From the 5 minutes I've read about it, I don't see anything objectionable in the GNS theory itself. It seems most of the conflict was the aggressive push from its evangelizers and the insulting nomenclature for non-GNS systems.
A nuance I didn't see (but I could have missed it) is that a player doesn't necessarily stay in 1 mode forever. Personally I am a Gamist person, but I have used Narrativist on occasion, and Simulationist when GMing.
There, bring on the pitchforks!
 
Now that I'm (partially) back online:
> conflict was the aggressive push from its evangelizers
Well, yes. But the aggressive push can take other forms than evangelising.
For example, it can take the form of basing the rules of acceptable discussion on a strong adherence to or preference towards a given position.
 
Fwiw, we have no rules against system-agnostic questions
They are explicitly on-topic.
 
No written rules, but I see them more prone to being closed by unwritten ones, and more prone to being pushed towards a system-gnostic conversion.
 
So the Forge people used GNS to classify the goals of different games. Like, if you're trying to provide a skill-testing challenge for the players, they'd call that Gamist. This was...not too insane an idea.
Then they went and ruined it with One-True-Wayism and the insistence that games should be designed entirely around a single goal.
 
Not the only OTWism that faction promoted though.
 
5:56 PM
@vicky_molokh At the very least, that is not always a bad thing. EG this question from earlier today which originally was listed as system agnostic.
 
@MarkWells Which does make a certain kind of sense, and harkens back to what some people are always talking about how D&D (for example) doesn't handle non-gamist things very well.
 
@vicky_molokh If I could try to understand your point of view, what do you think of that change? Acceptable? Not?
 
/me stares. That one had system stuff right in there. I'm talking about questions that don't have it (and they usually don't have it because they don't need it, because they're trying to get answers from a different PoV than the systems).
 
Because I feel like you've got some good points that I'm not understanding. Concrete examples help.
@vicky_molokh Sure, I went with a pretty clear cut example to see where we both stood on that at least.
(it was also very recent so convenient to grab)
 
I agree that the question you linked was a system-specific one.
 
00:00 - 18:0018:00 - 00:00

« first day (3058 days earlier)      last day (306 days later) »