|
Post by ayslyn on Aug 24, 2018 16:39:06 GMT -8
Only when taken completely out of context, Tomes. Yep. Or sometimes in context. That too. Flags aren't always accurate. But flags be flags! …. Ummmm…. What? I am talking about your specific variation of the OP's specific post. I have no clue what you are now talking about.
|
|
tomes
Supporter
Hello madness
Posts: 1,438
Currently Running: Dungeon World, hippie games, Fallout Shelter RPG hack
|
Post by tomes on Aug 24, 2018 17:17:22 GMT -8
I am talking about your specific variation of the OP's specific post. I have no clue what you are now talking about. Sounds like a good place to stop for the day!
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Aug 24, 2018 17:59:11 GMT -8
oooooook…
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2018 23:54:31 GMT -8
"Now don't get me wrong. I don't mean all [Lindenstein] players are somehow the worst. I do mean to say that they aren't magical unicorns who can do no wrong. Gaming isn't inherently improved by a [Lindenstein] presence. It's improved by good gamers of any [nationality]. I'd rather be without [Lindensteiners] if the options are bad [Lindensteiners] players or no [Lindensteiners] players." Sure. Valid. But it sure sounds like you have something to grind against Lindensteiners. If I was from Lindenstein and heard this, it's a pretty nice warning sign to avoid that table. Why? The exception I take to the standard wisdom of women in gaming being good is that it places their gender above their qualities as a player. Many people are so eager to have women present that they pat them on the back for things which make me want to scream. I'll give an example from the podcast.
Recently someone wrote in about a player who when attacked by some kind of dog-like creature in a savage worlds game chose to try and command it like a pet. That's stupid. It's like allowing a roll to jump the grand canyon. The wolves don't know: "Sit boy!". It was pandering that wouldn't have flown with a more experienced player (especially a male). Yet the panel of hosts clapped for it like seals performing for a treat. This wasn't good gaming or fair treatment, it was insulting.
Talking openly about bad players despite their gender privilege is necessary for the good of the hobby. It's about actual equality and presenting the world as it is instead of how it would be convenient for our political ideologies. If you want to avoid someone for being candid, perhaps you shouldn't be at my table. That table is a place for people willing to be held to equal standards.
|
|
tomes
Supporter
Hello madness
Posts: 1,438
Currently Running: Dungeon World, hippie games, Fallout Shelter RPG hack
|
Post by tomes on Aug 25, 2018 16:49:24 GMT -8
Why? The exception I take to the standard wisdom of women in gaming being good... On an individual basis: An individual woman in gaming being good? Yah, that depends on the person. Judge away. Respond to THEIR PARTICULAR ISSUE at the gaming table ("they hog the spotlight"), and not "what" they are (woman, man, non-binary, trans, language, race, religion). I think that all makes sense. Should you make an effort to include women more so than men? Should you make an effort to include more underrepresented people in the hobby? Some say 'yes' because it enhances representation in a space which may not be welcoming, and you'd find me in that camp. Some may say 'no. just be color-blind and treat everyone individually'. There's all sorts of articles on privilege that discuss these issues. About women as a group being good in gaming? Yes, I 100% believe this. The alternative is: "Women in the hobby are not good for gaming" or to a lesser extent: "Women in the hobby may not be good for gaming." In both cases you've classified a whole contingent of people based on something that has nothing to do with the topic at hand: Gaming. In both cases, that's some serious Gatekeeping. Unless of course you believe that it's possible that women may somehow have features that should allow you to exclude them as a group from tables, in general?
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Aug 25, 2018 17:14:09 GMT -8
You're doing it again....
The OP wasn't saying anything of the sort. It was asking for specific stories. There was no collective anything.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 25, 2018 19:45:11 GMT -8
tomes Let’s sum up then, shall we? Because I am not willing to grade anyone on a curve because of their special interest group, I am somehow against that group? Further, I and my table should be avoided because we share different views than yours. Is it just me, or is the person gatekeeping based on ideology you? I think just about every geeky dude would enjoy having more women in the hobby. It would be nice to have more of them who share our interests. The same is true of just about any “good ol’ boys club” you can think of. Many geeks aren’t trying to escape their wives or significant others. In fact, we’d love to discover such a person who shares our interests. So stop trying to sell this narrative of people trying to shove women out of the hobby because of their gender. If it’s true, it is only so in a minority of cases. As an aside, I have an example of what you get when anyone of a specific group is good enough instead of the best person for the job. Anyone remember Sarah Palin? I don’t think it was a good thing she was on the ticket, even though she is a woman. I might agree that we need more representation for women in government (especially since the government is supposed to represent the people), but I wouldn’t agree that Palin was good for that. There are admirable women on both sides of the aisle, but she was not one of them. And yes, I’d rather have no women in government if my choice of candidates was made up of Sarah Palin clones or only men.
|
|
tomes
Supporter
Hello madness
Posts: 1,438
Currently Running: Dungeon World, hippie games, Fallout Shelter RPG hack
|
Post by tomes on Aug 25, 2018 20:03:38 GMT -8
You're doing it again.... The OP wasn't saying anything of the sort. It was asking for specific stories. There was no collective anything. My comments aren't directed at the OP.
|
|
tomes
Supporter
Hello madness
Posts: 1,438
Currently Running: Dungeon World, hippie games, Fallout Shelter RPG hack
|
Post by tomes on Aug 25, 2018 20:54:09 GMT -8
ayslyn, @stevensw To be fair, reviewing the OP, and the post I'm having a visceral reaction too, maybe I'm overreacting. But you know, experience with friends, and some things worded in ways that can vaguely sound off can sometimes have that consequence.
|
|
|
Post by ayslyn on Aug 26, 2018 11:49:43 GMT -8
If I might offer some advice to do with what you will....
I have found that when I am having that sort of reaction to a post, it's best for me to walk away from it for at least the night, if not twenty-four hours before responding at all.
A bit back, I had to cut off all ties from someone I had considered a friend (a word that I do not apply lightly) because of some baseless and truly disgusting accusations they made. I waited almost a day and a half before I, metaphorically, pulled the trigger on that decision.
|
|
bobcatt
Apprentice Douchebag
Patron
An infinite number of monkeys can't be wrong...
Posts: 81
Preferred Game Systems: AD&D 1e, 2e, 5e, Top Secret/S.I., Classic Traveller
Currently Playing: nothing at all :-(
Currently Running: completely stalled doing 5e via Roll20
Favorite Species of Monkey: Barrel of
|
Post by bobcatt on Aug 27, 2018 9:48:20 GMT -8
I guess I started something again without intending to. My bad.
|
|
|
Post by Kimi on Aug 27, 2018 12:39:39 GMT -8
"Now don't get me wrong. I don't mean all [Lindenstein] players are somehow the worst. I do mean to say that they aren't magical unicorns who can do no wrong. Gaming isn't inherently improved by a [Lindenstein] presence. It's improved by good gamers of any [nationality]. I'd rather be without [Lindensteiners] if the options are bad [Lindensteiners] players or no [Lindensteiners] players." Sure. Valid. But it sure sounds like you have something to grind against Lindensteiners. If I was from Lindenstein and heard this, it's a pretty nice warning sign to avoid that table. Why? The exception I take to the standard wisdom of women in gaming being good is that it places their gender above their qualities as a player. Many people are so eager to have women present that they pat them on the back for things which make me want to scream. I'll give an example from the podcast. Recently someone wrote in about a player who when attacked by some kind of dog-like creature in a savage worlds game chose to try and command it like a pet. That's stupid. It's like allowing a roll to jump the grand canyon. The wolves don't know: "Sit boy!". It was pandering that wouldn't have flown with a more experienced player (especially a male). Yet the panel of hosts clapped for it like seals performing for a treat. This wasn't good gaming or fair treatment, it was insulting. Talking openly about bad players despite their gender privilege is necessary for the good of the hobby. It's about actual equality and presenting the world as it is instead of how it would be convenient for our political ideologies. If you want to avoid someone for being candid, perhaps you shouldn't be at my table. That table is a place for people willing to be held to equal standards.
Hey Steven, I think we were clapping like seals for the fact that the player was acting/thinking outside of the box. They were willing to take a risk, just like jumping the grand canyon is a huge risk and very likely to fail. If that's what they player decides their character would do, great. It makes for an interesting story! It's their choice! Huzzah for the GM who lets their player risk their necks to do something daring. The player got super lucky if I remember correctly and nailed their roll. The dice decided that it worked, not the gender of the player. They could just have easily failed the roll and ended up being ripped apart by the animals. The dice are equal to everyone. The dice decided. An epic roll created an epic and unexpected moment in the game. I think we all have stories like that, don't we? Sometimes it's those hail mary moments that we remember long after the rest of the campaign is only vague recollection.
|
|
|
Post by EricaOdd on Aug 27, 2018 14:04:51 GMT -8
I guess I started something again without intending to. My bad. Nah, it's ok. Just think open-mindedly about what I said about not using "female/s" as a noun instead of an adjective. It's all I ask.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 29, 2018 22:35:33 GMT -8
Hey Steven, I think we were clapping like seals for the fact that the player was acting/thinking outside of the box. They were willing to take a risk, just like jumping the grand canyon is a huge risk and very likely to fail. If that's what they player decides their character would do, great. It makes for an interesting story! It's their choice! Huzzah for the GM who lets their player risk their necks to do something daring. The player got super lucky if I remember correctly and nailed their roll. The dice decided that it worked, not the gender of the player. They could just have easily failed the roll and ended up being ripped apart by the animals. The dice are equal to everyone. The dice decided. An epic roll created an epic and unexpected moment in the game. I think we all have stories like that, don't we? Sometimes it's those hail mary moments that we remember long after the rest of the campaign is only vague recollection. Jumping the grand canyon on foot is guaranteed to fail. There should be no roll because success is not possible. However, if said person had a motorcycle, a ramp, and was a skilled stuntman... well then we have a situation to roll for. My problem with the situation at hand was that there should have been no chance for success, which means no roll. You can't roll a 20 or explode some dice and make the literal impossible happen, and players who think otherwise are IMHO, the worst. I abhor hearing stories about just this sort of behavior by players who don't grok the basics of why dice are rolled.
I would have had zero problem with the roll and the applause in question had the player had anything which would suggest this was possible for their character. But as I remember they lacked even training in the skill (which is to say nothing of some kind of edge that might allow them to control wild animals). They didn't have a spell of that would allow them to speak with animals. Really, they had nothing. They wished in one hand and shit in the other, but instead of having nothing and a hand full of shit (or at least a warning that their outcome would be just that), they got everything because they were lucky.
I would remember this game moment for years. I'd hold it up as a shinning example of bad gaming where consequences didn't exist and the suspension of disbelief was shattered. This wasn't a hail Mary, this was a WTF moment.
P.S. Sorry it took me so long to respond. I've been buy the last couple of days.
|
|
tappy
Journeyman Douchebag
Host
Posts: 192
Preferred Game Systems: Apoc World, Monsterhearts, L5r, Wod
Favorite Species of Monkey: Space Monkey
|
Post by tappy on Aug 29, 2018 23:00:12 GMT -8
Because someone asked you to? For example, I ask people to call me "Tappy" on the podcast. You could reply with "why? That isn't your name". While you are technically correct that it isn't my actual name, just as female can technically be used as a noun, I asked you to do so. If you refuse, that is your prerogative, but it isn't difficult or any skin off your back to call someone by a different name. Doing something like that because someone asks you to is polite, and refusing to is rather impolite. Now, you may be choosing to be impolite here on purpose, I don't know exactly why you are refusing a simple and easy to follow request from a fellow HJ listener. But when someone asks you to please refer to them in a certain way, I'm not sure why you wouldn't, unless it is intentionally derogatory or impolite to you (like, "call me 'master'" of some bullshit like that).
|
|