What is Political and Mod Direction

Best Selling RPGs - Available Now @ DriveThruRPG.com
PolarBlues said:
I suspect what might bring out the aggression isn't just two people realising they have different tastes in ice cream, but rather the concern that a more general shift in ice cream preferences may, in turn, make one's favourite flavour harder to find in supermarkets and dilute one's relationship with frozen deserts in general.

Or maybe it just people and the Internet.
Click to expand...

I think you are overlooking on important factor



Stumpydave said:
The bigger issue when posters state "no politics" is a political statement and start using terms like "dog whistles", "privilege" or "unconcious bias". Effectively accusing people of 'badwrongthink' either surreptitiously ("You horrible -ist!") or unconsciously ("You're so -ist, you don't even know it!").
Click to expand...

I hate these phrases. While there is some validity to some in concept, more often it seems they are used disingenuously along the lines of "so have you stopped beating your wife?"


JAMUMU said:
On the other hand, certain posters have a habit of taking (a great many) things as bad faith provocations, reacting as if they've been personally slighted, then swinging into threads all guns blazing like they alone are the final arbiters of truth and justice. I don't think that's healthy for the board's culture or reputation, and not a great way to retain or attract new posters.

Anyway, I look forward to second-guessing all your personal politics based on your opinions of geese and broccoli.
Click to expand...

While some may just like arguing or stirring the pot I think many of us carry some traumatic baggage from our experiences on less friendly forums. Sometimes it can be hard to remember that a poorly phrased comment may simply be a poor choice of words, and not a 3 dimensional chess move.
 
BedrockBrendan said:
I think that underlies most flame wars. Sometimes it is true (in D&D edition flamewars, there could only be one edition at a time, and not that the editions were determined by the flame wars, but there was a zero sum game behind those arguments). I think with these style arguments for the hobby as a whole though, this is less true, especially now. With everyone, making every kind of game, it isn't like the styles won't see published support (and if your style ceases to see published support, the bar to entry is so low, one can always put out material for their preferred style)
Click to expand...

You're way too optimistic.

One of the reason I despise rpg.net (along with that whole "side" at least in the rpg environment, rpg.net just happens to be the biggest fish in this particular pond) as much as I do is that I like Zak's work. And, contrary to them, I have absolutely no problem separating the art from the artist.
Now, thanks to the fact that those guys hate him (not even his work, the artist himself) with a passion, and Steve Wieck is increasingly willing to humour their consensus, and his company has an almost total stranglehold on the market, I will never be able to purchase another of his rpg products again.

Another similar event (although in that case it was indeed related to the work itself) happened with Tournament of Rapists. In that case, for me at least, it was more of a theoretical problem (that whole line is basically nearly-unusable D20 dreck when you get down to it, and I'd have never purchased the thing), but I'm still pissed about it.

Given current market realities, the sad truth is that a politically motivated minority group can easily hold what amounts to a censorship position... and they aren't the least bit reluctant to use it. Those (US-based, to boot; i.e. a country several thousand miles away from me) political positions are personally affecting me in a negative way, hence why I can't stand them. The very act of expressing those positions automatically creates an actual, real-life danger of more products disappearing from the market, and that's before you even take into account the chilling effect on creativity and risk-taking.
 
Luca said:
You're way too optimistic.
Click to expand...

I wasn't talking about political, cultural or personality wars in the hobby. I was speaking strictly about wars over editions, play styles (traditional versus narrative), etc.
 
Luca said:
You're way too optimistic.

One of the reason I despise rpg.net (along with that whole "side" at least in the rpg environment, rpg.net just happens to be the biggest fish in this particular pond) as much as I do is that I like Zak's work. And, contrary to them, I have absolutely no problem separating the art from the artist.
Now, thanks to the fact that those guys hate him (not even his work, the artist himself) with a passion, and Steve Wieck is increasingly willing to humour their consensus, and his company has an almost total stranglehold on the market, I will never be able to purchase another of his rpg products again.
Click to expand...
I know it's peripheral to the point you're making, but you might want to know that Zak is direct selling now via his blog. I think pretty much everything is available from there apart from a few things for other publishers mostly still on Drivethru.
 
Giganotosaurus said:
That sounds like people arguing over ice cream flavors, some people like chocolate and others like vanilla, but instead of accepting that other people have different tastes they whine about how terrible the other flavor is.
This feels dumb. I'm going to eat a sandwich.
Click to expand...
That’s a fair summary, IMO. The underlying problem, though, is that you can view RPGs as entertainment or as technology—tools used to achieve some goal. They are both, of course. But the more one focuses on rulesets as tools, the easier it is is to make arguments that your set of tools does a better job than other sets of tools, and so people trying to achieve a certain result should use yours, not the other ones. The more your game design is based on an explicit theory of how games function, the more tempting such arguments become. By this point, there has been a good deal of theorizing on both sides of the divide.
 
I thought the whole warring RPG camps thing was about two broad groups of people who were both mad at 90s era WW games, but for different reasons, and were mad at each other for not coming to the same conclusions about how to properly show up mid-90s White Wolf.

Or maybe both are mad at WotC D&D.

I've lost track really.
 
Black Leaf said:
I know it's peripheral to the point you're making, but you might want to know that Zak is direct selling now via his blog. I think pretty much everything is available from there apart from a few things for other publishers mostly still on Drivethru.
Click to expand...

I know, but what he's selling are basically his sketches sold as .pdf. Before Raggi was essentially forced to drop him, he was publishing books for LotFP... and no matter what you think of Raggi, you've to admit he knows his stuff when it comes to publishing. Those books are beautiful, if nothing else.
 
Toadmaster said:
I don't know anything about your specific examples, but at some point people have to take responsibility for themselves. If horror movies cause me to have panic attacks, and I willingly watch horror movies is that the fault of the producer, director, actors, theater owner? Unless they advertised the film as Winnie the Pooh, and substituted Saw then it is kind of on me.

It is natural to feel some guilt over bad reactions that you were involved in, it is the sign of a humane person. If a kid blows a stop sign on a motor scooter and I hit him with my truck, it is not my fault, but I'm certainly going to feel bad about it and probably be filled with doubt and guilt that maybe if I were paying more attention I might have seen him in time to stop, but in the end he ran the stop sign.
Click to expand...
You can do your best but you're gonna make mistakes... and as I tell everyone, making mistakes is fine, it's inevitable, it's how you deal with it that's the key thing.
Luca said:
One of the reason I despise rpg.net (along with that whole "side" at least in the rpg environment, rpg.net just happens to be the biggest fish in this particular pond) as much as I do is that I like Zak's work. And, contrary to them, I have absolutely no problem separating the art from the artist.
Click to expand...
Separating art from artist is a choice everyone gets to make for themselves, in every context; I'm not of the opinion that either is an objectively better option. But on the other hand, storefronts are not obligated to sell every single thing that exists - it's up to them what they want to stock and what they don't. They are not obligated to sell every product simply because it exists.
Luca said:
Now, thanks to the fact that those guys hate him (not even his work, the artist himself) with a passion, and Steve Wieck is increasingly willing to humour their consensus, and his company has an almost total stranglehold on the market, I will never be able to purchase another of his rpg products again.
Click to expand...
No. Zak is not entitled to have his works stocked on DTRPG just because he wrote them; it's up to DTRPG to decide what they want to stock. Their store, their rules. And no matter how much people want to claim it, DTRPG isn't a monopoly; there are plenty of other open storefronts - itch, lulu, amazon, frex - or he could have continued to partner with Raggi et al, or worked with another publisher like Venger, or even continued to sell his own products.

Zak also spent years pissing off almost everyone in the RPG community and eroding any goodwill he might have had. He ruined his own reputation.
DeadBob said:
I thought the whole warring RPG camps thing was about two broad groups of people who were both mad at 90s era WW games, but for different reasons, and were mad at each other for not coming to the same conclusions about how to properly show up mid-90s White Wolf.

Or maybe both are mad at WotC D&D.

I've lost track really.
Click to expand...
RPG's started going downhill when D&D was released in 1974 anyway.
 
Yeah, honestly I think it's really difficult for any of the mods to sympathise with Zak in general. I wasn't on the team yet at this stage, but his "MODS MUST FACTCHECK OR BE CONSIDERED EVIL" thing wasn't exactly good for the smooth running of the board, to put it lightly.
 
Zak is his own brand of special. Plenty of people were willing to allow product to trump producer but often he pooped on their hands as a special thank you for doing so. It's not a surprise he gets poop back for his behavior.
 
Black Leaf said:
Yeah, honestly I think it's really difficult for any of the mods to sympathise with Zak in general. I wasn't on the team yet at this stage, but his "MODS MUST FACTCHECK OR BE CONSIDERED EVIL" thing wasn't exactly good for the smooth running of the board, to put it lightly.
Click to expand...
And we decided to ban shortly before the Mandy accusation, not after, and he was already banned almost everywhere people talk about RPGs aside from the Site and Twitter. The writing was already on the wall for Zak's future in the RPG scene. Mandy just put the final nail in the coffin.

Zak may have been brought down by mob justice, but nobody in the gaming scene did more to establish that tactic than Zak, so screw the self-pitying BS he goes on about now.

If you are upset that Zak is persona non grataeand it harder to get his work, blame Zak.
 
Baulderstone said:
Zak may have been brought down by mob justice, but nobody in the gaming scene did more to establish that tactic than Zak, so screw the self-pitying BS he goes on about now.

If you are upset that Zak is persona and it harder to get his work, blame Zak.
Click to expand...

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

Many of the mob-encouraging folk have learned that the hard way.
 
Ladybird said:
No. Zak is not entitled to have his works stocked on DTRPG just because he wrote them; it's up to DTRPG to decide what they want to stock. Their store, their rules. And no matter how much people want to claim it, DTRPG isn't a monopoly; there are plenty of other open storefronts - itch, lulu, amazon, frex - or he could have continued to partner with Raggi et al, or worked with another publisher like Venger, or even continued to sell his own products.
Click to expand...

You're not replying to what I wrote.
Quote a sentence of mine where I write "Zak is entitled to be sold by store X".
Hint: you won't find one.
The tl, dr here is quite simple: Wieck and the "woke faction" (I know, I know... dangerous generalization) of the RPG world are directly responsible for me not being able to purchase any more of Zak's product. I hold them responsible, hence, I despise them. What everyone is, or isn't, entitled to, is utterly immaterial.

As for your other objections:
  • Zak is still selling his own products (pdf of his sketches, essentially, although I think they're edited to some standard... not sure as I haven't purchased any) through other means. That's not what I'm interested about. I'm interested in professionally edited and produced books. And Zak was one of the few guys in this sector where "professionally edited and produced" wasn't just an aspiration, to boot.
  • Raggi was basically forced to drop Zak. This is common knowledge. Contrary to 99% of RPG's publishers, Raggi actually earns enough money to make a living out of his publishing work. Wieck flat out forbade Raggi to sell any new Zak's books on DriveThruRPG. This means Raggi would have quite simply bankrupted had he kept employing him. This would have meant he and the few people he employs (think it's 2 or 3) would have lost their means of living. So, it was one of those "offers" you really cannot refuse.
 
Nobby-W said:
And, AsenRG AsenRG knows what sounding is now, if I recall correctly.
Click to expand...
It's more like "trying to forget about it", but you're right...:grin:

Baulderstone said:
System preference is fine. You can even dislike games. It's when you get into arguments between the OSR and The Forge and the like, where you are arguing about abstract ideologies rather than games themselves that it becomes a serious problem.
Click to expand...
So...no to the sandbox clique? Do I get a pass if I join the Frei Kriegspiel Bunch:devil:?

Black Leaf said:
Just to clarify, there has been no official ruling on that yet. It isn't mixed messages so much as that it's the kind of question this thread is set up to answer and the mods are giving their opinions like everyone else.
Click to expand...
I think this was referencing some other recent threads, actually.

Black Leaf said:
Mine remains what I said at the start.

Calling RPGs (outside the obvious outliers) racist is a no.
Click to expand...
:thumbsup:

Black Leaf said:
Calling settings racist is fine.

Calling history racist is even more fine.
Click to expand...
...serious question, man, what do "racist setting" and "racist history" even mean?
That races make a lot of difference in those settings (all D&D settings coming to mind...)?That in history, race has been a determining factor of what has been allowed to people and what opportunities were present to them?

Black Leaf said:
If you want something more specific, I'd suggest that people should only make statements in these areas that the man on the Clapham Omnibus would agree with. We don't need to take into account people who think playing in a bad setting makes you a bad person, nor do we need to take into account those who think being told a setting is bad means they're being de facto accused of agreeing with that badness by playing in that setting. Both are too far outside the realm of reasonable opinion to be worth worrying about.
Click to expand...
If we assume those two to be far outside the realm of reasonable opinion, yeah, I think this would cut down on the discussions:angel:!

Black Leaf said:
One reason I think we do let stuff slide is that generally speaking we moderate from a position of assuming good faith where most issues are mistakes rather than intentional fuckery. (Especially the other mods. It's fair to say I'm the most cynical I think).
Click to expand...
Yes. I have been able to partially deduce your political leanings from your posts, but the result of said incomplete analysis is "if cynicism was a political side, A Fiery Flying Roll Black Leaf would be too extreme for the Stormfront to compare".
 
I've been thinking the Pub is slightly left-of-center but so slightly that even right-leaning people would probably feel fine here. Do I get a bonus? A permission to upload a bigger avatar or something:tongue:?
...said he, while looking at his own lack of an avatar. A letter is just fine:shade:!
Nobby-W said:
Utter Twaddle. As any right thinking person will tell you, Dungeon Crawl Classics is the definitive edition of D&D.
Click to expand...

Nobby-W said:
No, on second thoughts, DCC uber alles!
Click to expand...
Now you're talking:grin:!

Toadmaster said:
One of the things that drives me nuts is how often people base acceptable only on their view point, and sadly RPGs are not immune to this. It seems like many have difficulty differentiating the difference between "I don't like" and "is without value". There are types of games I'm not interested in but it doesn't hurt me in the least that there are people who enjoy them. Don't like LARPs, narrative games, crunch heavy games etc, fine don't play them, stating your disapproval adds no value to the discussion.

This becomes very obvious in any thread including sex or fetishes, or games like Gor, Powered by the Apocalypse, Alpha Blue, Black Tokyo etc which tend to get derailed by juvenile and judgmental posts. Now I'll admit some of these posts are funny, but it is a shame that serious discussions can't exist for some subjects. I single this specific topic as it is so blatant. It doesn't matter if I'm interested in playing these games, I'd prefer that we not send the message that only certain types of games are welcome.
Click to expand...
Yup:thumbsup:!
Toadmaster said:
I would disagree that horror gets a pass, I see a lot of the same stuff brought up with horror scenarios particularly when "safety cards" get brought up.
Click to expand...
Well, "more of a pass than others" would have been better, but I was tired already and just wanted to post and be done with that post:smile:.

Also, Agemegos Agemegos you can PM me. And let's just say I self-censor a lot when describing any sessions not involving kids as players...:wink:

KrakaJak said:
D&D 5e, the most popular version of D&D, had something in the vicinity of 14 Million players in 2017, and sales have increased by 40%-50% every year since. As many people play D&D as see Marvel movies.

Critical Role has had over 225 Million views, just on Twitch.

Actors, directors, artists and creators of the biggest media properties today constantly cite or are still actively playing D&D. Many credit D&D and roleplaying games as part of their formula for success.

RPGs are not as small time a hobby as you seem think. RPGs, and D&D specifically, are definitely culturally significant.
Click to expand...
I admit that this surprises me quite a bit...but OK, I'm fine with doing - or having done, the jury's still out - something Culturally Significant:grin:!
 
Endless Flight said:
Not that it means a hill of beans for a non-political forum but I do find it amusing that half the Pub thinks it’s left and the other half thinks it’s right.
Click to expand...

As I said before, despite being one of those who believes there's a slant, I think this more than anything else indicates you guys are doing a bang-up job.
 
With the exception of ~3 members who just can't seem to stop themselves from bringing politics here, I have no idea what the politics are of the individuals on the pub are, nor do I care to. So if the intent of the "No Politics" rule is to set politics aside so we can have mostly-civil discussions of gaming and related topics, it has worked pretty well thus far from my perspective.
 
E-Rocker said:
With the exception of ~3 members who just can't seem to stop themselves from bringing politics here, I have no idea what the politics are of the individuals on the pub are, nor do I care to.
Click to expand...
I don't know for certain, but I suspect that some of the folks here that I feel most sympatico with are actually across the chasm from me politically. But we share a dislike of censorship and the passive-aggressive (mealy mouthed?) style of arguing some folks have. Which is probably why I enjoyed the 'feisty' nature of the Site, until it became so thick with Pundit's nonsense that I had to go elsewhere (I'm thankful for the Pub).
So the friction/arguments/flame wars don't bug me near as much as the phony 'kumbaya' stuff.

But yeah, I don't want to read/argue about politics here.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Banner: The best cosmic horror & Cthulhu Mythos @ DriveThruRPG.com
Back
Top