Thursday, March 4, 2010

My Totally Mature Response to a Blog Post That Others Have Already Responded To

This one here.

My response to that blog and the one commenter:

Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat stinkypoopoohead Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat John Jacob Dingleberry Shits His Twat is My Twat Too Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat Twat.

Call us juvenile again after that. I dare you!

Funny enough I'm doing the first draft of "the meaning of story within role-playing" today for the box, so... yeah, should be a good day!
Posted by at

39 comments:

  1. JimLotFPMarch 4, 2010 at 9:51 AM

    The point being that to defend against that sort of criticism, we effectively have to do so on his terms, using his language and thinking in an effort to justify our choices and preferences.

    Sorry, not playing.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Michael McClungMarch 4, 2010 at 9:53 AM

    It's a straw man argument, for sure.

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousMarch 4, 2010 at 10:02 AM

    We is amused :-D

    ReplyDelete
  4. AnonymousMarch 4, 2010 at 10:38 AM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  5. ChrisMarch 4, 2010 at 2:33 PM

    Missed this latest teacup storm. Not going to rise to the bait. FN plays his game his way; we play ours ours.

    ReplyDelete
  6. WMarch 4, 2010 at 2:36 PM

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  7. JimLotFPMarch 4, 2010 at 2:43 PM

    What does Three Brides have to do with the post in question?

    ReplyDelete
  8. CoopdevilMarch 4, 2010 at 3:01 PM

    >His Twat is My Twat Too

    The mind boggles!

    ReplyDelete
  9. trollsmythMarch 4, 2010 at 3:04 PM

    Frankly, I'd rather Mr. Raggi spent his time making new cool stuff than bothering with trolls.

    Er, well, that sort of troll, anyway. ;p

    Well played, sir.

    ReplyDelete
  10. AnonymousMarch 4, 2010 at 3:36 PM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Jeffrey RunokiviMarch 4, 2010 at 3:59 PM

    Why Faustus? The fact is that you are wrong and WoD is a haven for frowning erstwhile gothic posures who spend more of their time weeping into their lace cuffs than actually having anything that even resembles fun. Oh...and you're WRONG!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  12. AnonymousMarch 4, 2010 at 4:06 PM

    Beware of all cock gobbling gobble cocks!

    ReplyDelete
  13. WMarch 4, 2010 at 4:13 PM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  14. AnonymousMarch 4, 2010 at 4:15 PM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  15. UnknownMarch 4, 2010 at 4:34 PM

    The argument sort of boils down to:

    Emo games are for real grown up big kids. Ages 18+ with grown up stuff (bewbies and everyone is sad?). Little babies play games that say "Ages 10+" on the box. I don't like you blogging about baby games instead of Emo games.

    How does this make you have more fun with your hobby? Who's stopping you from doing what you like?

    ReplyDelete
  16. Jeffrey RunokiviMarch 4, 2010 at 5:02 PM

    Mr. Faust...you really have sold your soul to the Devil, haven't you?
    The end of your post is right...Bollocks to the Future...it doesn't exist. Hel, it doesn't even exist in our language...there is no Future tense...so what are you worried about? Put on some eyeliner, some black nail lacquer and a velvet ascot and go cry like that sad clown of life you and your sniffling lot really are! We will all just stay over here and have fun doing what we like.

    ReplyDelete
  17. GrimMarch 4, 2010 at 5:16 PM

    dude is trying too hard.

    ReplyDelete
  18. BlUsKrEEmMarch 4, 2010 at 8:24 PM

    It seems to me that the original post was generalizing a gaming style based off of a bad experience with a shitty group, and then looking for examples to support their ideas.

    As someone who regularly plays or runs Labyrinth Lord, D&D 4th ed, and has been active in the White Wolf community for more then a decade I see a lot of this game / edition hate. From my experience I have to tell you: Every last one of you is wrong.

    Why everyone in this damn hobby feels the need to debase other people's game is just beyond me. Just because you prefer Frosted Flakes doesn't mean you have to piss in in other people's Cheerios. I do not care if you had some bad experiences with a shitty gaming group. I love these games. So shut the fuck up and you can be a magical elf over there, I'll be imitating a radioactive mutant over here. If you don't like my mutant shuffle then don't use that as an excuse to say "People who play Gama World can't dance."

    ReplyDelete
  19. The_MythMarch 4, 2010 at 9:00 PM

    The last comment really nails the coffin.

    Well said.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Jeffrey RunokiviMarch 4, 2010 at 9:07 PM

    This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Jeffrey RunokiviMarch 4, 2010 at 10:02 PM

    You are right, Bluskereem, I have been a Player Hater...and I should not be. However, Ole Mr. Faustus was not generalizing...he was using people's names.
    One thing I have realized is that arguing with people who are not fans of Old School games is a waste of time. They go about their business with all the zeal of a missionary (argue if you want...I have a degree in missions!) and will not brook trying our green eggs and ham. Fine with me, and I should not hate the player, but do not tell me that I cannot hate the game!

    ReplyDelete
  22. AnonymousMarch 5, 2010 at 2:02 AM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  23. UnknownMarch 5, 2010 at 2:55 AM

    Don't be so Emo. You're still missing the point...

    1) You might feel like Elf Quest is more "mature" than He-Man... but neither is terribly mature. Nobody into RPGs, Comics, Toys etc should be criticizing anyone else for enjoying something that's "not grown up enough".

    2) How does what Raggi or Maliszewski or any other "Old School" blogger writes about their games and preferences affect your enjoyment of your own hobby? I'm sure they could find you some "New School" rants about old games... but who really cares?

    ReplyDelete
  24. AnonymousMarch 5, 2010 at 3:46 AM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Ben BrooksMarch 5, 2010 at 3:54 AM

    I'm tending towards "Old School" for my own reasons. (Never having played that much when I was younger.) However I can appreciate what newer and/or more story driven games are doing. Everyone has something they prefer and enjoy.

    I enjoyed his article and plan to read more of his blog, and have been following LotFP for some time. (Thanks for pointing me to his blog by the way. :) )

    Now having said that:

    He DOES have some good points, and you guys ARE being dicks about it. I thought his article was pretty even handed. He acknowledges that many of you have legitimate reasons for preferring the 'old school' as he talks some of the more stilted aspects of the genre and it's community. Why do you have to be so aggressively defensive?

    ReplyDelete
  26. UnknownMarch 5, 2010 at 4:49 AM

    Don't be hating on Emo. One of my players is in an Emo band.
    xXRepresentXx

    you guys all act like… your blogosphere… etc

    Who are you talking to here? We're both posting comments… are we both part of the OSR, or the blogosphere (what are the territorial boundaries of the OSRoBlogosphere?), or does it depend on what games and/or music we like when not posting nonsense online?

    ReplyDelete
  27. TenkarMarch 5, 2010 at 4:58 AM

    Holy Crap! Faust, you're full of your own self importance.

    Simple fact. People will talk up what they enjoy. We enjoy the OSR.

    Old School Gaming is what I have fun with. 3e lost me in its version of the "DC Implosion". I really wanted to like 4e, but I just don't like the mechanics.

    You do realize that most gamers don't blog, or even read blogs? Old School, New School, Short Bus with Hockey Helmets School. It doesn't matter to most gamers out there. They'll never read this shit. They'll be playing 4e cause it says D&D, or Vampire, or... gee... that's about it.

    As for story telling... every 4e adventure I've read (first three published by wizards) were the definition of Rail Road. Maybe they've gotten better, but I havent had the desire to check.

    ReplyDelete
  28. AnonymousMarch 5, 2010 at 5:06 AM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  29. AnonymousMarch 5, 2010 at 5:16 AM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  30. UnknownMarch 5, 2010 at 5:18 AM

    so you're falling back on the claim that you're not part of an online grouping.

    It just so happens that I wrote about this very topic yesterday. From the post:

    "My advice to anyone who wants to run 1974 D&D with superheroes and battlemats, or Exalted using Matt Finch’s “Old School Primer” would be to just go for it and have fun. Don’t worry about whether you think your game fits into any “school”, and just focus on having fun with it."

    Yep.

    Old School, New School, Short Bus with Hockey Helmets School. It doesn't matter to most gamers out there.

    Awesome, and exactly right.

    ReplyDelete
  31. TenkarMarch 5, 2010 at 5:31 AM

    Faust, I read your chest pounding, authoritative college thesis of a post: how about this?

    "You also have elevated a single edition of a single game to the status of a bible, complete with appendices. This is religion at its heart, and what do all religions have in common? Hatred of change, unwillingness to tolerate dissent, they’re a haven for people who seek shelter from the consequences of their own social problems, they are full of bullies and disciplinarians, and they tolerate no narrative that conflicts with their own."

    Again, full of yourself and one far out conclusion. BTW, which edition are we referring to, as the OSR tends to go with 3 early editions of D&D and 1st ed AD&D. I mean, this is further afield then comparing the King James and the Roman Catholic Bibles? Or is Old Testament D&D, New Testament AD&D and the King James AD&D 2e? Where do the Red Sea Scrolls fit into your thesis?

    Damn, we're a bunch of bullies with social problems that have no tolerance of others.

    Thanks dude. You know me so well.

    ReplyDelete
  32. TenkarMarch 5, 2010 at 5:36 AM

    Stuart: Heh, let see that become a politically incorrect forum sig for someone ;)

    In all seriousness, all sides of the hobby need each other, as there is much overlap. I'm sure I could enjoy a game of 4e if the DM was friggin' amazing, just like a piss poor DM could sour me on C&C of LL. In the end it's always the players and the DM that make a game succeed, not the rules.

    ReplyDelete
  33. AnonymousMarch 5, 2010 at 5:43 AM

    This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  34. TenkarMarch 5, 2010 at 5:54 AM

    Just realized, Unearthed Arcana would be the Dead Sea Scrolls... there your go, give it to your professor... I guarantee you a C+ at the least ;)

    ReplyDelete
  35. UnknownMarch 5, 2010 at 6:00 AM

    In all seriousness, all sides of the hobby need each other, as there is much overlap

    Mike "4e School" Mearls is a frequent commenter on Jeff "Space Helmet School" Rients blog. Ryan "MMO School" Dancey often comments over at the RPG "Angry Pipe School" Pundits blog.

    Dogs and Cats living together... mass hysteria! :)

    Stuart I just looked at some of the posts on your blog and you're right, you don't come across as internal to the OSR blogosphere at all. But then, your posts are remarkably balanced, aren't they?

    I thought this one on the Bene Gesserit was really UNbalanced... but like I said "I think the idea of balanced classes in RPGs is pretty over rated anyway."

    For Stuart, Tenkar and others here who're copping my foul mouthed tirades - if you look at the comments in my own blog you'll see that my manner there is a little different. I'm taking the liberty here of speaking a language Flame Princess understands... the language of twats. Don't make the mistake of thinking I'll speak to you like this on my own blog.

    The Attack Hook can be an effective method of building traffic to your site, but it depends on whether you want to focus on just number of hits or if you want to grow a certain type of community. If your traffic comes from Attack Hooks you might find the comment section is always a bit volatile. They also tend to spike traffic and have a short term effect on your blog.

    I strongly encourage you to consider focusing more on the Resource Hook. Google will treat your blog better, and you'll build a more enjoyable community for your site. Do more posts about Equipment for the Victorian Era and I'm likely to visit your blog via a Google search.

    There's so many people writing ranty posts... and we're ALL better than that.

    ReplyDelete
  36. JimLotFPMarch 5, 2010 at 6:05 AM

    Yesterday was the biggest day ever as far as hits to this blog.

    Bleh.

    ReplyDelete
  37. KentMarch 6, 2010 at 1:53 AM

    Twat and so on
    I thought you didn't drink Raggi.

    Anyway it is pathetic of you to delete faustusnotes comments.

    ReplyDelete
  38. JimLotFPMarch 6, 2010 at 7:14 AM

    Perhaps, but the entire point of this post was that I wasn't going to engage him or his arguments. That point is defeated if he's arguing his point with other people in the comments of the very post made to not engage him.

    ReplyDelete
  39. KentMarch 7, 2010 at 12:41 AM

    You and Rients have a little more integrity in the face of opposition than the other *players* so it is a pity to see such a jokey diminution.

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)