|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
If he won't listen then he won't listen... but that doesn't mean you have to stop talking. Keep giving him advice outside the game and see if he doesn't eventually start taking it.
Now if you don't have that kind of patience then it's best to just find a new GM and hopefully the slap in the face that he wasn't good enough will motivate him to learn more before trying again.
Toon would annoy me. Just because of the word itself, referencing cartoons and/or Roger Rabbit, to me it sounds sillier and as if the user is not taking his character very seriously.
Is this fair? You are painting possibly very false motives onto someone else just because that is how you yourself feel about a word. In all likelihood they have their own completely unrelated way of looking at the term. I can assure you if for example I came from one of my niece's D&D parties and had the term "toon" stuck in my head. And then was referring to my character as my toon in your game; it would NOT mean I was taking your game or my character any less seriously then anyone else.
Just going by connotation from my perspective no ill was ever intended by the use of "toon" ..."murderhobo" is a different story. But "toon"? Why get enraged that someone is getting all um... slangy or trendy with their language? If you want arm-chair psycho-analysis I would say the disrespect is entirely in the head of the one getting upset. And no good can come from such an attitude. I don't care about the use of the term... I do care about the people who are taking this way too seriously. Make me the bad girl if you wish as long as you can step back and laugh at yourself later. ;)
Is it? Yay!
I suppose I should be amused by all this nerd rage over what some people call characters. I mean really does it matter? As long as you understand their meaning and you obviously do or you would be confused rather than enraged.
Toon: as I said already, it doesn't bother me anymore. To my ear it sounds extra cute and slangy. I don't use it but that is just because it still seems a bit strange to me. I suppose if I was in a group that used it regularly I might start using it without even realizing it myself.
Murderhobo: The first and to date only place I have seen this is right here on these very forums. It also caused me a moment of confusion when first reading it; and it strikes me as rather derogatory in nature despite the frequent use here. I might have even used it myself in an effort to be extra snarky.
Mob: I always thought this term was literal; as in that mob of minor enemies you have to fight to get to the boss. It has been fun seeing other peoples ideas on where the term may have started. I do use this from time to time as it is straight forward English and fits my interpretation of the meaning perfectly. And we all want to speak clearly don't we?
Tank, Healer, Controller, DeePS, Buffer, pull, aggro, DOT, HOT, ect.: MMO terms. I use them and I think everyone does now. They are as new as MMOs I think but they are also the perfect way to describe roles in a RPG, computer or not. No better words exist for these meanings.
Wow I can't believe this string of lies and slander. All I did was fix a misleading statistic posted by someone else and now somehow I am supposed to be saying violence against men is ok?! You owe me an apology.
The real issue is how do we help women have an equal voice in a male dominated world. How in ANY WAY is violence against men relevant toward improving the plight of women? Or are you somehow suggesting men's issues should take precedence EVEN in a thread about objectification of women? You want to solve the violent nature of many men fine that is a lofty goal but this isn't the place to do it. Why not start your own thread to cover violence against men?
Thank you LazarX. That is it exactly.
Oh and Sissyl, the topic isn't domestic violence either. The topic is objectification of women. In case you didn't bother to read that. Although someone stated 40% of men are victims of domestic abuse, how much of that is male on male domestic abuse you know like fathers hitting their sons? I would suspect a lot of it based on the different statistic I quoted.
The term threw me off the first time I heard it; I thought they were talking literally about a cartoon of some sort. But after it became apparent they were discussing a PC I had no real issue with it. I wouldn't use it myself, because it doesn't sound right. But who cares if anyone else uses it? As long as your language is clearly understood you are fine.
Dept of Justice wrote:
Most perpetrators of sexual violence are men. Among acts of sexual violence committed against women since the age of 18, 100% of rapes, 92% of physical assaults, and 97% of stalking acts were perpetrated by men. Sexual violence against men is also mainly male violence: 70% of rapes, 86% of physical assaults, and 65% of stalking acts were perpetrated by men.
A lot of this violence against men is done by men not so much is done by women. Trying to dismiss sexism because men are abused too is absurd when so much of it is done by men.
How can anyone pick just one?
Imowen my twice fallen Paladin/Black Guard Archer... tragic but epic story of love and war but nearly impossible to go back to playing her.
Mei Chan Min my Rim Sorceress from Star Wars. So full of wisdom yet so powerless to affect her own fate.
'Hearts' My struggling investigator who liked both cybernetics and magic and could never choose between them from Shadowrun.
Lady Lucky my ancient martial artist from Palladium Fantasy who was ALWAYS deep into some form trouble in one of the best City Campaigns I have played in. Her in party rival was in no small part to blame for most of it. The GM should have just named his game the adventures of Lady Lucky and the Snake Sorceress. Frienemies to the very end.
Of course 'Mer-Maid' my marine biology based super who got Rifted to Rifts earth. Lots of craziness in that short lived game.
Or Evangaline the burning angel from Nightbane. Who somehow made it to more universes than I care to number ranging from Palladium Fantasy all the way to Rifts and even Robotech.
Hama it is a musical. Kind of hard to have a musical without music.
Real love is what she and her sister had... not what she could get from her latest boyfriends. I still don't see any homosexuality... Ms Skaggs must have had a horrible upbringing if she can't identify with the love siblings have for each other and in her strange world reinterprets it as homosexuality.
The whole main cast have lost everything they cared about... and instead of finding each other and forging a new future they remain at arms length from each other.
And by the end what has changed? Spike goes off to die. Faye has the whole girl out of time theme slammed in her face. Ed and Ein leave much the same as when they came and Jet just continues on. It leaves me feeling depressed by the end. Sure it is a fun ride getting there but still...
Yeah like Aelryinth I have been mostly doing solos to get the full experience. My wizard started act5 at 88k damage and blasted all out of her path at torment 1. That is until that first big angel boss where I learned the hard way why my build was weak. I had no way to escape being cornered and once cornered I was easily killed. So I dropped to master and kept going. At this point I had 200k damage because the drops of 61 level and up make 60th level stuff look like toys. However I was determined to finish the act at all costs and so I pushed higher and higher without regard for my ever worse gear score (I still have too many level 60 items to function effectively at level 70.) But as I hit points where I found it too difficult I would just drop the difficulty and keep going... by the time I finished act 5 I was all the way down to normal difficulty. Clearly my poor wizard needs a rebuild from the ground up.
That isn't surprising Pan. Men don't have to deal with sexist behavior on a daily basis. You probably only think of it in an academic sense if you think of it at all. So yeah, it isn't surprising if the term never came up in your circle of buddies. It isn't an issue for you, not even in the reverse direction.
Sure you could use that too. It isn't the popular way but it gets the point across just as well I suppose. Feel free if "reverse" has too much baggage for you.
Well I had more fun with this in d20 than Rifts. Being me in Rifts was a lot of running for my life from very dangerous enemies and hoping someone bigger got the bad guys attention.
The d20 game was more like wandering from universe to universe and we weren't as bound by classes. I had a WWII era German submachine gun and a handful of spells by the time the campaign went on permanent vacation. Fun stuff. Good luck with it.
Are you confused by the term? Sexism is singled out in many cases as against women. While strictly it can mean against either gender; if you asked random people on the street about sexism most if not all of them would assume you meant against women. This makes the addition of "reverse" to the term necessary to make it clear you are targeting men not women.
Freehold DM wrote:
Would I be objectifying a sexy man who started undressing for an ad showcasing dice? I might try not to... but I probably would. So yes I suppose it would be reverse sexism.
It still doesn't make it right even if you do it to a man Freehold DM.
The only thing surprising about the ad was that it was for a convention. Did you all miss the fact that she walks in in a sexy outfit and starts undressing next to a dice display case? So from the start I was expecting her to be using sex to sell something RPG related like dice.
Objectification of women is a form of sexism, so yes this was sexist. The fact that everyone it seems uses sex to sell isn't an excuse to continue... but since sex actually does work very well in selling I guess a few voices in objection aren't going to change anything. Money rules marketing not good ethics.
PS: Upon further consideration maybe men wouldn't have noticed the dice rack... they did pick someone attractive to undress, they probably didn't even look at the dice.
Matt Thomason wrote:
Yes, this is the internet and that's what people love to do on forums is argue endlessly. Fortunately people aren't that way IRL.
Lazurin Arborlon wrote:
I dont know I think he tried very hard to not make it a label but a descriptor of aproach. Maybe sensitivities being what they are right now there is no good way to make people happy. I felt like it was a sliding scale not a "your are type a, you are type b." thing. For example I would say I am pretty 50/50. I have ideas in my head of the person I would be happy pretending to be for a year before I ever even get started on numbers. But that doesnt change the fact I want that person to be good at one form of combat, and have at least one secondary function that contributes to the party...trap finder, crafter, social butterfly, smarty pants...whatever.
Arguing descriptors vs slider bars is moot. Attitude is what makes two dissimilar style gamers able to sit down and enjoy a game together. Lets face it the difficulty of searching out two random gamers with the exact same play style is high. But if they both come to the table with an inclusive attitude then they can both have fun.
Matt you do realize your three (system, story, and game) seem to align with the three established play styles (gamist, narrativist, and simulationist) except that you seem to have reversed the meaning of the numbers on the last one such that a lower number is more in favor of realistic portrayal vs that the higher number meaning stronger as the standard definition would have. This is kind of awesome, like someone working out through their own logic process something others have done before and getting a better understanding of it as a result. You should definitely check out the standard definitions and evolve your own work after seeing the work of others.
One bit of advise however, I don't like meaningless numbers. Rather than say 1-9, why not say high, medium, or low with a clear definition of each... or as many points on the range as you can clearly define if three doesn't seem like enough.
So scientific vs artistic seems to be a relabeling of optimizer vs role player? ~sigh~ Relabeling something doesn't change it. So the question can we reconcile the two in the same group? Yes, I do it all the time. BUT it takes a group of people who want to work past their differences to enjoy the game in order to do it. Sadly the GM is powerless to invoke such cooperation by edict. It helps a LOT if the players start out as friends outside the game, but it isn't mandatory; I have found myself part of a couple pick up groups with just such an evolved attitude toward inclusion. Perhaps the most important part is to NOT think about what I want from the game, and instead think about what I can bring to the game.
Matthew Koelbl wrote:
First, I am sure SHIELD agents do carry credentials and if given the chance it is clear Coulson would have presented them. But the guards refused to consider anything other than their pass code. Second as agents in the field the are acting as representatives of SHIELD itself. I could understand if the guards used a secure line to call up the chain of command and maybe get further orders, but they simply locked and loaded. Which is bad for two reasons 1: They have NO idea if these agents have been sent here on an approved mission or not. 2: If they fail then their superiors have far less intelligence as to what happened at the destroyed facility.
I bolded the false part of your statement. From what we have seen so far SHIELD seems to have no limits to it's authority over local or national concerns. So you are false in assuming they had no authority to enter. I could be wrong but so far I have seen no evidence to the contrary.
I have no idea about the future of Skye as a character on the show or in the movies. But a family member of mine works as one of the editors for this show, and he said that in all the test viewings before release and the feedback from viewers, her character is the least liked character on the show by a large margin. The producers thought they hit a home run with her character but Marvel fans and testing audiences have both been brutal.
I did a web search for this claim and guess what I found? Nothing. The vast majority of complaints are bad acting and crappy stories. I am beginning to suspect you made this claim up. Care to post a link and prove me wrong?
Um... Radar at a secret base? That is as stupid as bringing a spotlight with you while you hide in the bushes so you can see if anyone is coming. And it is highly likely the base is sound proof. Now why there weren't passive things like security cameras aimed at the landing pad I have no idea. But it is good writing that they wouldn't see a plane coming or hear it land.
If there is one person they could stand to lose it would be Ward. I understand Skye isn't popular but I like her and would be a fair bit cross if they wrote her out just because her popularity was low.
Matthew Koelbl wrote:
Your analogy isn't right...
I would fix it by saying a cop with a search warrant in hand attempts to enter a hospital to take the medicine for his own wife's life. The guard doesn't know the cop isn't supposed to use that medicine for personal reasons, but he fights back with lethal force anyway. The guard in this situation is clearly the bad guy and the cop wouldn't get in trouble for killing him. He might get in trouble later for unjustified use of the medicine however depending on who finds out.
Actually that episode convinced me that either Quinn or one of the other SHIELD team people has one of the occular implants. Why else would the clairvoyant set this all up? The clairvoyant can clearly track his own implants so he was counting on using this to get someone with an implant to the secret location and revealing it.