Except, as you've already (quite condescendingly, which I find funny coming from the person failing to grasp the concept) pointed out, an analogy relies on fundamental similarities to be recognizable.
Political/Armed forces affiliation (something which generally determines how you will act in a given situation) and race (something which has little to no bearing on your attitude or actions) are fundamentally dissimilar things. There is no analogy to be made between the two.
This is the point you stubbornly refuse to see and then keep assuming it is everyone else who is missing it.
Where have I explicitly stated that that is the part of the analogy that I think is similar? Again, I challenge you to find, quote and bold that part of my post. I already know you're going to fail if attempt it, because I have not done so. In fact, I have stated zero judgments about the specifics of this analogy, I have only stated judgments about people's counters to the analogy.
You are inferring something that I have not said. And in doing so, continue to make the mistakes that I have been pointing out.
Again, you're focusing on the specifics of the analogy, instead of trying to understand the concept being expressed.
Me: I don't like cars, I was hit by a blue car once.
You: Not all cars are blue.
You're focusing on the wrong part.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Would moralizing about situations in game worlds count as a sacred cow of D&D/Pathfinder, or RPGs in general?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Classes with poison use:
Poisoner Rogues (no alignment restriction)
Alchemists (no alignment restriction)
Ninjas (no alignment restriction)
Daggermark Poisoner (no alignment restriction)
Assassin (any non-good)Classes that can use poison with no repercussions:
Everyone except a Paladin.
is the POISON evil? no. But the reasons people use poison is. And thus, poison usage freely, evil.Make up your mind. Is it absolute morality or not.
If it is, poison is inherently evil and makes anyone who uses it more evil.
If it isn't, then some people's intent when using it does not color the act itself.
I'd say it's much more a case of honor rather than good/evil. Honorable characters, like the paladin, would generally consider poison use to be dishonorable.
I think Rynjin has replied for me and clearly IronTruth doesn't understand the definition that he actually copied and pasted. Let's break this down yet again because this is lost on him:
Apple is to fruit as lettuce is to vegetable.
In the analogy he's putting he is not comparing two things correctly
Goblin is to RACE as DRC militia is to an ORGANIZATION OF PEOPLE
Since goblin is a race and not just an organization he needs to compare something equal which would be a race/ethnicity or something that goes beyond simple military/political organization.
Making an analogy doesn't give cart blanche to say anything i.e. "Obama with his DoJ is like Hitler and his SS" . It isn't "semantics" to call out an analogy that isn't a correct or fair comparison.
You are arguing semantics, mostly because you're focused on a specific detail instead of looking at the larger picture. You keep harping on this detail, as if it's going to change my mind, but all you're doing is repeating the same thing over and over, which I've already told you isn't the point.
Me: You have to put the car in drive to go forward.
You: But the car's in REVERSE!
Caps added because you seem to like caps.
Stop focusing on the goblin = African thugs aspect. Seriously, ignore that element of the analogy. Completely forget that that is important, because it isn't. Look at the broader picture.
I kind of want to bet someone money you'll continue to focus on that detail though. I would find it both amusing and profitable.
Since this has degenerated into a bunch of inappropriate mudslinging, I'm locking it.