Are Half-Elves Boring?


Gamer Life General Discussion

1 to 50 of 84 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Radiant Oath

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Let me start by saying, I like half-elves. They've got an elfy sort of perspective that's human-like enough that I can wrap my head around (I have a really hard time roleplaying an elf's long-lived perspective) and they can grow beards where usually elves can't! That said...I worry that sometimes I gravitate to them TOO often when thinking of characters, wanting to play characters that are "cool" and "handsome" and have a kind of "protagonist energy." Like, you don't really SEE fantasy media that treats other non-human types like dwarves and gnomes as anything but sidekicks. Most of them don't get much personality beyond "They're a dwarf," or "They're a gnome." Half-orcs have similar issues, since the average one has the fact that they ARE a half-orc dominating their roleplay. So...am I a boring roleplayer because most of my characters fall into the special-snowflake half-elf category?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The thing I love about PF1 is that I could play any ancestry over and over again and it will always be interesting. There is a lot more to just having pointy ears. You could be from any number of places around Golarion. You could have any number of classes, even the same class over and over and still have variety. Even if classes had only two options each, you could still differentiate on personality. There is no limit to where you can take it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have mixed feelings about half-elves. Sure, Aragorn [a Dunedain, so practically a half-elf] and Tanis Half-Elven have amply demonstrated that there's drama to be had in the whole "one foot in each culture but don't really belong to either" trope. But in RPGs, they're often a bit lackluster mechanically. In PF1, for example, they're not really much different from humans. If you want something more distinctive, you have to dig into alternate racial traits, race-specific feats or archetypes, or find a way to exploit the multitalented racial trait early on.

The one half-elf I've created for PFS 1E (out of 17 PCs, to date) is a half-sibling to my wife's half-orc. Our original idea was that they would adventure together, and complement each other's schticks, but we ended up not playing them together very often after the first few levels. A big factor in that was that my wife had a lot more fun with her PC, who was easy to make very effective at being a strength-based rogue, but I struggled some with keeping my inquisitor fun to play.

OTOH, I have several human PCs. The bonus feat and skill ranks are a boon to many different builds, and exploring all the wildly different human cultures in Golarion is fun. I debated making some of them half-elven, but full human just ended up being the more appealing option for various reasons.

I have yet to build and play an elf in PFS (apart from a few times playing the iconic rogue when I was starting out). Much like half-elves, the various character concepts I've had for which I might have considered an elf, another race won out.

Radiant Oath

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Tim Emrick wrote:
I have mixed feelings about half-elves. Sure, Aragorn [a Dunedain, so practically a half-elf] and Tanis Half-Elven have amply demonstrated that there's drama to be had in the whole "one foot in each culture but don't really belong to either" trope.

And part of the issue, as a friend suggested when I was discussing this with him, is that other ancestries, like half-orcs, tieflings, dhampir and changelings take that trope and have a bit more EDGE, so half-elves end up seeming less interesting by comparison (unless you use an edgier elf like a drow). It just leaves half-elves with the "human for people who think humans are boring" schtick.

Quote:

OTOH, I have several human PCs. The bonus feat and skill ranks are a boon to many different builds, and exploring all the wildly different human cultures in Golarion is fun. I debated making some of them half-elven, but full human just ended up being the more appealing option for various reasons.

I have yet to build and play an elf in PFS (apart from a few times playing the iconic rogue when I was starting out). Much like half-elves, the various character concepts I've had for which I might have considered an elf, another race won out.

See, I'm not so concerned with how GOOD the ancestry is statwise, I'm concerned about it being boring from a NARRATIVE standpoint.

I'm trying to design a PC for the Pathfinder: Kingmaker video game, and I have a concept I really LIKE (a Paladin/Aldori Swordlord) but I kind of feel like it only really works with humans or human-adjacent ancestries like half-elves and such, and since humans are boring by default, naturally I looked to half-elves-and-orcs. Problem with a half-orc Swordlord is a prominent NPC, Kassil Aldori, already IS a half-orc Swordlord, so the PC would be redundant with him.

An elf would have been alive longer than Brevoy's existed as a nation, so why would the human Aldori's and the Crown's political grievances seem important to them?

Same with a dwarf joining an organization concerned both with human politics and agile swordplay, especially since said dwarf would give up their clan name and adopt Aldori as a surname, something I imagine a dwarf would consider outright blasphemous. That'd be a weird dwarf, and PFKM already HAS a weird dwarf in the form of Harrim, the pessimistic Groetus cleric who can't forge anything right.

And all the other ancestries have similar redundancies with Party Members or other NPCs...so what DO I make my Swordlord to best fit the story the gane is trying to tell? Humans and half-elves seem to be the only ones that "slot" into the character I'm looking to make from a narrative standpoint, but does that make me a boring roleplayer since I've played similar characters in my play-by-posts and such?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Why exactly are humans boring be default?

Radiant Oath

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Because players are human, so you don't have to worry about incorporating an ancestral perspective into how you roleplay the character. You don't have to consider how your extremely long life would color your interactions with comparatively shorter-lived people like if you were roleplaying an elf, or consider requiring constant novelty in order to stave off the Bleaching if you're roleplaying a gnome, for example.


10 people marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Characters aren't boring because of race and/or ancestry/background/heritage. Characters are boring because the player runs them as boring.

Even the bog-standard human fighter can be either boring or interesting based on how the player develops and presents them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Humanity gives you practically the full range of human fiction and a fair chunk of human nonfiction to work with for your character. If you find all that boring there's no hope. Half-elves can use much of that, plus rejecting their elven blood or their human blood while the world still sees those in them, or seeking acceptance by one or the other.

In particular for a paladin duelist there's the conflict between the injustice in duels (strength of people's sword arms doesn't correlate well with the justice of their cause) and the justice they serve. Not that you'd necessarily see a lot of that in a computer game I guess.

Radiant Oath

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I mean, that's just the conventional TTRPG wisdom from what I've heard on the forums: everyone picks humans for their super-stellar bonuses and it's boring and lazy roleplaying, that things like orcs/half-orcs, tieflings, kitsune, goblins and skittermanders are just a better roleplaying experience.

Guhhh, now I feel more indecisive than before!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Another way to look at it is humans are a blank slate. I mean how many times have you heard folks want to go against type when it comes to elves and dwarves? These alternate ancestries have baked in traits and such to give them flavor. Sometimes though it stifles creativity. Humans on the other hand, are easy to customize.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I gotta agree with DCP upthread. Half-Elves aren't inherently boring, any more than any standard race is. Mechanically they've got some flare, some blandness, and there are alternate traits to refine them more.

The setting default for a lot of campaign worlds has been that elves are aloof tree huggers that spend 99 out of every 100 years contemplating their navels. Meanwhile orcs are traditionally portrayed as they are in Golarion - savage brutes who lust for battle and conquest. In those settings, being half-elf would be like "meh, you're half Neutral Hippie so who cares?" versus being a half-or which would be "the baby might grow up to EAT us!"

Baked in character interest.

Imagine a setting that flipped the script? How about a setting where elves, with their inhumanly long lifespan and increased intellect are actually cold, calculating schemers that are constantly finding new ways to torture humanity with their latest experiments. Orcs meanwhile are a proud hillfolk that have been captured and exploited for centuries by elves as humanoid draft animals.

Being a half-orc in that world could make you inherently sympathetic to most while being a half-elf you are at best considered an abomination by all cultures and at worst hunted by everyone as their natural enemy. Neither of those have anything to do with the mechanics of the race and entirely to do with how the setting positions them to be perceived and roleplayed.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I agree with Mark: Lore of the setting in question is everything!

I played in a campaign back in the early '90s, where the humans and elves were at war.

The elves were cold, scary, unknowable, alien invaders who didn't think like people... and who didn't think humans were people.

The elves had all gone away for "a little while" (i.e. ~7000 years) and in the intervening time, the humans had advanced from scattered bands of hunter-gatherers to standard fantasy RPG levels of society, technology, and magic.

And when the elves returned, they were NOT happy that these "lesser creatures" had taken over "their" land... and launched a war of extermination.

Radiant Oath

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I mean, in this particular instance, the setting IS Golarion (Pathfinder: Kingmaker, specifically). Half-elves ARE there in Brevoy, but part of me wonders does half-elf really ADD anything to the character, in the sense that with the concept I wanna work with, you could remove the half-elf aspect and just be human and NOTHING about the character would change?

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
I mean, in this particular instance, the setting IS Golarion (Pathfinder: Kingmaker, specifically). Half-elves ARE there in Brevoy, but part of me wonders does half-elf really ADD anything to the character, in the sense that with the concept I wanna work with, you could remove the half-elf aspect and just be human and NOTHING about the character would change?

The thing with half-elf, in my experience, is you get to play with any human ethnicity you want *and* play the moody emo loner who 'doesn't fit in' and isn't like everyone else.

Whether you're Chelish or Taldan or Ulfen or Varisian or Mwangi, there's an entire *other* story behind your parentage (and that human culture may or may not be entirely cool with your 'other' heritage), and some unusual potential for having maybe watched your human parent grow old and die, while the elven parent may not even be middle-aged and, if you've met them, acting more like a sibling than a parent.

And if you don't want to deal with that, you don't have to.

You could even come up with some funky situation where members of an elven culture didn't want to personally interact with bordering humans, and deliberately sired some half-elves to act as go-betweens, and while that practice may have died out generations ago, there are still half-elven descendants of the original half-elves in a town of almost entirely half-elves, sort of embarrassing the elves with their stubborn refusal to go away, forever reminding them of that awkward experiment...

The idea of a half-elf (or half-orc) with two parents of the same (half) heritage and not 'one elf, one human', is fun. They might even have a name for themselves, other than 'half-elf,' since they aren't 'half' anything, but exactly like their mothers and fathers!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yes, Half-Elves are boring.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

A character is what you make of it. I've made many characters of different ancestries and sometimes their heritage plays a part, and sometimes it doesn't. It doesn't have to be an important part of the character any more than being a dwarf or halfling does. Granted, some ancestries have interesting bits that comes with them, like kobolds or gnomes, but they also don't have to be an important part of those characters either.

Any option is only as interesting as you make it. I made a human druid who is comparable toa crazy conspiracy theorist in real life but is actual right about fighting otherworldly invaders. The character is not terribly informed by his heritage, but is still interesting.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

So we're trying to avoid redundancies in the story of the Kingmaker video game, we're shooting for Aldori Swordlord and we want someone to fit into the narrative of the political struggle between the Aldoris' and the nobles of Brevoy?

Ok, well a quick glance a the Golarion wiki tells me that the swordlords are so called b/c they are taught the dueling style of Baron Aldori, they swear to a pact never to teach this style to a non-member and part of their goals is to maintain the independence of Restov from Brevoy.

Why would ANYONE join this group? Well, let's see...

1. The free city of Restov is described as fairly cosmopolitan but also "rough around the edges." Many folks in the city want to appear as cultured as their neighbors. If you've got the talent to get in, being a member of the prestigious Swordlord Academy could bring a lot of clout

2. You've got a bone to pick with members of a rival dueling school. You had raw, natural talent but the other street guilds gave you thrashings instead of training. You found a home and a forge to temper your rage into honed skill

3. You were a legacy of the academy. You parent, and your parent's parent have both been members before you. It is only proper and fitting that you should join the ranks of the Aldori - it is your destiny.

4. House Rogarvia has disappeared. While this should make the free city of Restov MORE free, instead the city's fate hangs on a razor's edge. You've been given everything you hold dear by the graces of the free city, and you'll do everything you can to ensure it REMAINS free!

Now, what races do these describe? ANY of them.

You mention above that an elf wouldn't take any notice of the politics involved and you're right, but elves adore art, even martial arts. An elf then might easily join the academy and pledge themselves to this pact for love of the duel, only to find later that they have a genuine passion for the ideals of freedom and justice that the school was founded on.

Dwarves too - this school is about honing a skill in battle and using that skill to ensure that those born free remain free, so long as they follow the lawful oath of the pact. That SCREAMS dwarf, and I'm sure that a case could be made that a proud dwarf would ADD TO, not REPLACE their sometimes numerous surnames in joining this legion.

But who else? Tengu, for their love of swords. Humans, half-elves, and half-orcs b/c, y'know, humans. Halflings - being a swordlord means never again being picked on as a slave or servant and ensuring your blade can be spent in the cause of freedom is another blessing on top! Maybe a grippli/catfolk/lizardfolk/ratfolk; a poor "savage" frog-man who was treated as little more than an animal in the gutters of Restov until a woman with a blade at her side extended a hand and an offer.

The 4 elemental races, the Ifrit, Oread, Undine and Sylph might have a weird time aligning their lineage with Restov unless you make half their parentage human from the city. Some monstrous races too might be tough to fit in like Orcs or Kobolds.

The most important thing to remember is that the common fluff of the race, their intended "history" in the Golarion setting, doesn't necessarily define YOUR character. Your PC is, by their very nature of being an adventurer, the exception to the rule. The stereotypical dwarf for example might be trained for fighting but they have no use for going off on damned fool adventures. Their training with arms and armor is for defense of home and hearth; kobolds, mites and other crazier threats lurk in the shadows all around the caverns we've yet to mine. A good dwarf's place is working a pick axe or hammer in service to their clan, not out seeing fortune and glory in some ancient wilderness!

But YOUR dwarf... maybe they were raised in greater Brevoy under the oppressive rule of the old nobles. Now that there is chaos they've escaped to Restov, only to find that they're just another mook on the street. They have no fortunes, no respect, no clan... but then they managed to best another novice and secure a spot at the Academy. Here they have a home, a name, and they're part of something going back years. Suddenly the ancient halls of the Five Kings mountains or the stereotypes of forging and mining don't matter. All that matters is swords, fighting, and the tradition they've sworn themselves to.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

A Half-Elf's advantage is the ability to poach things from three of the seven core ancestries.

One trick I explored once but only partially carried out was piling on the spell-like abilities at 1st level. This can be done via alternate racial traits, the Arcane Talent feat, and various race, regional, and other traits based on the background of you elf or human parent. You could have a fighter or other non-spellcasting martial character with access to more spells at a time than the actual party spellcaster has.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

To the initial question: I find the lore regarding half-elves in Golarion to be kind of boring. It's pretty stock-standard D&D-esque stuff.

I think this is part of the design philosophy from when PFRPG was first launched 11 years ago, when they decided to make the game as back-compatible as possible with all the D&D 3.5 material that was already on the market.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, Golarion started off as a place where the designers were having their games right? And they started off playing 3x D&D correct? So it'd stand to reason that 3x half-elves' flavor initially sounds a lot like Golarion's half-elves.

Since this is a Kingmaker video game, based in the world of Golarion, the default half-elf is gonna seem pretty boring: you're born of 2 worlds, human and elf. Neither side really accepts you and even though you age much faster than your elven parentage, you still age slower than your human kin so you're forever trapped between these 2 cultures with all the angst and ennui.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

But you can play a half-elf who isn't necessarily the first generation offspring of a human and an elf. My last half-elf PC was many generations removed from any pureblooded elves, and she grew up in a village where most of the inhabitants had similar origins.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It's rare that I play half-elves, I have one in PFS1 (who eventually became my current highest level character) Seeker tier 'rural' Scarab Sage.

First character was initially 'just some rando fighter', respec'd into barbarian with defensive stance at L2, and didn't look back.

I have one in PFS2 who had the (mis)fortune of encountering a drunken deity, calling them on their BS, and the next morning ended up with a funky sword, a drunken bird that only spoke in bird-words, and said drunken deity is apparently having a riot watching the adventures of them on Scry-Per-View. :P

Second character is pretty deep -- they delved into the Rivethune teachings to reconcile their elven and human halves, and it launched into something bigger.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think the "humans can be just as interesting" argument misses the point - yes, you can have a very interesting human character by giving them lots of personality.

But if you clone that character (personality and all) but make the clone be green and have 6 arms, I think it would be hard to argue that the clone is more interesting, because green people with 6 arms are pretty novel (this isn't subjective, no one on earth has ever met a green person with 6 arms, it is objectively a deviation from the entirety of the human experience of what people look like).

The problem people have is that they make non human characters less interesting than they could be because they make stereotypical elves or dwarves. The full breadth of everything you can do with a human character is available to other characters, people are just mostly limiting themselves from doing that because most media portrays fictional cultures as monolithic planets of the hats. In reality these other species of people would be just as diverse as humans are.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

IMO, with the advent of 2e, all character ancestry options are fluff for role-playing. Once upon a time, the grognards tell me, character ancestry (called "race" then) greatly mattered as to the direction and distance your PC could take in a campaign. By making the playing field equitable it all boils down to the setting the GM is running and session 0 decisions.

To answer the OP directly:
Half Elves are no more or less boring than any other character option.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Members of the design team have asked that we not use the word "fluff" on these forums when describing their product as some of the designers feel it is a term that is wholly dismissive of their work.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
dirtypool wrote:
Members of the design team have asked that we not use the word "fluff" on these forums when describing their product as some of the designers feel it is a term that is wholly dismissive of their work.

Interesting. It seems a catchall for personality, appearance, and all the non-number related stuff that makes a character more than just numbers on a sheet.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Whatever your view of it: the Creative Director of the product line this forum exists to discuss has said that the usage of that term makes him less interested in engaging with us, here.

James Jacobs wrote:
Be that as it may, the use of "fluff" as a term feels derogatory and diminishing to me, and when I see it used instead of more respectful terms like "flavor" or "lore" that tends to chase me away from taking part in discussions. So from a perspective of creating a friendly and welcoming place for me to take part in a discussion, it's far from a quibble to me. All I ask is for folks to keep this in mind, and to not be confused if the overuse of the word "fluff" to describe what I get paid to do ends up minimizing my interest in taking part in the back and forth. ;-)

Let's be respectful of that.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Fluff

Quote:

something of no consequence

The book is pure fluff, but fun to read.

If you only care about mechanics that's fine, but you don't have to insult the other components of the work. Fluff is an insult unless you're talking about a pillow or a fox tail. It got picked up and spread because it was an insult to diminish the effect and effort that went into non-mechanics of published works.

That doesn't make it not be an insult.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:

If you only care about mechanics that's fine, but you don't have to insult the other components of the work. Fluff is an insult unless you're talking about a pillow or a fox tail. It got picked up and spread because it was an insult to diminish the effect and effort that went into non-mechanics of published works.

That doesn't make it not be an insult.

Not sure where this is coming from but, hey!, Internet, so can't say I'm totally surprised.

For me, and everyone else I know who plays TTRPGs, fluff is decidedly non-pejorative.

DrDeth, the great and gregarious grognard, agrees (near as I can tell from the various contexts in which he uses the term).

So too does the wisest of all Internet forums, Wikipedia!

O Great Wiki wrote:
Fluff: The setting and ambiance of a game, as distinct from the rules/mechanics, particularly in reference to written descriptive material.

Quite so! Thank you Wiki!

;)


4 people marked this as a favorite.

If the history of language has taught us anything, it is that a term can be widely used while being horribly insulting and offensive without the majority of people realising it is offensive (a prominent example of this is "rule of thumb" which comes from a practice relating to state sanctioned domestic violence).

That aside, if you know that a term is going to hurt or insult someone, and it's easy to use other terms, and nothing is lost by using other terms instead, there isn't really an argument for not doing the courteous thing.

Edit: lore also sounds way cooler and evocative of fantasy settings


One weird consideration for Half Elves that's specific to Golarion is that, visually, they got nearly the same eye appearance as regular Humans- so with real-life Elven Art from Non-Golarion sources [be it from D&D, Videogames, LotR, Anime, and etc.], they'd all fit in just perfectly fine as... Half-Elves [in the Lost Omens Setting]. ;p


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Is it beyond you to consider someone else’s wishes and simply use a different word? No matter how many freely editable sources you quote, or things other posters on this forum said in 2013 - the fact remains that in a thread in 2020 the Creative Director of the company whose forums you are currently posting on stated a sincere dismay at the usage of that term. He stated that seeing it used to describe his work made him feel unappreciated and less interested in engaging in these forums.

His thread in this area of the board is one of the few places he regularly does engage, and conversing with him is something you’ve availed yourself of - so why is he not worthy of the simple courtesy of using a less charged word?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Tender Tendrils wrote:

If the history of language has taught us anything, it is that a term can be widely used while being horribly insulting and offensive without the majority of people realising it is offensive (a prominent example of this is "rule of thumb" which comes from a practice relating to state sanctioned domestic violence).

That aside, if you know that a term is going to hurt or insult someone, and it's easy to use other terms, and nothing is lost by using other terms instead, there isn't really an argument for not doing the courteous thing.

Edit: lore also sounds way cooler and evocative of fantasy settings

Good points TT. From the context, obviously I didn't, don't, and won't use the term to offend someone. Should I need to communicate with JJ on his thread I'll be sure to use the term "flavor" in deference to his request.

OTOH, people citing non-RPG definitions of an RPG term to show that said irrelevant definition to be offensive is absurd. Wikipedia may be publicly editable (though not by me) but it defines the term precisely how I (and every other gamer I know!) use the term and it is specifically the RPG definition which is most relevant, no?

sigh.... Internet.... so uselessly pedantic sometimes

Edit: "Lore" in the games I play requires a knowledge check or similar, whereas the other word falls under general PC awareness.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

The definition of fluff that was presented by Rysky is the Webster’s definition, and it is the same one that was brought up in the discussion about this in the thread where this originally came up.

That the game Community has added a new colloquial definition doesn’t replace the original definition - or it’s context within other communities. Content creators are part of the TTRPG community and communities of creators.

Drawing your line in the sand at respecting Jacobs’ wishes to his face while going to these lengths to prove that it’s still okay to use the term is what we call paying it lip service.

Final note, if you of all people are going to complain about the pervasive nature of pedantry on the internet - I expect this means your own behavior and posting style will be amended moving forward.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Let's just go with "flavor." It has a tasty connotation.

The rules and numbers are the rice. It's okay in and of itself, but kinda bland until you top it with a spicy vegetable curry. Now you've got a dish that's worth savoring.

The fun of an interesting character adventuring in an exotic, magical world is what I remember, more than the stats and math.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't especially seek James Jacobs' input, but insulting him by using a term that I can see could be irritating seems unnecessary. And yeah, the people who use the terms fluff vs. crunch are definitely saying that 'fluff' is something less important.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
avr wrote:
I don't especially seek James Jacobs' input, but insulting him by using a term that I can see could be irritating seems unnecessary.

Agreed! Glad I've never done that.

avr wrote:
And yeah, the people who use the terms fluff vs. crunch are definitely saying that 'fluff' is something less important.

Some people I suppose. I've already cited people in good standing on this very forum who, well prior to my appearance here, use it the way I do.

I also cited, linked, and quoted the definition for the RPG community which both agrees with my usage of the term and, more importantly, is the relevant definition.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

If we all let you declare yourself the most correct boy on the internet, will you go away?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I disagree with Quark as much as anyone but telling them to go away isn't going to help anything. Neither is telling them they're wrong all the time.

Respect for and listening to each other is how you change opinions (which goes for everyone involved).


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

If you're willing to try to change Quark Blast's opinion by being respectful to him and engaging with him on his terms - feel free. I on the other hand - like many others - have been disrespected repeatedly by Quark Blast on this forum for the last three years.

Respect is both earned and is a two way street. When he's wrong, I'm going to say so. When he triples down on being wrong because snatching a victory from the jaws of defeat in an internet debate by continuing to argue an off topic point about why he should be justified in using a word that people have asked him not to across five days of real time is more important to him than being a decent person and using a different word - I'm going to call that out too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
dirtypool wrote:

If you're willing to try to change Quark Blast's opinion by being respectful to him and engaging with him on his terms - feel free. I on the other hand - like many others - have been disrespected repeatedly by Quark Blast on this forum for the last three years.

Respect is both earned and is a two way street. When he's wrong, I'm going to say so. When he triples down on being wrong because snatching a victory from the jaws of defeat in an internet debate by continuing to argue an off topic point about why he should be justified in using a word that people have asked him not to across five days of real time is more important to him than being a decent person and using a different word - I'm going to call that out too.

That's fine, but telling them to go away doesn't help. And it clearly doesn't work.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In this particular instance I kind of agree with him, as I think JJ is a bit too sensitive about the subject as it's his livelihood and he's trying his damnedest to make sure it's taken seriously.

I'm not sure if it's really so important to correct people that people call it lore, fluff, or whatever is regionally popular.

Of course it is to some people, and so it's important to be respectful about it, especially when they've done so much to evolve their profession as JJ has, which Quark has acknowledged he does.

Language is a magical and fascinating thing.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Firstly, my response about going away was clearly meant as sarcasm (most correct boy on the internet?)

Secondly, over sensitive or not - JJ has said that the terminology when used on the forums of his company make him not want to engage with the posters on his companies forums. The least we can do is respect his wishes.

The difference between JJ and QB in this instance is that one wants to not feel belittled on the forum belonging to the company he works for while the other wants to be right on the internet. If respect is so important as you claim, why do JJ’s wishes deserve less respect than QB’s wish to keep arguing a moot point?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

To be honest, I'm too tired to get overly involved, just trying to get everyone to get along.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

To the accomplishment of what?

This isn't trying to decide where to eat for the night, you can't apply "we're a loving family" to every situation and make people get along. Even in families that doesn't work. Trying to force people to "get along" just for the sake of getting along accomplishes nothing.

1 to 50 of 84 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / General Discussion / Are Half-Elves Boring? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.