OOTS #1063 - The Discussion Thread

[8BitNinja]

When I am unsure or can't remember, the singular they is my default. Some can be... snippy if they are called the wrong gender.

I may enjoy playing clerics who focus on negative energy, but even I know it's best not to make a paladin potentially snippy.

It's okay. I'm not snippy, I'm just confused.

I just thought that they correctly used was only plural.

[Chei]

It's okay. I'm not snippy, I'm just confused.

I just thought that they correctly used was only plural.

'They/their' is becoming a generally accepted term for people of indeterminate gender, non-binary, or a singular person in the hypothetical i.e. instead of saying 'his or her', you can say 'their'.
I'm not really well-versed in this kind of thing, but that's my understanding of it.

[JumboWheat01]

'They/their' is becoming a generally accepted term for people of indeterminate gender, non-binary, or a singular person in the hypothetical i.e. instead of saying 'his or her', you can say 'their'.
I'm not really well-versed in this kind of thing, but that's my understanding of it.

It's also much less of a pain to type than s/he.

[keybounce]

I thought we all knew that fear leads to anger, which leads to hate and finally suffering. Or this the wrong crowd for that?

I think Andi's fear lead to anger, which lead to hate against Andi, and will now lead to suffering for the whole ship.

What's the extended Da&Dr version of that sequence again?

[Sir_Norbert]

Here we go.

[rambaldi]

It's okay. I'm not snippy, I'm just confused.

I just thought that they correctly used was only plural.

People often assume that, but if you think about trying to describe some unknown singular person then 'they' and 'their' seems natural.

I have recently wondered how you would go about describing a two-spirits person. Do they need plural terms? They aren't something we have where I am from, and aren't included within our collective acronym (although we include a few terms as well that I haven't seen used elsewhere, that are specific to south Pacific cultures).

[8BitNinja]

People often assume that, but if you think about trying to describe some unknown singular person then 'they' and 'their' seems natural.

I guess I am a follower of the old ways when it comes to language (and other things)

Something I am proud

[JumboWheat01]

I guess I am a follower of the old ways when it comes to language (and other things)

Something I am proud

Trust a paladin to be stubborn about tradition.

[KillingAScarab]

I guess I am a follower of the old ways when it comes to language (and other things)

Something I am proud

Languages do change over time, English included. Otherwise, we would never get "I Melt With You."

[zimmerwald1915]

Languages do change over time, English included. Otherwise, we would never get "I Melt With You."

English especially. Languages like French and Mandarin are more heavily regulated.

[8BitNinja]

Trust a paladin to be stubborn about tradition.

Hey, I like my tradition and order. We paladins are champions of good, but you gotta remember that lawful bit.

[Xyril]

It's okay. I'm not snippy, I'm just confused.

I just thought that they correctly used was only plural.

You're not wrong, and in a formal setting, particularly formal writing, I try to follow that traditional rule more closely and go with "his or her" or possibly "his/her."

People in the U.S. have used "their" when speaking informally for as long as I can remember, and on the internet--which probably facilitates an unprecedented amount of informal writing--a lot of people do the same.

[Sir_Norbert]

As the recently linked Wikipedia page points out, singular "they" has a tradition of 500 years behind it.

[Shining Wrath]

Let me be the first to point out that "let" used to mean "hinder or delay", e.g., Hamlet "By heaven, I'll make a ghost of him that lets me!". Which is to say, anyone who thinks English is sacrosanct and immutable needs to let it go.

[Quibblicious]

Because of you, I had to look up the definition of perfidious.

Thanks

My life is complete.

Okay, not really, but I like spreading the word of the words.

Q

[Quibblicious]

NO.

Failed spot checks all round today, what?

YOU get a failed spot check!And YOU get a failed spot check!

Oprah's gotten nasty lately.

Q

[Quibblicious]

So, how about them Bears?

They're busy in the woods.

Q

[JumboWheat01]

My life is complete.

Okay, not really, but I like spreading the word of the words.

Q

You know, that actually sounds like a fun character concept, a bard who's adventuring to spread language. Must write that down.

YOU get a failed spot check!And YOU get a failed spot check!

Oprah's gotten nasty lately.

Q

No wonder everyone's failing, we don't make Spot checks anymore, we make Perception checks now. Can't make a Spot check if it doesn't exist.

[Kish]

No wonder everyone's failing, we don't make Spot checks anymore, we make Perception checks now. Can't make a Spot check if it doesn't exist.

Who's this "we," cowboy?

[Peelee]

They'll take 3.5/Pathfinder from my cold, dead hands.

[Kish]

Pathfinder would be Perception. But 3.5 continues to thrive, be widely played, and be the basis of this comic.

[Peelee]

Pathfinder would be Perception.

Aha. I have yet to play it, but have heard just about nothing but good things.

[KorvinStarmast]

I have to agree that the relentless cavalcade of recent misfortune has long since transitioned from reasonable to downright absurd.

The only things that have conclusively gone well for the protagonists so far in this entire book is that fewer of the vampire spawn survived to accompany Lurkon than he expected, that Malack's necromantic staff got destroyed, and that Roy has been learning a bit more about how to unlock his greatsword's true potential. Oh, and Crystal getting her final demise, in a storyline tangent. That's it. Literally everything else has been a stalemate, a fiasco, or nullified/subverted to serve the villains' goals.

And the MiTD beginning to subtly subvert Redcloak's/Xykons efforts to find the gate. And Lien/O'Chul establishing an OP (observation point) to keep an eye on the Kragor's Gate progress.

About ships, captains, and Emperors ....

When Bandana became Captain they were not in port. They were flying along and Julio departed on a flying carpet, and then Laurin ported Tarquin onto the deck and things got busy. How many members of the crew (there are apparently dozens) should Bandana have negotiated the terms of her captaincy with?

Zero. I eagerly await the reply from a different position.

Since we're here, I'm a little confused: what did you mean when you said "That is for the rest of the crew to decide"?

Someone thinks that ships are run by "kumbaya" which from fishing vessel to supertanker, is not the case. Nor on pirate ships.

Your point is well made that the underlying conflicts were already being fought in the legislature and in the streets, but if you want to stretch that reasoning, the first shot of the Civil War was fired by Aaron Burr.

Awesome ref is awesome. Nicely played.

Romulus Augustulus (roughly; "Romulus the-not-all-that-impressive-really") Last emperor of the west. Deposed in 476 by the general Odoacer and sent to live out his life in Campania. It's really not that hard a question.

Campagna regione is a pretty nice place to live, climate wise. Almost never snows, it's a rich agricultural region, and the fishing is pretty good. Plus, being an emperor, he could probably end his days on Capri in Tiberus old mansion. Nice crib, emperor or not.

You don't seem to be understanding the problem. Under no circumstances is your judgment considered superior to that of your commanding officer. Its why theyre the commanding officer and you aren't. If for whatever reason you believe that their orders are physically impossible to carry out, then the appropriate action is to tell them, not to assume command. Doing your own thing on a ship (or airship) gets people killed. That's why there are such harsh measures in place to enforce the hierarchy.

Yeah, some people just don't get it, no matter how hard one tries to educate them.
The ox is slow, but the earth is patient
(Gratuitous reference to High Road to China which also featured flying between high mountain peaks, but no frost giants)

[Quibblicious]

You know, that actually sounds like a fun character concept, a bard who's adventuring to spread language. Must write that down.

In my world, I have a clerical subclass that's actually a bardic class dedicated to the spread of proper linguistics and elegant speech patterns. About ten percent are adventurer types out proselytizing good speech patterns.

As one player discovered, it's not wise to correct the grammar of a dragon.

No wonder everyone's failing, we don't make Spot checks anymore, we make Perception checks now. Can't make a Spot check if it doesn't exist.

Oprah giveth, an Orpah taketh away.

Q

[dancrilis]

Zero. I eagerly await the reply from a different position.

As stated to Shining Wrath the timeline they gave is wrong.

Someone thinks that ships are run by "kumbaya" which from fishing vessel to supertanker, is not the case. Nor on pirate ships.

Ships follow rules, we don't know the rules on this one.
You may wish to read 'The Pirate Primer', but for reference.

I. Every man has a vote in affairs of moment; has equal title to the fresh provisions, or strong liquors, at any time seized, and may use them at pleasure, unless a scarcity (not an uncommon thing among them) makes it necessary, for the good of all, to vote a retrenchment.

Page 467 (Pirate Articles, Robert Bartholomew)

Yeah, some people just don't get it, no matter how hard one tries to educate them.
The ox is slow, but the earth is patient

It is a virtue I am happy to have, learned for dealing with people on the internet (and in life).
Let us try one more time using only the simpliest terms (I sometimes get overly wordy): You don't get to decide what my arguement is.

You can ask me to clarify it, you can misinterpret it (and lay the blame on me if you feel that I have communicated poorly) etc, but you don't get to decide what it is.

[Keltest]

Ships follow rules, we don't know the rules on this one.

The idea that Scoundrel (or any captain for that matter) would deliberately put in an article allowing for crew members to ignore his orders seems implausible, to the point where I'm not sure why youre even bringing it up. Yes, its technically possible that Andi actually has official permission to KO her captain whenever she feels the need to, but that doesn't make it an argument worth addressing.

Likewise, we are not telling you what your argument is, we are pointing out that it is a terrible argument with all sorts of flaws in it.

[KorvinStarmast]

You can ask me to clarify it,

Then clarify that you understand the difference between "affairs of moment" and "what's going on at this moment." Affairs of moment means "things that are important." Indeed, choosing to continue on after the Godsmoot was important, in terms of "hey, we ain't gettin' no pay.

And That Was Resolved.

Let me by crystal clear: Rich offer up two strips of discussions on affairs of moment, on the Mechane, between Captain and crew, before they set sail after the priests all met and Durkon teleported away.
Just because Andi disagrees does not mean there wasn't. There was discussion and a decision was reached.

That affair of moment was decided with "off we go, even though some voiced disagreement." Nowhere in pirate articles is unanimous consent required to build consensus or make a decision.

Further that point, as you were no doubt taught in kindergarden, there is a time and a place for everything. Mid battle is not a time to call a council. You do that before or after the battle. You fight and win the battle.

I do not find in the pirate articles that during a battle pirates have a right to call a meeting or to kill the captain. Did you? If so, please share.

To be frank with you, I am not sure if you are playing devil's advocate, or simply don't understand how stuff on shipboard works.

If the former - got it.

If the latter - not sure there's any help for this if you refuse to accept input from those who do.

[dancrilis]

The idea that Scoundrel (or any captain for that matter) would deliberately put in an article allowing for crew members to ignore his orders seems implausible, to the point where I'm not sure why youre even bringing it up. Yes, its technically possible that Andi actually has official permission to KO her captain whenever she feels the need to, but that doesn't make it an argument worth addressing.

They live in a world with mind control, you can't think of a single use case justifying establishing a rule that allows crew members (or specific crew members) to use judgement to avoid the captain leading them to death?

Likewise, we are not telling you what your argument is, we are pointing out that it is a terrible argument with all sorts of flaws in it.

With due respect to your point:

Spoiler: Quoted for Truth

Show

So, dancrilis, your argument is essentially that anyone, at any time, can disobey any order they like; even up to assaulting superiors, simply because they think they have a better idea.

NO.

That is not my arguement and as such that is not true - this is the comment that has started this rabbit hole, had GreatWyrmGold stated 'Quoted for Like' I would not really have an issue with it.

[KorvinStarmast]

That is not my arguement and as such that is not true - this is the comment that has started this rabbit hole, had GreatWyrmGold stated 'Quoted for Like' I would not really have an issue with it.

Given that you advocate for Andi having the right to attack Bandana, that characterization of your argument was fair if not precise.

Again, if you are playing devil's advocate: got it.

[dancrilis]

Given that you advocate for Andi having the right to attack Bandana, that characterization of your argument was fair if not precise.

Again, if you are playing devil's advocate: got it.

I don't think it was fair - I think it was delibrately exaggerating for affect.
But I clarified that with Marlowe (I believe) - perhaps I could have been clearer.

However as stated the nested statement above is not the issue - saying that it is 'truth' is what I choose to comment on, it is not true as that was not my arguement.


Back to Andi:

My understanding if why people disagree with Andi's decision is as follows:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assume that Andi has the best possible motivations and knowledge and a firm belief that the ship was immediately doomed.

This leaves two options (call it a 50/50 split as there are others who are experienced aboard)
1. That she is right.
2. That she is wrong.

If she is wrong and Bandana is right she has prevented the ship having safe passage.
If she is right than she has created a scenario where the pink haired girl might decide that Bandana is right and incapacitate Andi and direct the ship back into danger.

Given this attacking Bandana had a 50% chance of being wrong right off the bat (and exposing the ship to further danger) and less than a 50% chance of saving the ship as even if she is right someone else might act on there own initiative and muck things up. Than attacking Bandana was the incorrect move.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The figures can be argued etc but that is giving Andi the best possible motivation and a firm belief that the ship was immediately doomed (two things that we do not know).

I don't disagree with any of that really (which is why I said she should have taken a vacation if she could not serve under Bandana).

But this discussion started on duties and I don't know what the ship charter (if one exists) allows or demands for her to do - it is possible that she is following it (if unlikely).