Results 661 to 690 of 1475
-
2017-10-15, 11:58 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
Yes there is. You want "there are some messages that can't correspond to a given text" to mean "biodeterminism in games isn't racist" but it doesn't mean that. I could mean that, but you would have to actually prove it by demonstrating that the message is somehow to large to correspond to the text.
I made a separate thread for a separate discussion. That you describe it as a "troll thread" is an accusation of bad faith. My answer to that is: sit on a stick and spin on it. In any case, that discussion has no bearing on this one.
As for your use of "absolved", I need no absolution because I'm not obliged to discuss this with you, here or anywhere.
Wrong. There's no circularity. In the example, we know rain is not a metaphor for grief because it is a random encounter. Hence we can show that rain does not consistently have anything to do with grief, hence interpreting it thus is false.
2) why words have meanings they have is a matter of you attending more English lessons than anything I need to do. For the record, semantic drift exists, but that means information can be lost, not that all meanings are valid for any message.
I mean, how was he supposed to know? Is there some reason the message couldn't have meant what he thought it did? Once you've accepted that the message is a function of the text, rather than the author's intent, you still have to have 100% of the debates postmodernism does, you just eventually crown someone victor and declare one message correct.
That's the issue. "The message is the literal text" is an interpretation. If you move away from "the correct interpretation is the author's" you have to present arguments for the interpretations that you want (notably this has yet to happen at all for the topic that sparked the original interpretation -- Max, Frozen, and Segev are all conspicuously silent on what other conclusion we should draw). If you don't move away from that, you can't resolve ambiguous cases and you can have the same text taking on different meanings (which puts you in much the same place practically).
-
2017-10-15, 04:10 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2009
- Gender
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
Anyone who is not Cosi, call of hands: who actually thinks I've been talking about "biodeterminism" in this thread or argued for the non-sequitur that "there's limited information in any given message" somehow leads to "biodeterminism in games is not racist"?
Originally Posted by Cosi
In general? Yes, there is possibility of miscalibration: you know when you have miscalibrated when you can't extract intelligible meaning from the message. Third or so time I'm explaining this same thing to you. Again, think of an encrypted message. If your decryption key is off by one symbol, you get no message, just gibberish.
Originally Posted by Cosi
What I have said is that in context of natural languages, when a sentence coincidentally has meaning in many languages, neither me nor my language teachers would argue that the coincindental message is the one I was sending. Same principle can be applied elsewhere: if a message has multiple meanings, you discard the one that doesn't fit the sender. If this determination cannot be made (for example, you know nothing about the sender), then the correct answer is that there are multiple plausible interpretations, but it is unknown
which is valid. (If you can't think of when this would matter, the two meanings could be contradictory or of entirely different subjects, so while each meaning would be plausible alone, a sender couldn't have plausibly intended both).
The joke here is that if you want to argue for more than one valid meaning for any given message, the burden of proof is on you. The idea that there might be multiple valid readings of a message does not get around the fact that each message has limited information, nor does it make it admissible to ignore parsimony. So in no case are there arbitrarily many admissible interpretations.Last edited by Frozen_Feet; 2017-10-15 at 04:13 PM.
-
2017-10-15, 04:19 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
You should read the threads you post in, because this tangent started when people repeatedly insisted that having racism be literally true wasn't racist because things don't have meanings. That is the side you are fighting for. If you want to fight for that position without the implied defense of the place the argument started, that is a situation where you should make another thread (as opposed to, say, trolling about racism).
In the given example? No. Or can you prove some way in which randomly occurring rain will also lead to rain that consistently symbolizes grief?
1. The rain is random and has no meaning.
2. The rain symbolizes grief.
Your position is that it necessarily must be that 2 is incorrect. The alternative is that 1 is incorrect, and our random tables should not include "rain" because it has a specific meaning. This is the problem you (and more broadly the "nothing ever means anything") side keeps missing -- once you abandon the prospect that messages are fixed by authors, you have to actually defend the message you believe in, which none of you ever do.
I'm not even saying that the claim I'm making is right. I'm saying that as long is your position isn't "it is impossible for that to be right", you have to give an actual reason why it is wrong.
Yes I do, which is why I have not actually claimed that there is just one valid message for all cases. Seriously, find a quote where I say that. You're conflating arguments again.
The joke here is that if you want to argue for more than one valid meaning for any given message, the burden of proof is on you. The idea that there might be multiple valid readings of a message does not get around the fact that each message has limited information, nor does it make it admissible to ignore parsimony. So in no case are there arbitrarily many admissible interpretations.
-
2017-10-15, 04:49 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2015
- Location
- Gondor, Middle Earth
- Gender
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
This can also be applied to the Sword and Sandal genre, but the fact that formations are used for marching purposes only.
I'm a Lawful Good Human PaladinJustice and honor are a heavy burden for the righteous. We carry this weight so that the weak may grow strong and the meek grow brave
— The Acts of Iomedae, Pathfinder
Avatar made by Professor Gnoll
-
2017-10-15, 05:14 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2009
- Gender
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
Yeah, they are incompatible, as in they cannot be true of the same message. We know 1 is true of my games, so we can show that 2 is not. This does not preclude 2 from being true of some other message. Third time or so I've explained this exact thing.
Originally Posted by Cosi
Now, the underlined part is actually interesting, but only for how absurd it is. First, is =/= ought; we can correctly determine 1 is true of my games regardless of whether you think I should be doing that. Second, come on, let's hear it: why'd you jump to that as an alternative, when the much simpler alternative is that rain is a symbol in some messages and not in others?
Originally Posted by Cosi
Also, since you seem unable to grasp this: no-one needs to have an interpretation nor defense of such to show that someone else's interpretation or defense of such is full of crap.
Originally Posted by Cosi
Your problem, time and again, is that you think I'm arguing for something else than what I am, and refusing to admit I'm correct on the most trivial of points.
Originally Posted by Cosi
I've entertained your questions insofar as they've been good questions about how that works in the context of the example, "why does it rain in Frozen_Feet's games?" For example, "why use just English, instead of English plus added symbolism?" was a good question, and I hope the answer was interesting to other participants in this thread.
So why do you care? Hell I know and based on all proof you do not, as you seem more interested in making feeble ad hominem accusations than reading what I write."It's the fate of all things under the sky,
to grow old and wither and die."
-
2017-10-15, 05:24 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2010
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
I can't speak for everyone, but I suspect I'm not alone when I say I stopped paying any attention to you, Max, Segev, and Cosi arguing about messages, literary criticism, or post-modernism. When I see the thread has new replies, I just check to see if it's a new answer to the OP or if it's just more of you guys talking past each other.
-
2017-10-15, 05:31 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2009
- Gender
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
That's fair.
"It's the fate of all things under the sky,
to grow old and wither and die."
-
2017-10-15, 05:42 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2012
- Location
- Tharggy, on Tellene
- Gender
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
On that note:
Lack of Spears: Seriously, it was one of the most common weapons for thousands of years, the fact that most warriors arent using them or axes always drives me a bit nuts. Also the lack of main characters in western fantasy who use spears. Kinda annoying.
-
2017-10-15, 05:45 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
And my point is that you are begging the question. If you get to decide what rain does or does not mean, you have already accepted the core premise of postmodernism. If you do not, you have to provide some argument why rain doesn't symbolize grief and therefore should be randomly generated, rather than occurring non-randomly when there was a bunch of grief. All you've proven is that you use rain to not mean grief, but that doesn't make that correct any more than you using "cat" to describe a dog would make you right if you did it frequently enough
My point, targeted at Xuc Xac, VitruvianSquid and some others, was that though all pieces of intelligible fiction are messages, not all messages make a big damn point of the outside world. Additional to that point was that not all "whys" and other things you can infer from a message are part of the message, and where to draw the line.
You could even have some midrange approach where some values are entirely invalid while others are possible, but not necessarily correct. For example, you can definitively say without checking that "balloon" is not the root of a polynomial with an integer root, because "balloon" is not an integer. But you would have to check "7", because "7" is an integer and therefore might be correct.
Once you put information theory into the mix, you lost, because information theory says that there are a range of possible solutions and the only way to know if to have the right template, but the rightness of your template is something you have only been able to define circularly ("parsing the message as if rain doesn't mean grief is correct because it is the simplest set of assumptions to get the correct answer, which is correct because we know rain doesn't mean grief"). Hell, you're only able to find a flaw in the idea that "rain means grief" by assuming additional context, which is exactly the problem you had with the methodology that produced that answer!
-
2017-10-15, 05:50 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
- Gender
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
well good news: Way of Kings has Kaladin. he wields a spear.
what bothers me is a lack of crossbows. like, the existence of supernatural beings far more powerful than the crossbows should've stopped the fear of them cold and made people invest into them more, but apparently everyone thinks bows are cooler, because when did you ever see a main character wield a crossbow?
-
2017-10-15, 05:53 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
I think Fiddler has one in Malazan.
The Nuban has one in Prince of Thorns, and IIRC it gets used to take out the big bad of the first book.
In Empire in Black and Gold crossbows are an important part of the setting (again, IIRC -- it might be air rifles).
Various MTG card art has people wearing crossbows, whatever that's worth to you.
-
2017-10-15, 07:53 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2010
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
Imagine if all real-world conversations were like internet D&D conversations...
Protip: DnD is an incredibly social game played by some of the most socially inept people on the planet - Lev
I read this somewhere and I stick to it: "I would rather play a bad system with my friends than a great system with nobody". - Trevlac
-
2017-10-15, 08:05 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2016
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
"If you want to understand biology don't think about vibrant throbbing gels and oozes, think about information technology" -Richard Dawkins
Omegaupdate Forum
WoTC Forums Archive + Indexing Projext
PostImage, a free and sensible alternative to Photobucket
Temple+ Modding Project for Atari's Temple of Elemental Evil
Morrus' RPG Forum (EN World v2)
-
2017-10-15, 10:56 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
They become a staple of combat in Wheel of Time over the course of the series. They're particularly useful against Trollocs who are poorly armored large melee combatants, they can cut down dozens when they start developing the crank mechanisms to launch barrages of bolts at a time.
Though none of the main characters are really known for using them themselves, I suppose. That's more of a matter of them not really needing to by the time they became ubiquitous.
Discworld uses crossbows as straight stand-ins for guns as well. Fairly common among guard and assassin characters.
-
2017-10-15, 11:57 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2009
- Gender
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
I haven't responded on the topic for awhile because it seems obvious by now that the side repeating the ideas I find destructive are either arguing belligerently on bad faith or are hopelessly prejudiced, but since I'm mentioned by name here, let's drag this dead horse out and give it a thorough beating:
I don't know why this point would be targeted at me, because this point has nothing to do with the points I was arguing against, which were:
1. You should read books and think nothing, because applying literary criticism is a waste of time and literary critics take orders from a cabal that make arbitrary declarations on what books are about.
2. There are a great many books that are enjoyable because they have no message.
3. I, personally, am a mean, terrible person who wants to force people to look at books the way I look at books
On the subject of all pieces of intelligible fiction being messages We are in agreement. They are all messages.
On the subject of not all messages being "a big damn point of the outside world," I have already written the following:
We are once again in agreement. I do not think most messages within fiction - critically acclaimed or otherwise - revolve around a "big damn point of the outside world," most stories are more like a cocktail mix of many points.
On the subject of how not all things you can infer exist within the original message:
Well duh, that's why I wrote:
This is to say that yes, people make unlikely inferences all the time.
This is to say, the extremely outlandish inferences tend to get weeded out by discussion, but there could be multiple points of view in contention within one school, or within one mind about a fictional story (example: I might read Lord of the Rings and think, "J.R.R. Tolkien has written a series of novels about WWII, only he swears up and down they are not about the war, but also I see these other elements that suggest the war elements only exist to mimic earlier epic stories, and I haven't decided yet which interpretation I like better.")Last edited by Vitruviansquid; 2017-10-15 at 11:58 PM.
It always amazes me how often people on forums would rather accuse you of misreading their posts with malice than re-explain their ideas with clarity.
-
2017-10-16, 01:11 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2015
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
We are in an English language forum, exposed to a lot of primary English language fiction drawing often on Britain and its history.
The English and the Welsh never were really heavily invested in crossbows, but in bows. In other countries that is different and fiction originating there might very well use other firearms more often. In Europe Italians had a lot of really famous and prestigious crossbow units and many other countries have at least some. In Asia China was really big on crossbows and you will find them accordingly in fiction or legend.
So basically we lack crossbows in English language fiction fo the same reason as Robin Hood being more famous than Wilhem Tell.
Ok, let's discuss this.
On the subject of all pieces of intelligible fiction being messages We are in agreement. They are all messages.
And no, unconscious bias of an auther that might show in his work is not a message. If an author reveales something unwillingly about himself, that is not a message.
On the subject of not all messages being "a big damn point of the outside world," I have already written the following:
And that a work can make more small points intead of one big, yes, that is a given.
Not knowing what the author wanted to tell can allow you to make statements what might plausibly be a message. But it always stays a guess. And as soon as you get contradictory plausible interpretations, you know that some of them must be wrong. You still don't know which ones.Last edited by Satinavian; 2017-10-16 at 01:35 AM.
-
2017-10-16, 06:49 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
Speaking of WoT, doesn't either Mat or Perrin have a spear as their personal weapon?
Also (at least on TV) Oberyn has a spear. I think one of the Sand Snakes too?
I can't think of any armies of spear wielders off the top of my head, but I can't think of any armies of sword wielders off the top of my head either.
-
2017-10-16, 07:25 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2016
- Location
- Corvallis, OR
- Gender
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
Dawn of Hope: a 5e setting. http://wiki.admiralbenbo.org
Rogue Equivalent Damage calculator, now prettier and more configurable!
5e Monster Data Sheet--vital statistics for all 693 MM, Volo's, and now MToF monsters: Updated!
NIH system 5e fork, very much WIP. Base github repo.
NIH System PDF Up to date main-branch build version.
-
2017-10-16, 07:27 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
- Location
- San Francisco Bay area
- Gender
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
Think?
I don't even understand the sentence.
If anyone cares here's the Wikipedia entries for
"biological determinism"
and
"non-sequitur",
both of which (especially "non-sequitur") go down into a rabbit hole of unfamiliar references, making them effectively unintelligible, as if they're extended sentences in multiple foreign languages mixed in.
I have other things to do with my time.
-
2017-10-16, 08:16 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2012
- Location
- Tharggy, on Tellene
- Gender
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
-
2017-10-16, 08:38 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
-
2017-10-16, 12:47 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2016
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
When I tried to create a game back in the 90s (JRPG full conversion for Quake, got about 40% of the way done) literally the first thing that I did was give the main character a spear for this reason. Well and because I wanted the dash attacks to be based on a thrust rather than a slash as so many games have them. And because the main character was in the navy. Okay there were a lot of reasons why I gave him a spear but that was definitely one of them.
On the lack of crossbows brought up I think there are more main characters with wrist crossbows than full size units lol. The reload time and awkwardness really cuts down on the crossbows suitableness for main characters though. Main characters tend to mow down mooks and it's hard to look dignified when reloading an archaic crossbow.Firm opponent of the one true path
-
2017-10-16, 01:22 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2016
- Location
- Back home
- Gender
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
I remember hearing that this is the result of associating swords with the European nobility somewhere down the line. I might imagine (I'm by no means an expert on historical asian cultures) that the katana might have a similar association over there, leading to the "noble" heroes using swords across the genres.
-
2017-10-16, 07:58 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2016
- Location
- Earth
- Gender
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
One thing that annoys me;
Stupid banal Evil. I like rping as evil but that evil must have depth. Too often you get people without any depth, moving in a straight predictable line. DMs who have had to suffer through it say "no evil!" and so a third of interesting chasracters never see light.
Another is;
Always selling your soul. I expect better of my villains than to be so weak as to sell their soul in every evil game that comes across. It's always towards the beginning if not the first thing you do.
-
2017-10-16, 08:58 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
- Location
- The US of A
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
The Born-into-Destiny thing, aka I'm special because of fate and/or things other people, not because of me.
There have been a lot of really great stories told where the central focus is on a character who was "the one who was prophesized" or who is "the son of the dark lord/the savior/the previous generations hero"; I loved Rick Riordan's Young Olympians series (where the characters are literally half-god). But lately I've been getting the feeling that this trope is being overused. As a kid I bought into it hook, line, and sinker- I'm sure I wasn't the only one who imagined a letter arriving to invite me to wizard-school. As an adult though, the idea that our greatness is determined more by accidents of birth instead of our actions actually comes across as a little depressing. I'd love to see more stories that were about your average Joe-Smoe that stepped up when it really counted instead.
Think about nearly ever recent pop-culture phenomenon- Harry Potter was "the boy who lived", who survived the killing curse as a baby and was targeted because of a prophecy/stable time-loop. The X-Men and Marvel superheroes are 99% born into their powers (with the exception of Cyborg, Hawkeye, and Black Widow). Naruto had the demon-fox sealed inside him as an infant. Natsu was trained by a dragon. Steven is a human/gem hybrid. etc etc etc
But the one that REALLY set me off, that had me punching walls in frustration, was RWBY. We have 3 seasons of Ruby, the main character, being adorkable and kicking ass, for no other reason than because she can and she's good at it. And then come the season 3 finale, we find at that her "silver eyes" mean she's born to be a warrior and fight Grim on behalf of humanity. ****. That. ****. It was almost enough to make me stop watching the series. It seemed totally unnecessary at that point, and IMO only served to detract from the beneficence of her actions.
So yeah, if we could just cool it on that for a little while, I'd think that would be seriously chill.
-
2017-10-16, 10:18 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- May 2016
- Location
- The Lakes
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
My hand is remaining down.
I'm not even sure where this notion of "racism" as supposedly inherent in different fictional species being different is coming from, other than fantasy gaming's blinkered insistence on using "race" as a misnomer for "species".
Well, I guess I do know where it's coming from... the even more blinkered insistence that non-human but intelligent/sapient/sentient species in speculative fiction always and only exist as allegory, and cannot be just an exercise in worldbuilding and/or fostering a sense of wonder.
No one would bat an eye if you wrote that cats and dogs are different -- not better or worse, just different -- but write about two entirely fictional intelligent species where one is faster and the other stronger... and suddenly certain sorts will insist that you've written some sort of veiled allegory.
Which probably tells us more about them, than it does about the text or the author.Last edited by Max_Killjoy; 2017-10-16 at 10:20 PM.
It is one thing to suspend your disbelief. It is another thing entirely to hang it by the neck until dead.
Verisimilitude -- n, the appearance or semblance of truth, likelihood, or probability.
The concern is not realism in speculative fiction, but rather the sense that a setting or story could be real, fostered by internal consistency and coherence.
The Worldbuilding Forum -- where realities are born.
-
2017-10-16, 10:37 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jun 2011
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
You forgot a sense of dread, by the way. Through I think the reason races become an allegory for well...Races, is that there are a lot of high profile work (such as Lovecraft and Star Trek) that go that route so people see it even when it's just supposed to highlight how not human these other people are.
I wonder if it's possible to string these people along by giving races certain traits and see how long they take in deciding which allegory is present.For all of your completely and utterly honest needs. Zaydos made, Tiefling approved.
-
2017-10-16, 11:03 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2011
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
I think the racism aspect more comes from the common, though increasingly subverted, portrayal of Orcs, Goblins, Trolls and the like, as a sapient species that is inherently stupid, brutish, and evil. I agree that basic differences between races or species are not racist, and that most examples in fiction are not meant allegorically- the complaint, unless I'm grossly misunderstanding the discussion, arises more from the worry that these portrayals show an attitude that is very problematic if it's kept in the real world. How strongly it translates out of fiction is the most likely point of debate, then- assuming a goblin your character runs into is an enemy is probably a very far cry to making similarly disparaging assumptions about real-life minorities, even if it does stem from the same basic mental process.
It's a falcon. Wearing a Fedora. Your argument is irrelevant.
Official Member of the No Cussing Club
-
2017-10-16, 11:25 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
- Gender
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
Yeah. nevertheless I want to stay away from that thought process as far as possible. Not because I think its thought crime or anything, but because I personally don't like it and want nothing to do with thinking that way. I do not want to add such negative things to the world when there is already too much. I have entire book series on orcs being heroes so I'm covered there at least, probably not the best series but I like it anyways. doesn't need to be, its something I want and does it well enough for me to like it.
-
2017-10-17, 01:02 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2015
Re: Fantasy Tropes/Cliches that Annoy You
Most of the objections in this thread were less about different species being different and more about the inherent evil races and the concept of morality as hereditary trait and a universe based objective moral value judgement of racial traits.
That is also a concept that was very common in fiction from the first part of the last century and got less and less common as decades went by. Because it reminds people of racial arguments how about certain kind of humans without measurable meaningful physical differences were bound to develop bad behavioral traits and thus were inherently inferior. That is where the racism angle comes from. Justified i think.