Metamorphosis

[Dust Raven]

Re: Metamorphosis

 

Clear communication is so difficult sometimes. I'm probably more guilty than anyone else here when it comes to being clear and concise with expressing my ideas and thoughts.

 

Just A Clarification

 

- Christopher Mullins

 

Quite possibly the most clear and concise thing you've said. j/k

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Metamorphosis

 

First of all' date=' the whole right and wrong thing is ridiculous in this context. There is no right and wrong when discussing definitions and intended meanings.[/quote']

Where do you get that? Of course there is! We discuss the rightness or wrongness of rules and interpretations all the time on these boards!

 

Does this help clarify my stance. (8^D)

It seems we're arguing about two different things. I'm arguing about whether a rule makes sense (is right). You're arguing about what the rule is. I see no need to argue about the latter. I can read perfectly well, I understand English, and I know who Steve Long is.

 

When I say, "Shapeshift as-is is a problem because of X, and it should be Y, which would be better because of Z," and you respond by saying, "That's contrary to Steve Long's official ruling," then you haven't really addressed my argument. I'm arguing from logic, and you're arguing from authority. Again, I know who Steve is, and I understand what the official rules are. I don't understand what the point is of continuing to invoke Steve, if it isn't to say that I'm wrong merely because I disagree with Steve.

 

This is even more baffling when I read other threads and see all the other rulings, re-interpretations, and suggested rules changes that are contrary to the official Steve-approved rules, and people don't pile on with "that's not the Steve way." Why is it that when I bring up such an idea, people feel compelled to invoke Steve at me? What other conclusion can I come to other than that you're saying, "How dare you disagree with the infallible Steve?!?" Do you think I don't know what the official rules are? Do you think I can't read? Do you think I'm stupid?

 

If you disagree with my ideas, give me a logical reason why they're wrong. Or give me a better idea.

 

Again, it's ridiculous to think of rulings as unfair or fair in this context.

What context do you mean? I don't understand this statement at all. We discuss the fairness or unfairness of rules all the time on these boards. Why is this one different?

 

So then you accept the fact that Steve Long's rulings are "official" and the baseline with which these discussions are based on. If so, then there is no debate and we can move on.

I've moved on a long time ago. Would you care to join me? The debate I've been trying to have is on the merits of the current structure/cost/rules regarding the Shapeshift power, and how it might be improved to better reflect the fairness, flexibility, and other qualities for which we all apreciate the HERO system.

 

To answer the question you meant to ask:

I think Shapeshift as defined fills an area that the rules didn't fully cover before.

However, it still does not address adequately other gaps that were previously addressed, however poorly, by 4th Edition Shapeshift. Such as amorphous creatures and other minor shapeshifting SFX that didn't require additional abilities.

 

So that's a firm Yes and No. (8^D)

I'm not sure that quite answers the question I "meant to ask," but at least it's on the subject.

 

Look, someone, perhaps it was you, posted something about how the 10% Mass rule didn't prevent someone from becoming a snake that could squeeze through bars or something just large enough for a snake to fit through. I clarified, having had discussions with Steve Long on this specific subject and was told, "No, you must buy Desolid or Shrinking for that". I wasn't discussing the "Merit" of the ruling, but the actual meaning of that ruling and its application.

I *was* discussing the merit of the ruling. I don't recall my exact words, but allow me to rephrase: The 10% Mass rule *shouldn't* prevent someone from becoming a snake that could squeeze through bars etc.

 

If you think it was a horrible ruling, great, now how do you want to fix it so it works in your games.

That was what I posted several pages ago.

[PhilFleischmann]

Re: Metamorphosis

 

Please keep your arguements within the above. My post already conceded that at your table you're right' date=' not Steve.[/quote']

Have I insulted you? I don't see how. I was merely responding to Chris's assertion.

 

I was pointing out that on the Boards we start with the notion that Steve is right, we move forward from there.

*Some* of us move forward from there, others seem to be stuck there.

 

If you refuse to quote people within the context of their statements or even simply talk to them in the same discourse with you is useless as all meaning will be removed for what you want to read not what we say.

 

you only hurt yourself and you don't help your case

I have no idea what you are talking about here. I was quoting only the parts of the posts you and others posted that were relevent to my response to Chris. I was trying to avoid going off the subject. I wasn't trying to trap you.

 

If I misunderstood you, you're welcome to clarify. What was the point of your invoking the official status of Steve? If you're trying to argue from authority, you only hurt yourself and you don't help your case.

[schir1964]

Re: Metamorphosis

 

I've moved on a long time ago. Would you care to join me?

No need to be condenscending. You probably didn't mean it that way, but it certainly comes across that way.

 

I *was* discussing the merit of the ruling. I don't recall my exact words' date=' but allow me to rephrase: The 10% Mass rule *shouldn't* prevent someone from becoming a snake that could squeeze through bars etc.[/quote']

Aha, so here's where all this started then. I did not get that at all from your post. It seemed to me that you thought the 10% Mass, as defined in the rules, allowed one to become a snake and slip though bars and such.

 

Now that you've clarified what you intended. Hey, no problem. Whether or not this should be allowed within the Shapeshift power or perhaps somewhere else is debatable.

 

That was what I posted several pages ago.

And some of us have mentioned this same concept in other older multiple threads, but I'm not going to get angry or frustrated because you haven't read them or remember them here. You seem to waste a lot of time on posts saying the exact same thing over and over again, instead of trying to clarify what you mean.

 

And if I missed one of your posts where you did clarify, please forgive me. It might be better to just post a simple clarification when it appears that someone has either misread your post or didn't get the meaning behind your post. It'll save you a lot of this back and forth posting like this.

 

Now me... I'm thick headed, so I need to sometimes go back and forth a few times to fully understand what someone is trying to get me to understand. (8^D)

 

- Christopher Mullins

[zornwil]

Re: Metamorphosis

 

No offense at your group, and I've been following your progress, but is there a group I can join who's mission statement is something along the lines of "To show others the Hero System is fine the way it is and is in no need of additional rules, kludges, glitch fixes or plugs. To clarify apparent inconsitancies and contradictions and to explore the true mean and value of the rules. To stat out complicated builds using the existing rules without fail and to show others that if a Power were called Hackfilberwright it shouldn't be knocked just because it doesn't appear to Hackfilber the way someone thinks Hackfilbering is defined."?

 

Sorry, just another obvservation that there seems to me more creedance given to people saying it's broken than to those who are saying it's not. Which is odd, because it's like a whole lot of people go on about the flexibility of the system and how great it is to seperte SFX from the mechanics, but then turn right in and complain there isn't a "turn into a fish" Power.

I don't think the mission of GIR is incompatible with whether the system is praised, or, for that matter, criticized. I'd ask you to reread the mission statement. There is no attack or even an implication of breakage, although I think any rich system will have valid sources of disagreement on application, and, besides, a large part of the mission is to support a desired play experience which may not be supported "out of the box," which may not require (as you allude to) any actual changes. Which brings to mind that there was a minor change to that mission statement and it should read "a desried play experience," not "the desired play experience" (as there is no one such thing and it was simply a mistake to say "the").

[zornwil]

Re: Metamorphosis

 

No offense at your group, and I've been following your progress, but is there a group I can join who's mission statement is something along the lines of "To show others the Hero System is fine the way it is and is in no need of additional rules, kludges, glitch fixes or plugs. To clarify apparent inconsitancies and contradictions and to explore the true mean and value of the rules. To stat out complicated builds using the existing rules without fail and to show others that if a Power were called Hackfilberwright it shouldn't be knocked just because it doesn't appear to Hackfilber the way someone thinks Hackfilbering is defined."?

 

Sorry, just another obvservation that there seems to me more creedance given to people saying it's broken than to those who are saying it's not. Which is odd, because it's like a whole lot of people go on about the flexibility of the system and how great it is to seperte SFX from the mechanics, but then turn right in and complain there isn't a "turn into a fish" Power.

PS - how were you following the progress? I'm just curious. We haven't really done much, haven't done anything formally releasable aside from the mission statement, and at this point have only discussed a few elementals in terms of axioms and mechanics. There's quite a bit more to do, but this is one of those things that tends to take a long time as people dedicate time only as possible. So, anyway, I'm curious what you meant by that.

[prestidigitator]

Re: Metamorphosis

 

That is quite a correction. What is a, "desried," play experience, exactly?

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: Metamorphosis

 

That is quite a correction. What is a' date=' "desried," play experience, exactly? [/quote']

I saw that, too, but I wasn't going to be that nit-picky!

[prestidigitator]

Re: Metamorphosis

 

I saw that' date=' too, but [u']I[/u] wasn't going to be that nit-picky!

I figured he deserved it for the necromancy.

[Sean Waters]

Re: Metamorphosis

 

The desired play experience is whatever I want it to be.

[zornwil]

Re: Metamorphosis

 

I figured he deserved it for the necromancy.

:

 

Well, the educated all know that "desried" means "fried desire," a Southern term referring to desire so intense it fries in its own juices...oh, well, that was lame, but I tried...

[Dr. Anomaly]

Re: Metamorphosis

 

:

 

Well, the educated all know that "desried" means "fried desire," a Southern term referring to desire so intense it fries in its own juices...oh, well, that was lame, but I tried...

 

Actually, zornwil, I thought it was funny.

[Dust Raven]

Re: Metamorphosis

 

PS - how were you following the progress? I'm just curious. We haven't really done much' date=' haven't done anything formally releasable aside from the mission statement, and at this point have only discussed a few elementals in terms of axioms and mechanics. There's quite a bit more to do, but this is one of those things that tends to take a long time as people dedicate time only as possible. So, anyway, I'm curious what you meant by that.[/quote']

 

Actually, could you direct me to the current mission statement?

 

As far as keeping up with what's going on, I read the posts of the people I know are members (I know because they mention it in their posts) and they'll say "me and the GIR got to thinking and..." (paraphrased, obviously). I definately can't claim to be on the up and up with everything that's discussed, but I can with what the group has made public.

[zornwil]

Re: Metamorphosis

 

Actually, could you direct me to the current mission statement?

 

As far as keeping up with what's going on, I read the posts of the people I know are members (I know because they mention it in their posts) and they'll say "me and the GIR got to thinking and..." (paraphrased, obviously). I definately can't claim to be on the up and up with everything that's discussed, but I can with what the group has made public.

I believe Christopher relayed it, it's just "a desired play experience" instead of "the desired play experience."

 

There's nothing official in public, just doing "construction work" now. Anyone who's referenced the group is, just as the statement above implies, just talking about general thoughts inspired by or mentioned in. It's been pretty dead lately. Sorry.