A little bit of Conflict for hurting people with the Force?

[Jedi Ronin 1,588]

Browbeating dissenters and lying with ease?  This isn't some new, novel or uncommon phenomenon in politics or media.

[StarkJunior 1,240]

Anyone else find it hilarious that in that story Tramp gave out a DSP for someone drawing a lightsaber because obviously that means you intend to kill someone, but then he refuses to say Yoda or any other Jedi would get Conflict for similar situations?

[Donovan Morningfire 10,200]

5 minutes ago, Jedi Ronin said:

Browbeating dissenters and lying with ease?  This isn't some new, novel or uncommon phenomenon in politics or media.

Unfortunately true.

[GroggyGolem 2,848]

2 hours ago, Benjan Meruna said:

You know, I kept thinking that I had read an account of Tramp's GMing in the past, so I finally went looking for it and found it, and hoo boy:

When asked why he felt Tramp should never GM or have any power over player characters, he said this:

 

I especially noted where Tramp claims, of his own free will, that he doesn't feel qualified to run games of this RPG in particular and he prefers to be a player. Yet here he speaks with such authority on the matter, like he knows something that everyone else doesn't.

 

That story about Tramp GMing was a train wreck. It just kept getting worse but I couldn't look away.

 

[Tramp Graphics 2,328]

18 hours ago, Kael said:

And yet you try to shoe horn sooooooo many concepts and lore from d20 era. 

It's not the lore I have a problem with. It's the mechanics.  First, I'm not a fan of level-based systems to begin with, especially purely level-based systems. The RCRB was fine, because they had fixed specific aspects of D20 mechanics that I loathed since AD&D, namely their armor mechanics and lack of independently advanced  skills. When Saga Edition came out, however, they took everything backwards, abandoning skills and armor damage reduction and going back to the days of Armor Classes (with armor providing defense bonuses against getting hit), and "proficiency checks" based upon overall level, going back to a purely level-based advancement. Armor does not prevent you from being hit. It absorbs damage after you have been hit. It is actually easier to hit someone wearing armor than someone not wearing armor. As a result, I refused to even touch Saga Edition with a ten foot pole. So when people ask why I don't talk about the information from Saga Edition, it's because I refused to even look at that abomination of a game once I found out what the designers were doing with the system's game mechanics. 

Frankly, my favorite system is R.Talsorian Games' Fuzion system, the successor to their Interlock system; a purely skill-based system with no set "classes", a very simple skill/combat resolution system, skills that can be advanced independently, talents and perks which can be bought by anyone in any combination, and a fully fleshed out life-path system, and a proper armor system where the armor has a stopping power rating subtracted from any damage taken. R.Talsorian Games is the creator of the  Cyberpunk 2020 (and Cyberpunk 203X), MekTon Z, and Teenagers from Outer Space RPGs.

The idea of a Wisdom score is not unique to D20. It's simply a reflection of a character's innate common sense, prudence, and mental discipline, his wisdom. 

The Jedi Consular may have been a term introduced in D20, but has since expanded beyond it into the video games and the comics, so it is now an ingrained part of the SW lore, not simply a game mechanic. 

Consulars are well known for their wisdom, Sages in particular. And the Lightsaber style granted as part of the Consular career is Willpower based. I believe this was intentional on the developers' parts. It is also no coincidence that many aspects of a high wisdom (discipline, vigilance, prudence, etc)  are also aspects of a high willpower, and that many of the career skills for Consulars are Willpower based, as well as Intellect based. 

[StarkJunior 1,240]

Can you please explain, then, why Coercion is a Willpower skill and why the skill descriptions for Vigilance and Discipline have little to do with any sort of wisdom?

Or the concept of a wise fool?

Or that you can have a character who has high values in all of these, but can still not be wise?

Or that you can become a doctor/health professional solely for money, and have none of the core values you insist they must have?

Or any of the other points people have brought up?

You have repeatedly failed to do so, at all.

Just as you keep insisting that Jedi Consular - an entirely Legends concept - should have the same relevance as canon material.

Edited March 2, 2017 by StarkJunior

[awayputurwpn 7,720]

"Cunning" and "Wise" have very similar lexical definitions and share many synonyms. Their connotations vary from each other somewhat, but Wisdom is often synonymous with Cunning (Shrewd, Clever, Crafty, etc). Important to note that Perception and Survival are both Wisdom skills in the previous d20 systems, and Cunning handles these in FFG's system. Yet, Cunning is distinct from Wisdom in that it connotes a more devious type of character—it is possible for a devious character to not be exceptionally wise. 

Willpower and Presence share most similarities with d20's "Charisma," but it was very smart of FFG to split them into their separate forms: Willpower for strength of character, and Presence for strength of personality, whereas Charisma in the d20 functions for both. A character with high Willpower can simply be very obstinate or hardheaded (which is the opposite of wise, since wisdom listens to reason), and a character with high Presence can be primarily a flashy or flamboyant type with little common sense.

All that to say, "Wisdom" and "Charisma" from the d20 systems have been complete mixed together and then divided up into Cunning, Willpower, and Presence. And then they threw the idea of a "medicine" skill over to Intellect to give it some love  

Neither Willpower, Cunning, nor Presence is a good equivalent for Wisdom in d20. Looking at the definition of a Wisdom score vs. the definitions of Willpower (e.g. self-control), Cunning (e.g. savvy), and Presence (e.g. confidence), there's something in each of them that was a part of Wisdom in previous systems. 

TL;DR: Willpower is not the "best" indicator of "wisdom" in this system—no characteristic is. Reading the descriptions for each characteristic, this becomes perfectly clear.

 

[Tramp Graphics 2,328]

5 hours ago, mouthymerc said:

In that thread Tramp does go on to say that he hasn't played or GMed for about ten years. That would mean that he stopped some time after this GM experience with Elias all went down. This could be for a variety reasons including that people just got fed up with such dogmatic and inconsistent views. He tends to cherry pick things that support his viewpoint while glossing over the bigger picture. I'm not even sure that if he got to play that his viewpoint would improve because he just doesn't seem to be capable to appreciate any other viewpoint but his own.

The reason why I haven't played or GMed in that long is because there aren't any people in my area who play the games I do. Most of them are into CCGs, D&D,  or Vampire the Masquerade and its sister games. I prefer Cyberpunk, Mekton, TfoS, and Star Wars. And, as far as getting into any games here, I've been spending all of my time on these boards working on converting my old WEG character over, and organizing a game, not joining other games. 

4 hours ago, StarkJunior said:

Anyone else find it hilarious that in that story Tramp gave out a DSP for someone drawing a lightsaber because obviously that means you intend to kill someone, but then he refuses to say Yoda or any other Jedi would get Conflict for similar situations?

That situation was a matter of the character drawing a lethal weapon against an unarmed opponent in a bar room brawl. 

3 hours ago, GroggyGolem said:

I especially noted where Tramp claims, of his own free will, that he doesn't feel qualified to run games of this RPG in particular and he prefers to be a player. Yet here he speaks with such authority on the matter, like he knows something that everyone else doesn't.

 

That story about Tramp GMing was a train wreck. It just kept getting worse but I couldn't look away.

 

I never claimed to be a good GM. In fact, I have very little experience as a GM. I prefer playing. That game in particular was only my second attempt at GMing, and it was a solo campaign with only one player. Definitely not an ideal situation all around. However, I do like to have a full understanding of any game system I play, and read the rules and mechanics fully and thoroughly to get as deep an understanding of the rules and mechanics as I can. 

 

21 minutes ago, StarkJunior said:

Can you please explain, then, why Coercion is a Willpower skill and why the skill descriptions for Vigilance and Discipline have little to do with any sort of wisdom? Or the concept of a wise fool? Or that you can have a character who has high values in all of these, but can still not be wise? You have repeatedly failed to do so, at all.

Just as you keep insisting that Jedi Consular - an entirely Legends concept - should have the same relevance as canon material.

A "wise fool" is a contradiction in terms. It should be noted, according to this article, that the "wise fool" is not a person who is both wise and foolish, but rather, a person who is essentially powerless, and lives by his or her innate instincts, which garners him or her a sense of "common sense" wisdom, and insight, and the protection granted someone who isn't expected to "know any better". He or she is a person who may not have much in the way of book learning, but does have a deep grasp of common sense, prudence, purity, and understanding of human nature. It's the difference from being smart and being wise. 

 

Why is Coercion a Willpower skill? because it requires a strong willpower to intimidate dominate another person, and to not be intimidated. It should also be noted that exceptionally wise people are also very hard to intimidate and are very good at intimidating others. Secondly, a high discipline and being very vigilant have a lot to do with wisdom. As a rule, a wise person is very disciplined and very vigilant.

 

As for why a "Legends Concept" such as the Jedi Consular should have any weight in this discussion, This whole game system is built upon both Legends and new Canon. The various Careers in this system are taken from Legends. Legends material wasn't completely discarded by Lucasfilm when Disney bought them out. They have consistently been bringing back many things from the old canon back into the new canon. So, yes, they are still relevant. 

Edited March 2, 2017 by Tramp Graphics

[HappyDaze 10,108]

Do you have examples of these wise people that are exceptionally good at intimidating others?

[HappyDaze 10,108]

And again, reading the material thoroughly without playing the game isn't going to give you full understanding any more than extensive masturbation will help you learn to sexually satisfy a partner.

[awayputurwpn 7,720]

1 minute ago, HappyDaze said:

Do you have examples of these wise people that are exceptionally good at intimidating others?

I'm sure there are some examples that can be pulled from somewhere.

I mean, sure a character can be wise and intimidating. But the two qualities aren't even related to each other. You could be wise and nonthreatening...just like you can be dextrous and intimidating, or intelligent and charismatic. But in all those examples, the one doesn't presuppose the other at all. You can have any two personal characteristics that aren't mutually exclusive; but just because they don't cancel each other out, it doesn't mean they're necessarily dependent on each other.

In other words, just because a character can be wise and intimidating, doesn't mean he must be both or neither.

[StarkJunior 1,240]

32 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Why is Coercion a Willpower skill? because it requires a strong willpower to intimidate dominate another person, and to not be intimidated. It should also be noted that exceptionally wise people are also very hard to intimidate and are very good at intimidating others. Secondly, a high discipline and being very vigilant have a lot to do with wisdom. As a rule, a wise person is very disciplined and very vigilant.

 

Who's rule? Yours? Because I can think of plenty of characters/concepts who aren't either of those things, but still wise, and vice-versa.

Also, now you're just shoehorning Coercion into some weird mandatory relation to prove your point, and as @awayputurwpn said, they aren't even related.

Also, you've literally said that wise people can't be reckless, but wise fool tropes are frequently reckless and stupid.

Edited March 2, 2017 by StarkJunior

[Tramp Graphics 2,328]

21 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

Do you have examples of these wise people that are exceptionally good at intimidating others?

Sure. Jesus, Mr Miyagi (Karate Kid franchise), pretty much any Martial Arts grand master, Ghandi. 

18 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

And again, reading the material thoroughly without playing the game isn't going to give you full understanding any more than extensive masturbation will help you learn to sexually satisfy a partner.

I don't deny that. However, having a solid understanding of the rules before playing is certainly better than playing with no understanding of the system 

12 minutes ago, StarkJunior said:

Who's rule? Yours? Because I can think of plenty of characters/concepts who aren't either of those things, but still wise.

Also, now you're just shoehorning Coercion into some weird mandatory relation to prove your point, and as @awayputurwpn said, they aren't even related.

Also, you've literally said that wise people can't be reckless, but wise fool tropes are frequently reckless and stupid.

Actually, no, they're not reckless at all; at least not according to the article about the "Wise Fool" I linked to above. They may not have a high IQ, but they have a lot of common sense, and self-discipline. They are not reckless. And I'm not shoehorning Coercion into anything. I'm simply pointing out that people with a high wisdom tend to be hard to intimidate, and can be very intimidating simply by their uncanny calm in the face of a foe. 

13 minutes ago, awayputurwpn said:

I'm sure there are some examples that can be pulled from somewhere.

I mean, sure a character can be wise and intimidating. But the two qualities aren't even related to each other. You could be wise and nonthreatening...just like you can be dextrous and intimidating, or intelligent and charismatic. But in all those examples, the one doesn't presuppose the other at all. You can have any two personal characteristics that aren't mutually exclusive; but just because they don't cancel each other out, it doesn't mean they're necessarily dependent on each other.

In other words, just because a character can be wise and intimidating, doesn't mean he must be both or neither.

I agree. And I never said that they had to be both or neither, but truly wise people do often naturally intimidate those who are ignorant and brutish with their natural calm in the face of adversity or bullying, being very hard to intimidate in turn.  Think about it, how easy is/was it for their detractors to intimidate Socrates , Moses, Jesus, the Dali Lama, or Ghandi, some of the wisest men in history. 

Edited March 2, 2017 by Tramp Graphics

[awayputurwpn 7,720]

9 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

I agree. And I never said that they had to be both or neither, but truly wise people do often naturally intimidate those who are ignorant and brutish with their natural calm in the face of adversity or bullying, being very hard to intimidate in turn.  Think about it, how easy is/was it for their detractors to intimidate Socrates , Moses, Jesus, the Dali Lama, or Ghandi, some of the wisest men in history. 

Okay, but all these people were also very intelligent and (arguably) also very charismatic. Wisdom isn't necessarily the defining characteristic here to determine their influential/intimidating natures.

[Tramp Graphics 2,328]

1 minute ago, awayputurwpn said:

Okay, but all these people were also very intelligent and (arguably) also very charismatic. Wisdom isn't necessarily the defining characteristic here to determine their influential/intimidating natures.

No argument there. However, their wisdom did also make them very hard to intimidate. Thus the correlation between a high Willpower and wisdom. Very wise people tend to have strong wills. The wise are not easily intimidated, nor are they "wishy-washy". 

[HappyDaze 10,108]

Wisdom can also allow you to recognize when you really should be afraid. If it helps you to 'resist intimidation' when the danger is real, then you're confusing wisdom with foolishness.

[StarkJunior 1,240]

10 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

No argument there. However, their wisdom did also make them very hard to intimidate. Thus the correlation between a high Willpower and wisdom. Very wise people tend to have strong wills. The wise are not easily intimidated, nor are they "wishy-washy". 

But that doesn't make them automatically good at intimidating others, nor does it mean they have a high Coercion.

Also, Radagast the Brown is a good example of a wise character who probably doesn't have very good discipline and is probably not very vigilant. After all, he was an unwitting pawn in Saruman's plans to capture Gandalf and displayed naive and innocent qualities, but he was still an Istari. Wise when it came to the birds and beasts - though Gandalf commanded greater respect and knowledge from birds - but he is still a character who doesn't possess the qualities you deem as necessary for a wise character in any sort of meaningful manner.

Still, he's my favorite of the Istari.

Edited March 2, 2017 by StarkJunior

[HappyDaze 10,108]

And to counter Tramp's example, really foolish people can also have very strong wills and be highly resistant to ever backing down. Or perhaps that is the exact example Tramp is trying to show us...

[StarkJunior 1,240]

5 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

And to counter Tramp's example, really foolish people can also have very strong wills and be highly resistant to ever backing down. Or perhaps that is the exact example Tramp is trying to show us...

Merry and Pippin - actually, Hobbits in general.

[awayputurwpn 7,720]

Tramp, As I showed in a post further above (also linked below), the d20 concept of Wisdom—the Jedi Consular's hallmark—has (along with Charisma, and Intelligence a little bit) been completely broken down and distributed, bit-by-bit, into each this system's "mental/internal" characteristics. Rationality, confidence, discipline, self-control, savvy: these are all actual examples of wisdom, and yet they are interspersed between 4 different characteristics. 

 

[Kael 1,865]

28 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

I don't deny that. However, having a solid understanding of the rules before playing is certainly better than playing with no understanding of the system

I would argue that you don't have a clear understanding of the rules. Not with the arguments you make. 

[Tramp Graphics 2,328]

18 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

Wisdom can also allow you to recognize when you really should be afraid. If it helps you to 'resist intimidation' when the danger is real, then you're confusing wisdom with foolishness.

Being resistant to intimidation does not mean being unwilling to admit when a situation is untenable. The difference is that the wise person won't let fear cloud his judgement, causing him to either overreact or be frozen in fear; but will instead act prudently. 

 

14 minutes ago, StarkJunior said:

But that doesn't make them automatically good at intimidating others, nor does it mean they have a high Coercion.

Also, Radagast the Brown is a good example of a wise character who probably doesn't have very good discipline and is probably not very vigilant. After all, he was an unwitting pawn in Saruman's plans to capture Gandalf and displayed naive and innocent qualities, but he was still an Istari. Wise when it came to the birds and beasts - though Gandalf commanded greater respect and knowledge from birds - but he is still a character who doesn't possess the qualities you deem as necessary for a wise character in any sort of meaningful manner.

I agree. That wasn't my point though. And Radaghast was not an unwitting pawn of anything. He knew it was a trap, as did Gandalf. Gandalf specifically ordered him to leave anyway. And yes, he was very disciplined, maybe not the most intelligent, but very in tune with nature. 

14 minutes ago, HappyDaze said:

And to counter Tramp's example, really foolish people can also have very strong wills and be highly resistant to ever backing down. Or perhaps that is the exact example Tramp is trying to show us...

Not the example I am trying to show, no. But yes, fools can certainly have strong wills too. 

10 minutes ago, awayputurwpn said:

Tramp, As I showed in a post further above (also linked below), the d20 concept of Wisdom—the Jedi Consular's hallmark—has (along with Charisma, and Intelligence a little bit) been completely broken down and distributed, bit-by-bit, into each this system's "mental/internal" characteristics. Rationality, confidence, discipline, self-control, savvy: these are all actual examples of wisdom, and yet they are interspersed between 4 different characteristics. 

 

Oh, I agree. My point though was that if we had to choose one stat to most closely represent Wisdom, I would go with Willpower. I would not use Cunning. As I posted above, Cunning and Wisdom have very different meanings and connotations; cunning being deceitful, scheming, and Machiavellian, wisdom being prudent, thoughtful, sensible. Starscream is very cunning, but not the least bit wise by any stretch of the imagination. 

8 minutes ago, Kael said:

I would argue that you don't have a clear understanding of the rules. Not with the arguments you make. 

And I would disagree. I may not have much practical expereicne with the game yet, but I have read the core rules (and the source books I have) cover to cover, studying the mechanics thoroughly many times over. 

Edited March 2, 2017 by Tramp Graphics

[StarkJunior 1,240]

13 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

I agree. That wasn't my point though. And Radaghast was not an unwitting pawn of anything. He knew it was a trap, as did Gandalf. Gandalf specifically ordered him to leave anyway. And yes, he was very disciplined, maybe not the most intelligent, but very in tune with nature. 

Not the movie - the books.

After the White Council met in T.A. 2851, Radagast used his friends among the birds and beasts to act as spies for Saruman as he was searching the Gladden Fields for the One Ring - something Saruman likely anticipated, and Radagast had no idea of Saruman's true ambitions.

Further, Saruman manipulated Radagast in the summer of T.A. 3018 by saying he was willing to help Gandalf and sent Radagast in search of him. Radagast found Gandalf on the Greenway near Bree, and told Gandalf of Saruman's invitation to come to Orthanc - which Saruman planned all along, knowing Radagast was naive and innocent, and easy to manipulate.

Radagast did eventually help in Gandalf's escape by sending Gwaihir the Windlord, but he was still easily manipulated by Saruman - the once Wisest of the Istari, who eventually fell into reckless fear and hatred, coveting the Ring for himself.

There are also theories Radagast fell from the mission given to the Istari by the Valar - suggesting he had little discipline at all.

Edited March 2, 2017 by StarkJunior

[awayputurwpn 7,720]

7 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Oh, I agree. My point though was that if we had to choose one stat to most closely represent Wisdom, I would go with Willpower. I would not use Cunning. As I posted above, Cunning and Wisdom have very different meanings and connotations; cunning being deceitful, scheming, and Machiavellian, wisdom being prudent, thoughtful, sensible. Starscream is very cunning, but not the least bit wise by any stretch of the imagination. 

 

Your agreement with me and your statement that "one stat can most closely represent wisdom" contradict each other. My whole point was that no one characteristic is a "better match" for wisdom. Wisdom isn't a stat in this system, and it is not "best represented" by any one of the stats.

[GroggyGolem 2,848]

6 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

And I would disagree. I may not have much practical expereicne with the game yet, but I have read the core rules (and the source books I have) cover to cover, studying the mechanics thoroughly many times over. 

Yeeaaaah why is anyone even trying to argue against this guy? He thinks he has a better understanding of the game than everyone else because he's read the books a few times.