OT, was Re: PCS/NPCS AND UNLIMITED SCENARIO IDEAS

> DAWGFACE wrote:

> you are starting to wear a bit thin here, OERJAN. i am not changing

No? OK. It was a bit hard to follow with the sudden change of subject line
<shrug>

> and i am not subject to interrogation by you or anyone else, so back

Nice to know that my months-old feelings towards you are finally being
returned :-)

> now on with my answer.

Your reference to 40K read as follows:

"OERJAN, exactly wot do you mean by defining which SG II scenario i am talking
about?

i was not aware that SG II had gone the route of the newer versions of 40K
with a set number of specific, offici, gaming scenarios to be gamed to the
point of barfing from boredom."

The first sentence was a perfectly valid, and neutrally phrased, question.

However, the subsequent "i was not aware..." part strongly implied that you
assumed me to be talking about 40K-style set and numbered scenarios, and
it also did so in a rather ridiculing tone. I don't know what you intended
this second sentence to accomplish, but all it actually did do was to annoy
me.

[long snip]

> you will find toys from 20 or more years ago locked in combat with

If this *had* bothered you, you probably wouldn't have touched GZG games

with a ten-foot pole - after all, "use whatever models you like" is the
basic tenet of all GZG's games. Same with me and my group... though our oldest
GW models are only about 17 years old, since the average age in our
group is only 25-ish.

[another long snip which - apart from the specific backgrounds and RPG
rules used - read very much like what my old college gaming group used
to do and what I'm trying to get my current group to accept]

> if this does not suit your own tstes fine. do you own thing and we

It suits my tastes quite well, except that I'm more a large-battle and
strategic-campaign person more than a skirmish person so I track the
histories of my battallions, regiments, generals, flotillas, fleets,
admirals and nations/empires more than those of individual rank-and-file

soldiers. Too many grunts in a brigade to name them all individually,
especially when the individual models are only 5-6 mm tall.

FWIW I've been gaming in this way on and off for about fifteen years
("off"
when the only opposition I could find were dug-in GW gamers; "on" when I

manage to get them out of the GW rut)... which is why I get so annoyed by your
patronizing comments about "missing things because you don't do
this-or-that".

I don't know if you actually *intend* the comments to be patronizing, but
that's the way they come across. The impression you give is one of "drawling
derisively about how superior your gaming style (described at extreme length)
is to our gaming styles, and doing this without having any idea of what our
supposedly inferior gaming styles actually are". (This
description is much exaggerated due to my less-than-perfect grasp of
English, but this basic feeling is there.) If this is not the impression

you wish to make, then you too may need to consider backing off a bit.

> i do believe in my first post under the above title, i specified

You did, yes. That was the "shorthand" discussion which you seemed to have
left in your previous post.

> get real; when i person says the figure looks like JOHN WAYNE, or

A lot of folks, maybe. All folks, no - not even all folks in a small
group, unless the group is very homogenous. Oh, everyone will get *a* point,
but it isn't necessarily the one you intended.

For example: on hearing the "Madonna" shorthand description one of my local
opponents would get the impression "good-looking artist and *very*
intelligent+successful business woman" while another would think "blond
bimbo in weird clothes who can't sing"... which of the two was it you
intended? Or was it a third? (Yes, my gaming group is quite mixed. Yours

seems to be more homogenous.)

"Looks like" and "behaves like" are two quite different things, though. I and
my local opponents know far too many people whose visual appearences

are badly misleading to easily equate visual appearence with personality
:-/

> the RPG tactical gaming is an outgrowth of the groups's background

Pretty much identical to my gaming life, then.

> yes, i did make a mistake i makig the blanket assumption that

OK.

> another thing; for some reason, i cannot cut and paste as y'all with

Out of curiousity, what email program and computer do you use?

Regards,

> I wrote:

...a long post which should have gone to DAWGFACE's private mailbox rather
than to the list. Sorry 'bout that, folks.

Later,