Can a setting have dependency issues?
Depends on the setting.
>>46628390
What does that even mean?
EPIC
>>46628390
Please explain.
>>46628465
You can't play a character for a game in SETTING unless the player is also a character in SETTING.
>>46628390
Yes.
>>46628490
So, you can only play games set in in mundane 2016 Earth? Sounds like some sort of shit arty game, unless you're playing African Warlord Simulator.
>>46628490
...what
Anon, you should get fresh air.
>>46628465
It is what is called a pune, or play on words.
Is there anything that doesn't depend on the setting?
I originally thought OP was talking about something like Dark Sun, which basically requires you to read the Prism Pentad to have any idea what's going on.
>>46628560
Calibration.
>>46628560
Usually human physiology.
>>46628560
Players quality
>>46628560
>Everything depends on the setting :p xd xd xd :)
>This disgusting 2016 /tg/ meme.
I want the newfags to leave.
If you don't like this response, stop making threads to which it applies.
>>46628581
That depends too. In many setting humans are much tougher than IRL.
>>46628595
>meme
>not a way to counteract "why all orcs are blue and love cheese? :^)" kinds of threads
If you want to ask /tg/ how they do certain elements in their settings, just do that, don't beat around the bush.
>>46628560
Your question does not.
>>46628560
> Is there anything that doesn't depend on the setting?
Crunch.
Setting is fluff by definition, and doesn't affect the crunch, unless the fluff is hard-integrated into the crunch.
Case in point: GURPS.
Anything can be played with GURPS, and GURPS doesn't depend on the setting.
>>46628547
>a pune
>>46628693
Aha, but GURPS is one of the few cases where the crunch DOES depend on what the setting is being used for, because you're supposed to choose the appropriate rules for the game type you're playing.
>>46628390
Can an OP post be vague?
>>46628560
Snack duty.
>>46628595
>2016 /tg/ meme.
You are the newfag. Leave.
>>46628711
No.
GURPS as a crunch entity doesn't change with the setting.
Whenever something comes up as an issue in-setting, a rule for it exists in GURPS. You don't create or change anything, you just find the appropriate rule in the entirety of GURPS rulebooks.
In general, even the most integrated crunch can in fact be divorced from the fluff, and thus, the setting. Resolution mechanics are just that - mechanics, and they don't depend on what you use them for.
>>46628695
You know it's a reference to Discworld, right?
>>46628629
>counteract
Oh god, so you ARE retarded.
It's a pointless statement that everyone ignores because it has no value or purpose. It's like lying down in front of a truck and hoping someone cares enough about you to not kill you, without realizing the driver didn't see you.
Any loose question can be summarized as "what is your preference?" Even people who play in established settings change things up sometimes.
>>46629245
Nah, preference threads are fine, even though many people's preferences too depend on what kind of setting they run. Then there are threads that ask one incredibly specific question with the assumption that every setting works like D&D (or worse, OP's headcanon donutsteelland) or threads that ask something super-vague with no concrete answer in sight, or just "is MY fun better than YOUR fun?" threads. "Depends on the setting" first appeared in THESE threads.
Also
>It's a pointless statement that everyone ignores because it has no value or purpose.
Doesn't this strike you as a bit, you know, pointless then?Although at least in this case i can understand - if you don't start thread with a bait post, it will never get replies.
>>46629416
>autism
Fine, let me explain. When somebody asks 'how * is' or 'how should * be', it's called a conversation starter. It is used to start a conversation, a meaningful exchange of information and ideas between two or more people.
When you say 'it depends of the setting', it is a conversation killer. Like what its name implies, a conversation killer is a statement destroying an ongoing conversation between two or more people.
Conversation killers are generally seen as bad, because people (not autistic, unlike you) like to discuss things.
>>46629507
>a meaningful exchange of information and ideas between two or more people
If you want meaningful conversation you should put more effort into meaningful OP rather than use old beaten stupid shit like anon above you described. Lazy OP - lazy replies. Here is your fresh (You).
>>46629507
>conversation killer
>on 4chan
kek
also we're talking about two very different kinds of threads, anon.
>>46629416
>Then there are threads that ask one incredibly specific question with the assumption that every setting works like D&D
Then why bother responding if you believe the question is not addressed to you?
>or threads that ask something super-vague with no concrete answer in sight
God forbid people want to discuss things.
>"is MY fun better than YOUR fun?"
Why act like the exploration of why we enjoy what we enjoy is some sort of crime? It's almost like you're one of those idiots who chant "stop disliking what I like" whenever any criticism is levied against them. Hopefully you're really not at that level, because that's where you hope that subjectivity excuses anything and everything and your entire goal is to kill anything even resembling a discussion and instead just want to turn all conversations into meaningless chatter.
>Doesn't this strike you as a bit, you know, pointless then?
A person being annoying is a person being annoying, regardless of how ineffectual they are. It's like a person pointing out whenever someone uses a noun in one of their sentences. People are still going to use nouns, regardless of how much it upsets you.
I'm sorry, but your little meme is as pointless as it is bizarre, a crusade that hopes to stifle discussion when it is little more than an additional reply that hardly can be considered a speed bump. If anything, the mean-spirited attitude you seem to profess is behind your meme puts these "vague questions" in an even more positive light.
>>46628562
>everything is hot and shitty all the time
>gee guys maybe we should run away
>Need water, yo
There, you now understand dark sun
Allow me to interject for a moment.
>Implying anyone on /tg/ cares about what's going on in your shitty original settings
The amount of replies in threads like those proves me right better than anything would.
Technically you could have game's setting tied so tightly to mechanics and meta so that it wouldn't make sense out of it.
>>46629574
>Then why bother responding if you believe the question is not addressed to you?
When somebody asks 'how * is' or 'how should * be', it's called a conversation starter. It is used to start a conversation, a meaningful exchange of information and ideas between two or more people.
>Why act like the exploration of why we enjoy what we enjoy is some sort of crime?
because stating that subjectivity excuses anything is absolute truth and has nothing to do with killing discussion and everything to do with enabling it, since it presupposes all ideas are equally worth exploring
>>46629574
You're making one very faulty assumption. You're thinking threads like these are always high-quality.
If the thread is good, people will ignore "depends on the setting" and move on.
If the thread is bad, it will die quietly, with a pitiful choked squeak.
"Depends on the setting" can mean a lot of things, from "I honestly can't decide what's better" to "this depends on so many factors that the question is useless even if i say how it's done in my setting" and to "Your thread is bad and you should feel bad".
>>46628595
I have a few questions.
Do you really think depends on the setting hasn't been a go to response until 2016, or is this in fact all a cunning ruse?
Did you never come into a discussion thread like this before?
Are you in fact new, and trying your best to sound like you're not new, as if you have something to prove on a site where the entire point is anonymity?
>>46629716
>since it presupposes all ideas are equally worth exploring
All that means is that discussion is meaningless. If all ideas are equally valued, then there is no discussion, merely chatter, since the end result is the same regardless.
Actually exploring the merits and failings of different ideas, and being able to sift through the bad ideas is a necessary skill for anyone hoping to end up with something that isn't just an over-complicated mess. You're right, in that some people dismiss some ideas too early, but far more often people cling to bad ideas that only get worse as they persist.
>>46629724
>If the thread is good, people will ignore "depends on the setting" and move on.
>If the thread is bad, it will die quietly, with a pitiful choked squeak.
With the person who commented "depends on the setting" having no impact on the result.
It's a meaningless yet mean-spirited post that says something between "I don't have anything interesting to say, but I still need to say something" and "STOP PLAYING D&D I HATE YOU."
>>46629931
Depends on the thread
>>46629625
Wait, isn't this EXACTLY what /tg/ should be used for ? sharing creative and mostly stolen ideas ?
>>46628724
maybe
>>46629931
Let me give you an example.
Do female dwarves have beards?
1. YES, they do.
2. NO, they don't.
3. MAYBE, some do, some don't.
4. What the hell is a female dwarf?
That's it. Those are the only possible answers. We logically cannot bring anything new to the topic. That is not discussion.
If instead you asked "how do you guess the gender of a dwarf IN YOUR SETTING?", that would be much more open-ended, with potential for answers you haven't seen before.
>>46631109
1. Yes, they do, because X.
2. No, they don't, here's some examples.
3. Maybe some do, some don't, here's why I think so.
Welcome to the wonder world of notautism. In Notautism, we can assume things without them being explicitly stated, and we can provide explanations with being asked for them.
>>46629507
They are trying to kill the conversation because the question is stupid.
>>46631706
Then have the balls to say "this is stupid" instead of being passive aggressive and making a comment that's been reduced down to meaning nothing at all through a mix of misuse and overuse.
>>46631489
>wonder world of notautism
The world you've never been before
>>46631799
The only stupid thing I see in this thread are your posts.
"Depends on the setting" is a perfectly acceptable answer when OPs can't be bothered to give enough context.
>>46631807
>>46631895
Sounds like you're just upset that people are calling you out on how silly your pet phrase is.
"Depends on the setting" is a worthless post that can be translated as "You mildly upset me for not going through the trouble of adding unnecessary clauses to your questions, but I recognize that I'm being too petty to openly criticize you so I'm just going to increase your reply count by one while everyone else chooses to ignore me."
>>46632021
>adding unnecessary clauses to your questions
If a clause changes the set of answers one can give without lying, then it is not unnecessary.
>>46628390
Do you mean like how early Pathfinderarguably current as wellhad massive 3.5 dependency issues?
>>46632081
It's wholly unnecessary in Notautism land.
You should come visit sometime.
And by sometime I mean in the future, not in the past, because you apparently need things like that specified for you.
>>46628560
Depends on the setting.
