Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart

[Derp]

@ganymede said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

Alzie did, actually.

Oh, so they did. I stand corrected! But that doesn't really negate the point, either. While Cobalt can come back with a snide 'maybe you should read further before commenting', I did read further, and her later reply seemed like equivocation justifying being mean-spirited toward another forum user earlier in the thread. It's not cool, and this is the kind of stuff that somehow seems to slide under the radar, even though we're in the constructive part of the forum. Again. You shouldn't get a pass for being catty toward another user just because you come back later and say 'well I suppose this could be ok to a certain class of player'.

As far as the actual chart goes, I've always found this to be a helpful tool. I saw this years ago, and have a copy saved on my computer, because sometimes it proves to be useful.

[Ganymede]

@derp said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

While Cobalt can come back with a snide 'maybe you should read further before commenting', I did read further, and her later reply seemed like equivocation justifying being mean-spirited toward another forum user earlier in the thread.

Are we reading the same thread here? Let me help you with Cobalt's first three posts.

@cobaltasaurus said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

sigh This is such a gross over complication. It does not need to be this difficult.

@cobaltasaurus said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

It's an over complication and way more information than a new player is going to need. It is not brief and concise, it's a visual mess that sends people not already familiar with mage running for the hills.

@cobaltasaurus said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

It doesn't send me running for the hills. I know how to the rules for casting in mage. I have had multiple people comment to me that looking at that image has completely turned them off of playing mage. @Sparks Is a good example of people turned off on mage. "This is too complicated, I'm going back to D&D." (Paraphrasing here.)

I'm glad it helps you, but it doesn't help everyone and it actively turns off some people.

Only then, after two direct replies, do we get:

@cobaltasaurus said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

Okay, sure. You're way of playing and learning is the One True Way, got it.

So, having cited to the record, your following conclusion seems out-of-place:

@derp said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

You shouldn't get a pass for being catty toward another user just because you come back later and say 'well I suppose this could be ok to a certain class of player'.

If not out-of-place, then your conclusion ignores what is clearly evident from the record.

[surreality]

@magee101 said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

@cobaltasaurus maybe it sends gou running for the hills. For me this is a godsend.

@cobaltasaurus said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

@magee101 It doesn't send me running for the hills. I know how to the rules for casting in mage. I have had multiple people comment to me that looking at that image has completely turned them off of playing mage. @Sparks Is a good example of people turned off on mage. "This is too complicated, I'm going back to D&D." (Paraphrasing here.)

I'm glad it helps you, but it doesn't help everyone and it actively turns off some people.

@magee101 said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

@cobaltasaurus the book does that too. Yoi know how long it took for me to sit down and say ok lets do it! Mage is a game that is going to take effort to play. If that silly picture turns them off, they might not have really enjoyed mage anyways

@cobaltasaurus said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

@magee101 Okay, sure. You're way of playing and learning is the One True Way, got it.

This is what I'm seeing, Gany.

Nowhere am I seeing Magee claiming a 'one true way', only that this chart is helpful to them and that they appreciate having it available, whether the chart is ideal or not.

The leap to catty bullshit is not on Magee here. Check your sacred cow bias.

[Ganymede]

@surreality

If someone suggested that something made you run for the hills, and then suggested that you didn't put any effort into playing or were turned off by something as silly as a picture, I would not hesitate to stick my umbrage in their face in a less polite way.

If you can't tell that Cobalt wasn't talking at Magee to begin with, you may want to check your reading comprehension. The problem with indicting someone for catty bullshit is the vast amount of catty bullshit that exists here.

[Warma Sheen]

@alzie Thanks again, by the way. This is really helpful and I will use it for sure to learn if I play 1e.

[surreality]

@ganymede 'run for the hills' wasn't magee's phrasing. 'Maybe it's that to you, but it helps me' is the actual antithesis of a 'one true wayist' attitude. There's no implication or accusation of laziness or stupidity being aimed at Cobalt whatsoever. There's no suggestion that it's the only way to learn at all, or that she doesn't understand the game or the rules.

The whole attitude was dismissive and condescending from the jump. 'Oh, sigh, that is a pile of garbage.' It's certainly not constructive, but the untouchables are freely permitted that, I suppose.

Is it intimidating and off-putting to some? Yep. Is it helpful to some? Yep.

Only one person here is making a personal attack, and it's one there's no reasonable basis to make, because the newer poster here never makes the claim or implication that there's any 'one true way'.

The closest thing to it is noting that if someone is intimidated or put off by the chart, it may not be a game they will enjoy, because ultimately it gets a lot more complicated than that, and that's not an unreasonable observation. That's not insulting to anyone. That's not making any claim they're too dumb to understand or learn it. That's a basic awareness that some people just don't like games with complicated systems, and even if there are things one can dabble in in the game that are not very complex as a new player, let's not pretend the game isn't ultimately quite complex with many conditionals to be kept in mind. It's perfectly fine for someone to not enjoy a game like that, and mage is definitely a game like that.

[Derp]

@Ganymede

It's not a problem with my reading comprehension. Other people are seeing this too. Probably because it's a well-known pattern. So I counter with -- Perhaps you've just become so accustomed to this type of behavior that you're not seeing it for what it is. Others in this thread seem to be following my train of thought just fine.

@surreality said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

The whole attitude was dismissive and condescending from the jump. 'Oh, sigh, that is a pile of garbage.' It's certainly not constructive, but the untouchables are freely permitted that, I suppose.

This.

[Thenomain]

@derp said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

@surreality said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

The whole attitude was dismissive and condescending from the jump. 'Oh, sigh, that is a pile of garbage.' It's certainly not constructive, but the untouchables are freely permitted that, I suppose.

This.

And dragging the conversation down in how someone said something is constructive, you two?

I agree with you a great deal of the time, but I think it's time people stop using their personal definition of "constructive" as a way to dismiss others.

Yes, Cobalt was being catty. She also had some damn good points.

--

I find it the most interesting that the chart is so polarizing. I've heard that it was created to be condescending of Mage. I've heard that it was made to be a useful tool. @Alzie is known to be very snarky in his own right so that may have tainted some people's reactions from the get-go.

I find nMage 1e's spellcasting to be confusing as fuck, and this chart painful to even consider.

But I've also coded similar systems all throughout WoD and people almost never get so touchy about them as they do with this.

I honestly don't know what's wrong with you people.

You people.

(Not me, clearly.)

[Apos]

@thenomain said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

But I've also coded similar systems all throughout WoD and people almost never get so touchy about them as they do with this.

People that have paid their dues in learning something unnecessarily complicated tend to be very protective of that. This makes for extremely unhealthy environments as it effectively encourages hazing of new players rather than helping them, and is particularly true of more competitive rather than collaborative environments. See RPI muds, where understanding the internal game mechanics gives someone a competitive advantage, for example. Another example are complaints about games being dumbed-down when they are changed to be made more accessible, even if the original system was inscrutable or just plain bad.

[Cobalt]

@Derp @surreality My objection was how @magee101 came across, to me, like s/he was saying that if you found this chart off putting then you couldn't enjoy mage. I'm not going to put in the energy to go back and directly quote it, but considering magee flat out said "if you find this off putting then mage isn't for you", I don't think I'm out of bounds in taking their words to mean that their way was the correct way and any other way was not.

Even told them: I'm glad it helps you, but it doesn't help everyone.

I'm not sure how that makes me the one saying there's only one right way.

I got frustrated and finally resorted to sarcasm. Obviously I shouldn't have, but like I said I resort to sarcasm when I feel like I've hit a brick wall.

[Thenomain]

@apos said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

@thenomain said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

But I've also coded similar systems all throughout WoD and people almost never get so touchy about them as they do with this.

People that have paid their dues in learning something unnecessarily complicated tend to be very protective of that.

Absolutely. The hue and cry when World of Warcraft made it easier to level up was legendary and repeated in song for generations after.

But I think what's happening here is that people who think the flowchart is fair or is unrepresentative are feeling insulted that what they enjoy is being called stupid for reasons of either misunderstanding (c.f., "this is a good tool once you know the system") or is misapplying the chart (c.f., "this chart is more complicated than it has to be").

It is a truly horrendous chart, but show a new programmer the breakdown of ANSI SQL's SELECT statement and see what they say. The thing is not a teaching tool, and should not be seen as such.

Nobody likes being misrepresented, and I think that several people are calling this out. The people being called out don't like the implication that they're being called stupid, either (whether they really are or aren't) and so the cycle of "You!/No You!" happens again.

In summary: Sometimes it's possible that you're on the wrong side of an argument and should have enough self-awareness and humility to accept it when it happens.

[Cobalt]

@thenomain To be clear, if anyone felt I was calling them stupid or wrong for liking the chart— I’m not.

I’m sure I did come across that way, and I’m sorry for that. If this chart is your jam— my bad friends. Use it and if you can use it to help other people good!

My preference is to use more bite sized pieces of knowledge. I find it to be too complicated, and more information than needed at once.

[Ganymede]

@derp said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

So I counter with -- Perhaps you've just become so accustomed to this type of behavior that you're not seeing it for what it is.

An ad hominem retort, counselor?

I suppose you're right. I am used to this sort of behavior. I see it every day here, from everyone, and every day at work. People who won't let a damn thing go; people who toss shade. So, I'll say what I mean to say another way.

Some people may find the chart intimidating. I don't. Some people may find the chart useful. I don't. Some people may not find the game to their liking due to the complexity of the magic system. I don't.

I find the game not to my liking because the only variety of players I dislike prejudicially more than players who play Vampire are players who play Mage.

(Note, I do like a lot of players who play Mage, but I haven't found a single "group" of players who seem more keen on power-gaming and obliterating other players / "their opponents" than people who fastidiously harp on the awesomeness that is Mage 1E.)

[Kay]

Mildly constructive spirit, go! Much appreciation to OP for uploading the chart.

Have kittens and puppies:

And bird:

[Derp]

@ganymede said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

An ad hominem retort, counselor?

No more so than the original point, which was that I lacked sufficient reading comprehension to grasp her point, iirc. Missing the words <--> missing the behavior (text vs subtext) felt like a logical counterpoint. It wasn't meant as an attack on you. No more than I assume yours was an meant as an attack on me, anyway. We argue. It's what we get paid for.

That said -- to @Thenomain's point that calling out unconstructive behavior is likewise unconstructive, sure. But ignoring it also lends it tacit approval. Which is arguably worse.

As for the mechanics of Mage, who likes it, who doesn't, its level of complexity, etc, I think that it's been beaten to death, and people are firmly in their camps. We won't change minds in this thread.

I appreciate this one as a tool and reference guide. If all levels of everything could be contained in a chart, we wouldn't need any other part of the book. But given how many possible paths it can take, I challenge anyone to make another that is both somehow simpler and equally comprehensive.

[surreality]

@derp You weren't the only one told to check your reading comprehension, as well. After a laundry list of things that weren't in evidence were cited, to boot. (Irony remains a thing.)

"You didn't read it the same way I did." != "You can't read."

[magee101]

@surreality Mostly what I find funny is once you actually quote my responses next to cobalt's it becomes pretty clear who was saying what.

Edited to remove shit I should just put in hogpit!

[magee101]

@cobaltasaurus also I do want to apologize if my comment "it might make you run for the hills" seemed catty! I totally misread your words and thought it said even players not new to mage were sent running for the hills. I was not trying to be catty but I can totally see how it would be when I dun fucked up reading

[Cobalt]

@magee101 No worries, I shouldn't have gotten sarcastic with you.

[magee101]

@surreality said in Helpful Spellcasting Flowchart:

The closest thing to it is noting that if someone is intimidated or put off by the chart, it may not be a game they will enjoy, because ultimately it gets a lot more complicated than that, and that's not an unreasonable observation. That's not insulting to anyone. That's not making any claim they're too dumb to understand or learn it. That's a basic awareness that some people just don't like games with complicated systems, and even if there are things one can dabble in in the game that are not very complex as a new player, let's not pretend the game isn't ultimately quite complex with many conditionals to be kept in mind. It's perfectly fine for someone to not enjoy a game like that, and mage is definitely a game like that.

So much this, all this, this is what I tried to get across in all my posts but I do poorley at. @surreality be my waifu