[X] My Assistant

[DocTaotsu]

...OK, OK so, Firefox & Word don't have context & syntax checkers...or even Chinese checkers. (blast, can't even blame this one on my Queen's English either) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

Actually... an ordinance could be considered to have a proximity effect as many tend to be rather broad & general.

...rollerblades away really really fast

*Pins her down with well placed ordinance fire. A priest and a cop are immediately dispatched to hunt her down.*

[Fuchs]

So, let me get this straight. You are equating outright calling someone a penis with an attempt to give the community a little light-hearted and free entertainment? This goes a long way toward explaining your mindset. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/eek.gif)

I just think you should stop trying to tell others to get a sense of humor if you're only finding stuff funny as long as it doesn't offend yourself.

Or, to word it differently: Are you calling an attempt to be light-hearted and funny by using a term from a comedy show a grave insult? After all your "hey, don't be so serious!" rhethoric?

And then refusing the apology?

Sheesh. Talk about double standards.

[Fuchs]

The fact you and Fuchs are trying to equate the two tells me you've got some pretty messed up ideas of what constitutes a "joke." The fact you're both trying to say that CGL's attempt at humor is somehow worse than simply calling someone a name tells me I was right several posts ago when I offered you a quarter to help you buy a sense of humor, because somewhere in your heads there is a broken meter.

I didn't say it was worse, as is clear in the post. But I can't help finding it rather silly to tell others to find something funny, and then react like a one was shot or cut at a quote from family guy. Both were, if applying the same standards, attempts at humor that backfired. So, how about dropping the double standard?

And while you are at it, maybe think about how it looks if you're complaining about an insult, and then turning around and insulting others ("broken meter in your heads"). (If it was meant to be funny, and a joke, by all means disregard that comment, but such a comment usually means calling someone insane, so qualifies as name calling, technically.)

[Kremlin KOA]

Hell, I thought it was funny. I reckoned y'all would get it when you read the bits cribbed from Dragons of the Sixth World.

Copy pasta is your evidence? you have got to be fragging kidding me. Copy pasta exists in all RPG work

The obsidimen was a nice touch, though. Kudos Syn!

Am considering hiring runners for an Op against Catalyst game labs, to make them put Obsidimen in the book
Anyone interested contact me at LTG NA-UCAS-SEA-555-5653

[Kremlin KOA]

I'm glad you enjoy the work I do at my day job, Catalyst Game Labs. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Yeah, when you actually do it.

Now get back to your slave pit and work on fixing those typos with your hammer and chisel. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wobble.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/spin.gif) (IMG:style_emoticons/default/spin.gif)

[Critias]

And while you are at it, maybe think about how it looks if you're complaining about an insult, and then turning around and insulting others ("broken meter in your heads"). (If it was meant to be funny, and a joke, by all means disregard that comment, but such a comment usually means calling someone insane, so qualifies as name calling, technically.)

Well, the trick there is that I don't care how it looks, really. I'll say what I feel like saying -- as the mods can attest -- and not really worry about that sort of thing.

The only way Fortune and I are applying a double standard is if you and Larme are doing the same. For every finger we point at each other, there are three more (since, really, the thumb still kind of points at the other person) pointing back at each of us...or...er...whatever the stupid old saying is.

If you guys can be chock full of righteous indignation over a prank gone awry, it's silly not to acknowledge someone else might be offended at being called, point blank, a stupid dick (Family Guy quote or not, though I'll admit I hadn't seen the apology at the time of my post). However, I can understand where you guys are coming from with your own version of the argument (where it's silly for Fortune and I to let CGL hide behind the "it was a joke" shield but refuse the same defense to Larme and his name calling), but because it's my side of the argument I'm still willing to give myself the benefit of the doubt and keep the moral high ground in my head.

For starters, a poorly-executed April Fool's prank is still, at heart, a well-intentioned joke (which quoting a tv show by means of insulting someone you disagree with on the internet may or may not be). Second, the name calling towards Fortune, in jest or not, came about as a result of the sand-in-the-vagina over the original prank; he drew fire, in essence, attempting to calm people down and get folks to stop throwing stones at someone else. Lashing out at Fortune, who is in no way affiliated with the original offensive prank, makes people lose a few moral-high-ground points, in my book. Thirdly, there's no TOS agreement that tells Catalyst not to publish fake previews to get a chuckle out of everyone, whereas there is a Terms of Service agreement in place that politely tells us all not to call one another stupid dicks.

So while I'll readily acknowledge "double standards" are being brought into play at this point in an argument, in even the worst case both sides are guilty of such. That being the case, I'll fall back on a combination of the "I'm Rubber, You're Glue" riposte along with the "He Started It" defense, and continue to sleep well at night.

Err, well, not "at night," really, since I'm at work right now and it's 3:45 in the morning. But, y'know.

[Fuchs]

Well, I can only point out that I did not insult anyone, but got insulted by you. So, where exactly is my double standard? Both insulting Fortune through a misfired joke, and insulting me and Larme by claiming there would be a broken meter in our heads is wrong.

I do understand Fortune being angry at the name calling, but I do think he should not be so quick to tell others not to take offense in the same thread - and he should not refuse the apology.

And once again - I did not insult anyone, nor call anyone names, nor told anyone to fix the broken meter in their head. I did point out what I consider a double standard - mainly, seeing something as funny, and telling others not to be offended, and then getting all angry at another misfired joke attempt.

From my point of view, there's

- a lame, stupid "joke" by Catalyst
- heated reactions to this by various people
- a rather patronising defense of Catalyst by Fortune, and some possibly insulting statement of Critias about broken meters
- a rather stupid "joke" by Larme, followed by an apology
- a heated reaction by Fortune to said "joke"
- me pointing out what I see as double standards.

[Synner]

Just a quick reply to all as follow through on Adam's post: please don't expect an apology, the April Fool's joke was a success on several levels, whatever you might think of it. Some people got it, some people didn't. Some found it funny, others didn't. Fine. That's to be expected. But... make no mistake, the "prank" did exactly what it was intended to do.

I do, however, regret not posting the debunk a week earlier, but somethings are out of our hands and things have been complicated what with 5 books in development and imminent parenthood on the horizon. For that delay, I publically apologize.

Those of you who did like the idea can expect to see a full unofficial writeup based on the pdf posted some time down the line - probably after Runners' Companion comes out and as soon as my desk clears (a little). As I mentioned in my post, the rules themselves weren't the joke (pretty much everything else was), but they were thrown together in less than 12 hours and they were definitely not playtested or edited.

[Fuchs]

Just a quick reply to all as follow through on Adam's post: please don't expect an apology, the April Fool's joke was a success on several levels, whatever you might think of it. Some people got it, some people didn't. Some found it funny, others didn't. Fine. That's to be expected. But... make no mistake, the "prank" did exactly what it was intended to do.

That does sound like it was testing the waters though.

I do, however, regret not posting the debunk a week earlier, but somethings are out of our hands and things have been complicated what with 5 books in development and imminent parenthood on the horizon. For that delay, I publically apologize.

The delay in debunking it was, together with the date, the main issues of the thing for me, so for whatever it's worth, that's ok.

Those of you who did like the idea can expect to see a full unofficial writeup based on the pdf posted some time down the line - probably after Runners' Companion comes out and as soon as my desk clears (a little). As I mentioned in my post, the rules themselves weren't the joke (pretty much everything else was), but they were thrown together in less than 12 hours and they were definitely not playtested or edited.

The rules did look very balanced already, and I'd put the rules in the companion anyway - after all, expanding the options is the book's point, and the whole companion are optional rules, from what I understand.

[Kremlin KOA]

So, let me get this straight. You are equating outright calling someone a penis with an attempt to give the community a little light-hearted and free entertainment? This goes a long way toward explaining your mindset. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/eek.gif)

Hey a penis is a wonderful device, with practical and enjoyable functions

[Kremlin KOA]

Hey folks,

I'd just like to say that we wanted to post the explanation sooner, but both Peter and I have had some major real-life stuff to deal with in the past couple weeks, and the delay got unacceptably long due to that. For that, I apologize.

I call Bullshit

You posted on the dragon threads
it would have taken less time to go "It is a joke guys"

sorry, you were not too busy

No, wait, I am not sorry for pointing this out

[Kremlin KOA]

Just a quick reply to all as follow through on Adam's post: please don't expect an apology, the April Fool's joke was a success on several levels, whatever you might think of it.

I think it comes under the false advertising part of the fraud act in Australia, I am curious to see if it does in America too. When I finish looking up the appropriate sections I will let the thread know. Anyone who studies or practices Law in the US would be appreciated if they could find out and save me time

Some people got it, some people didn't. Some found it funny, others didn't. Fine. That's to be expected. But... make no mistake, the "prank" did exactly what it was intended to do.

I do, however, regret not posting the debunk a week earlier, but somethings are out of our hands and things have been complicated what with 5 books in development and imminent parenthood on the horizon. For that delay, I publically apologize.

You guys contributed to the threads in question.

Those of you who did like the idea can expect to see a full unofficial writeup based on the pdf posted some time down the line - probably after Runners' Companion comes out and as soon as my desk clears (a little). As I mentioned in my post, the rules themselves weren't the joke (pretty much everything else was), but they were thrown together in less than 12 hours and they were definitely not playtested or edited.

[Synner]

That does sound like it was testing the waters though.

Not entirely incorrect, but not in the way you're probably thinking. As I said in the post, these rules were also intended to showcase the basic framework people can expect for the new character options that will be used in Runners' Companion - you could say it was testing the waters for those.

The delay in debunking it was, together with the date, the main issues of the thing for me, so for whatever it's worth, that's ok.

We are slightly undermanned (for the time being) and these things will happen. If things had gone the way I wished we'd have posted the pdf at 00:01 April 2nd.

The rules did look very balanced already, and I'd put the rules in the companion anyway - after all, expanding the options is the book's point, and the whole companion are optional rules, from what I understand.

Runners' Companion is very much a book about introducing as many options as possible for PCs. I have the first drafts in hand and I can say there will be more than 20 entirely new (at least as playable) character "race" options—including metavariants, new playable races, ghouls, and other more unique options. Unfortunately, even more so than drakes, dragons, even young dragons, will automatically skew most campaigns away from the shadows and that's something that I do not at this point intend to include in a core rulebook.

You guys contributed to the threads in question.

I was responsible for posting the debunk not Adam, I assumed the responsability of doing it, and I'm the one who got caught up in other things. With that in mind, please refer to my single post in the various Dragon PC threads and "read" it in the current context.

[Fuchs]

Runners' Companion is very much a book about introducing as many options as possible for PCs. I have the first drafts in hand and I can say there will be more than 20 entirely new (at least as playable) character "race" options—including metavariants, new playable races, ghouls, and other more unique options. Unfortunately, even more so than drakes, dragons, even young dragons, will automatically skew most campaigns away from the shadows and that's something that I do not at this point intend to include in a core rulebook.

With PC A.I.s, Drakes, Vampires and Shapeshifters, Dragons won't really add much. Especially Drakes seem far too close to Dragons already for that. Really, label the book "optional", and add options - many of the races will be banned anyway in "shadow level" campaigns.

[hobgoblin]

who'da thunk a dragon could cause so much chaos? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

denver...

[hobgoblin]

I do, however, regret not posting the debunk a week earlier, but somethings are out of our hands and things have been complicated what with 5 books in development and imminent parenthood on the horizon. For that delay, I publically apologize.

hmm, imminent parenthood, congratulation, or good luck, depending on ones sense of humor (IMG:style_emoticons/default/wink.gif)

Those of you who did like the idea can expect to see a full unofficial writeup based on the pdf posted some time down the line - probably after Runners' Companion comes out and as soon as my desk clears (a little). As I mentioned in my post, the rules themselves weren't the joke (pretty much everything else was), but they were thrown together in less than 12 hours and they were definitely not playtested or edited.

looking forward to it (IMG:style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)

[Larme]

Some people thought the joke was funny. They criticized those who didn't for having no sense of humor. Then I made a joke they didn't think was funny, and they exploded with the same fire of righteous indignation they accused us of having. Because it was a different kind of joke, i.e. the kind that doesn't make them laugh. (IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif)

As far as I'm concerned, that was absolute unmitigated win.

[Prime Mover]

Gratz on the baby inbound Synner, got one myself due to arrive later this year. Want to see what its like working the shadows, live with a hormonally challenged pregnant women for 9 months. It's like being hunted down by angry trolls with cricket bats.

[raverbane]

Excerpts from the website

"For those who haven’t caught the obvious clues here are just a few"

The asterisks in the Dragon Attribute Table are all over the place.

Dragons and Technology offers two completely different prices for dragon-compatible nanotrodes.

The Transcendence Metamagic box: A little too big, don’t you think?

The Dragons and Ranged Combat Modifiers: “they may apply a modifier between +2 and +4 (gamemaster’s discretion; standard of -3)�

If typos and errors are supposed to be signs of an obvious joke.

Then I suppose Arsenal ( http://forums.dumpshock.com/index.php?s=&a...st&p=626203 ) is just a really early April Fool's Joke and we can all take our 'joke' copies of Arsenal to where ever we might have purchased them and exchange them for the 'real' copy of Arsenal.

Ok, I am getting confused with that is and isnt a joke and what is and isnt humor. Does this mean Arsenal was or wasn't a joke?

[Stahlseele]

Arsenal was NOT a Joke . . but looking at all the things that were supposed to make it obvious that the runners compendium preview was a joke it very well could be, because most if not all of those hints at it being a joke are in there too . .

Oh, and Syn?
grab Aunty Ancient or at least his Stuff when you're working on the PDF with the unpublished stuff . . and put Obsidimen in there! ò,Ó

[swirler]

denver...

lol
thats exactly what I was thinking

[Eyeless Blond]

I think it comes under the false advertising part of the fraud act in Australia, I am curious to see if it does in America too. When I finish looking up the appropriate sections I will let the thread know. Anyone who studies or practices Law in the US would be appreciated if they could find out and save me time

Oh now, now, don't go being silly about breaking the law. Everyone breaks the law, all the time; part of the way governments exercise power over the governed, and why lawyers have so much power rather than armies in civilized countries, is that everyone has broken at least a few laws that they could be persecuted for. Whining because a business broke a few laws during the course of doing business is like whining that a baker broke a few eggs while baking a cake.

The way to show support or outrage in a market-based capitalistic society is to vote, with your dollars. If you don't like the things that Catalyst is doing, just factor that into your decision over whether to buy their books. If enough people do this, then you won't have to worry about SR-related jokes, because SR would cease to exist. If that's what you're looking for, then go ahead; you'll get the same thing with lawsuits anyway, and this way you keep your money rather than handing it over to some lawyer.

[Larme]

False statements, including false advertising, generally cannot give rise to legal liability unless they induce reasonable reliance. I think false advertising might be illegal if it could lead to reliance, regardless of if it actually does. But it would be impossible for anyone to rely on the "preview" in any way, especially to their financial detriment. The idea that an April Fool's joke (albiet a failed one) can be illegal is very lolworthy to me as a lawstudent.

[Stalker-x]

I think false advertising might be illegal if it could lead to reliance, regardless of if it actually does. But it would be impossible for anyone to rely on the "preview" in any way, especially to their financial detriment.

Maybe you're right. But what about compensation for the many broken hearts caused by this thread, which was only started because of the prank? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/biggrin.gif)

[apollo124]

who'da thunk a dragon could cause so much chaos? (IMG:style_emoticons/default/grinbig.gif)

Tehran? Anyone who opposes Lofwyr? The folks who used to run what is now Amazonia?
(IMG:style_emoticons/default/rotfl.gif)