How do you reconcile the fantasy of fighting being not the fight itself, but being allowed to?
>>98099406I don't even know what you're saying but you come across as a nogames retard
>>98099406This starts off OK but it really breaks down by the end: the last paragraph is horribly written and "the only thing that limits his rage is nothing" is so clumsily written.
>>98099757I disagree, I think it's very well written
advertisers must be really getting up the admins' ass about site activity huh?
>>98099789yikes, sorry about your taste.
>>98099790If this were to be genuine it's really sad to think of someone, presumably affected by reading this, but having no social or other actual outlet to discuss it so feeling the urge to post it here to a wasteland. It would be better if it were a bot.
>>98099821I'd argue not having friends is the norm, really
>>98099828If you are OP you probably would, yeah!
>>98099406>>98099789What system?
>>98099871I think it's Settlers of Lacan.
3/10 Attempt to incite actionRare choice of imageRespondes
>>98099828It's tragic that you think so.
>>98099998OK I can't stand you getting in on this.Assuming OP did or does feel some internal emotional stirring when he reads this stuff and assuming it's from where I think it's from (and I may be wrong), this is the most important post the guy ever made, OK?>https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2008/10/those_five_days_matter_more_th.htmlDon't wallow. It's fixable, it just takes effort.If you're just interested in othering as a psychological phenomenon in TTRPGs or whatever I'm not so invested.
>>98100077It's TLP yeah, guy's a brilliant writer. Read the book if you haven't, pure gold
>>98100146it's pretty dire.
>>98099406Reconcile with what? Why does it matter what the attractive part of the proposition is? Who or what prevents me from wanting things? Who even observes my motives?This meandering, ill-considered screed says so little it comes off as a long-form koan.
>>98100455Well it is from a long ass book, but it's basically you, having learned how to want
>>98100559So Op is asking if I mind wanting social permission to take some actions, and my answer is "no, if that even is the case."
>>98099406>this is wisdom, let us attendI don't ever care if he's right, he should kill himself for that prose. So should you, OP. Fields full of herbs.
>>98099406Traditional games?
>>98100872I read it as sarcasm, ie it obviously is not wisdom at all
>>98100077It baffles me that you think this is anything other than dross.
>>98099890lolnot actually lol but open mouthed smile
>>98099406The idea that the reason most RL bullying victims don't fight back is because society doesn't permit them to sure is something. As for the broader point, there wouldb't be an appeal to being allowed to fight if there was no appeal in the fight itself. Facing and overcoming danger, and being the kind of person who can and does consistently and reliably overcome danger, is the fantasy. I don't think the idea of some kind of a legitimacy to the act of violence being important is bullshit. Obviously people like to think of themselves, and the characters they associate themselves with, as hood guys with justified reasons for their actions. Still, the thrill of danger and violence without actual danger or violence being involved, and the thought of being a confident badass worthy of respect and admiration and unbound by fear, are the point of such fantasies. Legitimizing and justifying an action hero's violence is more just icing on the cake rather than the point, or itself a way to reconcile the appeal of danger and violence with violence actually being kind of bad in most situations.
OP, what the fuck are you talking about?
>>98102685I think the author heard some bullshit about how teachers only ever get involved with bullying when the victim hits back, and decided that was worth writing a paper about.
>>98099406I think that's why D&D and its antecedents remain the post popular genre for TTRPG regardless. The fantasy medieval milieu creates an environment in which the players can have immense immediate personal power, and a large lawless wilderness for it to happen in. In a western you have the wilderness but the genre convention is that "God made man. Sam Colt made men equal.", in a superhero game you have immense personal power, but all the social pressures and law enforcement remains. I think no matter how you set up the settings "rules", the presence of a certain technology or roles in a modern world implies rules that no player can get out of their head. The freedom of D&D always *feels* wrong there regardless.Then on top of that you have the whole tactical infinity thing being the USP of TTRPGs. It really lends itself to environs where you can try anything, and sometimes have a spell that does potentially dynamic things. There's a lot less fun in any game where you could just report this to the wizard cops, or the regular cops.What's the book anyway? I'm going to assume some kind of right wing edgelord text from the tone, but the assessment of the power fantasy at least seems pretty perceptive.
>>98099406If you're not a 90IQ brainlet there is nothing to reconcile because there is nothing profound about that realization.It feels profound to you because low IQ doesn't generalize, so you don't immediately make a jump to >what if we ignore the fighting part and just think about fantasies in general?If you did you'd also pretty fast go to>well, all fantasies in general concern things we can't fulfill in the real world, so there's probably a limited number of categories they belong toAnd then you'd make some very broad categories like>things we don't have the means to do>things we're not allowed to do due to social constraints>things impossible to do because they belong in a different time and placeAnd then your huge fucking revelation is just attaching fighting to one option out of three. It's not that big of a deal.
>>98103162right, but the point isn’t “fighting belongs to category 2” It’s why the fantasy is structured as being permitted to fight in the first place.It’s not “I want to hit him” it’s “I want a situation where hitting him is justified” The fantasy already contains the prohibition. That’s the interesting part.You have to look at the structure of the fantasy, not just the contents, asking not what the fantasy means but why is it like *that*
>>98103473People want to be good. That's it. Whether being good means living up to their own moral and ethical beliefs or being lauded as good by witnesses, or something else.Genuinely this is not an interesting revelation. It's like me saying "Everyone fantasises about eating the foods they consider delicious, sating their appetite completely, but very few include being fat and unwell in their fantasies. Curious!"
>>98103473It definitely is "I want to hit him". It's also "I want to be a good guy". Situations where hitting people is justified are there in fiction to reconcile those two desires. "I want a situation where hitting him is justified” is not in itself the point, it's something to facilitate two more fundamental desires and to help those desires coexist. Also what >>98104270 says.
>>98104309>>98104270You're still thinking in reverse. The fact that the fight needs to be sanctioned isn't a plot contrivance or a reconciliation between two competing wishes. It isn't a clever way of getting "what you want" safely, the sanction is the whole point. There has to be an omnipotent figure watching over the arena before you are allowed to act.Adn you can see this flaw in your own example of "I want to be a good guy" The version of "good" you use isn't an internal value; it's a value explicitly dependent on being "lauded as good by witnesses." You purposely (but seemingly "just because") add these Others into the daydream because without that external authority granting permission or keeping score, the fantasy falls apart.
>>98104426>There has to be an omnipotent figure watching over the arena before you are allowed to act.Yes, most people (except you and OP apparently) have a conscience.
>>98104447>But what you need to get out of these stories is how this generation and forwards will deal with guilt: externalizing it, converting it to shame, and then taking solace in the pockets of support that inevitably arise. Everyone is famous to 15 people, and that's just enough people to help you sleep at night. >It is, in effect, crowdsourcing the superego, and when that expression catches on remember where you first heard it. Then remember why you heard it. And then don't do it.
>>98099406>>98099789
>>98104476horses and water etc
>>98104467You'll have to translate that from meaningless puffery to English for us, anon.Converting guilt to shame and using your... Instagram followers to defuse it? Is that the problem? How does that relate to games? How does that relate to almost anyone other than the mildly famous? How does it differ from people getting into groups for collective comfort and doing obscene shit because of it (a practise that is certainly older than the written word)?This is either the most tepid puddle-shallow observation that people want to be the hero of their own story (as long as it's easy) or it's a completely batshit declamation of everyone who is not a sociopath.
>>98104426>You're still thinking in reverse.No, you're just stopping your analysis at a fairly superficial level instead of going deeper, and this is the sort of thing that might look complicated on the surface but is actually pretty simple if you do look deeper.>the sanction is the whole pointIt's not, and repeating that it is without actually making any kind of a case for it isn't good argumentation.>There has to be an omnipotent figure watching over the arena before you are allowed to actThat only describes any significant chunk of violent fiction if you define the concept of "an omnipotent figure watching over the arena" in such a broad and vague way that it means nothing. >The version of "good" you use isn't an internal value; it's a value explicitly dependent on being "lauded as good by witnessesNo, and you definitely didn't get that from anything I wrote. It's about living up to the viewer's/reader's/player's own internalized moral values while also getting to enjoy the (pretense of) thrill of violence.>You purposely (but seemingly "just because") add these Others into the daydream because without that external authority granting permission or keeping score, the fantasy falls apart.Admiration of others certainly is a common thing for people to dream and daydream about, but it's really a separate issue from this whole violence/permission thing. Here's a question you should really give some serious thought: when you see multiple people strongly disagree with you on this, and give you actual reasons for disagreeing instead of just calling you a retard, have you, at any point in this discussion, stopped to consider that you might be wrong? I did read OP with an open mind, and I did give serious thought to whether there might be something to the ideas there, eventually coming to the conclusion I've explained in this post and here >>98104309 >>98102685. Have you read the replies you get with a similar attitude, or with your mind already made up?
>>98104547I think it's pretty clearly >the most tepid puddle-shallow observation that people want to be the hero of their own storyIt's anon absolutely dazzled by something pretty shallow and insisting that anyone who sees deeper than that - and I'm not saying there's anything deep to any part of this, just deeper than that puddle-shallow observation - just doesn't get it.
>>98104606NTA but it's pretty obvious nobody responding has an understanding of Lacanian/Deleuzian theory so I doubt anon is going to accept any counterargument on that basis alone. Which is not to advocate for that theory or OP's shitposting, but it's just going to be constantly talking at cross-purposes ITT.
>>98104642That's psychoanalytical stuff, right? As a psychologist who's not really deeply familiar with theories of psychoanalysis - which, for all its historical significance and a degree of contemporary clinical relevance, isn't really a big thing in modern mainstream psychology or psychology education - I'm not sure if that makes me take OP any more seriously. I'll say, though, that /tg/ really isn't the place to make any argument that apparently requires familiarity with psychoanalysis to understand.
>>98104686No disagreement there.
>>98104686Then you're a pretty shit psychologist
>>98104703As I said, psychoanalysis just isn't a big part of modern psychology. It's not a big part of what's taught at universities. It's not even that big a thign in pscyhotherapy any more. Psychology in general has been through at least a couple of pretty significant paradigm shifts since Freud's days, you know? Cognitive psychology, developmental psychology and neuropsychology are significantly more important for my interests and work, at any rate.
>>98104703Thomas Harris has Lecter describe psychoanalysis as a "dead religion" in Silence of the Lambs. Not that that's a particularly scholarly reference, but I want you to reflect that even pop culture sources thought psychoanalysis was outmoded before you were born (and I'm confident your mother frontshat you in a year starting with a 2).
>>98104426There are games where characters are violent but it is not "sanctioned", like any overtly evil campaign, or most cyberpunk. I can't think of any where violence is sanctioned but does not occur, or is not a mechanically significant part of the game. I'm not sure what that would even look like - maybe a cop game where you can auto-resolve any situation with Police Brutality but you're encouraged to resolve things peacefully instead.What evidence do you have that "the sanction is the whole point"? Why should anyone take this idea at all seriously?
>>98104961The Police Quest/SWAT games and their knockoffs grade you on your ability to follow police procedure - the highest ranks are usually only achievable by preventing all loss of life, including among the perpetrators (by convincing them to surrender or performing nonlethal takedowns).
>>98099406Has anyone ever been far even as decided want to go do look more like?
>>98104426So then how do you square that with GTA being a top selling video game?
>>98099406I fucking hate midwits so much.>errrm actually you want a scenario where you can do violence freely, this means what you want is the approval of violence not violence itself.I like A, and i dislike B.If i have to do B to do A, i wont do it.If i can do A without B, i will do it.In case you didnt get it, A is fighting, and B is going against my morals.Its not more complex than that, if you think otherwise you are retarded.
>>98102685They mostly don't fight back because they're in a state of zugzwang. They would probably get their asses kicked in a straight fight, or have to be vicious in a way that further alienated them, or will not earn any esteem because third parties don't care about the victim's solipsistic personal character development. Almost every move makes the situation worse. Punching the bully in the face is stereotypical boomer device because they are a generation of narcissists.People are bullied because they don't fit in. Lashing out in extreme antisocial behavior doesn't actually improve their social status which is the root of why they're bullied: they're broadly an acceptable target because they're annoying or otherwise disliked.
>>98109596Sure, anon. I don't disagree. Tell that to the OP. Another thing is that there's a fairly significant overlap in bullies and bullied, with some people being both.
>>98109596Yeah if the awkward spergy kid lashes out physically at his bully it will just strengthen the malicious rumors that he's a future school shooter. Most advice never factors this in because most people mistakenly put normal high-functioning kids with decently high social status into the role of the bully victim when they mentally model these scenarios.
>>98109504Do you really think you're smarter than Lacan? Deluded isn't enough of a word for you
>>98110514I am smarter than all the psychoanalysis degenerates and their nonsense. The majority of it is masturbatory astrology for pseuds.If this is the view of Lacan, then he is an idiot and lacking in seriousness. It reeks of someone working backwards to prove their theory.
>>98109596>People are bullied because they don't fit in. Lashing out in extreme antisocial behavior doesn't actually improve their social status which is the root of why they're bullied: they're broadly an acceptable target because they're annoying or otherwise disliked.This.I got bullied in school because I acted like a robot for fun.I deserved it.
