12 replies to this topic

[Vortigern]

Read this. Especially you, SWG. I was browsing through the forums and stumbled across it. It deals with a pet point of mine. I'm sure you'll understand.

[Spectre]

How does this have to d-

Oh, I see now, eh heh heh.

[some_weirdGuy]

I stopped taking it seriously when Drewry said god makes us want to categorize...

And dont you want to maintain sanity, stability and solace vort?

And nature is so ordered! it just takes a mind capable of understanding this order for it to show through.
nature isn't conscious/self-aware, so therefore it cant possibly categorize its own order, but have the intellect to see these patterns and groups.

All this because i wanted different zombie types, instead of one off 'boss' zombies that would have to be super powerful for them to be worth while, because they wouldn't have the numbers to be able to be singularly weak without them completely sucking...

And we are humans, this argument is going in my favor Vort, start categorizing more! Your a human and thus must categorize things! You must! God says so.
(if you are so opposed to categorization there why is there so much of it in your RPG? there is a heap of categorization in it. Races, classes, the good guys and bad guys, the types of magics. You categorized everything, and yet you say you are opposed to order)

(*warms up for raging debate*)

[Vortigern]

Yes, this is entirely because you wanted to categorise zombies.

I categorised everything in Arsencia to make it easier for people, and to provide myself with several handy plot devices which I have every intention of using. The Paladins have already played a major role and will continue to do so. You'll notice that, since then, Arsencia has deviated strongly from those presuppositions. The other point about that is that most of it was simply brought forward from the original Arsencia, which was Nowe's creation, not mine.

And no, I do not want to maintain sanity, stability and solace. I can't help but think the world would be a better place if everybody stopped categorising everything and simply went along with the flow. While I admit that the arguments Ash made in that thread are true, I also stand by my point of view, however clichéd it may sound: free your mind (and your ass will follow). Man, I'm totally going to put that in my sig.... Anyway, you are naturally inclined to put everything into groups so that you can deal with it better, but it strikes me that the truly unusual minds, among which I like to think of myself (my incessant vanity is not the issue here, I should remind you. ) would be able to consider the world differently, individually. Then again, I should probably post this in that thread rather than this one, given that the RPG Frontier is not about philosophy at all. Meh.

[Copaman]

Oh, hell, we're totally about philosophy especically now that I'm RPing Neo

[{IRS}Athos]

Only because I let you.

[some_weirdGuy]

I had good reason for zombie categorization, as i said. If there is only 1 of a given type of zombie (ala the boss idea) then you cant have them be weak. The idea behind the different types of zombies meant that you could have zombies which are singularly weak, but then have a whole bunch of them so that their numbers make up for this.

With the random 1 off ones, you cant do this. Well, you can it would just be weak and useless...

Order is needed for a society to function, if we didn't try to order/categorize/find patterns in the things around us then we would still be monkeys swinging in trees and eating bananahs, instead of the advanced race we are now.

[Drakconus]

You guys are freaking out over naming types of zombies?

Ok so SWG wants there to be names for different 'general' (and I mean that in the losses sence) types of zombies, ones that are better runners, ones that are stronger, one that barf on you atracting other zombies quicker, etc... the list is endless.
But it does help to have names for general types of zombies, it assists the story because who wants to type out every time "Hey remember those zombies that hide in the bushes untill someone gets close, well there one right behind you."
wouldn't it be easyer just to type "Look Out theres a Hider behind you!"
Just like soldiers come up with their own names for things during war, surviors are going to name what ever they are fighting so that it is easy to define what the 'enemy' is.

From what I have seen it is a virus that is responsible for the zombies in the story, and using this information I can come up with at least three ways that there would be types of zombies classified as a different types.

1) People are different so their zombies are going to be different; a person infected was stronger than your average Joe, someone who was fat etc...and people who where simular in real life with have zombies that are simular.

2) There was a mutation in the virus that only manifests itself in x number of infected persons, this mutation makes them harder to kill, stronger, causes other zombies to follow them around, etc...mutation is a horrifing thing when dealing with things that are trying to kill you.

3) JUST BE CAUSE, most story lines have something that the charaters have to overcome wheather that be a 'shambler' zombie or a giant flying cheese burger (I thing SWG caught the burger though ).


p.s. I'm only just starting to warm up on the zombie thing, in high school I had some friends who were like the Trekies of zombies, they would go on and on and on about them .

Edited by Drakconus, 13 March 2009 - 04:54 AM.

[Spectre]

Classifying Zombies in a text-based RP is foolish and unneeded; only in games or movies should it be categorized in favor of the movie/game's popularity.

Text is different, sure, a few classes just for kicks couldn't hurt the popularity, but the whole point of making different types when they aren't going to be described is well, useless.

[Vortigern]

Exactly. Besides, FZM has let me in on his plan. I shall be vindicated!

Order is needed for a society to function, if we didn't try to order/categorize/find patterns in the things around us then we would still be monkeys swinging in trees and eating bananahs, instead of the advanced race we are now.

I believe exactly the opposite. I think without our desperate need to spend our time putting everything into some kind of order regardless of whether or not it needs it, we could so much further advanced than we currently are. I admit, there may be exceptions to this, such as in medicine, but that's because viruses and diseases are the same the world over. That's like the difference between a monkey and a sheep, except microscopic.

The world is a naturally chaotic place. Maybe we would have advanced spiritually and created some form of telepathic internet had we not imposed our designs over the planet. There's no way to know, because most people simply cannot conceive of a world where everything is different. The human mind simply struggles to encompass it. Which is exactly why I think we should start from the bottom and work up, like with an RPG, and then move up to government.

An example of why I believe individuality is better than classification is the criminal world. A proven murderer can be released because of a faulty search warrant, but in a world where individual cases were looked at without regard to the specific rules of the matter and in terms of conscience and the general good, that murderer would be imprisoned instead of set free to kill again. This happens. Sometimes murderers get charges kicked down to manslaughter by finding loopholes in the law, and suffer the same sentence as a babysitter who fell down the stairs at the wrong moment. Anyone remember the Tony Martin case? He was a farmer who shot two burglars, killing one. The other one sued him and won and Mr. Martin was sent to prison for six years before he was released. His life was ruined because two people broke into his home. In a world where the letter of the law was not as important as the spirit, he would have been fine and the burglars would have got what they deserved. The surviving burglar did not do any prison time at all, claiming trauma incurred by the events. How's that for a fine, orderly world?

[Rafv Nin IV]

The below post has nothing to do with zombies. I'm staying out of that one.

In many cases I agree with you, Vort, but criminal justice is one instance in which your ideas would not work. There is a reason that the law must be rigid and formulized--all people must be treated equally in the eyes of the law. People are not created equal in any such respect, saving the fact that we are all human; and therefore subject to the basic freedoms that we deserve merely for being human. There cannot be any fluctuation, any difference, in the way that law enforcement proceeds because one prejudiced judge could unleash a strew of biased prosecutions. This, unfortunately, means that occasionally, child rapists walk free. However, it is far better to let ten guilty men go unpunished than to ruin the life of a single, innocent individual.

Which brings me to the Tony Martin case, which I (briefly) researched about five minutes ago . All I can say is that you British are screwed up, and that in Oregon, at least, we are still gun-totin' rednecks enough to let the guy walk free. In my hometown, Silverton, we had the first fatal shooting in at least thirty years this last August. An Irish alien, suffering from schizophrenia, was reported "clawing at the front door" of a single mother's home late at night and "howling at the moon." When policeman Antonio Gonzales arrived on the scene, the Irishman charged, screaming at him. Gonzales shot nine times, hitting five (which is the only reason I disliked the incident--it doesn't inspire confidence in our police force) and killing the Irishman. The family of the Irishman sued; it was thrown out of court.

Ironically, Gonzales was fired from the police force for unrelated sex abuse charges, and is spending time in prison right now, but that's an irrelevant side-fact.

[Vortigern]

I disagree entirely. I think the judges should have the right to be entirely biased or otherwise for a case. Obviously, the jury's decision would still weigh in heavily, but ultimately I think a judge should be able to say "No, it was kill or be killed, you're off the hook," or "You may only have killed one man, but I know you're going to do it again, so I'm sending you away forever, you evil little bastard." And the way you keep judges from getting too crazy and being in the pocket of the mob or whatever is because they're all massively vetted anyway before taking office, so you just take a psych profile and several lie detector tests and other methods and make sure they're upright and honest and whatnot. I appreciate that this idea does indeed have several flaws, but I do not think the law should be absolute.

[Rafv Nin IV]

A judge is one man. A jury is many.

All people are prejudiced and biased. There is no such thing as a person who is entirely fair and just. The only way to even attempt to get around this is by having multiple people (who therefore have a wide variety of biases, some of which may be contradictory) decide. The judge might say "it was kill or be killed," but he might just as easily say "killing is murder, no matter the circumstances." The idea is to get a wide enough sampling of opinions to approximate the most just action; thus the jury system.