The Obsession with High Casual?

[HeySeuss]

a tl;dr - High casual is in common use. and while it's fun to debate-ify seblantics, the usage is well-understood.

[Kestrel]

Except it doesn't matter.

Yes. It's a commonly used identifier. However, there is a contradiction in your (animus) post that perfectly demonstrates how little meaning it actually has.

[Animus]

Is the contradiction being people associate it with length and not quality?

Anyway, it does matter.

Kestrel said
As a GM you're free to add rules and expectations to your games at pretty much your own wims, as long as it doesn't go below section-standards, which are all more than reasonable.

Sorry for requoting again but as you've said, GM's can add expectations and rules. When 'high casual' is indicated, its put there as a sort of expectation the GM has requested from the interested people. Although to varying degrees (seeing how some people abuse it), it is still a filter nonetheless.

Is it being overused as of late? Yes.

Does it still filter out people? Yes but to a lesser degree.

[Kestrel]

Animus said Some roleplays in Casual have 'lower' standards where most CS's are Mary Sues, incorrect grammar and punctuation and some posts so short that they're almost impossible to squeeze the word quality in.

Some 'High Casual' roleplays are more detailed with better use of english than some roleplays in advanced.

This is the one I'm talking about. If it's possible for 'high-casual' to be 'better' than advanced, it seems reasonable to assume 'low-casual' can be 'better' than 'high-casual.'

Also all of casual and even advanced have games with sues and/or bad writing. However this doesn't matter because quality-based segmentation would be far too up to interpretation.

The clear, written difference between casual and advanced is that casual has 1 paragraph minimum and advanced has 2 (oh and use f7 slightly better.) However those are the floor, not the roof. So yes, if you want to fit a roleplay into a category, you just go by minimum post length (and use of f7.) 'High-casual' on the other hand? There's not even a standard for length there. Some just adhere to casual standards, others to advanced. The step is that small.

So if all RP's technically do fit in the labels, and quality isn't consistent or a ruleset, where does 'high-casual' come in?

Look. You want 'advanced games' with a bigger, more chatty audience. Which is a perfectly fine reason to post your game in casual. However it doesn't make the term 'high-casual' anymore meaningful.

[Animus]

Through your analysis and thoughts, you've come to the conclusion that the term 'high casual' is fluff and you have used logic to explain how meaningless of a term it is.

However, most people have not come to this conclusion.

Ironically, that means it still serves its purpose and therefore has meaning. To put it simply, its like putting the label 'MEDIEVAL FANTASY' on their threads. There are different degrees to fantasy. High fantasy, mild fantasy, steampunk fantasy and so on and so forth. Are you instituting that they need not specify the type of fantasy, that the term medieval is redundant here?

I'm sort of trying to explain that. 'High casual' is simply a tag that OP makes to let people know his expectations. Theres no specific floor for 'high casual' but that doesn't mean its a worthless term.

[Kestrel]

Just because a lot of people believe something doesn't make it true. A lot of people use the word 'literally' improperly; that doesn't change it's meaning.

Also, genres have clear borders. Medieval Fantasy won't have the U.S.S Enterprise included, because that's outside of it's borders. 'High-casual' on the other hand does not have defined borders, outside the ones that go for the rest of casual too.

[Animus]

...we seem to be going nowhere due to our personal mindsets.

We are not discussing the specificity of a word never meant to be specific. 'High casual' is a straight forward term. The definition of which everyone has come to a general consensus of simply; Higher quality and length than the usual casual norms.

Anyway, that is not the point.

We are discussing whether or not it is redundant. Your argument is basically, this;

1. This word is useless.
2. The floor of Advanced is exactly one paragraph above Casual, meaning Advanced fits the next floor that everybody wants with 'high casual'.
3. It is redundant because another term already fits its definition.

My response is this;

1. That is not a fact. That is your opinion.
2. The floor of Advanced, is once again your opinion.
3. 'High Casual' implies higher standards than casual yet lower than advanced. Your opinion is that it shouldn't exist because your opinion of the floors of Casual and Advanced are right beside each other, leaving no space for 'High Casual'.

Your opinion is this word serves no purpose, is redundant and thus stop existing despite the FACT that it has helped segregate plenty of roleplays and served as a warning to people that the OP might have higher expectations than the norms.

This is what spurred to continue this debate so long, that somehow the opinions of some of the people here seem to override the opinions of many others that there is enough space between the standards of Casual and Advanced to fit in 'High Casual'.

[Kestrel]

1.) You say it means greater length, but then why are there threads with a paragraph minimum (casual) and others with two (advanced) and others with three (custom)? You say it means higher quality, but how do you define this quality and more importantly; how do you measure it? Give me actual quantifiers. As is, you are unable to present me with a proper way to define what seperates 'high-casual' from casual and/or advanced. In my experience, the definition of 'High casual' seems to be up to the interpretation of whoever uses it. Hell, I've been in both casual and 'high-casual' RP's a plenty and I can get by just fine writing the exact same posts. I've found it rare to be in a casual RP that doesn't have a majority of it's posts long enough to be in advanced. As a classification, 'high-casual' doesn't mean anything to me.
2.) The floor of advanced is recorded as 2 paragraphs minimum with good spelling and post significance. That's not an opinion.
3.) 'High casual' isn't between casual and advanced. It either adheres the standards for casual, or to those for advanced. Just in the casual section. There is no such thing as a 1.5 paragraph. I mean hell the only inbetweens I can think of are "1 paragraph, perfect grammer" or "2 paragraphs, good grammar." And I'm pretty sure you mean neither of those.

You can villify my post as attempting to mute and then brainwash the masses. However note that I never said you can't mark your game as 'high-casual' and I never said you can't request X standards in Y section (in fact I explicitly mentioned you can.) I just say that it's a meaningless, redundant term and am giving you my reasons why. Which is more because you challenged my post, rather than tryng to mute anyone.

I don't think I have much left to say much besides repeating myself. Oh well.

[Animus]

Well, I'm going to give this one last shot.

I am not trying to mute you nor damn your opinions. This is a discussion, to which I am pointing our the flaws in your first post. You are currently hellbent on insisting the term is useless because it has no fixed definition. I can tell you at least, had all the RPs that had 'high casual' were replaced and put in the Advanced, we would see the standards and segregation of Casual and Advanced be slurred and destroyed.

The standards of Casual will be lower and Advanced will be bloody full of RPs with extremely wide quality variance. Which you actually might not care for since you're only concerned with the floor. I am simply trying to get you to freaking understand that the floor? Its just the floor. It has little relevance when the median or mean post length is much much much above it.

Or will you honestly agree that with a majority of the Casual population shift to Advanced because they meet the floor requirements? That this would be ideal because then, it would truely fit these specific standards.

[Kestrel]

Clarification and repetition post it is.

Animus said
I am not trying to mute you nor damn your opinions. This is a discussion, to which I am pointing our the flaws in your first post.

That part was in reference to this;

Animus said that somehow the opinions of some of the people here seem to override the opinions of many others that there is enough space between the standards of Casual and Advanced to fit in 'High Casual'.

Particularly note the word 'override.' Also I didn't say you were trying to mute me, that would make that entire sentence silly. I was denying the reverse, because of the suggestion people with 'my opinion' override the 'opinion' of others.

Animus said You are currently hellbent on insisting the term is useless because it has no fixed definition.

Well, yeah. .

Animus said I can tell you at least, had all the RPs that had 'high casual' were replaced and put in the Advanced, we would see the standards and segregation of Casual and Advanced be slurred and destroyed. The standards of Casual will be lower and Advanced will be bloody full of RPs with extremely wide quality variance.

Which is rather silly because there already exists a huge variety in advanced and has for years. Also could =/= should. Also speculation =/= argument.

Animus said Which you actually might not care for since you're only concerned with the floor. I am simply trying to get you to freaking understand that the floor? Its just the floor. It has little relevance when the median or mean post length is much much much above it.

I understand perfectly what you are saying, I simply think you are wrong. The minimum is what defines the section, not the median, therefore your argument is void. It's the median that has no relevance.

Animus said Or will you honestly agree that with a majority of the Casual population shift to Advanced because they meet the floor requirements? That this would be ideal because then, it would truely fit these specific standards.

I never said or suggested that. In fact I suggested the opposite. Twice. Three times if you count this post.

[Animus]

My mind hurts.

Technically all we've arrived at is that we both have different perceptions of what defines the sections.

Which we are both going nowhere with because its like trying to convince a guy who likes the leafy part of vegetables is the best part and not the stalk. Vice versa.

-.- well hope we discuss something else one of these days

A discussion that I win, hopefully.

[Dervish]

Animus said
My mind hurts. Technically all we've arrived at is that we both have different perceptions of what defines the sections.Which we are both going nowhere with because its like trying to convince a guy who likes the leafy part of vegetables is the best part and not the stalk. Vice versa.-.- well hope we discuss something else one of these daysA discussion that I win, hopefully.

Discussions should never be about "winning", since that invites pointless confrontation and a lack of taking in consideration what the other party is saying, except in the capacity to use as ammunition in rebuke.

You guys are kind of getting worked up over something silly. Interpret the term High Casual as you will, because everyone has different expectations of what it is, including those who think it shouldn't exist because it's pretty much Advanced.

[HeySeuss]

I noticed that trying to win a discussion on the internet isn't as rewarding as one thinks. Also, one needs to know when to let it go. ;)

But FWIW, I think one of the fundamental rules is never to declare, "I win." It should be evident through the use of logic and evidence who won without having to state it.

That's just me and my asshole opinion, though.

[Meth Quokka]

HeySeuss said
I noticed that trying to win a discussion on the internet isn't as rewarding as one thinks. Also, one needs to know when to let it go. ;)But FWIW, I think one of the fundamental rules is never to declare, "I win." It should be evident through the use of logic and evidence who won without having to state it.That's just me and my asshole opinion, though.

You mean you don't agree with the old way of wading into arguments to win them and thus mount heads on your wall as a display of great you are?

[Kestrel]

Oh come on...

What the conversation arrived (and started) at was that Animus is more about the spirit of 'high-casual' justifying it's use, whereas I think it lacks a measurable definition and consider it redundant because of that. However by agreeing to disagree, it's accepted that people can and are allowed to hold those different perceptions (hint: the exact same conclusion dervish arrived at.) This demonstrates Animus isn't about 'winning' and in this context, I feel the phrase was more about getting to see eye to eye on another topic in the future.

While we're on the topic of semantics, though; you literally can't win a discussion.

[HeySeuss]

Kangaroo said
You mean you don't agree with the old way of wading into arguments to win them and thus mount heads on your wall as a display of great you are?

[StarWight]

Mahz said
Blackfire, Hyzhenhok, and I bluffed hard when we wrote the "standards" for Casual and Advanced.We knew we would never enforce them because that's a full-time job. But by using words like "moderated" and "strict", we decided to err on the side of scaring users away and created a mental barrier. Somehow the barrier still stands and Advanced is what it is."High Casual" emerged from users and is just a way of expressing a similar thing but within the Casual subforum -- the largest roleplaying block by design -- and with less of a barrier.The main goal of the entire Free/Casual/Advanced strata was to give a dedicated subforum to the people on the edges of the bell curve (Free and Advanced). Any further subdivision of Casual would have to be entirely user-driven and organic. Hence, High Casual.In the end, the distinctions are far more successful and have lasted far longer than we thought they would. After all, they were never actually moderated.

They were *self* moderated Mahz. User moderated, rather than staff moderated. And, psychologically speaking, people bind themselves to what they perceive are rules expected to be followed. I could totaly use the rpguild for the subject of a term paper xD

I use high casual in some of my own rps when I want to draw in that crowd too scared to jump to advanced. They are more than capable, but they fear the jump. , I post my ooc/ic in casual, and ask for the upper limits of casual. My latest one I made sliding scale, allowing rpers to post from high casual to advanced--2 paragraphs minimum (well written) and if they want to, they can post more. I just see so many afraid to hop to advanced, when they are far beyond capable. I think high casual is a nice compromise between casual and advanced.

When I say high casual, my own expectations are no less than 2 decently written paragraphs and also that the rp will delve into more than just action--it will have alot of character development and a focus on plot instead of "omfg we have to kill things!" It's as much about character interactions/relationships as it is about the action going on.