Smart kids are the exception. My oldest daughter is smart - not compared to the kids that go on the genius kid's show with Doogie Howser, but she gets straight As in all AP classes and that kind of shit. Do you know who she is stupid compared to? Herself when she is an adult with a fully formed brain, and the knowledge, wisdom, and experience to more fully utilize her brain in a much more effective, responsible, and intelligent way. Her taste in games, books, food, etc, will also change as she matures.
In the earlier post you said my reasoning was fallacious. And ended the post with the biggest and most obvious kind of fallacy - the non sequitur. Logic that does not follow. In a blatant and egregious example. I think you would do well in making good points that support your argument and respond to the other person's argument rather than do the college kid thing and call out a person for doing (X) and then immediately do a more egregious example of (X). You have a sounder mind than most on this forum, and you also sort of read and somewhat reply to the points someone stated instead of trying to collect buttons for one-line quips - all of this I appreciate and like. And, again, as I stated above I have my own issues that go beyond communication - so I am not saying I am great and do nothing wrong and you are stupid and do nothing right so listen to me. Even when I have a good point I often lose it by focusing on nonsense and attacking people. I need to improve and am trying to improve.
I agree with your point about absolutes. Absolutes are not good, and I know of no examples of a good rpg, or any rpg, that was completely random. In fact, the elements I like most about it, the very way to manipulate the random, is by non-random/systematic systems like class, race, and character development systems.
But the truth is also true in the opposite. There is no completely non-random/systematic rpg I can think of. There are games mislabeled as rpgs, sure, but no actual rpgs.
So, we certainly could have an argument about how a game is better or worse at various levels of random/systematic mixes. I am more than happy with people at least admitting that a pure non-random/systematic rpg would not work and would inherently suck. I can say for 100% certain I would have zero interest in an game calling itself an rpg that was completely random with no systems to provide a framework for the random such as classes, races, skills, abilities, attributes, weapons, items, chargen, chardev, leveling, etc. The rpg systems that I love.
And lastly, it sounded like I was bashing Telepath Tactics in my earlier post, which was not my goal. It is a quality game in the FFT vein. My views on it are similar to FFT and other games of that ilk. They just don't offer me much. There isn't many carrots on a stick. The big carrot is combat, and once I get good enough to know I am going to win them all the game gets boring to me. The same happens in arpgs to me too, or other rpgs. The core reason is the same reason I dislike pure dungeon crawlers - more dungeon just isn't enough of a hook for me - I need content like quests, towns, npcs, story, etc, to break up the monotony. I enjoyed the rpg that the dev of Telepath tactics made prior to Telepath Tactics. Or I am assuming Telepath RPG was made by him.
If more of the FFT type of games were like Blackguards 1 - I would be a huge fan of that genre. And I admitted the Fire Emblem on the 3ds did have a challenge on the difficulty level where your units permanently die when they die. But sadly, it just didn't have the systems, itemization, or interesting chardev enough to keep my interest either.
Anyway, I just wanted to clarify and extend and olive branch. I really do need to re-eject. Thank you all for the discussion, and sorry for being a jerk in a lot of my earlier posts.
