2012/01/04

David's reply and mine

It was long, so it's better to make a post, so i can elucidate the points and clarify it to myself as weel.

The pillars of D&D, the foundation of D&D is not infallible, that is another reason why no one should just "modify it", but rather,adopt another game.

Here i meant that it is not necessary to modify it if you are at a loss, because there ARE other options. If i am dissatisfied and there are not other fantasy rpg's under the sun, the only option i could have would be that of modifying d&d, but this is not the case.

Not creating or moving towards another fantasy rpg- and believing instead to solve the problem MODIFYING D&D is fallacious, is simply an illusion. You will end up playing D&D in any case because you didn't destroy or removed its nature.


While I understand what you are saying, I don't agree with any of this at all. Since when has modifying D&D become the wrong thing to do? It's what the authors of the game did all along and what we as gamers have always done. It is WHY there is such a proliferation of RPGs.

True, it is why there is such a proliferation of RPGs. Although the "other" fantasy rpg's are sons and daughters of the AD&D grandfather, we are not allowed to think that there still flow AD&D's blood in their vein. I already said that, the big mistake is not granting a separate identity to the other fantasy rpg's. Keep in mind that i am defending the other fantasy rpg's here, because -basically- i am against D&D and AD&D, because my real background was developed through the other fantasy rpg's.

It’s important to remember the original intention of D&D which is summed up in the final paragraph of the 3rd booklet:

There are unquestionably areas which have been glossed over. While we deeply regret the necessity, space requires that we put in the essentials only, and the trimming will oftimes have to be added by the referee and his players. We have attempted to furnish an ample framework, and building should be both easy and fun. In this light, we urge you to refrain from writing for rule interpretations or the like unless you are absolutely at a loss, for everything herein is fantastic, and the best way is to decide how you would like it to be, and then make it just that way! On the other hand, we are not loath to answer your questions, but why have us do any more of your imagining for you? Write to us and tell about your additions, ideas, and what have you. We could always do with a bit of improvement in our refereeing.

Of course Gygax later realised that it made business sense to make the game “Official” after the initial idea became too successful and the flood of RPGs began to swamp the scene (robbing TSR of market share), although it was a move that would later bite him in the arse when he left TSR and tried to write new games.

But the point is D&D has always been about people modifying the game to suit their own needs – “the best way is to decide how you would like it to be, and then make it just that way!” D&D wasn’t designed to be set in stone, but to be a toolbox for people to use as they saw fit.

Although TSR D&D in all its versions is flexible enough that they are easily compatible with one another, they can also be played with very different styles - not only from one another, but within a single ruleset.

You would have to strip out an incredible amount of fundamentals to make a typical RPG be nothing like D&D, and if that is a person’s aim then I agree, they should simply consider playing a different game.

Basically i agree, i wrote in the previous post that, although the "other" fantasy rpg's retain mechanical aspects which resemble or are derived from D&D, in the end they lose their linkage to it, because what matters most is their atmosphere, their Spirit, and you can taste this spirit only playing them. But this attitude (which is widespread) to consider the other fantasy rpg's nothing more than D&D sons, is a proof to me of just one thing: the inability to forget D&D- it's like playing another game (for instance Dragon warriors) while thinking about another thing-that is, D&D. After all, it's like making love with a woman while imagining you are with another one (and this prevents you from appreciating the beauty of the woman who is with you in that moment).

But D&D itself is incredibly flexible which again is why there has been such a multitude of D&D-like games produced over the years.

I am in no way against other RPGs and think the wide diversity of games is a wonderful thing. I do however strongly believe that people will play and obsess over what they enjoy. That is why most people tend to eat the same thing when they dine at an all-you-can-eat buffet/smorgasbord – despite the large variety to choose from. They partake of that they know and love, even after having sampled other options. People drink Coke not because it’s the most widely recognised brand, but because they like it. Getting frustrated or angry at people because they are still in love with D&D decades later seems to me to be a futile exercise, like King Canute trying to hold back the incoming tide.

I don't regard myself as King Canute, though i understand what you mean. Me and the others will forever be the minority, we know that perfectly well. We have our niche forums on the net, we are happy! But i can't refrain from fighting against a game that at times i despise. I don't hate it, but i know there are (as someone else commented- finer wines to sip.

The history of RPGs is one of natural selection, with the gamers doing the selecting.
In fact, the gamers are those who do the selecting. The question is open: beauty is so easily visible to everyone?
And if it was, would we all choose the most beautiful product or wouldn't we simply opt for the most entertaining?

1 comment:

David Macauley said...

After all, it's like making love with a woman while imagining you are with another one (and this prevents you from appreciating the beauty of the woman who is with you in that moment).

I think a better analogy is this:

It's like making love to a series of women in the missionary position. These women are all different and they respond differently, but in the end it's the same thing over and over.

Then you come across a woman who is wild and adventurous, maybe she likes doing it standing up, or on the kitchen table, or whatever. You're still having sex but boy is it different.

Now the truth is all those "same old, same old" missionary position women could also be made love to in wildly imaginative positions, but some folks simply chose to plough a familiar furrow and are happy. :-)

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...