satori01 said:
Gary, I am floored by the courage inherent in that statement,( I shouldnt be given your integrity on display though out the years,)but I find it a statment alas that is all too rarely made by individuals in creative ventures.
Hi Satori01
Thanks for your good words. Over the many years if being active in gaming I suppose I have become even more prone to speak my mind. I just hope I can always recognize when I was off base, say so when that's the case and stand corrected.
Even worse, it seems few individuals in today's coporatate creative world are given the chance to mature in their craft to be able to make such a statement, specificaly given what seemed to be WOTC purging of "veteran" designers, and the emphasis on the "NEW" being a paramount virtue in our world.
Well, what can one say to that, particularly in light of the fact that WotC and other publishers too are going back to remake the "old," and not a single new system has enjoyed the success that OAD&D had. That game was by no means perfect, nor were the modules for it, but they seem to have withstood the test of time much better than the "new school' material for "mature and sophisticated" players.
All that really underscores is that a love of an role-playing game and a desire to make it as much fun, provide great entertainment, are the most important things in design. Those are the factors that impress the gamers. No "art" or desire to make a "cutting edge" game that shows off the author's "creative virtuoisty" (at the expense of play enjoyment) will cut the proverbial mustard.
Learning to recognize errors, admit them, and thus grow creatively is something that has to happen to the competant designer, for Lord knows we all make mistakes!
It is all to easily to fall into the trap of equating expanding rules complexity with game depth, only to realize that more dice roling or rules doesnt lead to more soul in the game. I certainly went through a period in my halcyon youth of gaming where I created an ever expanding number of house rules to put my own imprint onto my game.
I do believe that every gamer with an iota of creativity does that very thing. I had four pages of rules additions to the original Avalon Hill GETTYSBURG boardgame after playing it for just a few months time. After a while we just tossed them aside, for they added nothingbut complications, didn't change the play, and brought no more enjoyment to the game. However, the exercise did teach me a number of the basics of game design. so the effort wasn't wasted.
I think you perfectly described a role playing truism learned though the harsh coin of aging, that rules dont make a game better, thoughtful and intelligent participation does. If you dont like your game, dont change the rules enmase, redifine and re examine the aspects of playing the rules should describe.
Thanks, and I agree. If that approach doesn't do the trick, find a new game where your thinking meshes better with the systems presented therein. When all is said and done, playing a game is about fun, enjoying the experience with a group of fellows. Whatever provides the vehicle for such entertainment is right for those concerned. That applies even if the game is packed with rules, more of them created as in-house material. the only problem with that sort of game is the audience for it will be small, and if the core group disintegrates the campaign is likely to end, and never be revived...
Cheers,
Gary
