I don't know if anyone has specifically mentioned these or not, in these ways, or even if they are really minority positions, or just minority positions of those who visit internet gaming sites.
But I'm apparently in the minority as regards these things (apparently, I'm not really sure, just my impressions):
1. I don't give a flying golden carp head about Editions or edition wars. To me a gaming system is just a backdrop, or a default starting position from which to venture forth, not a destination you're shooting for or a homeland you must inhabit. It's a just a base of operations, not a mission objective. If I wanna use something for my setting that is from AD&D I will, if something from 4E, I will, if something from Ars Magica, I will, and if I wanna invent something new, I will. It's the mission that counts, not your dropping off and extraction points. Editions be damned to me, it's just a ruleset for a game, not a law of physics. I don't owe it anything at all, it exists for me and my players, not me for it. A game might interest me, but it doesn't own me. And I don't sheriff for it either.
2. I used to think all DMs developed their own detailed world, setting, and milieu. That this was a fundamental and basic part of being a DM. Apparently this ain't the case.
3. That an RPG was primarily a role playing game, and secondarily a Wargame. (I got nothing against wargames, or combat-heavy situations in RPGs, as I like both, but I think of RPGs as role play first.) Apparently this ain't so either.
4. Gaming is something I do, and enjoy, and find useful and valuable. But it's far form my whole life and I don't get so exercised about it that I think it's worth a fist-fight over. Or even worth insulting people about. It's just not something I can see getting seriously upset about. Interested in, useful, debatable, yeah. But it ain't a cause for Total War, or even a guerilla action as far as I can see. I wish more people could argue things on the internet without becoming invested in their own positions to the degree that they can't see the other guy's point. Even when the other guy has a really good point. And I wish more epopee good argue in good humor, and would use humor in their arguments. I'd rather laugh over a good point and a clever remark than fume over one.
And while I'm at it, I don't think I know a person just because I know their position on a gaming matter, or through something they wrote on the internet. I'd have to really know em before I really know em. I don't confuse the internet for real life, and I don't confuse knowing how someone games for knowing anything else about them. Apparently a lot of people don't see it that way, or at least sometimes they forget that they don't see it that way. Now I'm not saying I'm perfect or having made my shares of stupid and unfounded assumptions about people, but I try to limit those things to what I've actually been exposed to and not just to words on a screen on the internet.
5. On the other hand, I don't much see the difference between what is useful in a game and what you can apply to real life. I don't see lines of demarcation and division between gaming and real life. They aren't mutually exclusive functions to me, but complimentary functions. And both can be used to practically assist with the other. And I mean that both practically, and realistically, not just metaphorically and theoretically.
6. Role play gaming isn't just limited to doing things one way or another. Because it's role play you can bring in all kinds of other, and related stuff to improve the game. Just like in theatre you can bring in sports and swordplay and codes and trickery and illusion and music and so forth. Role play is more than just about the mind and imagination. It's also about how the mind interacts with what is real, and how one thing relates to another.
7. Imagination is more important than rulesets. And mythology is more important than math. I got nothing against math (it's a useful tool) and nothing against rulebooks (also useful). But in a role play game their real effectiveness is limited.
8. We use real world religions and cultures and myths and languages and histories and science and technology and so forth in our games. We're not limited to those things, but we never exclude them and often find them far more interesting than any fictional or made-up version of the same.
9. Over the years I got to the point to where I don't even bother much with dice anymore. Decisions and daring and determination are more important than dice. And craft and cleverness than calculated statistics.
10. I encourage my players to invent. And to experiment. And I encourage them to build their own keeps and homes, to rise in status, to become social and political leaders, generals, sages, inventors, and so forth. To make money, to build things, to expand their power base to include more than just "adventuring power." I don't think the game is limited to just rising to the next level, killing monsters, sacking fortifications, and looting ruins. Ambition and accomplishment are more than just your next set of powers or your next level-up.
I like seeing my players become kings and diplomats and special forces agents and commanders and vadders and businessmen so forth, and to prosper and thrive. In all kinds of ways, and in all different environments. They should succeed in the world and above-ground, not just in the dungeon and underground.
