Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Campbell" data-source="post: 8149993" data-attributes="member: 16586">A couple things.We are talking about games here. Of course we are going to be talking about subjective aesthetic preferences. That does not mean that discussion as useless or analysis unfruitful. It just means we should realize that people come from different places and are going to use language that matches their values.I care about games as games. As things we can get mastery over and become better at. Skilled play is fundamental to my experience of games. It's why I like games so much. Roleplaying games, video games, board games, card games. You name it. Each game offers a chance to learn a completely new set of skills, new social dynamics, and most importantly new challenges to test my mettle against.In the tabletop roleplaying game space we do not really have neutral language. The language and trappings of mainstream games priveleges a very specific type of gameplay. It does a poor job of describing and depicting what is going on in most games in the OSR space and various indie spaces. It also tends not to approach games as like games. See how terms like gamist, rules lawyer, and meta gaming get thrown around as slurs in this community.Other communities have language and trappings that was developed to do what they wanted to do better. The Big Model was mostly built to identify Story Now play so games could be designed that do it well. The Primer to Old School play was designed to show people a way to play old school games that embraces them as tests of skill.I get that a fair number of people play games without regard to their objectives. This is also a big thing in video games where a big swath of people talk about fun and playing skillfully separately. I think that when games are well designed playing them well is fun. I get that is not what everyone is looking for. I cannot speak for them. I can only speak for myself.I would like to have a fruitful conversation, but I am not going to adopt language and framing that assumes games should not be discussed as games. If you have no interest in discussing games as something that should have purposeful designs, meaningful instructions, and room for skilled play we probably do not have anything meaningful to discuss. I play and run a lot of mainstream games myself. I'm running Scion Second Edition and will probably run Legend of the Five Rings Fifth Edition soon. I'm not advocating for any particular playstyle. I do not to convince anyone of anything. I would like to have a discussion, but I understand and interface with games in particular ways. I can try to understand where you are coming from, but if you expect me to adopt your framing when I do not agree with it I do not see us having a meaningful conversation.</blockquote>

Verification