eleran said:
This would be one of the pictures I would put in the dictionary next to the word stale. But I have never been either a fan of chess or adept at it. Although I respect the people that can play it at a high level quite a bit.
I'd put it in the dictionary next to the word stale
mate
On a more serious note, I've enjoyed playing chess quite a lot for a couple of years. The thing is, after a certain point you really have to start memorizing matches to get any better. At that point I decided it was more tedium than fun and stopped playing it.
I also firmly believe that chess belongs to the category of games where the player who makes the first move cannot lose unless making a mistake. I.e. it's in the same category as tic-tac-toe, reversi (engl.?), and checkers. It just hasn't been proved yet because the number of possible moves is so large - but it's only a matter of time until someone does.
Back on topic:
The comparison of chess and D&D fails on more accounts than I could possibly list. So, I'll limit myself to one point I consider crucial:
Part of the enjoyment in D&D comes from new toys to play with: new monsters, new items, new feats, new classes, etc. It never gets boring because it keeps changing and evolving. While this can be accomplished by a creative DM without any need for additional supplements, it also requires a lot of time which many DMs do not have, so obviously, it's an excellent way for a company to make more money than from just selling the rules.
This still doesn't account for the need of releasing a new version of the rules from time to time. However, I think it's important to keep the game alive. No rpg system is perfect (or at least I don't know of one
![Stick out tongue :p :p]()
). Over time you'll notice more and more tidbits you don't like about the game. You can make do with house-rules but eventually you'll reach a point where the minor nitpicks become numerous enough that you no longer enjoy the game the way you used to.
Rule-Mastery is another problem: While not everyone is a min-maxer, given enough time everyone will notice that some things work better than others and start using the winning strategies, eliminating variety.
Btw.: Incidentally, this effect is usually amplified by the rules-bloat caused by supplements, so they're a really a mixed blessing.
That's when you need the rejuvenating effect of a new ruleset:
It will get rid of (most) of the problems you've grown to hate and refresh your enthusiasm. They'll also reset the metagame: You need time to figure out the new winning strategies and can have fun again exploring different options. The sense of wonder is renewed.
Then, after a couple of years (sometimes more, sometimes less) the cycle repeats: The new ruleset will have new tidbits you're starting to dislike, you get frustrated because of things that don't work as well as you once thought, etc., etc.