Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 6413288" data-attributes="member: 3192">I think what happened is game theory informed the design of D&D in ways no one had much experience in before. There were very few cooperative games anywhere, in boardgames, cardgames, or wargames. Almost none of them allowed players to have variable power levels and still be balanced (see the original Dungeon! boardgame for where that game design from). And none but perhaps Mastermind included a referee who relayed hidden information behind a screen to those who were to "play" the game. By which I mean to decipher the current game situation to obtain objectives within the game. I believe the term "role playing" came from the wargaming community in the military where roleplaying was used in military exercises. This was to differentiate it from theater and get at what the core of games where. That massive requirement of intellect and memory inherent to game design and play. Gary was very insightful to include many other aspects of great game design into D&D too, but I believe he borrowed a lot design from the golden age of wargaming too, so not everything is to his credit. Even advancement happens in many games.What didn't happen was Gary explaining the design of the game. Or why he called it an RPG later. Or what made it an RPG. And when a slew of imitators came later they didn't know what they were doing. Neither did most players. But many did and many understood good game design and recognized it in D&D. That there was a disagreement at the top levels of the community between D&D and GURPS that trickled down to the fans is part of history. And afterwards no attempt was made for some clear distinction at what an RPG needed to be and RPG, or what went on in an RPG, or what was role playing even. (For D&D players performing a personality was understood by many as not necessary all the way into the mid-90s IME). Now we get to contemporary RPGs. There is still confusion. In fact, there is a history of confusion. But now the storygame community wants to make storytelling role playing and RPGs storygames. Something 1000s of prior games never were in the RPG hobby.That to me is rewriting history to fit the absolutisms of today. And it is the deliberate extinction of a hobby by those who have a "better" understanding. Without the backlash who would be playing any of all those games? But the misunderstanding and ignorance persists. Even among those who are fans of older games.So, I'm not here to exclude contemporary RPGs from being RPGs because they can't hang a label on their game. I'm trying to understand and put forth the definition of role playing and game D&D was designed within. These matter for anyone who wants to play D&D as it used to be before the 90s confusion and the contemporary attempt to make all RPGs, well, nothing whatsoever like D&D.It's the removal of thought that other definitions seek by seeking widespread acceptance. It is the accuracy of understanding where we came from that I seek. No one's going to or should determine "the way all RPGs must be understood."</blockquote>

Verification