Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="prosfilaes" data-source="post: 6416180" data-attributes="member: 40166">I think it unhelpful to look at the SUV and act like it's a sports or utility vehicle. Any realistic understanding of the SUV requires understand that no matter what the ads say, no matter what the dealers are selling, many, possibly most, of them are used as minivans. And the better selling SUVs are designed with features that support that, no matter how much they advertise off-road performance. I don't trust forewords to accurately reflect how the game is being played, or even necessarily how the game is designed to be played. I'm curious if WoD authors ever had that explicit contrast put to them, the need to sell the game as dramatic, angsty art and yet write stuff that appeals to the group of people who just wanted to play vampires and werewolfs for maximum carnage. Nothing else matters other then what happens when the rubber meets the road. Has Magic: the Gathering always been a collectible card game? When first released, they did not fully expect the randomness and rarities to interact the way they did to produce the first CCG. Should we look at what WotC intended, or how it's always been played in practice?Any definition of SF that did I would expect to be negative towards Star Wars. Star Wars derives from deep SF roots and much SF has grown from it. You want to say that Star Wars is not science fiction, despite it coming from a rich heritage including the Lensman series, then you're making up a new definition that doesn't match who people use the word science fiction. Prescriptive definitions of a genre like that are almost always to evict someone; that's not really "heavy metal" or "country" or "science fiction". Descriptively? Everyone accepts Star Wars as science fiction. People who aren't trying for negative phrasing simply label it as space opera or not hard science fiction and move on.Likewise, again, 5 out of 6 story games I had at hand labeled themselves RPGs. By giving a definition of RPG that excludes them, you're telling an entire group of people, some of whom are established writers for games that (almost) everyone agrees are RPGs, that despite what they think, they're not writing roleplaying games. That is negative. Why not accept that there's "story games" and "traditional RPGs" all under the RPG umbrella, instead of writing a definition that excludes a bunch of things labeled and understood to be "roleplaying games" from the genre?</blockquote>

Verification