Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Rob Kuntz" data-source="post: 8220202" data-attributes="member: 7015759"><p>There are no absolutes in Fantasy; and as far as that goes there should be none in a Fantasy RPG.&nbsp; Whatever works works.&nbsp; Defining sandbox for one will not define it for another.&nbsp; There are too many variables, past, present and future.&nbsp; Even more structured play has its variances starting with defining what ons views (or others view) as structure.&nbsp; The proof of one's play/design experience is always in the intuited approach to engagement which leads to changes and collects a breadth of feedback that in the best of cases hones the approach.&nbsp; It's quite like applying a single daub of paint to a canvas and then standing back to decide which paint to apply next in relation to the first.&nbsp; It's always a new start, especially when considering the complexity levels possible with a living canvas of a Fantastic Imaginary World. I for one believe that such variance creates different models that might lead as future examples in design; this is the way the creative crucible of D&amp;D was fashioned, in fact, by bucking the entrenched models of the day.&nbsp; Did that change those that wanted to adhere to those models? No.&nbsp; Did it usher in a new era in games that we all correspond to in some ways?&nbsp; Yes.&nbsp; It's all good for who it's good for.</p></blockquote><p></p>

[QUOTE="Rob Kuntz, post: 8220202, member: 7015759"] There are no absolutes in Fantasy; and as far as that goes there should be none in a Fantasy RPG. Whatever works works. Defining sandbox for one will not define it for another. There are too many variables, past, present and future. Even more structured play has its variances starting with defining what ons views (or others view) as structure. The proof of one's play/design experience is always in the intuited approach to engagement which leads to changes and collects a breadth of feedback that in the best of cases hones the approach. It's quite like applying a single daub of paint to a canvas and then standing back to decide which paint to apply next in relation to the first. It's always a new start, especially when considering the complexity levels possible with a living canvas of a Fantastic Imaginary World. I for one believe that such variance creates different models that might lead as future examples in design; this is the way the creative crucible of D&D was fashioned, in fact, by bucking the entrenched models of the day. Did that change those that wanted to adhere to those models? No. Did it usher in a new era in games that we all correspond to in some ways? Yes. It's all good for who it's good for. [/QUOTE]

Verification