Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Drifter Bob" data-source="post: 1631618" data-attributes="member: 17723">We don't agree in our interpretations of these numbers, obviously.  Not that it really matters, and I don't claim to be an expert pollster for armitrage or something, but I did take statistics in college, and it seems to me that 1/4 of the posters to ENworld, who would probably be considered hard core D&D players, is probably representative of a similar proportion of the much, much larger group of D&D players out there.  I'm sure I don't need to point out this is the basic method of statistical surveys... this is how Niellson ratings are determined, for example.You and other frenzied critics of the very concept of analyzing the game for areas of improving the maturity level seem to have jumped to several rather odd conclusions about the motives, methods, and aims of those of us who are interested in a more mature game.  All we have done is attempted to discuss a few ideas, citing a few problems and begin to speculate about a few potential solutions.  Nowhere in this thread will you find a manifesto.  We were just bouncing a few ideas around.  My original intention with the poll was to A) see if there was interest, and people who felt the same way I did about what I percieve as a problem, and then B) attempt to discuss the idea a bit further.So since I have voiced no concrete ideas of what either your #1 or #2 above would entail, I really don't understand how you can categorically condemn them, except as some kind of panicked reactionary backlash against the very idea of changing the game, which as I have pointed out, WILL keep changing regardless of whether anyone wants it to or not.  I would like to believe that you and a couple of the others have some actual point to make, but all I see right now is angry recrimination and backlash, which doesn't make a lot of sense to me.  I'm not trying to screw up your game, I'm personally trying very hard to be polite.  So please relax.  Put it in perspective.  Count to ten or something.As for great players solving all problems, I agree.  A brilliant, reasonable set of players and DM will have a fun game with (or in spite of) almost any rules system.  I am talking about the bigger picture, the way the newer players are approaching the game, the way the game itself is evolving, and how that effects the market for suppliments etc.I'm sorry if you can't grasp this, but there ARE plenty of independent RPG's out there, (and no, I'm not talking about Vampire) which have rules that tend to promote different styles of game pay than the current D&D.  You and a few other folks seem to have this belief that rules have absolutely no effect on how the game is played, but thats not true.  There are games out there with enhanced role playing, and games which are more mechanical.  Games with more abstract combat ranging to more realistic and faster combat, games which are sillier and more childish and games which are more adult.  The rules do effect the way these games are played, just as they do effect the way D&D is played.  Personally, I am afriad that the hyperconservative, canonical streak in the D&D audience will mesh with normal market driven forces and cause the game to once again stagnate and die out, which will drag much of the independent rpg community with it, and leave us with nothing but everquest and grand theft auto until some new outfit buys the DnD license and re-invents it yet again.  After all, it's been run into the ground a couple of times before, and one thing which has always remained constant was the conservatism of the fan base.The fact that we cannot even discuss the idea of improving the game in a civilized manner even in a relatively polite forum such as ENworld does not bode well for the future, IMO.DB</blockquote>

Verification