Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 4010228" data-attributes="member: 42582">I don't think it's that odd.For example: suppose I knew that someone was putting out a new book in moral philosophy, defending a new interpretation of Socrates' moral system (I've got in mind Rai Gaita's Good and Evil from the early 1990s). If I posted a poll on a moral philosophy webforum, I might get a semi-meanignful indication of what serious moral philosophers think. But it would have no relevance to what the general population thinks, despite the fact that nearly all thinking people have an opinion about, and an interest in, the issues that Gaita discusses in his book.By way of analogy, most RPGers don't think very hard about the nature of their RPGing, the system design that underpins it, the coherence of the gameworld and system, etc. They just get together with their friends and play. My impression is that most of them play D&D because it's the game they've always played, and they have fun with it.When 2nd ed came out and did things pretty much the same, they nearly all switched over. When 3E came out and did nearly everything quite differently, they nearly all switched over. I suspect that when 4e comes out, nearly all will switch over. I think that Ryan Dancey is correct, that for most players it is networks (and also, I supsect, branding) and not system details that determine their RPGing.This I agree with.</blockquote>