Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Clint_L" data-source="post: 8992308" data-attributes="member: 7035894">I think this is hyperbolic. Obviously the books are not &quot;for all intents and purposes, completely useless&quot; because people, in their millions, have been and are successfully playing the game such that they invest considerable time, energy, and money into it. I offer the premise that most people who continue playing the game do so because they find it fun. Though, as you allude to with your last point, it may just be that the game is addictive (I think it is probably both, to varying degrees).I don't really understand your point about not knowing what enemies your sword will encounter - to me that is a feature, not a flaw. You prepare as best you can and then something else happens instead. Such is life. It's thrilling.Isn't it interesting, if accidental, design that people with diametrically opposed views on how the game should be played can still play it and have fun? I play Fiasco pretty often, and the few times it has sucked was specifically because one player had a diametrically opposed view to the rest on what the game should be. It was quickly unplayable.As a teacher, I recognize that a central authority in the DM can keep the game going even with players who might not think much alike. On the other hand, we continue to train people to defer to central authorities and not take responsibility for their own circumstances and learn to work together better. It's a pickle.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Clint_L, post: 8992308, member: 7035894"] I think this is hyperbolic. Obviously the books are not "for all intents and purposes, completely useless" because people, in their millions, have been and are successfully playing the game such that they invest considerable time, energy, and money into it. I offer the premise that most people who continue playing the game do so because they find it fun. Though, as you allude to with your last point, it may just be that the game is [I]addictive[/I] (I think it is probably both, to varying degrees). I don't really understand your point about not knowing what enemies your sword will encounter - to me that is a feature, not a flaw. You prepare as best you can and then something else happens instead. Such is life. It's thrilling. Isn't it interesting, if accidental, design that people with diametrically opposed views on how the game should be played can still play it and have fun? I play [I]Fiasco[/I] pretty often, and the few times it has sucked was specifically because one player had a diametrically opposed view to the rest on what the game should be. It was quickly unplayable. As a teacher, I recognize that a central authority in the DM can keep the game going even with players who might not think much alike. On the other hand, we continue to train people to defer to central authorities and not take responsibility for their own circumstances and learn to work together better. It's a pickle. [/QUOTE]

Verification