s/LaSH
First Post
Thus (by the original argument) there are no bad RPGs, just bad... what do you call the experience of playing a game? Gamplay sessions, I guess. Just bad gameplay sessions. It should, however, be possible to isolate components that detract from gameplay sessions. If a marketed product has nothing but poor components, it's fairly much worthwhile to say it's a bad RPG. After all, why buy something when something else can do everything it can do better?
Thus, the 'bad package' can exist and should be avoided.
Then, of course, there's the whole 'but what is bad?' question, and there's no real answer to that. Complexity? Simplicity? Lack of options? Too many options? Character advancement? Inevitable character death? I can think of systems that fill each of these criteria that have huge followings.
Spawn of Fashan, though, is probably unsalvagable.
Thus, the 'bad package' can exist and should be avoided.
Then, of course, there's the whole 'but what is bad?' question, and there's no real answer to that. Complexity? Simplicity? Lack of options? Too many options? Character advancement? Inevitable character death? I can think of systems that fill each of these criteria that have huge followings.
Spawn of Fashan, though, is probably unsalvagable.