Oi this is getting ridiculous.
Heinsoo didn't say Talisman. I never quoted him as saying so. I was responding in kind to the hyperbolic follow-up posters who selectively quoted me and added their own 2-bits in trying to show how superior their logic was to a selective quote. Yikes, do you want me to go and edit the original post so we don't get some nasty internet rumor started here that Heinsoo burned D&D for the Talisman board game? *(watch this get misquoted later)*
Wulf,
I would never say we should impose a "purity test" on D&D players/designers. God knows that I've enjoyed some of the changes Monte brought to the game. I'm not saying we should exclude jocks, women, small children, or any other person from the game or even having an opinion on how to change the game. However, it goes back to my original post and the idea that 2nd Edition had some history to it (not mechanics of the operating system for the game) that I think could be lost in the shuffle. Hubris isn't just a six letter word.
I guess it bugs me to a certain extent because I bought Rolemaster, Talislanta, Talisman, Champions, GURPs, etc., ad infinitum, just like every other gamer. I didn't play them more than once in all honesty or in some cases, at all, but I don't walk around touting that the mechanics of D&D are superior in every way to every other game. I recognize that the mechanics of D&D throughout the history of the game has been fairly poor. However, it had more "fluff" to it that *I* think is the important part that sometimes seems to be missing from the newer editions. I noticed this in 3.X as well.
My question about "D&D Players" vs "Gamers" is part personal observation and part question. I sometimes get the feeling reading the boards though, that the grognard is the person told to shut up, to go in the corner and die since their time has passed. That's just as silly as a grognard dismissing the newer players and their ideas.
