Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
On Grognardism...
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ifurita'sFan" data-source="post: 8396190" data-attributes="member: 57656"><p>You are the one that started this with accusations of "rife with speculation and nothing concrete." This is a ridiculous attempt at provocation and was frankly beneath me to reply to other than to point out that starting a post by claiming another's "posts are rife" with anything or that there is "nothing concrete" in them, is a base attempt at provocation via insult by claiming their opinion has no merit and shows a disturbing lack of character. There, now that is an insult. The fine gentleman that I replied to read what I had to say and saw at least in part what I was saying and put it in terms of Art and negative space. He understood, something clearly you did not.</p><p></p><p>That said I beg to differ that you laid out in detail an answer to the specific question as you claimed you had. The question as asked, was </p><p></p><p><em>"If you think RPG design peaked in the late 70s, what about that design speaks to you so strongly?"</em></p><p></p><p>you stated</p><p></p><p><em>"the things that appealed to me the most about early D&D were rulings over rules,"</em></p><p></p><p>In my opinion that is not you answering the question about what about the DESIGN speaks to you, at all. How people interpreted or ruled on the rules, is not design, it is the minutia of defining ambiguities in the rules, as a designer you should know, that is not design. And while that is an entirely valid (for you) reason why you <u>liked</u> it and I'd not gainsay you your preference or cast aspersions on you for deriving enjoyment from the system in that way. (That you gain pleasure in the discussion and clarification of the rules and the reasons behind them is absolutely a valid reason to enjoy something,) But it really doesn't speak to the design itself, does it? So, you did not answer the posters question as it was asked, did you? The answer should be obvious that NO you did not.</p><p></p><p>Further you stated;</p><p><em>I don't think it "Peaked" in the late 70s, but that style of play has an appeal to me, and it's not just nostalgia. As I mention in the preface of the OSR project I'm working on:</em></p><p></p><p>Now that is partially on topic, explaining that you feel it did not peak in the 70's kudos to you on that score. I likewise think it still hasn't peaked. There is always a higher peak to reach for.</p><p><em></em></p><p><em>"I firmly believe that just because an edition may be newer (even if it does a lot of great things), that it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s going to be a better experience for everyone, and thus I honestly feel like there is room in the modern gaming world to enjoy an old school style of game play and to give gamers that option."</em></p><p></p><p>Again, in my opinion you failed to answer the question. You mentioned a like for the style of play, not what in the game design appeals or fails to appeal to you. A style of play can be encouraged or discouraged by constructing the game experience to reflect that style, but style of play does not speak to the design of the system.</p><p></p><p>If you disagree with this summary, please indicate why you feel you answered the question.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ifurita'sFan, post: 8396190, member: 57656"] You are the one that started this with accusations of "rife with speculation and nothing concrete." This is a ridiculous attempt at provocation and was frankly beneath me to reply to other than to point out that starting a post by claiming another's "posts are rife" with anything or that there is "nothing concrete" in them, is a base attempt at provocation via insult by claiming their opinion has no merit and shows a disturbing lack of character. There, now that is an insult. The fine gentleman that I replied to read what I had to say and saw at least in part what I was saying and put it in terms of Art and negative space. He understood, something clearly you did not. That said I beg to differ that you laid out in detail an answer to the specific question as you claimed you had. The question as asked, was [I]"If you think RPG design peaked in the late 70s, what about that design speaks to you so strongly?"[/I] you stated [I]"the things that appealed to me the most about early D&D were rulings over rules,"[/I] In my opinion that is not you answering the question about what about the DESIGN speaks to you, at all. How people interpreted or ruled on the rules, is not design, it is the minutia of defining ambiguities in the rules, as a designer you should know, that is not design. And while that is an entirely valid (for you) reason why you [U]liked[/U] it and I'd not gainsay you your preference or cast aspersions on you for deriving enjoyment from the system in that way. (That you gain pleasure in the discussion and clarification of the rules and the reasons behind them is absolutely a valid reason to enjoy something,) But it really doesn't speak to the design itself, does it? So, you did not answer the posters question as it was asked, did you? The answer should be obvious that NO you did not. Further you stated; [I]I don't think it "Peaked" in the late 70s, but that style of play has an appeal to me, and it's not just nostalgia. As I mention in the preface of the OSR project I'm working on:[/I] Now that is partially on topic, explaining that you feel it did not peak in the 70's kudos to you on that score. I likewise think it still hasn't peaked. There is always a higher peak to reach for. [I] "I firmly believe that just because an edition may be newer (even if it does a lot of great things), that it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s going to be a better experience for everyone, and thus I honestly feel like there is room in the modern gaming world to enjoy an old school style of game play and to give gamers that option."[/I] Again, in my opinion you failed to answer the question. You mentioned a like for the style of play, not what in the game design appeals or fails to appeal to you. A style of play can be encouraged or discouraged by constructing the game experience to reflect that style, but style of play does not speak to the design of the system. If you disagree with this summary, please indicate why you feel you answered the question. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
On Grognardism...
Top