Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Rob Kuntz" data-source="post: 8396205" data-attributes="member: 7015759">We, that is, Gary and myself as play-testers, co-designers and co-DMs, made no mistakes, whatever that means.Gary standardized the rules for 3 reasons:1)&nbsp; In a move to extricate Arneson from AD&amp;D and thus from the initial concept, which TSR lost in an out of court settlement;2)&nbsp; To sell adventure modules one had to have a consistent, standardized rules set--TSR's catalog AD&amp;D era was 80% adventures; it was about empowering TSR's market, mostly.&nbsp; The RPGA was a mirror image of that;3)&nbsp; To guard against encroaching competition from other RPG companies.Just for the record Gary never played by the rules, he was the rule as a DM, so was I.&nbsp; That philosophy originated (commercially) with OD&amp;D, but even though it was mentioned as &quot;possible&quot; in AD&amp;D, that old ideal was subsequently squashed by the newly minted&nbsp; Random House deal in concert with the burgeoning of TSR's customer base because of that, which introduced a tidal wave of predominantly by the book players who were groomed to purchase pre-made materials and who had not experienced the previous DIY model we at first extolled and made successful (i.e., a full 100% of players roughly 1974-1977 were DIY only). With the changed and standardized rules leagued with pre-made adventures (1977-present) DIY has diametrically decreased to the point of insignificance. Your assuredness is misplaced, kinda like saying that even though the circus pulled out of town their tent stakes are still there.&nbsp; I should know, I watched it rise to its apex and then fall overnight to an establishment model. Its blood was shed long ago, and only droplets remain to be curiously examined, kinda like any ancient ruin...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Rob Kuntz, post: 8396205, member: 7015759"] We, that is, Gary and myself as play-testers, co-designers and co-DMs, made no mistakes, whatever that means. Gary standardized the rules for 3 reasons: 1) In a move to extricate Arneson from AD&D and thus from the initial concept, which TSR lost in an out of court settlement; 2) To sell adventure modules one had to have a consistent, standardized rules set--TSR's catalog AD&D era was 80% adventures; it was about empowering TSR's market, mostly. The RPGA was a mirror image of that; 3) To guard against encroaching competition from other RPG companies. Just for the record Gary never played by the rules, he was the rule as a DM, so was I. That philosophy originated (commercially) with OD&D, but even though it was mentioned as "possible" in AD&D, that old ideal was subsequently squashed by the newly minted Random House deal in concert with the burgeoning of TSR's customer base because of that, which introduced a tidal wave of predominantly by the book players who were groomed to purchase pre-made materials and who had not experienced the previous DIY model we at first extolled and made successful (i.e., a full 100% of players roughly 1974-1977 were DIY only). With the changed and standardized rules leagued with pre-made adventures (1977-present) DIY has diametrically decreased to the point of insignificance. Your assuredness is misplaced, kinda like saying that even though the circus pulled out of town their tent stakes are still there. I should know, I watched it rise to its apex and then fall overnight to an establishment model. Its blood was shed long ago, and only droplets remain to be curiously examined, kinda like any ancient ruin... [/QUOTE]

Verification