Proclamation

[The_Universe]

You just continue to impress the hell out of me The Universe. I love David Icke stuff. It's great fun. If you search really hard, you can even find an article attacking me written by Icke supporters.

In the last Mutants & Masterminds game I played, I actually ran a fifth columnist in the league of shape-shifting space lizards secretly controlling the earth. There is great RP fodder, as well as just funny stuff in the Icke corpus. Did you know he was the former leader of the UK Green Party?

What can I say? I like to read about what the crazy people do with their time. I'd love to read that article if you can dig it up - a "defense" of the "reality" of the reptoid conspiracy would be great fun to read!

 

[Umbran]

Is it succeeding?[/quopte]

It is succeesing better than any other RPG.

If it is, is it as an amphibious beast, or despite it? How much more sucessful could it be if it became a true RPG, instead of the dual natured creature it is?

Considering that the less-amphibious beasts in the market sell poorly by comparison, one would not expect it to become more successful if it became what you call a "true RPG". The thing you seem to be missing, over and over, is that a great many people enjoy the wargaming aspect.

 

[Templeton580]

There comes a time in the evolution/development of anything new where it stops being part of an older clade (wargames) and forms a new clade of its own (RPGs). While RPGs have features found in wargames, they also have features found only in RPGs, and thus deserve a category of their own.

Saying something over and over again every couple months in multiple contradictory threads in an attempt to get as much atatention as possible does not make it so, Mythus.

In many people's minds, RPGs do enjoy a category of their own: RPGs. That is, games that are not played purely on a tabletop with figures (wargames). Each GM's RPG will have some amount of tactical stuff...likely depending on how much their players enjoy.

I would humbly suggest that messageboards are not merely an ineffective place to attempt to beat people over the head with your new paradigm, but also extremely irritating. Just FYI, man.

 

[fusangite]

Saying something over and over again every couple months in multiple contradictory threads in an attempt to get as much atatention as possible does not make it so, Mythus.

In many people's minds, RPGs do enjoy a category of their own: RPGs. That is, games that are not played purely on a tabletop with figures (wargames). Each GM's RPG will have some amount of tactical stuff...likely depending on how much their players enjoy.

I would humbly suggest that messageboards are not merely an ineffective place to attempt to beat people over the head with your new paradigm, but also extremely irritating. Just FYI, man.

You sir have expressed my view very succinctly. And keeping an amphibious rodent for... you know... domestic purposes... that ain't legal either.

 

[The_Gneech]

I truly do not like the mini using, 'bow down to the almighty grid' aspect, rules micromanaging shift in 3.5 from 3e.

In 3.5 from 3e? That seems a strange assertion. They're barely different, in terms of combat!

3.anything is far more map-oriented than 2.anything was, I'll grant you that; whether for good or ill. But 3e and 3.5 are far more like each other than either of them are like anything else.

-The Gneech

 

[DonTadow]

You can't have a true dungeons and dragons game without rules for combat. SUre you could ignore those rules and pretend fight, but then it becomes grade school again when you're playing with G.I. Joes with your buddy and you tell him your Flint killed his Cobra Commander. Then he yells at you that you didn't, takes both of his action figures and goes home.

You can make the combat rules in d and d as tedious or as lite as you want them but they need to be there. It's a game involving warriors combating with monsters. Players vs. dungeons and dragons. It involves risk. The dice and combat rules provide that risk.

I've done diceless games and they are fun if you're only into hte social interaction. But the risk factor of actually playing a game is gone. All the monsters WIll be defeated. All the traps will be sprung and all the treasure will be found.

 

[Umbran]

Is it succeeding?

Economically, it is succeeding better than any other RPG.

If it is, is it as an amphibious beast, or despite it? How much more sucessful could it be if it became a true RPG, instead of the dual natured creature it is?

Considering that the less-amphibious beasts in the market sell poorly by comparison, one would not expect it to become more successful if it became what you call a "true RPG". The thing you seem to be missing, over and over, is that a great many people enjoy the wargaming aspect. You continue to dismiss them and their impact.

 

[Templeton580]

You sir have expressed my view very succinctly. And keeping an amphibious rodent for... you know... domestic purposes... that ain't legal either.

I don't need your sympathy, man...I need my johnson!

 

[Gomez]

I wonder if mythusmage is more upset about the lack of role-playing that he can get out of his players than the tactical aspect of 3.5. If he can have a rule set that forces a player to role-play then all the better.

 

[Templeton580]

Plenty of Narrativist-style games to be found over at The Forge.