Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Aaron L" data-source="post: 1570455" data-attributes="member: 926">Ya see, right there, you are wrong.&nbsp;&nbsp; Roleplaying is a psychiatric tool.&nbsp; The hobby is roleplaying GAMES.&nbsp; I play a GAME in which I ROLEPLAY.&nbsp; I want to have fun portraying a character who is attempting something with a chance of failure.&nbsp; There IS a competitive aspect, and the competetion is against either myself, or the odds.&nbsp; Without that competetive aspect, it would be little more than sitting around a room telling stories to your friends.&nbsp;&nbsp; If that's what you want then more power too you, go for it.&nbsp; I don't want it at all, and I doubt very that many people do.So for you have proposed several things:RPGs are failing&nbsp; (I have never seen any evidence of this, either personally or through statistics)The competitive aspect of RPGs drives potential players away (I have never seen evidence of this, and I heavily doubt such is the case.&nbsp; This culture thrives on competition)Renaming and &quot;reinventing&quot; RPGs as the &quot;roleplaying hobby&quot; would attract&nbsp; hordes of new players.&nbsp; (I rather doubt that it would attract a 10th of the current players it drove away as their hobby attempted to change itself into some sort of amateur scriptless drama guide.&nbsp; I am talking buying players here, not people who play what they have.&nbsp; Those will always continue to exist) You have stated a desire for a more realistic combat system with no initiative system or distinct &quot;combat rounds&quot; as they make the chaos of combat into something managable.&nbsp; You have also said that you desire a system which is less rules oriented, less &quot;gamish&quot; Well my friend, good luck reconcilling those two diametrically opposed goals. In fact, any system in which cimbat takes place MUST have combat made into something managable, unless you render it into a simple win/lose variable and describe how it went.&nbsp; The big problem seems to be the fact that you think most people want what you want.&nbsp; I disagree, and I propose that the vehemence with witch your views are disputed on this lone message board offer a small amount of proof to that fact.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Aaron L, post: 1570455, member: 926"] Ya see, right there, you are wrong. Roleplaying is a psychiatric tool. The hobby is roleplaying GAMES. I play a GAME in which I ROLEPLAY. I want to have fun portraying a character who is attempting something with a chance of failure. There IS a competitive aspect, and the competetion is against either myself, or the odds. Without that competetive aspect, it would be little more than sitting around a room telling stories to your friends. If that's what you want then more power too you, go for it. I don't want it at all, and I doubt very that many people do. So for you have proposed several things: RPGs are failing (I have never seen any evidence of this, either personally or through statistics) The competitive aspect of RPGs drives potential players away (I have never seen evidence of this, and I heavily doubt such is the case. This culture thrives on competition) Renaming and "reinventing" RPGs as the "roleplaying hobby" would attract hordes of new players. (I rather doubt that it would attract a 10th of the current players it drove away as their hobby attempted to change itself into some sort of amateur scriptless drama guide. I am talking buying players here, not people who play what they have. Those will always continue to exist) You have stated a desire for a more realistic combat system with no initiative system or distinct "combat rounds" as they make the chaos of combat into something managable. You have also said that you desire a system which is less rules oriented, less "gamish" Well my friend, good luck reconcilling those two diametrically opposed goals. In fact, any system in which cimbat takes place MUST have combat made into something managable, unless you render it into a simple win/lose variable and describe how it went. The big problem seems to be the fact that you think most people want what you want. I disagree, and I propose that the vehemence with witch your views are disputed on this lone message board offer a small amount of proof to that fact. [/QUOTE]

Verification