Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jack7" data-source="post: 5734907" data-attributes="member: 54707">Yeah, I have a problem with that. By that I mean  sometimes I will make a general point and then use a sort of tangential example  to illustrate that is obvious in one way, but not obvious in all  ways.   I talk in terms of commanders and rank and order because  that's my nature. It's easy for me to formulate those examples. But I didn't  mean that example to be an entire encapsulation of what I meant. I didn't mean  to restrict everything i was saying to that one example. So I admit that can be  confusing at times, and it was my fault.   My real point was a general philosophical one and it was  this:   Game Designers should not be establishing roles  for players. Players should.   Players know through play and the dynamics of their  party who will be best at any role, be it combat or other roles.   I have nothing against Game Designers speaking about  roles, or giving examples of how they may work in any given situation, but it's  the players who are or will become good at certain roles. Pre-fabricating roles  and pre-designing them and affixing them to classes or other component  structures is a big game design and construction flaw in my  opinion.   Players should be free to assume roles, create roles,  change roles, etc. It is role playing after all not Role-Assignment. That treats  players like children who must be prescribed their role, rather than develop or  construct or create their own role(s) through role-play.   Role play is the job of the players and it should be  their choice, not the Game Designers choice to pre-arrange and pre-assume "Role  Structures." Game Designers should stay out of role-playing except maybe to give  advice and examples.    This occurs in my opinion because far too many game  designers want to emphasize their own importance and supposed genius than that  of the people who will use the game. There's nothing wrong with a clever and  creative game designer, but to me this is like the Senate fighting a war.  Soldiers fight wars, that is their job, not Senates. governments can say, a war  needs to be fought, or it doesn't, but it should not be taking command of an  army, planning strategy, or running ops.    Hope that better explains my point and I tried to avoid  all but one example in this case so as not to tangentially confuse my  point.</blockquote>

Verification