hawkeyefan
Legend
I lofted this idea a while ago and it didn't seem to gain much traction, but, let's try again.
To me, most RPG's are not games in and of themselves. They are game creation engines. You never actually play an RPG - you play the campaign (whether it's predetermined or created as you go) using the rules for that RPG. Which means that every single campaign is a largely self contained game that is not repeatable at another table. The game consists of the campaign+rules+players. And, because of those three variables, you can never reproduce a given game at another table.
Which makes any sort of shared language discussion EXTREMELY difficult as each group develops its own game and then, once that game (campaign) is finished, they create another game - possibly similar but not the same - for the next campaign.
I mean, it's laughable to think that my Primeval Thule game with no core casters and almost 100% home brew created is the same game as my Dragon Heist game where I ran the pre-made module. And neither are the same game as my Ghosts of Saltmarsh campaign, despite all three using 5e rules.
When no two instances of any RPG ever have the same starting, middle or end points, how can they be considered to be the same game? And, since my game, your game and Bob's game over there, despite maybe using the same RPG system, share virtually no commonalities (I'm using Ravnica, you're using a home-brew world and Bob's set in Ravenloft) how can we really have a common language for discussion?
There are the rules of baseball....and then there is any given game of baseball, which will play out in its own unique way according to the rules. I don't think that this means that no one ever actually plays baseball.
So although I understand what you're saying, I don't know how much that distinction matters? Or how much it would impact discussion.