Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ariosto" data-source="post: 4804358" data-attributes="member: 80487">I agree that action-adventure games and those with other emphases are fundamentally &quot;different hobbies&quot; with only slight overlap. I think it would be an impoverishment rather than an enrichment to turn, say, D&amp;D into a &quot;tea party&quot; game. My thoughts have turned to the prospect of making new games of the former type with wider (or at least different) appeal. Making new games of the latter type does not personally interest me much.Slight as it may be, I don't think we should dismiss the potential overlap.I played in elementary school, before encountering D&amp;D, an &quot;educational&quot; game in which players took the roles of (if memory serves) members of a &quot;city council&quot; voting on different proposals and then seeing the results. It was, like Diplomacy, basically a game of pure strategy with social interaction as the primary mode of play. Like GDW's (much later) game Red Empire, competition was moderated by the fact that everyone could lose.That was not quite an RPG, at least by the measure of D&amp;D and its ilk. However, it got me thinking on lines similar to those that had led to the development of D&amp;D, and led me to introduce some &quot;role playing&quot; elements to the war games my friends and I cooked up. I started then with a vague idea of a Marvel Comics game that did not quite crystallize until D&amp;D hit me with its &quot;lightning bolt&quot;.What this recollection suggests to me is that wider exposure to things at least in some ways similar to D&amp;D is likely to &quot;prime&quot; people already inclined to be &quot;gamers&quot;. Those other things may reach demographics D&amp;D itself does not. Some people who don't &quot;get&quot; the game now might come back after one of those other experiences in a more receptive frame of mind.There are &quot;non-gamers&quot; ... and there are &quot;gamers who don't know it yet&quot;.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ariosto, post: 4804358, member: 80487"] I agree that action-adventure games and those with other emphases are fundamentally "different hobbies" with only slight overlap. I think it would be an impoverishment rather than an enrichment to turn, say, D&D into a "tea party" game. My thoughts have turned to the prospect of making new games of the former type with wider (or at least different) appeal. Making new games of the latter type does not personally interest me much. Slight as it may be, I don't think we should dismiss the potential overlap. I played in elementary school, before encountering D&D, an "educational" game in which players took the roles of (if memory serves) members of a "city council" voting on different proposals and then seeing the results. It was, like [I]Diplomacy[/I], basically a game of pure strategy with social interaction as the primary mode of play. Like GDW's (much later) game [I]Red Empire[/I], competition was moderated by the fact that [I]everyone[/I] could lose. That was not quite an RPG, at least by the measure of D&D and its ilk. However, it got me thinking on lines similar to those that had led to the development of D&D, and led me to introduce some "role playing" elements to the war games my friends and I cooked up. I started then with a vague idea of a Marvel Comics game that did not quite crystallize until D&D hit me with its "lightning bolt". What this recollection suggests to me is that wider exposure to things at least in some ways similar to D&D is likely to "prime" people already inclined to be "gamers". Those other things may reach demographics D&D itself does not. Some people who don't "get" the game now might come back after one of those other experiences in a more receptive frame of mind. There are "non-gamers" ... and there are "gamers who don't know it yet". [/QUOTE]

Verification