Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="riprock" data-source="post: 2970329" data-attributes="member: 42506">I don't have Master of the Game.&nbsp; I *do* have Roleplaying Mastery and recently I've started reading it again.Unfortunately, my lack of common sense and somewhat slanted sense of appropriateness means that I am probably still missing many of the points therein...To return to the quote in the original post:You know, it's really beautiful when it works that way, but in my experience, it's very hard to keep a campaign together with exactly the same people for a long time.&nbsp; The most resilient campaigns I've seen had one referee and a variable pool of players.&nbsp; Very few players really got the long-term enjoyment.D&amp;D really does have *excellent* game balance *if* you have about four players, one DM, and a year of steady gaming sessions.&nbsp; I suspect that in the 1970's, Western society was more stable and sociable; nowadays America has books like &quot;Bowling Alone&quot; which document the disintegration of community, Europe has tensions with immigration (involving economic and religious conflicts), and Asia is mostly playing World of Warcraft.&nbsp; I came to Asia in 2004, from Europe, and the language barrier is small compared to the difference in sociability.IMHO this is a problem with the notion of progress in role-playing games.&nbsp; Building up a character by slow, steady accumulation of points is not always practical.&nbsp; Nowadays, millions of people are willing to have a long-term commitment to World of Warcraft but not to a gaming group.&nbsp; I personally find World of Warcraft to be a game-killing competitor.&nbsp; I'm stuck playing or running one-shots or war games or board games because all the people who really like fantasy are playing WoW, except me!&nbsp; If this gets any worse I'll have to give up my *interesting* hobby -- RPGs -- and start playing cards and MahJong, just to have players.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="riprock, post: 2970329, member: 42506"] I don't have Master of the Game. I *do* have Roleplaying Mastery and recently I've started reading it again. Unfortunately, my lack of common sense and somewhat slanted sense of appropriateness means that I am probably still missing many of the points therein... To return to the quote in the original post: You know, it's really beautiful when it works that way, but in my experience, it's very hard to keep a campaign together with exactly the same people for a long time. The most resilient campaigns I've seen had one referee and a variable pool of players. Very few players really got the long-term enjoyment. D&D really does have *excellent* game balance *if* you have about four players, one DM, and a year of steady gaming sessions. I suspect that in the 1970's, Western society was more stable and sociable; nowadays America has books like "Bowling Alone" which document the disintegration of community, Europe has tensions with immigration (involving economic and religious conflicts), and Asia is mostly playing World of Warcraft. I came to Asia in 2004, from Europe, and the language barrier is small compared to the difference in sociability. IMHO this is a problem with the notion of progress in role-playing games. Building up a character by slow, steady accumulation of points is not always practical. Nowadays, millions of people are willing to have a long-term commitment to World of Warcraft but not to a gaming group. I personally find World of Warcraft to be a game-killing competitor. I'm stuck playing or running one-shots or war games or board games because all the people who really like fantasy are playing WoW, except me! If this gets any worse I'll have to give up my *interesting* hobby -- RPGs -- and start playing cards and MahJong, just to have players. [/QUOTE]

Verification