Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="rounser" data-source="post: 5400343" data-attributes="member: 1106">BryonD, you represent the concensus view that has crept into the game's culture like a thief in the night.&nbsp; The founders of the game knew that D&amp;D is fundamentally something of a lark, and that creativity came hand in hand with in-jokes and random madness &quot;just because&quot;. You represent how far we've strayed from the oldschool ideal of a grab bag of fun, and towards codified attempts to create some live-play version of The Great American Fantasy Novel, with all attendant ego and pseudo-realism that entails.For players, I think that the memories that stick are rarely those of the DM or game designer, who want to have others admire their creation.&nbsp; Even mostly serious campaigns can afford to occasionally break the fourth wall or throw in a sly pop culture reference, and the result be depth and richness, not childishness.&nbsp; I think your dismissal of whimsy as being childish represents perhaps that you don't understand what D&amp;D gameplay organically tends towards without egos getting in the way, the original settings and the nature of the creativity behind what we tale for granted today, and in general seem to have confused running a game with writing a novel (a very common mistake).That you choose not to tap such a rich vein of fun is typical; you are the rule, not the exception, and the game's culture has lost so very much as a result.&nbsp; Some things are a lot more fun in play than in theory or as static words on a page, like 4e's combat rules play better than they read (although they'd have to, given how dry a read they are, and perhaps desperately in need of some high gygaxian whimsical genius to liven them up).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="rounser, post: 5400343, member: 1106"] BryonD, you represent the concensus view that has crept into the game's culture like a thief in the night. The founders of the game knew that D&D is fundamentally something of a lark, and that creativity came hand in hand with in-jokes and random madness "just because". You represent how far we've strayed from the oldschool ideal of a grab bag of fun, and towards codified attempts to create some live-play version of The Great American Fantasy Novel, with all attendant ego and pseudo-realism that entails. For players, I think that the memories that stick are rarely those of the DM or game designer, who want to have others admire their creation. Even mostly serious campaigns can afford to occasionally break the fourth wall or throw in a sly pop culture reference, and the result be depth and richness, not childishness. I think your dismissal of whimsy as being childish represents perhaps that you don't understand what D&D gameplay organically tends towards without egos getting in the way, the original settings and the nature of the creativity behind what we tale for granted today, and in general seem to have confused running a game with writing a novel (a very common mistake). That you choose not to tap such a rich vein of fun is typical; you are the rule, not the exception, and the game's culture has lost so very much as a result. Some things are a lot more fun in play than in theory or as static words on a page, like 4e's combat rules play better than they read (although they'd have to, given how dry a read they are, and perhaps desperately in need of some high gygaxian whimsical genius to liven them up). [/QUOTE]

Verification