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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 6296987" data-attributes="member: 3192">The irony here is that "literary side" is put in quotation marks. Does he mean there is no literary side to the game? Every side is the literary side? Something else?The falsehood is that role playing isn't engaging in the mechanics of the game, but instead about expressing a fictional persona. The latter isn't role playing, at least it never was for early D&D. Every game mechanic in early D&D was to enable better role playing by players.On the other hand, the article's content is tantamount to predetermining particular strategies players are supposed to follow when playing the game. That doesn't allow for learning through play much at all for the players.  How a player plays any game, meaning their particular discerned strategies, is supposed to be left open to the players. What we get here might be called strategy directives. To me this is a confusion by the designers about the focus games. Games are about players discerning better strategies through play. Usually game designers won't offer strategies to players about how to play. That's part of the joy of learning about the game when playing it. OTOH, if players want the strategies they use to be attributed to fictional personae (and not themselves as game players), then that is something else entirely. I guess at last I am glad these are optional. A best I feel they are attempting to jump start players into being creative by being a creative for them.</blockquote>

Verification