Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 7429079" data-attributes="member: 42582">My conjecture as to how common this sort of player is is based on a mix of observation (circa 20 years out of date now - I'm thinking of back when I use to hang out with the University RPG club) plus trying to make sense of posts I see on these boards.For me, it's similar to people I knew (also back in those Uni days) who really seemed to want to play 500, but showed no interest in actually learning how to bid well, how to follow the play, etc.Whether it's a virtue of a game to be amenable to such players is something I'll leave for others to debate - but I do think that D&amp;D suits them in a way that some other systems don't (just as 500 allows a competent partner to carry them, whereas in bridge, if they won the bidding and so had to play the hand, they'd just be hosed).Whether other styles of RPGing would suit them is also a question I don't have an answer for - I think it's possible, but I'm not sure a relatively intricate system like FATE or even 4e is where I'd go to for that.I think the contrast (for me, at least - I can't speak for [MENTION=48965]Imaro[/MENTION]) is not between &quot;setting/GM-driven&quot; and &quot;no myth&quot;, but the extent to which a player has to engage the system with any degree of sophistication. A pretty light system (eg Prince Valiant, or something even stripped back from that; or HeroQuest revised using only simple contest resolution) might well be fine for that sort of player, especially one-on-one or in a small group of friends.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 7429079, member: 42582"] My conjecture as to how common this sort of player is is based on a mix of observation (circa 20 years out of date now - I'm thinking of back when I use to hang out with the University RPG club) plus trying to make sense of posts I see on these boards. For me, it's similar to people I knew (also back in those Uni days) who really seemed to want to play 500, but showed no interest in actually learning how to bid well, how to follow the play, etc. Whether it's a virtue of a game to be amenable to such players is something I'll leave for others to debate - but I do think that D&D suits them in a way that some other systems don't (just as 500 allows a competent partner to carry them, whereas in bridge, if they won the bidding and so had to play the hand, they'd just be hosed). Whether other styles of RPGing would suit them is also a question I don't have an answer for - I think it's possible, but I'm not sure a relatively intricate system like FATE or even 4e is where I'd go to for that. I think the contrast (for me, at least - I can't speak for [MENTION=48965]Imaro[/MENTION]) is not between "setting/GM-driven" and "no myth", but the extent to which a player has to engage the system with any degree of sophistication. A pretty light system (eg Prince Valiant, or something even stripped back from that; or HeroQuest revised using only simple contest resolution) might well be fine for that sort of player, especially one-on-one or in a small group of friends. [/QUOTE]

Verification