Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wik" data-source="post: 5959174" data-attributes="member: 40177">I love this thread.&nbsp; 2e did a lot of stuff wrong, and it did a lot of stuff right.&nbsp; I have a lot of fond memories playing the game, and while I probably wouldn't go back to it, I think it does sometimes get the short end of the stick.I think the biggest problem the game had is its schizophrenia regarding narrative - namely, the designers had come to the conclusion that the game had somehow moved beyond dungeon-exploration roots.&nbsp; It often would say that dungeon exploration was okay, but that eventually, players would want to move beyond the dungeon doors and do some &quot;serious role-playing&quot;.The game seemed to feel it was all about interactive storytelling, to the detriment of other details.&nbsp; Or, as one poster put it above, that the mechanics didn't mesh with the narrative.&nbsp; What this lead to were game designers designing stories that were interesting... but that the players couldn't interact with in any interesting way (ie, railroads).&nbsp; NPCs that were exceptions to the rule, so that players would say &quot;Why can't *I* be a wizard with armour, if he can be?&quot;.&nbsp; And settings where the players were expected to be second fiddle to characters from novels (and feel thankful for the privilege!). It's no surprise that 2e was a product of the 90s.&nbsp; Many of us recall the &quot;multimedia&quot; craze of games that were on the market at the time - interactive movies that were, plainly, absolutely no fun.&nbsp; For awhile, everything was multimedia... and then the bubble burst when it was realized that people weren't going to pay for little more than a good story - they had movies and books for that.&nbsp; That was the big problem with 2e.&nbsp; It was trying to sell people a story, but not giving them the tools to interact with it.&nbsp; Compare that to later editions, where the story is less stressed, and the players are given much more in the way of interacting with the story (and GMs are not outright encouraged to manipulate players as they were in the 2e books).&nbsp; That was the big 2e problem, beyond anything to do with mechanics.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wik, post: 5959174, member: 40177"] I love this thread. 2e did a lot of stuff wrong, and it did a lot of stuff right. I have a lot of fond memories playing the game, and while I probably wouldn't go back to it, I think it does sometimes get the short end of the stick. I think the biggest problem the game had is its schizophrenia regarding narrative - namely, the designers had come to the conclusion that the game had somehow moved beyond dungeon-exploration roots. It often would say that dungeon exploration was okay, but that eventually, players would want to move beyond the dungeon doors and do some "serious role-playing". The game seemed to feel it was all about interactive storytelling, to the detriment of other details. Or, as one poster put it above, that the mechanics didn't mesh with the narrative. What this lead to were game designers designing stories that were interesting... but that the players couldn't interact with in any interesting way (ie, railroads). NPCs that were exceptions to the rule, so that players would say "Why can't *I* be a wizard with armour, if he can be?". And settings where the players were expected to be second fiddle to characters from novels (and feel thankful for the privilege!). It's no surprise that 2e was a product of the 90s. Many of us recall the "multimedia" craze of games that were on the market at the time - interactive movies that were, plainly, absolutely no fun. For awhile, everything was multimedia... and then the bubble burst when it was realized that people weren't going to pay for little more than a good story - they had movies and books for that. That was the big problem with 2e. It was trying to sell people a story, but not giving them the tools to interact with it. Compare that to later editions, where the story is less stressed, and the players are given much more in the way of interacting with the story (and GMs are not outright encouraged to manipulate players as they were in the 2e books). That was the big 2e problem, beyond anything to do with mechanics. [/QUOTE]

Verification