When did We Stop Trusting Game Designers?

[Fifth Element]

I think what he means is:

I don't think so, since the first sentence was "Wotc does not design a game". The context then indicated Mr.Gygax "designed" the game (D&D). So I think there's a misunderstanding in how the word "design" is being used in this thread.

 

[Desdichado]

Who's the "we" in the context of the OP? Some nebulous Internet group-persona?

I never "trusted" game designers, I've tinkered with my own way of doing things from the very first moment I started playing D&D, I left D&D very quickly because there were too many things about it I didn't like, and I'm not prone to childish online temper tantrums over things that I can easily change locally to get exactly what I want.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

In answer to the original post, and topic.

It was sometime in the mid-late 80s. I had grown dissatisfied with the worlds being produced, and after Forgotten Realms and the 1st Ed Oriental adventures came out I saw how you could use your own world, with the mechanics provided. Up until this time I had only ever played TSR games, D&D and Gamma World pretty much.

I discovered Champions at University in '85. A few years later, I had Champions, Danger International, Justice Inc, and others - same game system different settings. I started crossing them.

Then came 4th Ed Champions. System here. Setting there - completely independent of each other. At that point I saw the fact that the two could be decoupled and you can tweak and massage the rules to support the campaign feel you wanted in your game.

I trusted the game designer to make balanced rules I could use with game.... but I didn't trust them to be able to give me the gameworld I had in my head. And that is the big point - I have never used a published setting in my life, every game I have ever run has been a homebrew. So, no, I ignore Gary's tirade against guns, or Zeb's comments about magic items if they don't fit my world.
It's not a lack of trust, but the fact they aren't in my brain, knowing what kind of game I want to run.

 

[doppelganger]

The OP implies that Gary Gygax wrote part of the 2E DMG. Gary was long gone from TSR when 2E was released.

 

[smug]

I started in 1980 or so and remember people bitching about Gygax being pretty bad back then, which increased over the years up until the car-crash that was 1e Unearthed Arcana came out. It's true that public discussion was limited to stuff like the somewhat bitter Runequest vs AD&D arguments in the White Dwarf letters page, but I don't think that Gygax got enormous trust from the general gamer (from the young gamers, sure, but young people are perhaps more inclined to trust the people making the rules).

 

[xechnao]

To give him credit for "designing" 4E is rather far-fetched. Perhaps there is a language barrier?

Huh?
What I was saying is that EGG's D&D and Wotc D&D have been considered differently. In the first case EGG was a necessary part of the marketing value-perhaps an undesired one in the long run. In the second case D&D's own history is the major marketing value.

 

[Desdichado]

Since changing a username can be a PITA, do you think including one's name in one's sig is an acceptable compromise?

As someone who's username and real name were the same for years and years, I can tell you that there are good reasons not to have your name be quite so open too.

I started getting a little worried when vanity googles took me to ENWorld posts, for instance, that I might be having some impact my ability to get a new job.

Also, if you're the kind of person who's concerned about standing by what you say on the Internet, chances are you're not one of the people liable to post uninformed, clueless, needlessly vitriolic rants in the first place.

 

[delericho]

Yet, EGG flat out dictates your world to you and no one raises an eyebrow. Zeb Cook does the same thing and is lauded by some for maintaining the mystery of magic items.

As others have noted, this isn't quite as clear-cut as it seems. I recall even in the first Dragons (at around the time of the 1st -> 2nd Ed switch) I bought there were letters in the Forum section questioning various things being done.

At what point did game designers go from "Guys who want to make my game better" to "Those bastards who are trying to ruin MY game!"?

Does it go all the way back to the launch of 3e? When so many people simply refused to accept 3e as a "viable" version of D&D? The buyout of WOTC by Hasbro? 3.5? The end of print Dungeon/Dragon? Announcement of 4e? When did we stop trusting the game designers?

Part of it came when I realised that, given the time and resources, I could probably put together a game that was at least as good (or, at least, the arrogance to believe that that is the case). Part of it came with the internet, where it became possible to instantly tap into a group of minds who would quickly analyse and dissect anything and everything that was written to find the flaws, and also the range of ideas and opinions to render every design simultaneously the best idea ever and the worst thing imaginable.

And, yes, a lot of it has to do with the purchase of WotC by Hasbro, and the gradual increase in corporate influence on the game. And the end of Dragon and Dungeon. And that 'Cloudwatching' blog entry, and the nature of the 4e development which seemed (accurately or otherwise) a whole lot more closed and elitist than the 3e development did.

So, I put it to you, when did "game designer" become synonymous with "something icky I scraped off my shoe"?

Never. While there is a lot I don't like about how the development and rollout of 4e was handled, and while there is a lot I don't like about 4e itself, and while there are even certain designers I don't really rate, the group as a whole still do produce an awful lot of good material that I couldn't produce myself (a large amount of which takes the form of pre-generated adventures these days), and they do it for pay that I wouldn't accept, and while taking flak from all sides for their work. I have to respect them for that.

 

[xechnao]

I don't think so, since the first sentence was "Wotc does not design a game". The context then indicated Mr.Gygax "designed" the game (D&D). So I think there's a misunderstanding in how the word "design" is being used in this thread.

It is the distinction among "design a game" and "design the game" or "design a new version of the game". In the first case you are regarded as a game designer, in the second case as the responsible of the status of support of something already valueable.

 

[PaulofCthulhu]

Since changing a username can be a PITA, do you think including one's name in one's sig is an acceptable compromise?

It's still you, either way. It's all a matter of personal choice. Lots of people use pseudonyms for various reasons (fun or work-related, etc.) but as people have said here, anonymity + instant posting + audience can be too tempting for a very small percentage.

In the end it's the content of your posts that matters.