Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ExploderWizard" data-source="post: 4589632" data-attributes="member: 66434">The examples provided are an attempt to prove what exactly? The FR boxed set from 1E shows that &quot;official&quot; worlds can and do have the possibility for firearms. Perhaps Gary was not a fan of using this kind of tecnnology at the time the article was written but that doesn't mean DM's didn't use the stuff anyway, or if they did that it meant that they didn't trust Gary as a game designer.&nbsp;The reasoning for the treatment of magical items in the quoted 2E text is simply the feeling that the authors of 2E wanted for thier magic system. This is strictly a guideline for default assumptions and may be changed, just as some players changed 3E back to a similar style when it wasn't the default assumption.&nbsp;I don't see anything here that has to do with trust or a lack thereof. An opinion on a given subject is just that. &quot;Game designer&quot;&nbsp; hasn't become an icky term for me at least. Perhaps the perception of greater respect for designers in the past comes from the fact that real time discussion of thier opinions was far less common in the pre-internet era. &nbsp;If Mike had written either of these things back in the 80's I don't think there would be much difference, and if Zeb wrote that piece and posted it somewhere like ENWorld then you would see a lot of dicussion about it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ExploderWizard, post: 4589632, member: 66434"] The examples provided are an attempt to prove what exactly? The FR boxed set from 1E shows that "official" worlds can and do have the possibility for firearms. Perhaps Gary was not a fan of using this kind of tecnnology at the time the article was written but that doesn't mean DM's didn't use the stuff anyway, or if they did that it meant that they didn't trust Gary as a game designer. The reasoning for the treatment of magical items in the quoted 2E text is simply the feeling that the authors of 2E wanted for thier magic system. This is strictly a guideline for default assumptions and may be changed, just as some players changed 3E back to a similar style when it wasn't the default assumption. I don't see anything here that has to do with trust or a lack thereof. An opinion on a given subject is just that. "Game designer" hasn't become an icky term for me at least. Perhaps the perception of greater respect for designers in the past comes from the fact that real time discussion of thier opinions was far less common in the pre-internet era. If Mike had written either of these things back in the 80's I don't think there would be much difference, and if Zeb wrote that piece and posted it somewhere like ENWorld then you would see a lot of dicussion about it. [/QUOTE]

Verification