NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9713089" data-attributes="member: 18">I mean, it often is, both on a macro and micro level, with RPGs.Like, the way D&D is played now is absolutely "playing it wrong" compared to the approach D&D was designed for, up to and including 1E. But "playing it wrong" was more fun for more people so it became the dominant mode of play (in this case essentially a mode of play initially inspired by the Dragonlance adventure series).Or with Vampire: The Masquerade, an awful lot of people, like, maybe even a plurality (I hesitate to suggest a majority) played it was "Trenchcoats and katanas" or "Superheroes with fangs", i.e. more like an episode of Highlander (the TV show) or Forever Knight or Buffy/Angel or a similar action-drama with good supernatural beings biffing bad ones, and that was absolutely NOT one of the listed suggestions of ways to play VtM (though it wasn't a million miles from "Mean streets", which is one of the three approaches they suggest, it's just a lot less cynical). 2E VtM did seem to roll with this, eventually, as even did 2E Mage (c.f. "Tales of Dark Adventure", which basically fully allows for magically flying a motorbike through a stained-glass window whilst hosing down Terminator-Xes with your dual-wielded SMGs whilst guitars wail in the background!). Then Revised struck back with a vengeance, actually changing the rules and setting details to try and stop "Badwrongfun" of this kind (notably most of the original VtM people had left by then, including Rein*Hagen).And on a micro level, with individual characters, it can often be more fun to play something weird and which might not be mechanically optimal (though it may still be optimized - a different thing to optimal) nor a "standard concept" or "standard trope" or w/e, but which is actually a lot of fun. Hell sometimes the rules are sufficiently whack that what is optimal or even just functional is not what the game says it is (this was much more common in the 1990s, to be fair).But as [USER=7044197]@RenleyRenfield[/USER] says, if you are intentionally "playing it wrong", on a macro or micro level and NOT having fun, then you do need to ask the valid question: is this merely because of my own choices to not follow suggested approaches? Countless games have been condemned by people for not being things that they never said they were, for not being things they weren't designed to be. That said, if a game claims to be X, and isn't, it's fair to critique it for that.</blockquote>

Verification