Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ariosto" data-source="post: 4704906" data-attributes="member: 80487">As I am reading through this thread, it seems to me that a common underlying difficulty is this:There are long-established conventions by which we can meaningfully distinguish games from other things; role-playing games from other games; and Dungeons &amp; Dragons from other role-playing games.Probably THE fundamental cause of &quot;edition wars&quot; is a definition of &quot;edition&quot; to suit the purposes of a marketing department. Rhetorically, it begs the question of whether &quot;nth edition&quot; of X is in fact X by any more objective criteria. Practically, the latest thing is offered as a replacement for something previously known as X.That was not exactly the case 30 years ago, when the &quot;Original Collectors Edition&quot; of D&amp;D remained in print alongside Advanced D&amp;D -- and designer Gary Gygax made a point of asserting that they were different games.Had 3E remained WotC's &quot;D&amp;D&quot; and 4E been given some other name (and you can push that &quot;what if&quot; back to any previous step), some issues would be truly moot. I think that many others would be easier to handle as well.As matters stand, there are interests commercial and emotional in defining some terms -- especially &quot;prestigious&quot; ones -- in certain ways. Those run the gamut from the particular &quot;D&amp;D&quot; right up to the generic &quot;game.&quot;That warping of language can make it very difficult to discuss things in a more objective context. Terms have been made effectively synonymous with &quot;right&quot; and &quot;wrong,&quot; in artfully convoluted ways.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ariosto, post: 4704906, member: 80487"] As I am reading through this thread, it seems to me that a common underlying difficulty is this: There are long-established conventions by which we can meaningfully distinguish games from other things; role-playing games from other games; and Dungeons & Dragons from other role-playing games. Probably THE fundamental cause of "edition wars" is a definition of "edition" to suit the purposes of a marketing department. Rhetorically, it begs the question of whether "[i]n[/i]th edition" of X is in fact X by any more objective criteria. Practically, the latest thing is offered as a replacement for something previously known as X. That was not exactly the case 30 years ago, when the "Original Collectors Edition" of D&D remained in print alongside Advanced D&D -- and designer Gary Gygax made a point of asserting that they were [i]different[/i] games. Had 3E remained WotC's "D&D" and 4E been given some other name (and you can push that "what if" back to any previous step), some issues would be truly moot. I think that many others would be easier to handle as well. As matters stand, there are interests commercial and emotional in defining some terms -- especially "prestigious" ones -- in certain ways. Those run the gamut from the particular "D&D" right up to the generic "game." That warping of language can make it very difficult to discuss things in a more objective context. Terms have been made effectively synonymous with "right" and "wrong," in artfully convoluted ways. [/QUOTE]

Verification