Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Brother MacLaren" data-source="post: 3936055" data-attributes="member: 15999">I'm not saying that the rules of Monopoly became standardized because it was &quot;perfect.&quot;&nbsp; Nor am I saying that it gained widespread popularity because it was &quot;perfect.&quot;&nbsp; I am saying that the game became standardized because it gained widespread popularity.&nbsp; Once it got big, it became standardized.&nbsp; The two go hand in hand.&nbsp; There is nothing about &quot;better&quot; here; I have no idea if the predecessors to Monopoly were &quot;better&quot; games or not, nor do I care.&nbsp; I think D&amp;D would be a stronger hobby if its rules had been standardized more or less around the time it &quot;went big&quot; -- 1978-79.TSR tried to do this.&nbsp; Gary Gygax emphasized that people playing variant rules were NOT playing &quot;true&quot; D&amp;D.&nbsp; As I understand, this wasn't so much telling people &quot;Don't use house rules,&quot; but rather telling them &quot;There is a standard version, which is the rules in these books; know that any variation you play is a variation.&quot;&nbsp; The idea was that the game would become standardized enough that players could come from all over the country to cons and know what the rules were.&nbsp; (Monopoly has tournaments with standard rules, as does Scrabble.)&nbsp; Players could go from LA to NY and pop into a local game, knowing what the rules were.&nbsp; That was the vision -- a single standardized game.&nbsp; The rules would stay the same, and the company would make its money on modules, settings, minis, and so on.&nbsp; Had this been the case, I imagine that the *hobby* would be stronger but the *business* would be weaker.What happened?&nbsp; Well, the variant rules got more and more popular, especially those that boosted PC power.&nbsp; Splatbook-type material in Dragon magazine made its way to Unearthed Arcana, loading down the system with extra rules and power creep, and TSR saw how well that sold.&nbsp; Downhill from there.I think the idea of &quot;perfecting&quot; D&amp;D is nonsensical; I just want a game that I can be happy enough to play forever under a relatively consistent set of rules, much like all the other games that I love.&nbsp; As to complexity, I think D&amp;D could stand to be much simplified.&nbsp; We'll see how much 4E goes in this direction.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Brother MacLaren, post: 3936055, member: 15999"] I'm not saying that the rules of Monopoly became standardized because it was "perfect." Nor am I saying that it gained widespread popularity because it was "perfect." I am saying that the game became standardized because it gained widespread popularity. Once it got big, it became standardized. The two go hand in hand. There is nothing about "better" here; I have no idea if the predecessors to Monopoly were "better" games or not, nor do I care. I think D&D would be a stronger hobby if its rules had been standardized more or less around the time it "went big" -- 1978-79. TSR tried to do this. Gary Gygax emphasized that people playing variant rules were NOT playing "true" D&D. As I understand, this wasn't so much telling people "Don't use house rules," but rather telling them "There is a standard version, which is the rules in these books; know that any variation you play is a variation." The idea was that the game would become standardized enough that players could come from all over the country to cons and know what the rules were. (Monopoly has tournaments with standard rules, as does Scrabble.) Players could go from LA to NY and pop into a local game, knowing what the rules were. That was the vision -- a single standardized game. The rules would stay the same, and the company would make its money on modules, settings, minis, and so on. Had this been the case, I imagine that the *hobby* would be stronger but the *business* would be weaker. What happened? Well, the variant rules got more and more popular, especially those that boosted PC power. Splatbook-type material in Dragon magazine made its way to Unearthed Arcana, loading down the system with extra rules and power creep, and TSR saw how well that sold. Downhill from there. I think the idea of "perfecting" D&D is nonsensical; I just want a game that I can be happy enough to play forever under a relatively consistent set of rules, much like all the other games that I love. As to complexity, I think D&D could stand to be much simplified. We'll see how much 4E goes in this direction. [/QUOTE]

Verification