Quote:
Originally Posted by Rob Doupe
But at the time TSR published the Monster Manual, dungeon bashing was not a subset of roleplaying - it was the default style for the great majority of players. It's the other styles that were subsets, and small ones at that.
|
Rob, set theory doesn't work like that, and some of the subsets weren't so small.
[Roleplaying 1978 [D&D] [Empire of the Petal Throne] [Bunnies & Burrows] [En Garde!] [C&S] [Traveller] [Superhero 2044]] etc
(Venn diagrams excluded for the purpose of clarity)
Quote:
|
but because he refuses to recognize that the style of play he prefers was not supported by TSR's D&D material on purpose, not because of incompetence. He judges AD&D a failure because it wasn't the sort of game he wanted it to be. As others have noted, that's poor criticism.
|
I have already responded to this by saying that if any game concentrates exclusively on any single of mode of play (game challenge, simulation models, narrative development) I will be considered a truncuated form of roleplaying (and that's before considering the consistency and clarity etc of the rules) at best. Whether that is intentional on the part of the designers or not doesn't make one ioata of difference. It is still a truncuated roleplaying system.
And no, I'm not changing my rating method simply because others may not like the results.