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. This is why we're seeing such strong criticism of Lev's reviews; not because he dares to give AD&D a bad review, 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.
|
What you write points to the problem in a way that you don't seem to be aware of. You say, "He judges AD&D a failure because it wasn't the sort of game he wanted it to be." The devil is in the details adn language is really a tricky thing. Your sentence is wrong, you cannot say this about Lev. The correct sentence is, 'He judges AD&D a failure because it
isn't the sort of game he
wants it to be'. This is not a minor issue. The critics of Lev claim that one can only analyse the game from an historical perspective, by looking at it as it was then. Lev says no, one can look at an old game from the eyes of today. Distording his view in order to accomodate the view of his critics does no service to the interchange.