tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post1074992935676042641..comments2024-03-28T00:41:13.514-07:00Comments on B/X BLACKRAZOR: On Role-Playing (Part 5 of 11)JBhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03263662621289630246noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-30836986496541050562013-07-14T08:11:12.179-07:002013-07-14T08:11:12.179-07:00Count me amongst those that don't understand t...Count me amongst those that don't understand the heat of the earliest comments, either. Odd stuff - and I say this coming as a player of GURPS, who uses the tactical mini combat rules!<br /><br />I think that Alignment in D&D gets short shrift today because, as you said, when it was introduced people didn't explicitly know what was meant by role-playing. Now, many of them do - or they have friends to tell them what it means (don't get me started on how bad that can be) - and alignment feels less like a guiding attribute than it does a straight-jacket to them.<br /><br />I am a perfectly comfortable role-player. I don't need an abstract, potentially rigid construct to tell me how to feel when I inhabit the skin of an imaginary character. But, even today, some people do need that sort of guidance regardless of what system they're playing. <br /><br />"It’s a game…a game in which survival (or rather, lack thereof) is the only real measure of whether or not you, as a player, have 'lost.'"<br /><br />This particular sentence leaves me scratching my head a bit. I'm pretty sure that for me, living or dying have very little to do with my sense of losing when playing an RPG. Instead, the gauge is how good a story emerged from our character choices and random dice, and was a good time had by all.Jason Packerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02240705069654358715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-82623040690468781602013-07-13T14:23:46.866-07:002013-07-13T14:23:46.866-07:00This is a great blog post! Not sure why you'r...This is a great blog post! Not sure why you're getting flack for it. I don't see any edition warring going on. Sure, you have a particular bias - we all do. That doesn't detract from your investigation.<br /><br />The idea that real roleplaying evolved as an accidental byproduct of individual fantasy wargaming is an intriguing one. Without knowing the whole story or being a fly on the wall at those inaugural sessions, I'm inclined to agree with you. Fascinating stuff!<br /><br />VS<br />Venger Satanishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04447932700800930510noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-43600142860953802362013-07-13T06:17:57.213-07:002013-07-13T06:17:57.213-07:00"The game designer, that’s who."
Big wh...<i>"The game designer, that’s who."</i><br /><br />Big whup.<br /><br />Okay, you have clearly drunk the Kool-Aid.<br /><br />Where this entire argument breaks down is at the place where players, generally, let's say 99%, aren't writers; they are playwrites, they have never put together a novel, they aren't literary critics or devotees of literary deconstruction.<br /><br />As a result, the 'characterizations' they create - and the characterizations that Moldvay advances - are bland, simplistic and <i>repeated over and over again</i> from the great playbook of Television. They're dull as dishwater, and they're <i>exhausting</i>. This is what makes them such good substance for satire, for jokes, for mocking and insults. Because they are SHIT. And unless you're the simple minded fool television writers work down to, after a few years in the game, most would rather people just quit playing the crappy motivation-driven clichés and would just play the damn game.<br /><br />But, as I say JB, you have CLEARLY downed the Kool-Aid, and in your drugged, near-to-death state, you can't see all this. Alexis Smolenskhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10539170107563075967noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-51057048209581595232013-07-13T01:48:43.854-07:002013-07-13T01:48:43.854-07:00Your comparison of "space devoted to alignmen...Your comparison of "space devoted to alignment description vs. rest of the rules" is somewhat off. I suppose since you hate 2e you missed on the excellent job it does at explaining alignments. And obviously relative measures only tell a part of the story; absolute measures (i.e. how much REALLY you need to tell about alignments) do play a role. The other games offer larger bestiaries, more race and class options, bigger spell lists, bigger equipment lists etc. Mentzer devotes the same space that Moldvay does at describing alignments, yet the game is bigger, does it mean that its description is less valid? Sorry, but however you slice it, your comparison doesn't seem to make much sense.Antoniohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17258180992723371727noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4143435314932633148.post-38191738634252986072013-07-13T01:39:53.250-07:002013-07-13T01:39:53.250-07:00Again my question: what playing according to align...Again my question: what playing according to alignment (ALL versions of D&D have alignments) has to do with "moving miniature figures, throwing D20s, and maneuvering to avoid “attacks of opportunity.”" ? That's quite a rather cheap shot at 3e and later. But I might (I do, actually) use minis and maps with B/X AND play according to alignment, so by translation, I suppose I am doing something wrong? I hate to say this, I usually enjoy your posts, but more than analyses, they look like carefully worded expressions of your bias. I am no lover (nor play) 3e, 4e etc. but this lack of objectivity is really irking.Antoniohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17258180992723371727noreply@blogger.com