|
|
Post by mormonyoyoman on Apr 18, 2018 14:57:09 GMT -5
Prophets never name themselves thus. I remain the messenger for what Arneson created. Call it "Unpacking his design theory and systems organization" if you wish. I am merely relaying what I witnessed and experienced AND as prodded on by the nagging reflection (starting about 2006) that systemic attitudes amongst gamers in this hobby-cum-industry had become so disjointed/diffuse from what we had experienced during the play-tests and early days; that people could no longer fathom even the simplest of concepts that the MMSA and the LGTSA were furthering then. I do not see this as prophetic but as a part of that history, a retelling and reaffirmation of what Arneson promoted, albeit in more concrete scientific and design philosophy measures. It is also an assessment point from my 45 years in design. What seems prophetic is in fact actually hidden in plain view if one only takes the time to look at it for what it is. I do think you play down your historical contribution: correcting errors and providing previously-obscured facts are the meat of history. Besides, prophets do name themselves thus: Isaiah, the writer of Lamentations, Jeremiah, etc. Shucks, Malachi even clarifies some of the duties of a prophet. So don't sell yourself short. |
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Apr 18, 2018 15:58:40 GMT -5
SO i didn't go easy on anyone while defining a new system (NEW) with systems language in DATG and look what it got me. How many hats do you guys wear when it is convenient to do so...? I am assuming that your objective was to clearly and comprehensively present your thesis to as wide an audience as possible. My objective is to enjoy my game. If one other person enjoys it, that is enough. I'm not trying to present my game to as wide an audience as possible. Different objectives dictate different methodologies. As I previously noted, it was presented as a proof to those who were open-mided enough to acknowledge such. There were no expectations of any kind beyond that. However, I did not foresee outright dismissal based upon political entrenchment and sublime ignorance; this would not have happened BiTD, i would have instead been accorded a modicum of respect via benefit of the doubt as the wargames hobbyists gathered round to discuss its merits. IF there is one thing I have confirmed because of this (and long had I suspected as much) is that current people making up the RPG hobby ARE NOT equatable to the original cadre of those who initially formed it. Their depth regarding design has become so rigid, their philosophy so circular--and all due to repeated and generational modeling--that not only has this created a new establishment, but one even more distracted and insular than the one TSR had to fight in order to advance against the grain 1974 onward. |
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Apr 18, 2018 16:00:15 GMT -5
Prophets never name themselves thus. I remain the messenger for what Arneson created. Call it "Unpacking his design theory and systems organization" if you wish. I am merely relaying what I witnessed and experienced AND as prodded on by the nagging reflection (starting about 2006) that systemic attitudes amongst gamers in this hobby-cum-industry had become so disjointed/diffuse from what we had experienced during the play-tests and early days; that people could no longer fathom even the simplest of concepts that the MMSA and the LGTSA were furthering then. I do not see this as prophetic but as a part of that history, a retelling and reaffirmation of what Arneson promoted, albeit in more concrete scientific and design philosophy measures. It is also an assessment point from my 45 years in design. What seems prophetic is in fact actually hidden in plain view if one only takes the time to look at it for what it is. I do think you play down your historical contribution: correcting errors and providing previously-obscured facts are the meat of history. Besides, prophets do name themselves thus: Isaiah, the writer of Lamentations, Jeremiah, etc. Shucks, Malachi even clarifies some of the duties of a prophet. So don't sell yourself short. Not selling myself short, just not selling the prophet angle. |
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Apr 18, 2018 16:12:45 GMT -5
relaying what I witnessed and experienced AND as prodded on by the nagging reflection (starting about 2006) that systemic attitudes amongst gamers in this hobby-cum-industry had become so disjointed/diffuse from what we had experienced during the play-tests and early days; How to put the emphasis back on the conceptual instead of the mechanical, and how to break the closed system open again? Well, that's the point in identifying that a shift occurred; but will people care even f this is realized? As I have noted elsewhere and many times, it's ambivalence fed by an expedient entertainment model and it is late in the generational game (the leaders of companies are people previously weaned on the closed market model). The wargames hobby created real designers at a greater ratio compared to the numbers back then than what is being created from the vast people pool available from RPGers today. The mindsets have become distracted, the imports have changed, and much of this has to do with the mass consumerism model. How does one break back to a start that people, when presented with the facts about it, care not to recognize because they are comfortably numb? Kinda like trying to teach people to think about thinking when they have been taught not to think and just to consume, the low as opposed to the high road, etc. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2018 17:25:33 GMT -5
It's not just your imagination, and it's not just in the RPG/wargame world. My Old Testament professor at seminary commented that over the last 20 years or so he's had to begin his curriculum by teaching his students how to read different forms of literature; more and more students are exposed only to reading in "instruction manual" mode and no longer are able to cope with the differences between instructional reading, poetry, historical narrative, liturgy, folklore, etc.
And of course this is made even more difficult because what we are actually saying is that the old games really were objectively better than new ones, and all the people who have spent hundreds of dollars on massive collections of tomes aren't really going to want to hear that. For that matter, people don't like to be shown that their choices were wrong in general.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2018 17:26:58 GMT -5
However, I did not foresee outright dismissal based upon political entrenchment and sublime ignorance; Would "sublime ignorance" include "Waa! Big words are HARD!" ? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2018 17:29:38 GMT -5
No, I don't think big words are hard, but I read DATG three times carefully to dig out what was in there. Most people are lazy and don't want to work that hard, and anybody with any prejudice against this work, for any reason whatsoever, will find the use of difficult vocabulary as a convenient rationalization for disregarding the information.
|
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Apr 20, 2018 3:58:08 GMT -5
However, I did not foresee outright dismissal based upon political entrenchment and sublime ignorance; Would "sublime ignorance" include "Waa! Big words are HARD!" ? If one ignores history then they have settled upon delusion, instead. Truth never manifests through delusion. |
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Apr 20, 2018 3:59:04 GMT -5
No, I don't think big words are hard, but I read DATG three times carefully to dig out what was in there. Most people are lazy and don't want to work that hard, and anybody with any prejudice against this work, for any reason whatsoever, will find the use of difficult vocabulary as a convenient rationalization for disregarding the information. The "Mythification" continues, so to speak. |
|
|
|
Post by robkuntz on Apr 20, 2018 4:00:21 GMT -5
It's not just your imagination, and it's not just in the RPG/wargame world. My Old Testament professor at seminary commented that over the last 20 years or so he's had to begin his curriculum by teaching his students how to read different forms of literature; more and more students are exposed only to reading in "instruction manual" mode and no longer are able to cope with the differences between instructional reading, poetry, historical narrative, liturgy, folklore, etc. And of course this is made even more difficult because what we are actually saying is that the old games really were objectively better than new ones, and all the people who have spent hundreds of dollars on massive collections of tomes aren't really going to want to hear that. For that matter, people don't like to be shown that their choices were wrong in general. Yeah. I already knew this, but what's a designer to do who takes his work seriously? Find more fertile pastures... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2018 12:11:50 GMT -5
I honestly don't know. I haven't really thought about it much till the past couple of years, but on reflection seeing the direction this hobby went, as opposed to how it could have gone, is enough to make me weep.
|
|
