Re: FW: Re: RQ2, RQ3 and Lessons to be Learnt

From: Guy_Robinson.sbd-e@rx.xerox.com
Date: Fri 14 Jan 1994 - 10:49:32 EET


Wayne Shaw writes:

[about gaming "conservatism"]

>Not necessarily the same thing; many people find it easier to change
>games altogether than to tolerate changes IN the system they're familiar
>with. The song I hear on RQ3 just sounds a week bit too similar to the
>one I here from AD&D1 fans or pre-Fourth Edition Champions people.

If there is a crime which involves stressing role playing over commericial
obedience then a lot of RQ2 fans are guilty. If someone publishes a new
revision of a role playing game I think about it before I buy it. I
primarily think about it from a role playing angle.

AD&D2 and Fourth Edition Champions are not good examples because they did
not change the whole nature of the game from a role playing angle. Both
these games come largely without background.

Failure to buy a game is not a sin on the part of the person who does not
make the purchase, but an act of discretion for would-be buyer and some
thing to learn from for the would-be vendor.

Besides you are discussing this with 2 UK gamers. We are not the people
singing the song you are hearing in America.

Regards

        -- Guy Robinson --


0,,


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.7 : Sat 05 Jul 2003 - 20:31:16 EEST