robotnik2004 (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
robotnik2004) wrote2003-01-25 01:00 pm
robotnik2004) wrote2003-01-25 01:00 pm
Entry tags:
Off the Wagon
I've gone a couple of weeks without posting about RPGs, so I guess I can fall off the wagon now. Hell, I'm not even going to use LJ-cuts to spare the fainthearted. Watch me choke up your Friends pages with my geekiness! Moo ha ha ha haaa!
First, the following salvo from Ron Edwards, author of Sorcerer and Grand Moff Tarkin of the jargon-spouting indie gamers over at The Forge.
Why does role-playing culture not talk about its primary, defining activity? Oh, we talk about anticipating the experience, about buying and owning the games, and about playing them in the abstract, but rarely, if ever, about what we do while actually playing them—their content that we create. The literal act of role-playing is not a part of gamer culture, as we mainly discuss its trappings (the book, the system, industry gossip) rather than "what happened" during play.
Even when we do discuss the play itself, more often that not, the content is incoherent: "My guy did this, my guy did that," deep inhale, "and then he did this." Such talk may even turn into a litany of die rolls, punctuated by enthusiasm for what is, after all, a predictable outcome. ("And then, I got a 20!") If role-playing really were what it sounds like when described, it would be a worthless and pathetic thing.
This situation should change, if not in the overall culture, then at least in the experience of individuals. Role-playing is not perversion, we are not weird or fringe because we enjoy it, and frankly we should start behaving accordingly.
Comments, queries, cheers, jeers?
First, the following salvo from Ron Edwards, author of Sorcerer and Grand Moff Tarkin of the jargon-spouting indie gamers over at The Forge.
Why does role-playing culture not talk about its primary, defining activity? Oh, we talk about anticipating the experience, about buying and owning the games, and about playing them in the abstract, but rarely, if ever, about what we do while actually playing them—their content that we create. The literal act of role-playing is not a part of gamer culture, as we mainly discuss its trappings (the book, the system, industry gossip) rather than "what happened" during play.
Even when we do discuss the play itself, more often that not, the content is incoherent: "My guy did this, my guy did that," deep inhale, "and then he did this." Such talk may even turn into a litany of die rolls, punctuated by enthusiasm for what is, after all, a predictable outcome. ("And then, I got a 20!") If role-playing really were what it sounds like when described, it would be a worthless and pathetic thing.
This situation should change, if not in the overall culture, then at least in the experience of individuals. Role-playing is not perversion, we are not weird or fringe because we enjoy it, and frankly we should start behaving accordingly.
Comments, queries, cheers, jeers?
no subject
That being said, having watched the Teddie Roosevelt doc last night has made me want to run somekind of turn of the century rootin' tootin' epic... :)