[freeroleplay] Re: Essay on History of RPG
- From: "Samuel Penn" <sam@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: freeroleplay@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2004 13:17:48 -0000 (GMT)
Ricardo Gladwell said:
> Samuel Penn wrote:
> > It was a typo - you had D[icemaster] instead of [Dicemaster].
> > It's fixed now :-)
>
> Ta :)
>
> > Good article though. Disagree strongly with some of it, but that
> > comes down to personal preference, so is to be expected.
>
> I'm glad its excited such interest. I'd like to try and get some more
> people to contribute articles and content. I'd really be interested to
> start a discussion of the article particularly if it aids in making the
> essay more neutral and unbiased. For example, what do you disagree with?
Mostly his praises of some of the older games, such as RQ or
Cthulhu, two games I've never been particularly fond of. After
hearing so much about the wonders of RQ/Glorantha, it was a big
letdown to discover that I didn't think it was anywhere near as
interesting as settings like Greyhawk or Middle Earth.
But I didn't come upon these games until the mid 90's, and my
first sightings of Greyhawk/Realms/Ice's Middle Earth were in
the late 80's. They may have been good in the 70's (my first
brush with gaming was in '83, when I wrote a game based on
the Dr Who 20th Anniversary episode inspired, I think, by
"Starship Traveller"), but I really don't think either the
settings (Glorantha) or the systems (BRP) have withstood the
test of time at all well.
Of course, most of the gamers I know seem to love the BRP,
so I end up playing these games far more than I'd like.
Of course, some of the games he rates highly, such as StarWars
and Ars Magica, I agree with fully.
Now, let's see how many people disagree with me :-)
btw, I don't think there's any problem with it being biased.
I think it's a really good article as it stands, I just
reserve the right to disagree with bits of it! A history by
commitee would be dreadfully boring.
--
Be seeing you,
Sam.
Other related posts:
