A point I would like to make was that it was never the intention, either in my original post or in the articles I referred to, to dictate how anyone should run their individual game.
This is a theoretical argument about gaming, and in particular the relative benefits and disadvantages of detail and dice. I felt John in his articles stated this very clearly, but then went on to expound the virtues of more detail and less dice. I hoped to maintain that approach, but wanted to balance it by talking about less detail and more dice.
Like all the rest of you I, personally, am going to strike a balance.
Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater, but let's ensure we _do_ throw out the bathwater. Who are we? The people in this discussion. What does it matter what we decide? Well first of all, to quote, it's good to think, secondly I think these discussions are valueable to help us find our own game balance, thirdly there is a new game in production.
I'm sure I'm no different to anyone else on this digest in my hope that the game and company will succeed. Equally like most of us here I am not in any way directly advising Issaries. What I (we) are doing is simply participating in the democratic process of persuasion. What we are trying to persuade Issaries to do is to listen to all the varying approaches to RPGs and Glorantha. Discussions like these on the digest I believe provide invalueable market research.
Fortunately we are a sizeable, sophisticated, hopefully represenative, certainly vocal, market sample. Unfortunately we are likely to buy the Issaries products whatever they're like. I reckon that for Issaries to make a successful commercial venture they are going to have to sell about 10 times more copies of the product than there are digest readers in the first year or so. That's a lot of new customers to find.
So it's worth continuing with this debate. And remember: no-one is being told what to do with their game.
Cheers
Richard
Richard Develyn (http://www.skaro.demon.co.uk)
Powered by hypermail