>From: "L.Castellucci" <lightcastle_at_...>
>
>As Jane says, I think a lot of these so-called "tricky situations" come
>down
>to this split in how people want to use the system.
I'd agree. The problem with this discussion is that it's political. Brought to a head by the announcement of the new edition. Our side says, "Keep the system the way it is, because it supports how we want to play." And the other side is saying, "We've always had trouble with HQ as it is, so please do something with the new system to make it work better for us." And it's really less about the play styles that the rules support, but about havnig the system attract more players of the sort you need for your game. Or, at least, would prefer to see in your game.
You can claim your side to be the conciliatory side, saying you want to make the game more ecumenical, and open to all. But that's like saying that allowing prayer in school is fine, because the other side should just not get offended. It's a belief born of not seeing things from the other side's perspective.
More importantly, we're not going to convince the other side by simply explaining why it works for us, or why it does not. I think that both sides understand the other side enough already. Any more talk about it amounts to trying to convert people, and I think that's about as difficult as converting people from one religion to another.
So I think that there's not much use in it. I've certainly been guilty of this sort of thing in the past. So who am I to say that folks should think about ceasing with the rhetoric. But I just wanted to put my perspective out there for whatever it's worth.
Mike
Powered by hypermail