Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Downtime
I wonder how odd it is to be writing about role playing games (on an admittedly low level of regularity), when I haven't played a game in over six months, and haven't played regularly in years. I also wonder how much interest I really have in playing anymore, when the hobby has changed as much as it has. On a deeper level, how much of my own attitudes toward the current trends come from nostalgia for something lost rather than as a critique of what is?
Despite the growing Traditional Gaming Movement, I don't see the hobby having much growth. Most of the new products that spring up in support of refurbished old game products still carry the weight of postmodern computer gaming identity. That is, the modules are designed with the writer's AWESOME STORY in mind rather than playability, and the smell of over-the-top 'dungeon-punk' (I wish I had coined that phrase) still lingers on those virtual pdf pages. Small-press D20 books are on the wane, small-press old-school books are on the rise (at least in the print-on-demand internet markets), but nothing seems to be reaching out to new players. It's all about sustaining what current players want to play. And with simulations of Original D&D and First Edition AD&D, Second Edition is grossly underrepresented.
I know at least one person rejecting 'retro-clone,' the term that has been circulating among the adherents, as he wonders why we are referring to traditional gaming as such, or as 'old-school' style, when very little actual role playing occurs in this new style. The shift, it seems, from playing the part of a type in favor of playing the part of an individual, is at the core of this difference of philosophy in games. Based on what I have seen and experienced with contemporary art and literature, not to mention popular media, I agree with the objections to contemporary gaming. It is more of a challenge to play the part of The Fighter than to play the part of Giaccomo Fenderharp, Battlesinger and Bladespinner. I don't even know what the hell I just said, but I'm sure someone will think they can make that idea awesome with a bit of personalization.
This is a lot of the reason I don't play much anymore. I can't find anyone that shares this philosophy of gaming. Individuals are incredibly unreliable, while archetypes are as dependable as Old Faithful. Deep in the pits of the Underdark, surrounded by beasts that have not seen the light of day for centuries, I cannot rely on Giaccomo Fenderharp for combat support. I honestly have no idea what he can do, and I can't trust how necessary I am to him, since anything I can do, he can do better. I would rather trust the longsword of Robert the Fighter, whose survival depends on me as much as mine depends on him.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment