Quote from: SeanchaiWhy does it have to be done to me?

I mis-phrased that.  When was the last time you saw this happen?

!i!

Quote from: J ArcaneYes.  Me.  I don't believe in intentionally limiting one's own experiences, and I never will.  Whether it's games, or movies, or food, or any number of other things, I think it's a fundamentally broken behavior to ignore the wealth of diversity this world has to offer out of sheer laziness or mindless conservatism.

And I say any group successfully playing D&D and nothing but every week for a decade or two is doing something right.  And I bet you their game won't look too much like any published D&D rulebook.  Arduin and Synnibarr both started as one dude's idiosyncratic house rules.

Quote from: J ArcaneYes.  Me.  I don't believe in intentionally limiting one's own experiences, and I never will.  Whether it's games, or movies, or food, or any number of other things, I think it's a fundamentally broken behavior to ignore the wealth of diversity this world has to offer out of sheer laziness or mindless conservatism.

How is it "broken behavior" if what you're doing makes you happy, and no one gets hurt because of it? I intentionally don't go bungee-jumping, thus I'm "limiting my experiences". Well, you know what? I'm at peace with that.

Quote from: J ArcaneYes.  Me.  I don't believe in intentionally limiting one's own experiences, and I never will.  Whether it's games, or movies, or food, or any number of other things, I think it's a fundamentally broken behavior to ignore the wealth of diversity this world has to offer out of sheer laziness or mindless conservatism.

So is it your assumption that people who intentionally limit experiences are either lazy or mindless conservatives?

Has it occured to you that given certain time constraints and people's understanding of their own likes and dislikes they make discriminating choices every day? That by deciding the fun had evey other week playing GURPS is a check mark that doesn't have to be re-thought so that critical thought can be focused on things like "how am I going to pay for that new dryer?"

I'm not asking the following question to be dergatory or judgemental.  I'm really curious as it helps me understand your perspective.  I'll answer first.

• How old are you? I'm 40 - about to be 41.
• Are you married? I am - lucky for me.
• Do you have kids? I have two - 6 and 5 years old.
• How much leisure time do you have (defined as time not required for work, home care, day-to-day chores, or time required for kids)?  I have very very little.

The first three tend to influence the last one greatly.  I have very little leisure time that's just for me.  So the time I do have I need to maximize my enjoyment.  Now some people accomplish this by trying new things.  I'm one of those that's usually content to play what I know and enjoy. I'm not opposed to new things, but I intentionally limit my exposure based on my time constraints and my self-knowledge.

Am I lazy, a mindless conservative, or is there some other explanation?

That's not a response, that's a list of excuses.

I have a friend in Vancouver who's a gamer, and also married, with kids, and an IT job that takes up a hell of a lot of time.

Yet he's constantly showing up with new games, and endlessly inquisitive about finding even more.

He wants to be able to maximize his enjoyment time by seeking out ever newer, cooler ways to enjoy that leisure time.

Quote from: Sacrificial LambIan, you're being a prick.

Guilty as charged.

Quote...please just answer directly. Choose a position, and stand by it. If you won't do that, then stop pushing Sett's and Pundit's buttons. You're not the wronged party here. You're deliberately fucking with them, and you know it.

Fine.  I'll strike a deal here.  If Pundit and Settembrini will state whether or not they're homosexuals, I'll state whether or not I think D&D is commercial shit.  None of our answers will have a bearing on anything, and none of them are anyone else's business, but this seems to have become the raison d'être for this thread.

!i!

Quote from: James J SkachIs it true that people here are of the opinion that even if someone is having fun playing their D20 game every week that they are somehow wrong/lazy/ignorant/narrow-minded for not wanting to go looking for something new?

For not actively desiring to seek out alternatives to something you already enjoy?  Hell no.  For being resolutely unwilling to even look at alternatives when they're offered to you?  Hell yes.  Just like food, if you told me that because you liked hamburgers you weren't willing to even look at the seafood restaurant across the street, I'd tell you that you were an ignorant twat.  Same with games.  Blissful ignorance isn't a virtue, ever.

QuoteDo people think that D&D/D20 suffers from being commercially successful?

I think the makers of D&D are constrained from its commercial success from perhaps stretching as far creatively as they might like; Monte Cook said as much when he started Malhavoc Press.  That said, I think D&D 3.x is great.

QuoteIs the idea the commercially successful = lower quality prevalent?

It's a prevalent idea in any creative community, which says nothing about its validity.

KoOS

Quote from: J ArcaneThat's not a response, that's a list of excuses.

I have a friend in Vancouver who's a gamer, and also married, with kids, and an IT job that takes up a hell of a lot of time.

Yet he's constantly showing up with new games, and endlessly inquisitive about finding even more.

He wants to be able to maximize his enjoyment time by seeking out ever newer, cooler ways to enjoy that leisure time.

Did you not read a word I said? Those were not excuses.  I specifically said there are people for whom maxmizing enjoyment of leisure time is trying new things . For others, it's going with what they know.

Why is one right and one wrong?

Are the questions that damaging that you can't answer them? Bully for your friend, I'm glad he gets his fill doing as he sees fit! Why is it wrong for me to maximize my time the way I know is best for me?

For a guy who claims Pundit is all about badwrongfun you sure seem to be telling me mine is - and in no uncertain terms.

QuoteFor being resolutely unwilling to even look at alternatives when they're offered to you? Hell yes. Just like food, if you told me that because you liked hamburgers you weren't willing to even look at the seafood restaurant across the street, I'd tell you that you were an ignorant twat. Same with games. Blissful ignorance isn't a virtue, ever.

Bingo.

Quote from: King of Old SchoolBlissful ignorance isn't a virtue, ever.

Wow - really? Never? Not even with an unimportant silly hobby where I play lets pretend?

Man, this world is harsh.

Quote from: King of Old SchoolI think the makers of D&D are constrained from its commercial success from perhaps stretching as far creatively as they might like; Monte Cook said as much when he started Malhavoc Press.  That said, I think D&D 3.x is great.

See, now that's the kind of interesting comment I was hoping for!

Quote from: King of Old SchoolIt's a prevalent idea in any creative community, which says nothing about its validity.

Good point. I believe I agree with your assertion.

Quote from: James J SkachIs the idea the commercially successful = lower quality prevalent?

The idea is prevalent, and there is a certain validity to it.  Now, without some sort of commercial reward, a lot of fantastic products will never get produced -- there's little incentive for putting the needed energy into them.  But on the flip-side, the commercial aspect of the business model necessitates that some things need to be produced in order to generate revenue, whether they're inspired or not, whether they're any good or not.  So, being "commercial" carries a lot of guilt by association, whether it's merited or not.

!i!

Quote from: J ArcaneBingo.

Except, you see, I don't, in general, like seafood.  King Crab is about all I eat of seafood.

So my refusal is bad, how, again?

Quote from: James J SkachExcept, you see, I don't, in general, like seafood.  King Crab is about all I eat of seafood.

So my refusal is bad, how, again?

There's a difference between trying something, and not liking it, and never trying it at all.

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaI mis-phrased that.  When was the last time you saw this happen?

Why do I have to give you a specific date?

Seanchai

Quote from: Ian AbsentiaThe idea is prevalent, and there is a certain validity to it.  Now, without some sort of commercial reward, a lot of fantastic products will never get produced -- there's little incentive for putting the needed energy into them.  But on the flip-side, the commercial aspect of the business model necessitates that some things need to be produced in order to generate revenue, whether they're inspired or not, whether they're any good or not.  So, being "commercial" carries a lot of guilt by association, whether it's merited or not.

!i!

But in the answer you and KoOS provide, both answers are, essentially, no.  Commercial does not automatically mean lower quality. the chances are based on, I would suppose, company history? And with one so all over the board as TSR/WOTC/Hasbro, how could one make a judgement except to say it's a crap shoot.

What about Steve Jackson games, or WOD stuff - what's the history like there? Is it enough to make a judgement one way for the other?

And what about the flipside - is something Indie Press or small publisher automatically of greater quality? Not accusatory, strictly curious about opinions and how they shape discussions...