This post is in reference to Ron’s latest article, originally mentioned by Clinton in this thread.

Ron,

While I’m still reading through your first Heartbreakers article (I just encountered these), and I should probably crawl through past discussions before posting this, I want to get this down while it’s still fresh in my mind.

But isn’t what you are describing a fairly common issue in all areas of creation—not just RPGs? I mean let’s take music for example. You have the grunge movement starting out in the early nineties (around there anyway, just roll with me) and from there future musicians went about creating songs that all sounded like Nirvana and Pearl Jam rip-offs. This continues until some artist comes along and creates something wholly apart from the original style, which in turn catches on and then gets imitated.

So of course this applies to RPG design. There are certain watershed games that redefine the way people think about playing games, but as a rule most games just reiterate what has already been said—with a twist. D&D and Vampire are two of the most popular RPGs ever made and we see all sorts of new games released that simply try to achieve what those games did.

What’s interesting to me about the whole issue, is this idea that players feel that they need to redesign their favorite games. As you say, it really is a form of therapy to some people. But of course they never escape from the confines of the original design. They have yet, in many cases, to look outside the boundaries of one particular system. I did exactly the same thing when I started playing early Shadowrun and Mechwarrior (which pretty much copy themselves in my opinion).

So how do you solve this problem? You suggest just getting it out of your system, but I’d also add simply playing a different style of game—and doing so before you get too locked into a “this way is the only way” mindset. For me, the biggest breakthrough in roleplaying was when I realized that different styles of play are ok, and that I shouldn’t badger people about playing “correctly.”

Hi Tim,

The real problem with Heartbreakers is their astounding anachronism. The guys I met at GenCon, the authors of Demon's Lair, were probably about one year old when "D&D Headquarters" banners started flying in the windows of hobby stores. You know, those places that smelled like airplane glue and carried all the tank or army-men magazines. But I digress.

Your music parallel is valid, except that it would be very much like a young band today eagerly presenting their self-produced album with "we are innovative" splashed all over it, with the main feature thereof being the wa-wa pedal.

So I'm not talking about influences. Any endeavor is influenced by things, whether to adopt assumptions, to sophisticate them, or to provide alternate means or applications. Nor am I talking about plain old goals; Rune is balls-to-the-wall Gamist much like D&D tourney play back in the late 70s, but Rune isn't a Heartbreaker.

No, I'm talking about a very narrow understanding of what RPG design is, and of what the so-called industry is. This narrowness is no sin, and the energy and endeavor brought to the game's design and production is wonderful ... but the combination is heartbreaking.

As for solutions, the only way is to open up the culture of the hobby to wider understanding. There are so many avenues to do this ... one of them is the Forge itself, I hope, and others include getting some insitutional memory into game texts (I was really happy to see other role-playing games casually referenced in several places throughout Godlike), and the basic issue, as you very rightly state, is to get some quality time in with a variety of play experiences.

Best,
Ron

Ron Edwards wrote: Your music parallel is valid, except that it would be very much like a young band today eagerly presenting their self-produced album with "we are innovative" splashed all over it, with the main feature thereof being the wa-wa pedal.

No, I'm talking about a very narrow understanding of what RPG design is, and of what the so-called industry is. This narrowness is no sin, and the energy and endeavor brought to the game's design and production is wonderful ... but the combination is heartbreaking.

Ron Edwards wrote:
No, I'm talking about a very narrow understanding of what RPG design is, and of what the so-called industry is. This narrowness is no sin, and the energy and endeavor brought to the game's design and production is wonderful ... but the combination is heartbreaking.