De-geeking role-playing games : comments.
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
|
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
| 14 |
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
(no subject)
Still genre fiction, but way more accessible to the general public than your example, I think.
I think the notion of the content of the fiction is as important to this discussion as the systematic stuff Adam eluded to above. It doesn't matter* if you have a really accessible, easy-to-use system for... killing shapeshifting magi.
Matt
*Actually, it matters deeply, and I'm in favor of it, but not in terms of lowering the barriers to entry for people who aren't into genre fic.
(no subject)
However, I think I would get a much better reception if I stated that I was an actor in a play where my role was a scientist who... then if I said I was playing pretend with my friends. The first is socially accepted, the second is weird. I could say that I go camping, or play paintball, or fence competively. But if I say that I swing swords around (padded or otherwise) in an attempt to imitate Tolkien - that's weird.
I think if the fictional content is more familiar, that can be helpful, but not all that much. If I said it was a boardgame of some sort, that would also make it more socially acceptable and familiar.