Quote from: Phillip;446777It was all optional and additional the first time around, and if "Advanced" meant something different (which was far from clear) then the only bit of 'authoritative' text that really mattered was on PHB p.8 in all caps:

THE REFEREE IS THE FINAL ARBITER OF ALL AFFAIRS OF HIS OR HER CAMPAIGN.

This only adds needless complexity. Not only does AD&D have an unwieldy weight of rules, but which rules exactly were in play from table to table was infinitely variable. I have no idea how players kept up. WotC, in their extraordinary, innovative genius, thankfully, simplified this immensely by making the texts themselves genuinely authoritive.

Sometimes jeans fit better when you've worn them in yourself over time rather than having a tailor fit them.

Having an authoritative text certainly can help, but it's only really necessary if you're looking to organized play to guide the community.  As most people have observed, both in the traditional and indie communities, a ton of people either play houseruled versions of published games (including 4e), or they play homebrew.  Not many people play the big-name games strictly RAW, because a lot of groups don't know any other games and have to drift them towards their group's particular playstyle.

Also, do you play Heinsoo 4e?  Do you include all of the errata, or only some?  New magic missile, or classic D&D magic missile?  Essentials only, 4e core/hardbacks only, or mixed?  Monster Vault, errata'd MMs, or no updates to monster HP/attack progression?  Backgrounds grant a mechanical advantage, or no?  Themes on or off? Etc...

To be fair to WotC, Essentials is a nice effort to give new players a "clean" entryway into D&D, but there's still quite a bit of clutter forming.

Quote from: two_fishesWotC, in their extraordinary, innovative genius, thankfully, simplified this immensely by making the texts themselves genuinely authoritive.

And wine cups overflowed in the halls of the Porters and Bearers Brotherhood, and the fatted calf was slain in the courts of chiropractors and hernia specialists.

Also, jgants had his work cut out for him, trying to find anyone in the world who had ever "really played" 3e (and 4e was looking ever more doubtful).

Quote from: Peregrin;446784Sometimes jeans fit better when you've worn them in yourself over time rather than having a tailor fit them.

Having an authoritative text certainly can etc...

Clearly, I need to work harder to make my mockery apparent.

Quote from: two_fishes;446783This only adds needless complexity. Not only does AD&D have an unwieldy weight of rules, but which rules exactly were in play from table to table was infinitely variable. I have no idea how players kept up.

How often did you switch players or groups?  How frequently do you imagine most people found themselves in a completely new group?  And when they did, was it a matter of adjusting to a few houserules, or learning a brand new game from the ground up?

QuoteWotC, in their extraordinary, innovative genius, thankfully, simplified this immensely by making the texts themselves genuinely authoritive.

How is that better?  What percentage of gamers do you suppose are playing in sanctioned events almost exclusively, or moving around so frequently the need for a single set of rules is necessary?

When you get together with some friends for a game of football (either version), do you break out the NFL or FIFA rules and strictly adhere to them?  If the new guy (or girl) at work wants to join in, is it necessary to go over every single addition or subtraction your group has made to the 'official' rules?  Or does a quick run-down suffice, and they pick up the rest as they go?

It's as though 'modern' rules are some kind of first cause or inherent good, but no one can articulate exactly why that should be.

EDIT:

Quote from: two_fishes;446790Clearly, I need to work harder to make my mockery apparent.

Perhaps.  It may well be not your fault, also.  In either case, consider my questions rhetorical, and open for all to discuss.

Quote from: two_fishes;446790Clearly, I need to work harder to make my mockery apparent.

I still need four more Beginner's Luck tests before I can open up Internet Sarcasm.

Quote from: Phillip;446737I rather doubt that you have indeed been playing ADVANCED DUNGEONS & DRAGONS even in a superficial sense. However, I was quoting Mr. Gygax, and it seems to me unobjectionable for an author to say what his work is about. If you really have been gutting the game of action and drama, then I think it not only fair but most charitable to observe that you enjoy a distinctly different game, and so to advise those whose expectations might otherwise be misled.

Phil, you know when you asked me on a previous post the other day when you were being a dick... you are doing it again just thought i woudl keep you in the loop.

Quote from: jibbajibba;446797Phil, you know when you asked me on a previous post the other day when you were being a dick... you are doing it again just thought i woudl keep you in the loop.

Golly, thanks, Jib. As I recall, you amply demonstrated your expertise at being a dick.

You are obviously much more ignorant when it comes to rational discourse, of which that measured reply to the dickery of two_fishes was an example.

Quote from: Peregrin;446792I still need four more Beginner's Luck tests before I can open up Internet Sarcasm.

RPG Foursquare.  I am on it.