In the comments to this post.
"...dungeon crawls are dead simple, and the stories are totally familiar.
"They’re ‘boys playing in the woods’ stories, which appeal naturally to those prolonging their shared adolescence. They demand nothing.
"Nearly every old-school campaign chronicle I read these days is like a heedlessly unironic Peter Pan story without the moral content, a geek-triumphalist Lord of the Flies narrated by Jack. (I can’t help thinking of these folks as Robin Williams in Hook, finding his inner child by throwing food and ‘never growing up.’) Even Maliszewski’s campaign recaps at Grognardia come off as children’s stories – there’s nothing to distinguish them from the slow-moving bits of Harry Potter, and if you assume that he knows it then it’s easy to see why he and his buddies obsessively return to the ‘but mass-produced juvenile midcentury sci-fantasy pulp is so daringly amoral…’ defense."
If you see the plot of the story as the sole product of a game, then maybe the commenter MIGHT have a point. (Ignoring the fact that-in terms of word-for-word literary style--Jack Vance isn't far short of Nabokov.)
But it isn't.
The main points of the game are: hanging out with your friends, inventing strange things, and problem-solving--all of which are maturity-scalable activities.
spotted by the Eiglophian Press
Blood in the Chocolate ACTUAL PLAY
4 hours ago