critique 3: the emergence of the "traditional" game
PART 2 last time we talked about the structural underpinnings of (old school) dungeons & dragons as a language or a system of interactions. i argued that what sets apart (old) d&d from other games is that it is open and infinite. d&d is open because instead of being contained inside its own explicitly-defined rules, it opens the set of interactions to anything the players say happens. d&d is also infinite because it is a game without an end, which it accomplishes by shifting goalposts in the form of experience levels. i talked about how these structural constraints (or lack thereof) allow d&d players to simulate their fantasy endlessly, and how the enjoyment derived from pursuing this fantasy differs between (typical) women and men. gygax is therefore correct to notice a difference in enjoyment of games along gendered lines, but he is wrong to attribute it to biological difference when it is actually a social function of how girls and boys are raised and social