[Threshold]

Actually, bashing gophers with a baseball bat would indeed improve my typing. It would improve my hand-eye-coordination, my flexibility, my hand strength, and my endurance. All of those things would improve my typing abilities. You couldn't counter my other examples, and now you just offered up ANOTHER ONE that proves my point. Thank you!

As a concept, skill based systems are no more realistic than level based systems. It is all about the implementation.

You like skill based systems. That's great. I like them too. I don't like pure level based systems, so I am not trying to defend something that is my own preference. But I have already pointed out numerous ways in which skill based systems are "unrealistic" as well. They don't take into account cross-benefits of different activities, and they are prone to some of the most unrealistic abuses and behaviors of all (standing in a corner, using a skill over and over, or using a skill in a totally pointless way simply to improve it).

Both systems are game mechanic abstractions that a developer uses to adjudicate actions and determine a result. Neither one of them does a particularly good job of mimicking reality. Reality is far too complex. And you know what? It's ok. Realism is not and should not be the most important thing when designing game mechanics. Believability and fun are far more important and valuable goals.

If RPI folks want to make "skill based" a requirement for a game being an RPI, that's fine.

If RPI folks want to shout from the mountain top that they prefer skill based to level based, that is also fine.

If RPI folks want to declare skill based systems "better" or "more realistic", that is not fine. It is not fine when they try to pronounce their own personal preferences to be better than everyone else's. That isn't logic or reason. That is just arrogance.

Surprise, surprise! More elitism! "RPIs are better than everyone else because we lure away all your players! We're in yer playerbase, stealing yer players!" This is getting hilarious. You can't win the argument, so you fall back on more elitism. I really expected better from you, prof. True colors?

My games have attracted countless players who quit RPIs to join ours. We have even had coders (and at least one admin I recall off the top of my head) leave some of those "founding 3" RPIs to play our games. These are people who invested not just their time, but their MONEY in our games. Players move in both directions between RPIs and non RPIs. Perhaps more importantly, many players play BOTH types of games because they offer a different experience. So whatever point you are trying to make is not only elitist and desperate, but wrong.

Lets be honest here. The number of people who play and prefer RPIs is absolutely microscopic compared to the number of people who play "other MUDs" as well as the number of people who role play on "other muds." So don't break your arm patting yourself on the back.