Quote from: Urban Målare on May 08, 2025, 01:12:38 PMAnd regarding the elevators, she described in a panel ( https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/931-jen-kretchmer-teases-her-candlekeep-mysteries ) that the dungeon was filled with ramps and elevators powered by rope mechanisms or magic. The ramps are clearly mentioned in the dungeon, which I've read but not played, and I just assumed the magical elevators were the anti-gravity effects in certain rooms in the dungeon. Maybe I was wrong about those being the elevetors she referred to but it's really her words and not mine.

None of which was front and center or as big as made out to be. This was standard wotc outrage marketing and nearly everyone fell for it and gave them free advertising by complaining about something wotc LIED was there or lied it was as much a thing as really was. They did this alot throughout 5es run.

Quote from: Omega on May 08, 2025, 09:59:36 PM

Quote from: Urban Målare on May 08, 2025, 01:12:38 PMAnd regarding the elevators, she described in a panel ( https://www.dndbeyond.com/posts/931-jen-kretchmer-teases-her-candlekeep-mysteries ) that the dungeon was filled with ramps and elevators powered by rope mechanisms or magic. The ramps are clearly mentioned in the dungeon, which I've read but not played, and I just assumed the magical elevators were the anti-gravity effects in certain rooms in the dungeon. Maybe I was wrong about those being the elevetors she referred to but it's really her words and not mine.

None of which was front and center or as big as made out to be. This was standard wotc outrage marketing and nearly everyone fell for it and gave them free advertising by complaining about something wotc LIED was there or lied it was as much a thing as really was. They did this alot throughout 5es run.

Which I make a point of in the article.

"Reading the actual adventure, "The Canopic Being", makes it clear that the accessibility and "anti-ableist" stuff isn't really that central. Basically, the dungeon is filled more with ramps than stairs and there are several elevators, powered by magic or rope mechanisms (it's not specified). That's pretty much it. This fact could, of course, be used as an argument that the "anti-wokes" are once again, predictably overreacting to the preprogrammed culture war where the facts on the ground are rather innocent and banal. While there's something to such a critique on a general level, an argument like that in at least this specific case falls flat as Wizards of the Coast (WotC), the publishing company behind Dungeons & Dragons for the non-gaming readers, has decided to push the "anti-ableist" angle of the product straight out of the gate at launch despite the absence of much actual content in that vein. If this is a culture war, the wokes started it"

It WAS actually front and center in the marketing but it played an insignificant part in the final product, which makes it all the more interesting in the context of WotC pumping ESG scores, as I argue in the essay.

She claimed that there were gonna be ramps and subtle elevators with unspecified pulling mechanisms, I generously identified the anti-gravity stuff as elevators. It's not relevant for the argument of the essay if there are only ramps and no elevators, as you can see I make a point of the anti-ableist stuff not meaning much in the final product.

Wasn't the first woke thing D&D did was have Gygax take all the credit for Arneson's work? We glamorize the past a bit too much if we are telling ourselves that D&D never had the kinds of issues it does now. It's really bad now, don't get me wrong, but the game has always had issues with balancing everything to make everyone happy, imo. As a niche hobby with little to actually sell when the heart of the game is making your own content, there's always going to be trouble in paradise.

Quote from: D-ko on Today at 03:42:52 AMWasn't the first woke thing D&D did was have Gygax take all the credit for Arneson's work? We glamorize the past a bit too much if we are telling ourselves that D&D never had the kinds of issues it does now. It's really bad now, don't get me wrong, but the game has always had issues with balancing everything to make everyone happy, imo. As a niche hobby with little to actually sell when the heart of the game is making your own content, there's always going to be trouble in paradise.

While I agree it's shitty, how is that shitty in a particularly woke way?

I think the seeds of wokeness in D&D were planted very early on in that it was primarily a male hobby, and not just that, most men who played it were socially awkward, had difficulties talking to men in normal circumstances, to say nothing of women, and were only comfortable having a conversation among other gamers. So the only way they could talk to women is if women play the game. This means there was always an idea of "what can we do to make the hobby more appealing to women", and when the feminists came in saying to change X, Y and Z, the reaction was almost overwhelmingly "Thank you, we've been waiting for this guidance for decades!). This meant that there was literally zero resistance to the wokeification.

Video games had more a 50/50 split between men and women, so video gamers really didn't feel the need to change anything to get more women, so the exact same suggestions for video games, from the feminists resulted in the first GamerGate. The push back in the TTRPG space is bleed over from GG, and not really a core reaction that TTRPG players would have come up with themselves.

Quote from: jhkim on May 08, 2025, 02:48:11 PMIf you're going to use it as your opening example, it's important to note that the published adventure doesn't have any elevators or wheelchairs and isn't wheelchair-accessible (since the entrance is via a ladder). It does have ramps, but that's what actual Egyptian tombs have.

I think the adventure is a good example of a big online controversy and arguments over claims that have nothing to do with the published adventure. That's why I think it's important to distinguish between published material and social media claims.

Well, as I say in the article, I also think the claims _by Wizards of the Coast_ have little to do with the final product but as I say in the article, they were the ones blowing up the "anti-ableist" stuff _despite_ of this. They marketed the product as such straight out of the gate. There's really no references to social media posts at all in the paragraph dealing with the Canopic Being. If you're referring to the DNDBeyond post with James Haeck reporting on the press panel organized by WotC on Candlekeep Mysteries and the Canopic Being -- James Haeck worked for Wizards as a freelance writer and for D&D Beyond as as Lead Writer at the time of writing the post, making that a company statement and not a social media post. Looking through it again, there's not a single reference to any social media post in the entire introduction where the Canopic Being is discussed so I really don't understand your criticism.

In regards to the elevator thing, I edite the article to clarify:

"Reading the actual adventure, "The Canopic Being", makes it clear that the accessibility and "anti-ableist" stuff isn't really that central. Basically, the dungeon is filled more with ramps than stairs and there are supposedly (she claimed so in a panel teasing the dungeon) several elevators, powered by magic or rope mechanisms (it's not specified which and the only thing close to elevators in the dungeon are anti-gravity fields)."

Quote from: migo on Today at 05:37:53 AMWhile I agree it's shitty, how is that shitty in a particularly woke way?

I think the seeds of wokeness in D&D were planted very early on in that it was primarily a male hobby, and not just that, most men who played it were socially awkward, had difficulties talking to men in normal circumstances, to say nothing of women, and were only comfortable having a conversation among other gamers. So the only way they could talk to women is if women play the game. This means there was always an idea of "what can we do to make the hobby more appealing to women", and when the feminists came in saying to change X, Y and Z, the reaction was almost overwhelmingly "Thank you, we've been waiting for this guidance for decades!). This meant that there was literally zero resistance to the wokeification.

Video games had more a 50/50 split between men and women, so video gamers really didn't feel the need to change anything to get more women, so the exact same suggestions for video games, from the feminists resulted in the first GamerGate. The push back in the TTRPG space is bleed over from GG, and not really a core reaction that TTRPG players would have come up with themselves.

There is this prevalent notion that G. Gygax was a misogynist and people run on these rumors of what he did behind his wife's back and these things may or may not be true, yet if you read his books, 'Role-playing Mastery' and 'Master of the Game', Gygax mentions 'human imagination', the 'human mind, he does not, as far as I can see, say anything about makes being superior and really, if he had it would not have influenced our games as we took anyone that wanted to play, including sisters of friends. Yet if you look up Gygax on Google there is a Reddit article highlighted about what a horrible person he was and some of that seems based on rumors. I am NOT saying put him on a pedestal, yet we should look at the truth of the matter over detractor's claims because a lot of that bile is the impetus for some to seek virtue points in embracing wokeism. Did Gygax run around with escorts in Hollywood? Are there receipts for that, or is it just easier for minor players to repeat rumors to gain traction for their own interests?

Quote from: migo on Today at 05:37:53 AMI think the seeds of wokeness in D&D were planted very early on in that it was primarily a male hobby, and not just that, most men who played it were socially awkward, had difficulties talking to men in normal circumstances, to say nothing of women, and were only comfortable having a conversation among other gamers. So the only way they could talk to women is if women play the game. This means there was always an idea of "what can we do to make the hobby more appealing to women", and when the feminists came in saying to change X, Y and Z, the reaction was almost overwhelmingly "Thank you, we've been waiting for this guidance for decades!). This meant that there was literally zero resistance to the wokeification.

Video games had more a 50/50 split between men and women, so video gamers really didn't feel the need to change anything to get more women, so the exact same suggestions for video games, from the feminists resulted in the first GamerGate. The push back in the TTRPG space is bleed over from GG, and not really a core reaction that TTRPG players would have come up with themselves.

I agree with some of this, but video games had far from a 50/50 split. The way I remember it, the subset of women in video gaming was pretty small in the 80s and 90s for instance. The problem is, of course, when people think this necessarily means that women are driven out. There was a near woke takeover in both (tabletop and videogame), but as you say more successful in tabletop roleplaying games sadly (the Gamergate backlash in videogames was massive). I think roleplaying games are attractive to certain subsets of the population. Some are just geeky people interested in fantasy or historical scenarios, playing with maps and dice etc. But the amount of support for the modern woke trans movement in roleplaying games is pretty striking, and I think you can see the connection with "playing a role".

Quote from: Trond on Today at 10:47:02 AMI agree with some of this, but video games had far from a 50/50 split. The way I remember it, the subset of women in video gaming was pretty small in the 80s and 90s for instance. The problem is, of course, when people think this necessarily means that women are driven out. There was a near woke takeover in both (tabletop and videogame), but as you say more successful in tabletop roleplaying games sadly (the Gamergate backlash in videogames was massive). I think roleplaying games are attractive to certain subsets of the population. Some are just geeky people interested in fantasy or historical scenarios, playing with maps and dice etc. But the amount of support for the modern woke trans movement in roleplaying games is pretty striking, and I think you can see the connection with "playing a role".

I can't speak for the 80s, I was born then but only really became aware of it in the 90s. I think more people didn't have a console at home than did, but that was also more a factor of how much money they family had. So even going that far back I didn't notice a heavy dominance of boys with them. It's possible that it changes as adults, and in the 80s and 90s women stopped playing while men continued. In contrast, even in elementary school, D&D was heavily biased towards boys, and I knew zero girls all through high school who played, and most of the girls I played with were friends who didn't otherwise play TTRPGs. I feel also by the time GamerGate kicked off, the men/women split playing video games as adults was pretty even, while TTRPGs were still overwhelmingly men playing.

The part about playing a role is also something I find odd about wanting to play a trans character. Like if you are a trans woman, and want to play a woman, why not just play a woman, no prefix? If that's your fantasy, you have the perfect opportunity. So that makes me wonder a bit if they actually want to be women, or if the first thing is they want to be trans.

Quote from: migo on Today at 01:40:02 PM

Quote from: Trond on Today at 10:47:02 AMI agree with some of this, but video games had far from a 50/50 split. The way I remember it, the subset of women in video gaming was pretty small in the 80s and 90s for instance. The problem is, of course, when people think this necessarily means that women are driven out. There was a near woke takeover in both (tabletop and videogame), but as you say more successful in tabletop roleplaying games sadly (the Gamergate backlash in videogames was massive). I think roleplaying games are attractive to certain subsets of the population. Some are just geeky people interested in fantasy or historical scenarios, playing with maps and dice etc. But the amount of support for the modern woke trans movement in roleplaying games is pretty striking, and I think you can see the connection with "playing a role".

I can't speak for the 80s, I was born then but only really became aware of it in the 90s. I think more people didn't have a console at home than did, but that was also more a factor of how much money they family had. So even going that far back I didn't notice a heavy dominance of boys with them. It's possible that it changes as adults, and in the 80s and 90s women stopped playing while men continued. In contrast, even in elementary school, D&D was heavily biased towards boys, and I knew zero girls all through high school who played, and most of the girls I played with were friends who didn't otherwise play TTRPGs. I feel also by the time GamerGate kicked off, the men/women split playing video games as adults was pretty even, while TTRPGs were still overwhelmingly men playing.

The part about playing a role is also something I find odd about wanting to play a trans character. Like if you are a trans woman, and want to play a woman, why not just play a woman, no prefix? If that's your fantasy, you have the perfect opportunity. So that makes me wonder a bit if they actually want to be women, or if the first thing is they want to be trans.

Back when we bought video games in the store, I can't remember any girls coming along, or even being inside the store, at all. When we did have the games at home, sometimes a girl would join in, but that was it. You can also see it in the literature from the time; that Roberta Williams was a woman developer was seen as pretty special (she was actually a writer, not doing any programming. But the mere fact that she was involved drew attention). But at the same time, in interviews she gives absolutely no impression that she was made to feel unwelcome. So the story that we have been told over and over by Sarkeesian and others is inaccurate. Video games just appealed more to boys.

As for trans and tabletop roleplaying games; they don't usually want to play trans characters. But I did have a guy in my group who seemed uncomfortable as a male (and often played females). He later became a trans woman. (only problem is; if you ask me he never gave off any "feminine" vibes at all. Hope he/she is happy, but I'm sorry to say I doubt it).

Quote from: migo on Today at 05:37:53 AM

Quote from: D-ko on Today at 03:42:52 AMWasn't the first woke thing D&D did was have Gygax take all the credit for Arneson's work? We glamorize the past a bit too much if we are telling ourselves that D&D never had the kinds of issues it does now. It's really bad now, don't get me wrong, but the game has always had issues with balancing everything to make everyone happy, imo. As a niche hobby with little to actually sell when the heart of the game is making your own content, there's always going to be trouble in paradise.

While I agree it's shitty, how is that shitty in a particularly woke way?

I think the seeds of wokeness in D&D were planted very early on in that it was primarily a male hobby, and not just that, most men who played it were socially awkward, had difficulties talking to men in normal circumstances, to say nothing of women, and were only comfortable having a conversation among other gamers. So the only way they could talk to women is if women play the game. This means there was always an idea of "what can we do to make the hobby more appealing to women", and when the feminists came in saying to change X, Y and Z, the reaction was almost overwhelmingly "Thank you, we've been waiting for this guidance for decades!). This meant that there was literally zero resistance to the wokeification.

Video games had more a 50/50 split between men and women, so video gamers really didn't feel the need to change anything to get more women, so the exact same suggestions for video games, from the feminists resulted in the first GamerGate. The push back in the TTRPG space is bleed over from GG, and not really a core reaction that TTRPG players would have come up with themselves.

Honestly some really great thoughts here to my unfounded late-night rants. I don't have anything much to add, just agreeing that there's some great points here. There are a lot of male-dominated hobbies which have suffered from the gamergate problem and it's not like we intentionally gatekeep, it's just that women mocked people who used Palm Pilots, artificial intelligence, and kept stats for things until marketing geniuses such as Steve Jobs made those sorts of things trendy.

Quote from: migo on Today at 01:40:02 PMThe part about playing a role is also something I find odd about wanting to play a trans character. Like if you are a trans woman, and want to play a woman, why not just play a woman, no prefix? If that's your fantasy, you have the perfect opportunity. So that makes me wonder a bit if they actually want to be women, or if the first thing is they want to be trans.

I had a male player who played a trans woman character. He definitely wanted his character to be trans. Other than the character being extraordinarily tall for a woman, it only came up one time when faced with a portal trap that forced PCs to "speak their true name" while stepping through -- everyone enjoyed the player acting all embarrassed and trying to go through the portal last ...

A large part of being trans is struggling with self-identity. I've noticed that a large share of people in my own life who question their orientation either have literal memory problems from some kind of accident or come from a mixed race background and really struggle to self-identify. It doesn't help that America (and the west in general) is becoming the next Rome, but with microplastics instead of lead. Hormone levels are way off-balance, young women are getting semi-permanent slow-release hormonal birth control implants in middle school, and our entire water supply, food supply, and our industries as a whole all revolve around microplastics in a way even more concerning than lead in the pipes and utensils in Rome. Alex Jones might be a goofy guy trying to sell bullshit, but we really are turning the frogs gay and science has backed that up, time and time again. Women are hitting puberty younger, men are turning into women, and there's really no stopping what we've started without a major change of course that would have to rival the efforts of Rome. 

Quote from: Urban Målare on Today at 07:43:52 AMIn regards to the elevator thing, I edite the article to clarify:

"Reading the actual adventure, "The Canopic Being", makes it clear that the accessibility and "anti-ableist" stuff isn't really that central. Basically, the dungeon is filled more with ramps than stairs and there are supposedly (she claimed so in a panel teasing the dungeon) several elevators, powered by magic or rope mechanisms (it's not specified which and the only thing close to elevators in the dungeon are anti-gravity fields)."

Better, thanks.

The important point is this -- If someone just plays D&D, and isn't reading online articles about it, then the "anti-ablist" stuff isn't just non-central, it's non-existent. The dungeon is entered through a ladder, Egyptian tombs have ramps, and there's nothing anti-ablist about an anti-magic field. It's a nothingburger, as faelord put it.

So the question is, what your essay have to say to someone like this - who doesn't read or perhaps doesn't care about online commentary as opposed to gaming material?

---

That's the bigger point about all this stuff about whether TTRPGs should have or should not have more women. I think the only rule should be that people can play whatever they want. We can have both some RPGs that appeal more to women, and some that appeal more to men.

For me, it's not that I don't have political views. It's that I don't see RPGs as a way to accomplish my politics. If there are feminist people, there will be and should be feminist games for them to play. If there are anti-feminist people, there will be and should be anti-feminist games for them to play.

And for me, I buy RPG books based on whether the content in them is fun for me to play. That's why I suggest you distinguish clearly in your essay between game content vs articles / commentary / social media about the game. Obviously, it's your essay. But I think in the wider world of D&D players - outside of RPG discussion forums - there are more people who are like me, and mostly just care about playing the game.