https://www.enworld.org/threads/ray-winninger-is-head-of-d-d-rpg-team-mike-mearls-no-longer-works-on-rpg.671785/
Thoughts?
Says something about D&D 5e that Mearls has been gone for 6 months and no one even noticed.
Ray Winninger? The guy who did the Underground RPG way back when? Man, that's a name I've not heard for quite some time!
Cheers,
Franko
Quote from: Franko77;1128239Ray Winninger? The guy who did the Underground RPG way back when? Man, that's a name I've not heard for quite some time!
Cheers,
Franko
Yeah. DC Super Heroes, Underground, bunch of other stuff. Never really was on my radar although I always loved the cover art of Underground.
Quote from: Franko77;1128239Ray Winninger? The guy who did the Underground RPG way back when? Man, that's a name I've not heard for quite some time!
Cheers,
Franko
That's what would leave me a bit worried--nothing against
Underground, but with the current push to make everything partisan and polemical, I'm not sure I'd want someone with that background in charge of something like D&D that is
supposed to have broader appeal.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1128242That's what would leave me a bit worried--nothing against Underground, but with the current push to make everything partisan and polemical, I'm not sure I'd want someone with that background in charge of something like D&D that is supposed to have broader appeal.
...
A satirical game based on Cold War politics cannot be equivocated with the current political climate. At all.
Anyway, if you're at all interested in his actual approach to gaming, this is a good start (hosted by our own John Kim): http://www.darkshire.net/jhkim/rpg/dnd/dungeoncraft/
Quote from: thedungeondelver;1128235Thoughts?
And prayers?
badum-tss.mp3
Sorry, couldn't resist. :p
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1128242That's what would leave me a bit worried--nothing against Underground, but with the current push to make everything partisan and polemical, I'm not sure I'd want someone with that background in charge of something like D&D that is supposed to have broader appeal.
Which way do you feel the wind blows with him?
Only familiar with him as the Dungeoncraft writer in Dragon (or Dungeon?) magazine.
I like to entertain the thought that this would somehow lead to an unholy revival of old TSR Marvel Super Heroes, in a new edition influenced by MEGS. I mean, that's completely unrealistic and not happening, but it's a fun thought regardless. My realistic thoughts are: Meh, I'm sure he'll do a decent enough job with WotC D&D, and it'll continue to be run well enough, though continue to not be my jam.
Remember him from Torg waaaay back. Yeesh he doesnt look very old. How young was he back in the 90s???
Quote from: oggsmash;1128246Which way do you feel the wind blows with him?
His twitter is strongly left-leaning and he has clear Trump Derangement Syndrome.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1128251His twitter is strongly left-leaning and he has clear Trump Derangement Syndrome.
He did sign on to Gamers4Her four years ago ... but then, so did almost everyone else at WotC.
I don't really care because he can't retcon virtue signaling into old D&D but I do worry that someday, they're going to get someone at WotC who's going to decide that it's time to "erase the toxic legacy of Gary Gygax" and before you know it, old school D&D will be as the Germans say, verboten. And I'm serious about that; I run gaming events and use OD&D and AD&D almost exclusively.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;1128253I don't really care because he can't retcon virtue signaling into old D&D but I do worry that someday, they're going to get someone at WotC who's going to decide that it's time to "erase the toxic legacy of Gary Gygax" and before you know it, old school D&D will be as the Germans say, verboten. And I'm serious about that; I run gaming events and use OD&D and AD&D almost exclusively.
It's a not impossible (but not plausible--they are convinced they own the future and seem to have little or no concern about the past) Worst Case Scenario, but isn't that one of the cases where the retroclones and the studied 'speaking around' the trademarks approach used by the OSR would come into play?
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1128256It's a not impossible (but not plausible--they are convinced they own the future and seem to have little or no concern about the past) Worst Case Scenario, but isn't that one of the cases where the retroclones and the studied 'speaking around' the trademarks approach used by the OSR would come into play?
Possibly, but I'm more concerned with the erasure of history. It's already begun, really; when they were working on the OD&D set, Mearls stated flatly the cover of Eldritch Wizardry was "highly questionable" or "objectionable" or something and would be excised. You don't change/remove art. You don't. I don't care how uncomfortable it makes you or anyone else. And yes, RPG artwork
is art.
It'll be little things as time goes on. The covers of the OD&D books. Then art in the reprint/POD copies. Then mentions of Gygax
et al, and so on and etcetera, until someone (maybe even this guy) can perform the final purge and they can act like D&D history started with 3rd ed. or something and mumble about "previous editions not being up to modern standards".
Pat Pulling and her crowd couldn't have penned a better scenario.
We'll see, I guess.
I'll just point out that, traditionally, changes in D&Ds management seem to always result in a new editorial spinning up as the new guy seeks to put their brand on the property.
While I doubt the core mechanics would change much just due to the overall popularity of it, I wouldn't be surprised if a 6e that's basically what 2e was to 1e (right down with bowing to the PC of times... removing all the demons/devils/etc. then... rabid SJW propaganda now) comes out in time for the 50th Anniversary in a few years.
Quote from: Chris24601;1128261I'll just point out that, traditionally, changes in D&Ds management seem to always result in a new editorial spinning up as the new guy seeks to put their brand on the property.
While I doubt the core mechanics would change much just due to the overall popularity of it, I wouldn't be surprised if a 6e that's basically what 2e was to 1e (right down with bowing to the PC of times... removing all the demons/devils/etc. then... rabid SJW propaganda now) comes out in time for the 50th Anniversary in a few years.
I can agree with your point. I think his hiring is in preparation for work on 6e. And if they don't release a 6e for the 50th anniversary, then they missed an opportunity. It will also be the 10th anniversary of 5e, which isn't a bad run for an edition. But I cannot imagine what else they would change... mostly because I shudder at the thought.
The thing that smells fishy to me is that Mearls disappeared off the face of the product last year and was replaced with no fanfare about his departure. If he's in good standing at WotC and e.g. moving on to focus on Baldur's Gate 3, where's the normal corporate hoopla about new challenges and bringing his vast experience to a new space and here's our exciting new leader, blah blah etc.? I first started paying attention to D&D at WotC during 4th edition, which was a shitshow for other reasons, so I don't have a good baseline to judge against.
Is there any proof Mearls revealed the names of accusers to Zak S or any proof he did not do that?
Quote from: RPGPundit;1128251His twitter is strongly left-leaning and he has clear Trump Derangement Syndrome.
And more Players will get alienated or else drink the Kool-Aid in order to play.
Ray Winninger seems like a pretty random replacement. He will probably do just as well as Mike but considering the speed that WotC publishes we will not know about it until next year.
I am not impressed by this decision. It does not bode well for the future of the D&D game; unless you want radical changes to be made to the game.
It's 2021, and the Dream is Dead ;)
(This was the slogan for Underground, his superhero game set in fascist America in the far future year of...
....uh-oh! :D)
Quote from: RPGPundit;1128251His twitter is strongly left-leaning and he has clear Trump Derangement Syndrome.
IMO, the answer to my question about where the wind blows with someone should be....no idea. These people, I worry, if they feel a need to preach their beliefs on twitter are damn sure going to take it to work with them
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1128267The thing that smells fishy to me is that Mearls disappeared off the face of the product last year and was replaced with no fanfare about his departure. If he's in good standing at WotC and e.g. moving on to focus on Baldur's Gate 3, where's the normal corporate hoopla about new challenges and bringing his vast experience to a new space and here's our exciting new leader, blah blah etc.? I first started paying attention to D&D at WotC during 4th edition, which was a shitshow for other reasons, so I don't have a good baseline to judge against.
Appearances are everything, though, and given the social media brouhaha it probably matters to someone that things are as quiet as possible.
Quote from: oggsmash;1128282IMO, the answer to my question about where the wind blows with someone should be....no idea. These people, I worry, if they feel a need to preach their beliefs on twitter are damn sure going to take it to work with them
Mearls said gun-owners were the moral equivalent of ISIS terrorists, so nothing's really changing all that much.
"Twenty minutes of fun packed into four hours."
Good riddance.
"No one ever shouted a severed hand back on"
The reason I felt better about Mearls being in that position; is that he had recruited whatever help he needed to return D&D to a good, successful, popular game system. His rebound from 4E to 5E just flat out worked.
Perhaps the shifting sands of social change were bound to lead to his ouster from that position? It would be cool if he left WOTC and entered the OSR waters.....
Ok, D&D 5E is entering its late fall / early winter stage now.
Quote from: Mistwell;1128270Is there any proof Mearls revealed the names of accusers to Zak S or any proof he did not do that?
If Mearls did, he didn't do it in any email I got. And the emails he sent to both me and Zak would indicate to me that he did no such thing; I mean, it could have theoretically happened, but there would need to have been a direct subterfuge where both he and Zak said one thing in emails to me, and then had a completely different private conversation alone.
Quote from: Shasarak;1128272Ray Winninger seems like a pretty random replacement. He will probably do just as well as Mike but considering the speed that WotC publishes we will not know about it until next year.
I'm guessing the reveal happened now, without any specific reason for it to have happened now, because this is where the last products that Mike oversaw have been released. But I could be wrong.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1128251His twitter is strongly left-leaning and he has clear Trump Derangement Syndrome.
That's the baseline requirement for working at WotC, perhaps even for living in Seattle.
Have fun lighting him up on Twitter.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;1128253I don't really care because he can't retcon virtue signaling into old D&D but I do worry that someday, they're going to get someone at WotC who's going to decide that it's time to "erase the toxic legacy of Gary Gygax" and before you know it, old school D&D will be as the Germans say, verboten. And I'm serious about that; I run gaming events and use OD&D and AD&D almost exclusively.
Gary won't be the first founder to be memory holed or have their legacy rewritten to fit the current narrative.
We've already seen the OSR declared toxic by the SJW garbage and there's no reason that won't continue.
As for future gaming, all I need is 4-5 deplorable & problematic monsters who want to play at my table and the entire hobby can go fuck itself.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;1128257Possibly, but I'm more concerned with the erasure of history.
History is written (and rewritten) by the victors.
Culturally, academically, (and perhaps politically), we've allowed the SJWs to win. It's no surprise they would gather xir spoils of war.
Quote from: Melan;1128279(This was the slogan for Underground, his superhero game set in fascist America in the far future year of...
....uh-oh! :D)
LOL. That's a helluva coincidence.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;1128287Mearls said gun-owners were the moral equivalent of ISIS terrorists, so nothing's really changing all that much.
Gun owners are austere religious scholars? :D
More seriously, what has Ray Winninger written that was actually good? He always seemed to be the industry guy who was there in the background, but never rose above the generic dross of the Supplement Threadmill.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1128316If Mearls did, he didn't do it in any email I got. And the emails he sent to both me and Zak would indicate to me that he did no such thing; I mean, it could have theoretically happened, but there would need to have been a direct subterfuge where both he and Zak said one thing in emails to me, and then had a completely different private conversation alone.
I'm very curious about your assessment of the man, since I never knew him past a name on the book credits until he did his "you're fired from D&D!" tweet. Now that he's been thrown under the bus to appease a Twitter mob, think he'll reassess his position on who his friends are?
Quote from: Spinachcat;1128319Gary won't be the first founder to be memory holed or have their legacy rewritten to fit the current narrative.
Yeah, there was Gary and that other guy, wasisface. You know the one with the beard.
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1128267The thing that smells fishy to me is that Mearls disappeared off the face of the product last year and was replaced with no fanfare about his departure. If he's in good standing at WotC and e.g. moving on to focus on Baldur's Gate 3, where's the normal corporate hoopla about new challenges and bringing his vast experience to a new space and here's our exciting new leader, blah blah etc.?
I first started paying attention to D&D at WotC during 4th edition, which was a shitshow for other reasons, so I don't have a good baseline to judge against.
1: Because WOTC is owned by Hasbro and Hasbro puts up with only so much stupid from WOTC before they tighten the dogs leash again. Mearls and a few others suffered from chronic foot-in-mouth disease and Mearls in particular said alot of stuff that really alienated chunks of the playerbase. Odds are someone in charge finally stepped in. Hes a good manager and a fairly nice person when not suffering from SJW disease. Just horrible at PR. All through the early release of 5e he was what felt like once a week parroting some trendy new SJW buzzword or ideal.
2: 4e was a marketing disaster. Probably a try at outrage marketing that did exactly as predicted. It insulted and turned away a chunk of the customer base and they did not recoup that loss with new players enough at all. And what they did get for 4e turned into some of the most wretched idiots in RPG fandom sufficient that it eventually came to the attention of the execs as this was hitting them where it hurts. Their wallets. Since customers were now putting their cash in the hands of Paizo who was still producing 3e. The execs were, from first hand accounts, a bit appalled.
Quote from: Melan;1128320More seriously, what has Ray Winninger written that was actually good? He always seemed to be the industry guy who was there in the background, but never rose above the generic dross of the Supplement Threadmill.
So, just like Mearls then.
Quote from: Shasarak;1128322Yeah, there was Gary and that other guy, wasisface. You know the one with the beard.
We don't talk about that other guy and his Basic assed system. The Advanced game is the only one that matters even if we no longer call it "Advanced". ;)
Quote from: Omega;11283272: 4e was a marketing disaster. Probably a try at outrage marketing that did exactly as predicted. It insulted and turned away a chunk of the customer base and they did not recoup that loss with new players enough at all. And what they did get for 4e turned into some of the most wretched idiots in RPG fandom sufficient that it eventually came to the attention of the execs as this was hitting them where it hurts. Their wallets. Since customers were now putting their cash in the hands of Paizo who was still producing 3e. The execs were, from first hand accounts, a bit appalled.
The 'outrage marketing' part has been considerably exaggerated by Internet myth and the passage of time, IMO. There were some jabs at 3E, yes, but people had been making the same sort of jabs
before the announcement--Order of the Stick's first appearance in Dragon was a poke at the 3.X grappling rules that was pretty much the same joke made in the infamous video. There are a whole host of things that went wrong with 4E's design and marketing--
- veering too far from established D&D lore and overestimating the fanbase's tolerance for change,
- relying too much on the digital component after spending years both focusing on the miniatures and hyping up the 'in-person experience' in previous marketing,
- probably launching a year too early from both a design and marketing standpoint,
- hesitating on and finally overconstricting the licensing to the point that it alienated their third-party network and made things ripe for Paizo to swoop in and snatch up anyone feeling dissatsified,
- underestimating the desire for at least a figleaf of backwards compatibility,
- releasing an intro module that by all accounts was pretty badly done,
- and launching an edition full of expensive new books and components just in time for a global economic collapse
--but as I said, I think the 'outrage marketing', 'insult the fans' rhetoric has been exaggerated, largely by a fanbase that had gotten restive and unhappy and was just looking for a reason to dump on WotC.
Ugh....read the twitter comment from mearls just now about how the NRA is a terrorist organization. I wish I had read it before our game group loaded up on 5e books and stuff...I am going to end up unable to buy any rpg products if this keeps going. I salute GURPS for one thing, I have no idea where their line editor s politics fall. I do not want to know. I think media companies (naughty dog....) need to understand what ESCAPIST fun means.
Quote from: oggsmash;1128346Ugh....read the twitter comment from mearls just now about how the NRA is a terrorist organization. I wish I had read it before our game group loaded up on 5e books and stuff...I am going to end up unable to buy any rpg products if this keeps going. I salute GURPS for one thing, I have no idea where their line editor s politics fall. I do not want to know. I think media companies (naughty dog....) need to understand what ESCAPIST fun means.
Hang out on the GURPS boards for a while. It's not blatant, but it's detectable.
I have for years, but have not visited for a few years. I know he is canadian, but at least prior to 2016, not much pushed. I dont care if he is left as can be. He should be that at home and in personal life. At work, not so much. TDS perhaps caused alot of them to melt down.
Greetings!
Mearls believes that the NRA is a ISIS terrorist organization? Mearls is a fucking moron for believing that. Most of these latte drinking game designers seem to be a bunch of coddled, effeminate, sacks of animal cookies.
It is especially sad how uneducated so many of them are. They don't know real history; they don't have a fucking clue about the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights; and their comprehension of sound philosophy and logic is pathetic.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: oggsmash;1128350I have for years, but have not visited for a few years. I know he is canadian, but at least prior to 2016, not much pushed. I dont care if he is left as can be. He should be that at home and in personal life. At work, not so much. TDS perhaps caused alot of them to melt down.
Agreed. Best to keep politics out of your business.
Guess who won't let you get away with that?
Quote from: RandyB;1128352Agreed. Best to keep politics out of your business.
Guess who won't let you get away with that?
Well, I do not understand that philosophy, and when I was on the GURPS forums alot, I was also on RPGnet alot, and by comparison, GURPS is completely devoid of politics.
Quote from: oggsmash;1128354Well, I do not understand that philosophy, and when I was on the GURPS forums alot, I was also on RPGnet alot, and by comparison, GURPS is completely devoid of politics.
I miscommunicated.
It is not the GURPS folks I was referring to with my question.
It is SJWs who won't let you keep politics out of your business. You must embrace and advance their views, even to the destruction of your business, or else the SJW's will attack you and your business to destroy both.
Remember: ultimately, SJWs hate you and want you dead.
Quote from: RandyB;1128355I miscommunicated.
It is not the GURPS folks I was referring to with my question.
It is SJWs who won't let you keep politics out of your business. You must embrace and advance their views, even to the destruction of your business, or else the SJW's will attack you and your business to destroy both.
Remember: ultimately, SJWs hate you and want you dead.
I got what you meant regarding SJWs. I was just reiterating there may be some political hints on the GURPS forum, but when I was there all the time (from 13-15 years ago up to about 4 years back) I was also on RPGnet alot, and the difference was stark. But I can say it seemed like RPGnet did take a drastic change over a year or so period. I just can not remember when it took the turn, but it sure accelerated fast. So in my memory, GURPS forum was completely apolitical by comparison. My fault for still explaining my GURPS perception at the same time as not being clear regarding the SJW acknowledgment.
Regarding SJWs declaring those who do not kow tow as enemies...what do they do when the people they screech at calling them their enemies simply decide to respond in kind?
Quote from: oggsmash;1128356I got what you meant regarding SJWs. I was just reiterating there may be some political hints on the GURPS forum, but when I was there all the time (from 13-15 years ago up to about 4 years back) I was also on RPGnet alot, and the difference was stark. But I can say it seemed like RPGnet did take a drastic change over a year or so period. I just can not remember when it took the turn, but it sure accelerated fast. So in my memory, GURPS forum was completely apolitical by comparison. My fault for still explaining my GURPS perception at the same time as not being clear regarding the SJW acknowledgment.
Gonna go out on a limb here and guesstimate that the year RPGnet went overboard is 2016. Just a hunch. No reason.
Quote from: Valatar;1128321I'm very curious about your assessment of the man, since I never knew him past a name on the book credits until he did his "you're fired from D&D!" tweet. Now that he's been thrown under the bus to appease a Twitter mob, think he'll reassess his position on who his friends are?
I think that depends. On whether he's still working for WoTC (and it sounds like he is), and once the SJWs fully drum him out of there whether he still thinks he'll be able to get work from a lefty medium-sized gaming publisher later.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1128367I think that depends. On whether he's still working for WoTC (and it sounds like he is), and once the SJWs fully drum him out of there whether he still thinks he'll be able to get work from a lefty medium-sized gaming publisher later.
Word on the dndnext subreddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/dndnext/comments/ga86b6/ray_winninger_new_head_of_dd_mike_mearls/) is that Mearls has been working on the video game side, specifically on Baldur's Gate III. They also mentioned that his wife had their first child last year, so it's possible that him moving off D&D is more timed with all that.
Quote from: Valatar;1128362Gonna go out on a limb here and guesstimate that the year RPGnet went overboard is 2016. Just a hunch. No reason.
Much like the media, there are several markers. I think of 2008 as when they dropped the pretense of objectivity, and 2016 as when they dropped the pretense of a pretense. Works for some in the general population, too. YMMV.
Quote from: Valatar;1128362Gonna go out on a limb here and guesstimate that the year RPGnet went overboard is 2016. Just a hunch. No reason.
Overboard yes, but they were extremely woke before that, 4 years or more before. They just started banning people for ANY support of trump in 2016, but it was very easy to get a thread ban for a myriad of other things and they had rules that were catch alls long before that.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1128344The 'outrage marketing' part has been considerably exaggerated by Internet myth and the passage of time, IMO. There were some jabs at 3E, yes, but people had been making the same sort of jabs before the announcement--Order of the Stick's first appearance in Dragon was a poke at the 3.X grappling rules that was pretty much the same joke made in the infamous video. There are a whole host of things that went wrong with 4E's design and marketing--
--but as I said, I think the 'outrage marketing', 'insult the fans' rhetoric has been exaggerated, largely by a fanbase that had gotten restive and unhappy and was just looking for a reason to dump on WotC.
No. I saw some of the 4e marketing and it was insulting to everyone pre-4e. They went out of their way and it backfired. Added to that being all the points you made and no wonder it failed. But that negative advertising was quite real. It was why I passed on 4e.
Dont insult your customer base.
Quote from: oggsmash;1128354Well, I do not understand that philosophy, and when I was on the GURPS forums alot, I was also on RPGnet alot, and by comparison, GURPS is completely devoid of politics.
Its crept into some recent product in tiny little drops unfortunately. Wether that is indicator of worse to come, or just a fluke is anyones guess yet.
Quote from: Valatar;1128362Gonna go out on a limb here and guesstimate that the year RPGnet went overboard is 2016. Just a hunch. No reason.
According to some sources it was getting bad as far back as 2014.
Quote from: SHARK;1128351Greetings!
Mearls believes that the NRA is a ISIS terrorist organization? Mearls is a fucking moron for believing that. Most of these latte drinking game designers seem to be a bunch of coddled, effeminate, sacks of animal cookies.
It is especially sad how uneducated so many of them are. They don't know real history; they don't have a fucking clue about the United States Constitution and Bill of Rights; and their comprehension of sound philosophy and logic is pathetic.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
I am totally, "pro gun rights" too. I wish people would focus upon being what they get paid to be; and run a game company, run a gas station, act in movies, etc. without preaching their wacko ideas to those of us who love our freedoms.
"From my cold, dead hands".
Quote from: Valatar;1128362Gonna go out on a limb here and guesstimate that the year RPGnet went overboard is 2016. Just a hunch. No reason.
You are off by 10 years. :D Here is a good yardstick: TheRPGSite was founded* around the time RPGNet went to the dogs. That was the point where a lot of posters who had been active there would not put up with the constant bullshit and censorship anymore, and decided to establish their own community. And that place is here. :)
____________
* Added for historical accuracy: on the ruins of a Nutkinland offsite (and Nutkinland itself was an ENWorld offsite).
Quote from: Spinachcat;1128319That's the baseline requirement for working at WotC, perhaps even for living in Seattle.
When you threw that stone, it sailed right through the glass wall we're both in here in Los Angeles.
Quote from: Omega;1128377Its crept into some recent product in tiny little drops unfortunately. Wether that is indicator of worse to come, or just a fluke is anyones guess yet.
Any come to mind? Been a year or so since I got anything from them and if its not in the genre I am playing I miss it.
Quote from: oggsmash;1128358Regarding SJWs declaring those who do not kow tow as enemies...what do they do when the people they screech at calling them their enemies simply decide to respond in kind?
They'd love to cancel RPGPundit. They'd love to make him an example so the rest of us watch him lose his ability to publish, sell his work and perhaps even lose his regular income. Few things would make these wretched fucks happier...and we got posters here who would smile and nod.
So the answer is SJWs do what bullies always do. They beat the fuck out of someone they deem weak and alone as a message to everyone else that's what's coming for them.
But SJWs also do what bullies always do whenever a mass of people stand up...they flee.
Bloody a bully and all that's left is a coward.
Quote from: Mistwell;1128388When you threw that stone, it sailed right through the glass wall we're both in here in Los Angeles.
LA is weird. We're FAR less woke than the Bay Area which is less woke than Seattle or Portland. I regularly hear how "bad" LA is because we aren't in lockstep with our northern comrades. But I doubt that will continue much longer. LA's petty tyrants, I mean, elected officials, are desperate to sink the city.
Of course, just like New York, as soon as you leave a major city on the West Coast and visit the rest of the state, the woke factor drops fast. I was hanging out at Ventura beaches yesterday (about an hour drive from LA) and its amazing how it's another world.
I'm trying to be more positive about this. I'm hoping that it will cause Wizards to finally release some of the stuff they had been holding back. Like a Psionics book. I'm also hoping for an increase in their production.
Well, if you wanna know what to think about the new guy... TBP is positively gushing about him.
That pretty much says it all.
Quote from: Chris24601;1128417Well, if you wanna know what to think about the new guy... TBP is positively gushing about him.
That pretty much says it all.
Yeah; I expect they are creaming in their jeans, over on TBP. They are probably singing a rainbow striped pink victory song, right about now.
Quote from: thedungeondelver;1128235https://www.enworld.org/threads/ray-winninger-is-head-of-d-d-rpg-team-mike-mearls-no-longer-works-on-rpg.671785/
Thoughts?
Glad he's gone.
Quote from: oggsmash;1128398Any come to mind? Been a year or so since I got anything from them and if its not in the genre I am playing I miss it.
Just little things like a comment about "fixing" some of the art in TFT as it was "problematic". I'd have to go hunting for specifics and its so small its not yet worth it compared to some other SJG behavior unrelated to SJWs.
Quote from: Razor 007;1128419Yeah; I expect they are creaming in their jeans, over on TBP. They are probably singing a rainbow striped pink victory song, right about now.
Yes yes, and burning little effigies of Razor 007....
And preparing great parades where they celebrate all the enemies of Razor 007 and condemnation of everything Razor 007 loves.
And making little miniatures of Razor 007's house and family.... and smashing them!
Jesus.
The enemies you make in your mind are incredible! They truly have no equal.
Quote from: Nerag;1128446Yes yes, and burning little effigies of Razor 007....
And preparing great parades where they celebrate all the enemies of Razor 007 and condemnation of everything Razor 007 loves.
And making little miniatures of Razor 007's house and family.... and smashing them!
Jesus.
The enemies you make in your mind are incredible! They truly have no equal.
No!!!!!!! Ha!!!!!!! I hope the .net loves their clubhouse. It's what they want it to be. This place appeals to me more. That probably makes all of us a bit happier.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1128251His twitter is strongly left-leaning and he has clear Trump Derangement Syndrome.
At least he's not Crawford?
Quote from: Omega;1128444Just little things like a comment about "fixing" some of the art in TFT as it was "problematic". I'd have to go hunting for specifics and its so small its not yet worth it compared to some other SJG behavior unrelated to SJWs.
This I could see. One thing I appreciate about DCC, the art and tone is not apologetic.
Quote from: Nerag;1128446Yes yes, and burning little effigies of Razor 007....
And preparing great parades where they celebrate all the enemies of Razor 007 and condemnation of everything Razor 007 loves.
And making little miniatures of Razor 007's house and family.... and smashing them!
Jesus.
The enemies you make in your mind are incredible! They truly have no equal.
Well, if these people had not made it extremely clear they will go to any end needed to attempt to remove a person from being able to make a living in society for wrong think, your post might be funny. Those people are enemies. I hope they do not ever have to see the day they provoke a reciprocal response from their targets.
Quote from: oggsmash;1128475Well, if these people had not made it extremely clear they will go to any end needed to attempt to remove a person from being able to make a living in society for wrong think, your post might be funny. Those people are enemies. I hope they do not ever have to see the day they provoke a reciprocal response from their targets.
Nerag is gaslighting. Very clumsy, and very transparent.
Quote from: RandyB;1128476Nerag is gaslighting. Very clumsy, and very transparent.
And not very good, either. 2/10 effort, please try again, Nerag.
Quote from: Brad;1128479And not very good, either. 2/10 effort, please try again, Nerag.
You are too generous in your scoring. :D
Quote from: RandyB;1128476Nerag is gaslighting. Very clumsy, and very transparent.
I'd like Nerag to explain his position with 50% or less snark so we can understand his perspective.
Is he gaslighting?
Is he lacking information about what the SJW mob has done and its effect on the hobby?
Is he "mushy middle" thinking that everything will be fine as long as we keep ignoring it?
Is he dismissive of anything that doesn't scale up to major real world problems? (AKA, real cancer in the body > "cancer" in the hobby)
Or something else? Only Nerag can tell us.
Quote from: Omega;11283272: 4e was a marketing disaster.
4e was a disaster - end of the story. I couldn't care less about marketing. To me, it only took a single
enthusiastic review to realise that it sucked golf balls through a water cane.
For some nostalgic fun, here was that piece - in three parts!
http://legacy.aintitcool.com/node/35776
http://legacy.aintitcool.com/node/35799
http://legacy.aintitcool.com/node/35811
The same reviewer, later, tried to justify the whole fiasco by declaring...
3.5 didn't hold up. Nothing has amused me more than listening to the raving idiots who scream otherwise, backing up their opinions with "No, it works idiot. You just have to houserule it." When you houserule things, you're changing the rules. Because they don't work. Well, PATHFINDER, Paizo's answer to 4E is finally here. And it is the ultimate in 3.5 houserulings.http://legacy.aintitcool.com/node/42038
Notice how, even if you are against houseruling, once it is written in the book
it is no more houseruling. Basically, this turd said that Pathfinder fixed 3.5 - without realising it! What a failure.
Sorry for the detour, but this is one of my top favourite parts in RPG history ever. I consider it symbolic for the whole 4E era.
They mentioned he's working on the new Baldur's Gate in the thread. Could be he just had a career position move to working in the Videogame department now. If that's the case, than it's honestly a promotion, not a demotion.
Quote from: Orphan81;1128521They mentioned he's working on the new Baldur's Gate in the thread. Could be he just had a career position move to working in the Videogame department now. If that's the case, than it's honestly a promotion, not a demotion.
That wouldn't feel like a promotion to me.
Quote from: Razor 007;1128549That wouldn't feel like a promotion to me.
It would most likely mean more money and reaching an even bigger audience.
For how popular D&D is now, its a drop in the bucket compared to the reach and revenue of video games.
(https://imgur.com/a/JJF0bF6)
I'm sure it's just a coincidence (https://imgur.com/a/JJF0bF6).
Quote from: Melan;1128279It's 2021, and the Dream is Dead ;)
(This was the slogan for Underground, his superhero game set in fascist America in the far future year of...
....uh-oh! :D)
Well they certainly called that.
Quote from: Iron_Rain;1128238Says something about D&D 5e that Mearls has been gone for 6 months and no one even noticed.
The Real World has been busy with more important things...
-Ed C.
Quote from: Orphan81;1128552It would most likely mean more money and reaching an even bigger audience.
For how popular D&D is now, its a drop in the bucket compared to the reach and revenue of video games.
Video games are hot for a while, but people move on to newer games and systems pretty quickly. People will still play D&D 5E, far past BG3; for example. During the life of a print edition like D&D 5E, there are so many opportunities to interact and participate with the fan base. Each new hardback release stirs the coals again, and rekindles the flames a little.
Perhaps they told him he wouldn't get to oversee 6E, and he lost interest at that point anyway?
Quote from: Razor 007;1128577Video games are hot for a while, but people move on to newer games and systems pretty quickly. People will still play D&D 5E, far past BG3; for example. During the life of a print edition like D&D 5E, there are so many opportunities to interact and participate with the fan base. Each new hardback release stirs the coals again, and rekindles the flames a little.
Perhaps they told him he wouldn't get to oversee 6E, and he lost interest at that point anyway?
The point is, if he's working in the videogame division, it's not going to be just one game. It will be many games, or other forms of media. I can tell you right now, The "Free to play" MMO Neverwinter has made more money for Wizards than D&D 5th edition has. But the converse is, it wouldn't exist without D&D being around in the first place. The tabletop D&D is basically the equivalent of Marvel's Comic Books... they're an idea factory to transfer into more profitable venues.
So as it is, when Baldur's Gate 3 is done, he'll move on to the next multi-media project.
Going from writing tabletop RPG's to being a head consultant and writer in the video game industry means you are now at the Big Boy's table. Much like the comic book writers who've managed to transfer their talents to TV series and Movies.
Orphan81 is absolutely right. Bouncing from RPGs to video games, or comics to movies is the real money.
However, is there any evidence Mearls has a seat the Baldur's Gate table? You'd think that would be a big PR announcement with a change to his LinkedIn.
Quote from: Orphan81;1128521They mentioned he's working on the new Baldur's Gate in the thread. Could be he just had a career position move to working in the Videogame department now. If that's the case, than it's honestly a promotion, not a demotion.
Part of me would like to think that was the case. Just a job change. But with all else thats gone down. Who knows. I doubt we will ever know the whole story or even the true story. WOTC will either spin doctor this however they want. Or find some way to steal defeat from the jaws of victory. Again.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1128597Orphan81 is absolutely right. Bouncing from RPGs to video games, or comics to movies is the real money.
You and Orphan81 might be right about the money but we all know it is a step down from King of DnD.
I'm not sure how much money any single individual makes out of video games. People often see big money cuz they look at the final sales figures, but as far as I know a lot of that goes to the publisher or gets blown in production costs and marketing. And producing a major video game takes a lot of freaking time and extra hours a lot of times developers don't even get paid for (based on actual accounts from devs at the Champions Online* forums, which I used to frequent years ago).
*Cryptic Studios/PWI, same company that produces the Neverwinter MMO
EDIT: For example, in Champions Online the Swinging travel power, that Spiderman acrobatic animation (coolest looking travel power animation in the whole game) was completed by an animator working on their own time without pay cuz they had given up on it and didn't think the physics of it could be pulled off (based on actual stuff I heard directly from one of their devs). So next time you're swooshing through Millennium City doing cool spins though the air with your Swinging travel power on, know that that thing exists thanks to the valiant efforts of an unpaid dev's labor, working overtime (from their home IIRC) to make sure that thing made it to the game.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1128610I'm not sure how much money any single individual makes out of video games. People often see big money cuz they look at the final sales figures, but as far as I know a lot of that goes to the publisher or gets blown in production costs and marketing. And producing a major video game takes a lot of freaking time and extra hours a lot of times developers don't even get paid for (based on actual accounts from devs at the Champions Online* forums, which I used to frequent years ago).
*Cryptic Studios/PWI, same company that produces the Neverwinter MMO
EDIT: For example, in Champions Online the Swinging travel power, that Spiderman acrobatic animation (coolest looking travel power animation in the whole game) was completed by an animator working on their own time without pay cuz they had given up on it and didn't think the physics of it could be pulled off (based on actual stuff I heard directly from one of their devs). So next time you're swooshing through Millennium City doing cool spins though the air with your Swinging travel power on, know that that thing exists thanks to the valiant efforts of an unpaid dev's labor, working overtime (from their home IIRC) to make sure that thing made it to the game.
Yes but he wouldn't be brought in as a programming grunt. He'd be brought in as a story consultant and quest designer most likely. Which is where the big bucks actually are in the western game industry. It also doesn't require working crunch.
The writers of western games and world creators are the Rockstars of the video gaming industry, where the programmers are the unsung grunts actually making the damn thing work.
Quote from: Orphan81;1128614Yes but he wouldn't be brought in as a programming grunt. He'd be brought in as a story consultant and quest designer most likely. Which is where the big bucks actually are in the western game industry. It also doesn't require working crunch.
The writers of western games and world creators are the Rockstars of the video gaming industry, where the programmers are the unsung grunts actually making the damn thing work.
Pretty much. That specific example stuck in my mind because it was particularly memorable. But they mentioned a bunch of other stuff I don't recall and the point of the entire discussion was to dissuade us from the notion often held by most people that game development is this glamorous "fun" type of job that you should be glad to have above any other more mundane types of jobs. When the reality is that game devs are overworked, expected to take overtime every day, often working through the weekends, and once development is done and the game gets released more than half the development staff gets cut and they only keep the top dogs and everyone else has to update their resume and go look for another job. And this happens every single time with every single AAA game from every single company.
Former WOW developer Mark Kern (@Grummz on Twitter) has talked about this as well multiple times, so I know this isn't a single dev's experience. The only people that really get rich from video games are the execs from publishing company parasites like EA (and to a lesser extent maybe story consultants and such, I suppose), while actual game devs that truly make these games happen get chewed up then sped out by these companies once they're done with them.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1128509I'd like Nerag to explain his position with 50% or less snark so we can understand his perspective.....
[snip]
......Is he "mushy middle" thinking that everything will be fine as long as we keep ignoring it? ....
Whoa, wait now, don't you have "mushy middle" tendencies yourself?
To wit:
Quote from: Spinachcat;1128319As for future gaming, all I need is 4-5 deplorable & problematic monsters who want to play at my table and the entire hobby can go fuck itself.
not that I disagree with the sentiment, mind you....
I'm quite happy to act as the mushy middle as long as I'm left alone to do so. Or at least, live and let live. There's a sense in which this isn't even about left/right anymore, though but about statist versus individual--or even more specific, about those that want to control and those that don't.
I don't like gits telling me what I can play, making insinuations about what I play, telling me what I "really believe" when I say "X", reading their own insecurities and vices into the surface of whatever I'm playing, and generally being busy body assholes. It's annoying even when they have no power at all and the thing isn't all that important in the scheme of things (e.g. games). Combine any of that with a will to power and trying to link it to something more serious (e.g. racism)--then it quickly gets to be something worth stopping.
I also don't like liars and cheats and any other spin on "dishonesty" that one can imagine.
SJW are all of the above, and also the flavor of the age. The are Nazi's with a new marketing scheme. There are, of course as with the original Nazi's themselves, all kinds of circumstantial and prudential reasons why an individual may lack the ways, means, and will to oppose them, especially at any particular time. But let's not confuse the inherent limitations of people with the desired outcome. The desired outcome is that SJW's should be mocked, have their agendas crushed, and to the extent that they cannot shut up have their control of any power over others stripped utterly from them. An overt SJW shouldn't be allowed to be a kindergarten teacher.
Interesting discussion over at the PUB involving Pundits gaming landmarks if anyone is interested. Stay classy.
https://www.rpgpub.com/threads/ray-winninger-of-dc-heroes-fame-in-charge-of-d-d-now.4475/page-5
Hasbro is about the business of games. So Ray comes from the tech industry as a Platform specialist.
His goal is expanding D&D as an intellectual property. Make it the new Monopoly. There's no "Satanic Panic" to get in the way.
Let's take tabletop gaming several steps further than board or video games can go. It can be done.
I'm interested if Ray can do it ....
Quote from: Zirunel;1128618Whoa, wait now, don't you have "mushy middle" tendencies yourself?
Explain.
From my perspective, I shoot my mouth off too much to be mushy middle.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1128626I'm quite happy to act as the mushy middle as long as I'm left alone to do so. Or at least, live and let live. There's a sense in which this isn't even about left/right anymore, though but about statist versus individual--or even more specific, about those that want to control and those that don't.
"Live and let live" isn't mushy middle. That's a radical call for Individual Freedom in this age.
Even in our recent past, few Americans would think twice about defense of the First Amendment - freedom of speech, freedom of expression, freedom of press (including alternate press), freedom of worship and freedom of assembly. It's was basic common sense to anyone of any political bent. It's how we all operated, regardless of our pet causes.
But today? Standing for the First Amendment is an act of rebellion.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1128764But today? Standing for the First Amendment is an act of rebellion.
And "Far-Right" Fascism. That's the kind of fucked up, up side down world we live in today.
Back when I was still on Twitter I used to run into idiots calling free speech advocates fascists or claiming that free speech was some sort of "far-right" value almost every day (at least when I delved into political discussions), often while praising giant corporations for trampling over common folk--obviously a very """Left""" wing position these days. That's one of the many reasons why these left/right terms are absolutely meaningless, and TBH, I don't think they ever meant anything concrete to begin with. But they've become more arbitrary now than they ever were before.
And "right-wing" no longer means "conservative". It means "evil" person or "undesirable", which is why the media makes sure to brand any random person with an unapproved idea as "right-wing" and always add a qualifier when talking about any conservative politician as a "right-wing politician", while "left" wing politicians are just "politicians". It's a subtle reminder that one of these is not acceptable, while the other is considered the default position of any "decent human being".
Quote from: sureshot;1128708Interesting discussion over at the PUB involving Pundits gaming landmarks if anyone is interested. Stay classy.
https://www.rpgpub.com/threads/ray-winninger-of-dc-heroes-fame-in-charge-of-d-d-now.4475/page-5
Those guys dont seem to like Pundit much (or Zak or Mearls) but dont worry they will happily debate him if he comes over.
Quote from: Shasarak;1128768Those guys dont seem to like Pundit much (or Zak or Mearls) but dont worry they will happily debate him if he comes over.
Bit of a spurned lover vibe going on there re Pundit. :D
Quote from: S'mon;1128771Bit of a spurned lover vibe going on there re Pundit. :D
It's amazing how long they've kept that second-rate rpgsite running on pure envy.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1128772It's amazing how long they've kept that second-rate rpgsite running on pure envy.
It reminds me a bit of how people will come here as refugees from RPGnet and then talk endlessly about how awful RPGnet is! Of course RPGnet truly is awful, but it's not good to define yourself solely in opposition to something else.
It's also very amusing how they try to claim I've produced nothing of 'marketable worth', when I'm one of a tiny handful of independent RPG writers who makes a living off it. April was my second-best career month, only barely short of my best month, which was January, and better than my third-best month which was December.
But according to them I've "done nothing new" since Lion & Dragon, in spite of having produced 99 RPG products and a compilation volume since that time. Which is a model, by the way, responsible for my substantial increase in RPG-writing income.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1128772It's amazing how long they've kept that second-rate rpgsite running on pure envy.
I doubt it's envy and more wanting another forum with less politics. Not everything is about you.
Quote from: S'mon;1128773It reminds me a bit of how people will come here as refugees from RPGnet and then talk endlessly about how awful RPGnet is! Of course RPGnet truly is awful, but it's not good to define yourself solely in opposition to something else.
Well the Pub was created in the same way as the site was created to get away from rpg.net yet also do not define themselves as having been created because they left the rpgsite imo.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1128774It's also very amusing how they try to claim I've produced nothing of 'marketable worth', when I'm one of a tiny handful of independent RPG writers who makes a living off it. April was my second-best career month, only barely short of my best month, which was January, and better than my third-best month which was December.
But according to them I've "done nothing new" since Lion & Dragon, in spite of having produced 99 RPG products and a compilation volume since that time. Which is a model, by the way, responsible for my substantial increase in RPG-writing income.
From what I have read your not permabanned from the Pub and if they are spreading msinformation how much you have done in the hobby prove them wrong.
Quote from: sureshot;1128708Interesting discussion over at the PUB involving Pundits gaming landmarks if anyone is interested. Stay classy.
https://www.rpgpub.com/threads/ray-winninger-of-dc-heroes-fame-in-charge-of-d-d-now.4475/page-5
I particularly like how a lot of these criticisms seem to revolve entirely around character attacks without any actual concrete points about their work other than "Pundit never published anything after Lion & Dragon" *ignores the entire RPG Pundit Presents series*.
Then someone mentions 4e and they insist that 4e's flaws were so obvious anyone could've fixed them, like simply being aware of a problem tells you the best course of action to avoid them when redesigning a thing from scratch. Let's just ignore how 5e is the most successful edition in D&D history and pretend that just because 5e was always gonna be drastically different from 4e's epic fail that that means 5e was always gonna be a gigantic success no matter who worked on it. Cuz 5e
also being an epic fail couldn't possibly be on the cards.
I mean, WTF is even their point? That Mearls specifically hired Pundit and Zak just to fuck with the D&D brand?
It's very telling that they don't have any actual criticism of these people and are working backwards from a set of presuppositions on the basis that they don't personally like them, and are dismissing them on that basis alone.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1128772It's amazing how long they've kept that second-rate rpgsite running on pure envy.
Spite is a remarkable motivator.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1128785I particularly like how a lot of these criticisms seem to revolve entirely around character attacks without any actual concrete points about their work other than "Pundit never published anything after Lion & Dragon" *ignores the entire RPG Pundit Presents series*.
Then someone mentions 4e and they insist that 4e's flaws were so obvious anyone could've fixed them, like simply being aware of a problem tells you the best course of action to avoid them when redesigning a thing from scratch. Let's just ignore how 5e is the most successful edition in D&D history and pretend that just because 5e was always gonna be drastically different from 4e's epic fail that that means 5e was always gonna be a gigantic success no matter who worked on it. Cuz 5e also being an epic fail couldn't possibly be on the cards.
I mean, WTF is even their point? That Mearls specifically hired Pundit and Zak just to fuck with the D&D brand?
It's very telling that they don't have any actual criticism of these people and are working backwards from a set of presuppositions on the basis that they don't personally like them, and are dismissing them on that basis alone.
Greetings!
Yeah, that's right my friend. I have also noticed how many of the people at the Pub are one-time members here--but were banned. Those that were not banned from this site are themselves self-exiled from here, for whatever reasons.
Whether banned or self-exiled, they all seem to have a collective dislike of Pundit.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Huh, if they actually drop the "Internet nice guys playing Advanced Decorums & Dragons" shtick, I may even reactivate my account. ;)
Quote from: SHARK;1128794Yeah, that's right my friend. I have also noticed how many of the people at the Pub are one-time members here--but were banned. Those that were not banned from this site are themselves self-exiled from here, for whatever reasons.
Whether banned or self-exiled, they all seem to have a collective dislike of Pundit.
I think it's even more basic than a dislike for Pundit, though that is part of it. It's a dislike of a board where other people get to say that "all the made up stuff they have decided is racist, sexist, etc." -- isn't. Of course, Pundit having the board where that is true pisses them off, but they'd be equally pissed off if someone else--even someone with a much more mild public persona--had a similar board.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1128764Explain.
My explanation is your quote I cited. This one:
"As for future gaming, all I need is 4-5 deplorable & problematic monsters who want to play at my table and the entire hobby can go fuck itself."
Game on and ignore the industry. Pretty much the essence of the "mushy middle" as you defined it, no?
Again, I don't disagree, but it's a bit ragged to criticise the "mushy middle" after you take that position.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1128802I think it's even more basic than a dislike for Pundit, though that is part of it. It's a dislike of a board where other people get to say that "all the made up stuff they have decided is racist, sexist, etc." -- isn't. Of course, Pundit having the board where that is true pisses them off, but they'd be equally pissed off if someone else--even someone with a much more mild public persona--had a similar board.
Greetings!
Excellent point, Steven. Well, if they are SJW's, that goes a long way for explaining their hate of Pundit--and the RPGsite as a whole. The typical SJW mantras of 'Reee, Reee, such racism, sexism, etc" get hammered here, with zeal and enthusiasm.:D I think the atmosphere here is liberating, and refreshing.
The Pub reminds me of what EN-World has become, except that the Pub is smaller, and less flashy and organized.
Maybe I am weird, or something. I am a pretty strong fan of being welcoming, friendly, and courteous. At the same time, I don't mind people being honest, and just being themselves. A bit coarse, vulgar, some joking and so on, it's all good. I don't like uber-strict speech control though, or thought-police. Once you have tasted true freedom, it's hard to go back, I suppose. Years ago, I used to post on EN-World regularly. They generally had the whole "Keep the language grandma-friendly" which was tolerable, but they have increasingly instituted political thought control, and seem to very much align themselves with SJW's. That kind of board policy just rubs me the wrong way.
Well, I'm getting off on a bit of a tangent. I also think there's an argument for politics have seeped into every area of life. There are so many topics that are not directly related to politics, and yet, political ideas, attitudes, and conflicts still come into them. I'm not always up for a full-throttled political debate--as such endless arguing about politics can also be tiresome to me--but I suppose what I mean to say is that there is a lot of room between "Zero political discussion" and "Fire-breathing political debates." I think that middle ground where we discuss non-political topics, while also shading into politics, is just natural speech and communication.
It's kind of funny, as I have mentioned before one of the main reasons that I enjoy this place here so much, is that it does remind me of being a local, neighborhood bar, except it is filled with gamers. I like that we can have interesting intellectual discussions here, covering gaming, animals, science, literature, whatever, but also we can just talk normally, which includes politics and other life observations and commentary. There's no one at a brick and mortar bar standing over you, telling you what you and your friends can and cannot talk about, you know? I like having freedom here.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: Melan;1128800Huh, if they actually drop the "Internet nice guys playing Advanced Decorums & Dragons" shtick, I may even reactivate my account. ;)
Greetings!
*Laughing* Great observation, Melan! That made me laugh, my friend! "Drop the Internet nice guys playing Advanced Decorums & Dragons" shtick? *Rolling*:D
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1128802I think it's even more basic than a dislike for Pundit, though that is part of it. It's a dislike of a board where other people get to say that "all the made up stuff they have decided is racist, sexist, etc." -- isn't. Of course, Pundit having the board where that is true pisses them off, but they'd be equally pissed off if someone else--even someone with a much more mild public persona--had a similar board.
Well, for me a perfect example was this recent "Developments in gaming since 2010" thread. A guy starts a thread asking "What have been the main developments in games design over the last decade?" The first response was "SJWs ruined everything." I respond with what I actually think addresses his question, but really almost everyone in that thread was grouchy about SWJs, and they enjoy being grouchy about it more than they enjoy answering questions about RPGs. Maybe some people take their grouchy man-ness as some kind of low level heroism and resistance or something, I don't even fucking know. But, for it just to be an omni-present thing is tiresome and not worth the effort a lot of the time. Like I said over at the Pub, every forum gets to be about whatever it wants to be about, but... not wanting to listen to people sounding like a bunch of cranky old men angry at millennial snowflakes... like, it's not even a matter of being "pissed off" or "So & so hates so & so". It's just boring & tiresome & all-encompassing all the time, it's not fun. It's low signal-to-noise ratio (given the RPG signal I'm looking for amongst the grouchy noise). But... The Site's the Site, and if that's what it wants to be, that's cool. It'll just slide it down my scale of preferred places a bit, which doesn't matter. Obviously some people dig the whole vibe here, and it's a place for them. We've all mostly got places to go now, and that's groovy.
Quote from: NeonAce;1128812Well, for me a perfect example was this recent "Developments in gaming since 2010" thread. A guy starts a thread asking "What have been the main developments in games design over the last decade?" The first response was "SJWs ruined everything." I respond with what I actually think addresses his question, but really almost everyone in that thread was grouchy about SWJs, and they enjoy being grouchy about it more than they enjoy answering questions about RPGs. Maybe some people take their grouchy man-ness as some kind of low level heroism and resistance or something, I don't even fucking know. But, for it just to be an omni-present thing is tiresome and not worth the effort a lot of the time. Like I said over at the Pub, every forum gets to be about whatever it wants to be about, but... not wanting to listen to people sounding like a bunch of cranky old men angry at millennial snowflakes... like, it's not even a matter of being "pissed off" or "So & so hates so & so". It's just boring & tiresome & all-encompassing all the time, it's not fun. It's low signal-to-noise ratio (given the RPG signal I'm looking for amongst the grouchy noise). But... The Site's the Site, and if that's what it wants to be, that's cool. It'll just slide it down my scale of preferred places a bit, which doesn't matter. Obviously some people dig the whole vibe here, and it's a place for them. We've all mostly got places to go now, and that's groovy.
The interesting part of it is that the guy who made that first comment was actually in favor of some of this "SJW" stuff and was probably sour from arguments we'd had that same day in other threads that were actually about politics in the hobby (the "Orcs are racist" stuff specifically). And from what I saw from most other posters they briefly acknowledged that "yes, I think the SJW stuff is bad," (mostly in response to what that poster had brought up) then went on to actually discuss the topic at hand, which was recent developments in actual games. Some provided their own input regarding the political stuff at the request of the OP, but most of the discussion was initially about the actual topic.
It wasn't till the guy started rehashing arguments we'd already discussed to death at one of the actual "Orcs are racist" threads that I barged in and sent the thread to hell (as I mentioned and apologized for over at the RPGPub thread). I had only been lurking in that thread reading the actual game related stuff, like all of the in-depth info you provided, to see what sort of games people brought up till that point.
Quote from: Theory of Games;1128738His goal is expanding D&D as an intellectual property. Make it the new Monopoly. There's no "Satanic Panic" to get in the way.
You'd like to think that. But we are looking at the new satanic panic with moral outrage brigades once agian levelling their guns at Orcs, Drow, whatever else they can hallucinate is "problematic" now. It just hasnt spilled into mainstream awareness... yet.
Quote from: NeonAce;1128812Well, for me a perfect example was this recent "Developments in gaming since 2010" thread. A guy starts a thread asking "What have been the main developments in games design over the last decade?" The first response was "SJWs ruined everything." I respond with what I actually think addresses his question, but really almost everyone in that thread was grouchy about SWJs, and they enjoy being grouchy about it more than they enjoy answering questions about RPGs. Maybe some people take their grouchy man-ness as some kind of low level heroism and resistance or something, I don't even fucking know. But, for it just to be an omni-present thing is tiresome and not worth the effort a lot of the time. Like I said over at the Pub, every forum gets to be about whatever it wants to be about, but... not wanting to listen to people sounding like a bunch of cranky old men angry at millennial snowflakes... like, it's not even a matter of being "pissed off" or "So & so hates so & so". It's just boring & tiresome & all-encompassing all the time, it's not fun. It's low signal-to-noise ratio (given the RPG signal I'm looking for amongst the grouchy noise). But... The Site's the Site, and if that's what it wants to be, that's cool. It'll just slide it down my scale of preferred places a bit, which doesn't matter. Obviously some people dig the whole vibe here, and it's a place for them. We've all mostly got places to go now, and that's groovy.
All that's understandable. Now put yourself in the shoes of someone that's tired of the passive-aggressive style of "we just talk about gaming but slip in our little asides where we assume that all correct-thinking agree with our position that we consider 'moderate' but is actually fairly racial." Basically, what RPGNet would sometimes pretend to be back 10-15 years ago and ENWorld avoided for the majority of its first several years but not lately. Or since that's maybe a little unclear, let me spell it out. There was a time when a person being a passive-aggressive jerk on ENWorld would either get ignored (for that conversation) or if bad enough, would get told by the moderators to cut it out. Then it changed to where if the passive-aggressive jerk had the approved politics, they'd get away with it, and everyone else would get called out for it. When a board shifts from one way to the other, there is period of, for lack of a better phrase, "we still just want to talk about games" inertia that keeps people around. You have your conversation and hope the shithead doesn't show up. Eventually, everyone gets tired of it, trolls see the wedge in which to operate, and the fights become bitter and angry. The signal-to-noise ratio plummets. No one examines the root cause, which is the wide-open wedge, and if anyone points it out, they are accused of causing trouble. One begins to doubt the sincerity of the moderators and powers that be for having a good discussion ...
My view is that unless the moderators are going to keep
all politics out of the board, including their own, the signal-to-noise ratio will suffer. That's a lot to ask out of a moderator, though, especially with all the assholes that think "moderate" is whatever they happen to believe and that "moderate" isn't politics, it is just the things people say and all know are correct. It's tiresome to explain to such people that the thing they keep saying is politics, whether they've got the self awareness to realize it or not.
Finally, outside of the political/fight angle, there is also the simple problem that contentious discussions naturally generate a lot more posts than ones where everyone agrees. It's difficult to find a pure gaming topic that goes on for pages without a fight, because it's difficult to find one where people disagree enough to have back and forth but not so much they have an agenda. Far as I can tell, that problem is chronic on boards of all types, not just gaming. Which is why Melan's comment above is so apt. I found the signal-to-noise ratio on Pub low because of all the "patting ourselves on the back for how nice we all are" interfered with the gaming discussion, in multiple ways.
Given all that, I'd rather be in a place where the aggression isn't passive, because I find it more honest. I also find it easier to skim over when i just want to get to the good gaming parts. YMMV.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1128785I particularly like how a lot of these criticisms seem to revolve entirely around character attacks without any actual concrete points about their work other than "Pundit never published anything after Lion & Dragon" *ignores the entire RPG Pundit Presents series*.
Well so much for all that touting of the place as being "totally no politics at all!"
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1128817Given all that, I'd rather be in a place where the aggression isn't passive, because I find it more honest. I also find it easier to skim over when i just want to get to the good gaming parts. YMMV.
Aye, there is no doubting that the Site has points in its favor in that regard. For that reason, I think it'll always be in my rotation somewhere, unless it turns into a ghost town or something.
On topic, I did a little digging and found this interview (https://www.pigames.net/store/blog.php?entry=2465) with Winninger from four years ago. Might be of interest to people.
Quote from: Zirunel;1128807My explanation is your quote I cited. This one:
"As for future gaming, all I need is 4-5 deplorable & problematic monsters who want to play at my table and the entire hobby can go fuck itself."
Game on and ignore the industry. Pretty much the essence of the "mushy middle" as you defined it, no?
Again, I don't disagree, but it's a bit ragged to criticise the "mushy middle" after you take that position.
By my definition, the "mushy middle" are the people who "go along to get along" and "don't make waves". It's the people who quietly "accept the new normal" and tell everyone that nothing has really changed, SJWs are just a tiny fringe with no power, and the media is just doing their job. The "mushy middle" tells us everything will be nice as long as we don't look at the neon elephant in the room and when things get upsetting, let's all just go back to sleep.
Kyle Aaron who posts here is very much about ignoring/mocking the online culture wars and just tossing dice instead. He's not "mushy middle" because he's giving the finger to the whole circus and doing what he loves. I can respect that, even though I believe the circus will knock on his door eventually.
I have zero issue with any poster here who just wants to talk RPGs. I'm good with "Hey, take the politics to Pundy's forum! This thread is about gaming shit only!" because the culture war invading every nook and cranny of everything does suck ebola ass.
As for my statement, I stand behind it. I believe the future of free speech online (and offline) is fucked. It's only a matter of time before every space is made "safe" and people surrender every freedom. To be safe. To be protected. To be good. Long before that happens, public play for our hobby will be regulated by the SJW brigade, their lackeys and approved by the "mushy middle" who will obey because "otherwise I don't get to play". I see the writing on the wall at Calfiornia conventions. Soon enough, my choice will be to ban myself or get banned.
And when that happens, it will just be me and my dicing deplorables.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1128817All that's understandable. Now put yourself in the shoes of someone that's tired of the passive-aggressive style of "we just talk about gaming but slip in our little asides where we assume that all correct-thinking agree with our position that we consider 'moderate' but is actually fairly racial." Basically, what RPGNet would sometimes pretend to be back 10-15 years ago and ENWorld avoided for the majority of its first several years but not lately. Or since that's maybe a little unclear, let me spell it out. There was a time when a person being a passive-aggressive jerk on ENWorld would either get ignored (for that conversation) or if bad enough, would get told by the moderators to cut it out. Then it changed to where if the passive-aggressive jerk had the approved politics, they'd get away with it, and everyone else would get called out for it. When a board shifts from one way to the other, there is period of, for lack of a better phrase, "we still just want to talk about games" inertia that keeps people around. You have your conversation and hope the shithead doesn't show up. Eventually, everyone gets tired of it, trolls see the wedge in which to operate, and the fights become bitter and angry. The signal-to-noise ratio plummets. No one examines the root cause, which is the wide-open wedge, and if anyone points it out, they are accused of causing trouble. One begins to doubt the sincerity of the moderators and powers that be for having a good discussion ...
Just for my curiosity, and because it sounds like you might know, has EN World continued to go downhill? I bailed several years ago when Morrus decided to make his political prejudices into forum policies, but up til that point it was a really good community for discussing RPGs. I suppose I could check myself, but a quick look would not tell me much, and I'm not motivated enough to take more time on it.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1128817All that's understandable. Now put yourself in the shoes of someone that's tired of the passive-aggressive style of "we just talk about gaming but slip in our little asides where we assume that all correct-thinking agree with our position that we consider 'moderate' but is actually fairly racial." Basically, what RPGNet would sometimes pretend to be back 10-15 years ago and ENWorld avoided for the majority of its first several years but not lately. Or since that's maybe a little unclear, let me spell it out. There was a time when a person being a passive-aggressive jerk on ENWorld would either get ignored (for that conversation) or if bad enough, would get told by the moderators to cut it out. Then it changed to where if the passive-aggressive jerk had the approved politics, they'd get away with it, and everyone else would get called out for it. When a board shifts from one way to the other, there is period of, for lack of a better phrase, "we still just want to talk about games" inertia that keeps people around. You have your conversation and hope the shithead doesn't show up. Eventually, everyone gets tired of it, trolls see the wedge in which to operate, and the fights become bitter and angry. The signal-to-noise ratio plummets. No one examines the root cause, which is the wide-open wedge, and if anyone points it out, they are accused of causing trouble. One begins to doubt the sincerity of the moderators and powers that be for having a good discussion ...
Just for my curiosity, and because it sounds like you might know, has EN World continued to go downhill? I bailed several years ago when Morrus decided to make his political prejudices into forum policies, but up til that point it was a really good community for discussing RPGs. I suppose I could check myself, but a quick look would not tell me much, and I'm not motivated enough to take more time on it.
Despite claims to the contrary. As of 3 months ago ENworld was still pretty bad. I've heard nothing since to indicate that has changed.
Quote from: Omega;1128879Despite claims to the contrary. As of 3 months ago ENworld was still pretty bad. I've heard nothing since to indicate that has changed.
There are some pet SJW posters and some (quite a lot of) bad moderation, but it is if anything better than a couple years ago in that since Chris Helton (a true hardcore SJW of the Jessica Price variety) left, there is again more emphasis in talking about games and less in using games as a pretext to push SJW ideology. Morrus, Umbran & co are more like "Sunday Anglican" SJWs - Social Justice is their political religion, but they are lay believers, not priests. So it feels quite different from RPGnet, which is more the Islamic State of RPG Social Justice. It's more like Erdogan's Turkey - non-believers can sort of get along there, but need to be careful.
Quote from: Mishihari;1128877Just for my curiosity, and because it sounds like you might know, has EN World continued to go downhill? I bailed several years ago when Morrus decided to make his political prejudices into forum policies, but up til that point it was a really good community for discussing RPGs. I suppose I could check myself, but a quick look would not tell me much, and I'm not motivated enough to take more time on it.
I haven't been back to check. I've stopped visiting Board Games Geek, too, even though it wasn't nearly as bad. BGG's RPG section had just started down that same road relatively recently, but I could see it building for some time. I might be willing to wade in under different circumstances, at least at the latter, because when I left, both places still had a chunk of posters with which I enjoyed interacting. The problem is being able to interact with them without the shitheads intruding. I simply don't have the patience for it anymore. And in fairness to them, I've changed too. Boards don't appeal to me as much as they once did, and I spend a lot more of my dwindling free time preparing and running my two groups and working on my own system. Also, my tastes are just too out of step with most gamers to make a lot of the normal conversation very interesting in the first place, even without the hoopla.
At the time I left, the only way I could have stayed on ENWorld would have been if they let me reverse the dynamics of the "Ignore" list to be a "Pay Attention to Only" list. That is, instead of listing who I want to ignore, let me list the only ones I'll not ignore by default. That and being able to ignore most of the moderators when posting as regular posters instead of in their mod function. Understandably, forums aren't set up that way. Here, there are a few people I don't usually read with any great detail, but I don't feel compelled to put many on the ignore list. (Most of my ignore list here are posters that have since been banned. My list has been a fairly decent predictor in that regard.) I'll just skim some posters unless something catches my eye.
I've always been able to fit into a variety of communities well enough to get along, whether academic or blue collar. Hell, in high school, my casual friends ranged geek to athlete, from scholars to barely graduated, from model citizens to guys that ended up in jail. But the one constant was whatever the environment, it's the same for everyone there. Not one set of rules for those with the "approved" opinions and another set for everyone else. There were hypocrites in all of those social groups, too, in their own way. I haven't seen it change much in life since in that regard. I'm happy to not talk politics. I'm willing to talk politics. But if X is going to keep sharing his politics, then X is damn well going to listen to my rebuttal. Or X can shut the hell up. I'm fine either way.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1128873Kyle Aaron who posts here is very much about ignoring/mocking the online culture wars and just tossing dice instead. He's not "mushy middle" because he's giving the finger to the whole circus and doing what he loves. I can respect that, even though I believe the circus will knock on his door eventually.
I've been gaming since April 1st, 1983. I'm still waiting for that "eventually", just like I'm still waiting for gaming to die... "No, no,
this time it's
really dying!"
The praxis of contemporaneous ludological dialectic is one characterised by an excess of circumlocutious opaque dialetic with multitudinous and at best merely obliquely relevant references to extraneous ideological discourse, and this praxis has not at any time seriously challenged the dominant patriarchal heteronormative paradigm of rolling dice and eating snacks. Listen here, you motherfuckers, I know all about wordy bullshit rationalising your own nonsense:
I did an arts degree! Show up on time, bring snacks, and shut the fuck up and roll the dice. I wear the Viking Hat!
Good riddance to Mearls. His "twenty minutes of fun packed into four hours" observation, derived from watching some truly shitty DMing - let's face it, it was probably him DMing - led to his taking the beautiful mixed-up construction of D&D and smashing it and smearing his ideological shit on the walls like an autistic toddler. He took good rules and turned them into a glossy textbook of overpriced dullness and gaming mediocrity. Why the love for glossy, was it too much experience of having his books end up (somehow) with the pages stuck together?
Fuck him. Good riddance. I hope Gygax and Arneson are waiting for him in hell,
the Hell Of Needing To Go To The Toilet In The Night But It's Dark And 1,000 d4s Are In The Way.
I seriously doubt that anyone's ever going to stop you from playing the way you want, with your own select group of people, in the privacy of your own home with the curtains rolled all the way down. Anything beyond that is getting fucked to hell. You can't even voice unapproved opinions in most gaming forums, which is why a lot of us are here. And everyone's getting indoctrinated into believing in this nonsense in the outside world, so old school people from the decades of yore are the last remaining people with this "my game, my way--and anyone who reaches for my Viking Hat loses a limb!" mindset.
We just lost a recent member yesterday cuz he couldn't stomach our politics and he bought into woke nonsense. So the future is orcish, and "racially insensitive" depictions of orcs are not allowed.
The ones most affected are people who want to step beyond their private gatherings to publish their own stuff or participate in public events to promote their stuff or network with people in the industry. I can't wait for the day I finally finish my own system and decide to publish it, and a horde of neon haired idiots tries to cancel me, cuz I didn't explicitly state you could make your character any sexual orientation or identify as any gender they want, like that isn't completely obvious or any of my business how you want to build your character.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1128901...... I hope Gygax and Arneson are waiting for him in hell, the Hell Of Needing To Go To The Toilet In The Night But It's Dark And 1,000 d4s Are In The Way.
Over the years at Gen Con I met both Gygax and Arneson and I doubt either one is in a 'Hell'. Tho, of the two of them Arneson was always much more polite and friendlier - he even paid for his grand kids to be in the charity jail a couple of times for a laugh. He was a genuinely friendly and nice guy.
Gygax was a bit of a grumpy old man grouch.
- Ed C.
Quote from: SHARK;1128810Greetings!
Excellent point, Steven. Well, if they are SJW's, that goes a long way for explaining their hate of Pundit--and the RPGsite as a whole. The typical SJW mantras of 'Reee, Reee, such racism, sexism, etc" get hammered here, with zeal and enthusiasm.:D I think the atmosphere here is liberating, and refreshing.
The Pub reminds me of what EN-World has become, except that the Pub is smaller, and less flashy and organized.
Maybe I am weird, or something. I am a pretty strong fan of being welcoming, friendly, and courteous. At the same time, I don't mind people being honest, and just being themselves. A bit coarse, vulgar, some joking and so on, it's all good. I don't like uber-strict speech control though, or thought-police. Once you have tasted true freedom, it's hard to go back, I suppose. Years ago, I used to post on EN-World regularly. They generally had the whole "Keep the language grandma-friendly" which was tolerable, but they have increasingly instituted political thought control, and seem to very much align themselves with SJW's. That kind of board policy just rubs me the wrong way.
Well, I'm getting off on a bit of a tangent. I also think there's an argument for politics have seeped into every area of life. There are so many topics that are not directly related to politics, and yet, political ideas, attitudes, and conflicts still come into them. I'm not always up for a full-throttled political debate--as such endless arguing about politics can also be tiresome to me--but I suppose what I mean to say is that there is a lot of room between "Zero political discussion" and "Fire-breathing political debates." I think that middle ground where we discuss non-political topics, while also shading into politics, is just natural speech and communication.
It's kind of funny, as I have mentioned before one of the main reasons that I enjoy this place here so much, is that it does remind me of being a local, neighborhood bar, except it is filled with gamers. I like that we can have interesting intellectual discussions here, covering gaming, animals, science, literature, whatever, but also we can just talk normally, which includes politics and other life observations and commentary. There's no one at a brick and mortar bar standing over you, telling you what you and your friends can and cannot talk about, you know? I like having freedom here.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Hey Shark. Some of the people at the Pub might be SJWs or Alt-Right or Control-Left, you'd really never know because of the No Politics rule, not even Politics in Gaming. So the talk's all about gaming, or other shit. So basically you shoot the shit without having endless threads of "What the Twitter Mob and the Outrage Brigade did today", or people coming in to just troll the place over political nonsense and all the disingenuous forum warrior crap that goes along with it. The RPGsite has slowly morphed from being about Gaming to being about the Gaming Culture War. With all the ridiculous shit being spouted on all the other forums, it is refreshing to have a place where you have the freedom to talk about the culture war, but it's also refreshing to have a place where you can stow all that shit and just talk about gaming.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1128873... I believe the future of free speech online (and offline) is fucked. ....
The entire concept of Free Speech is a traditional liberal ideal that just doesn't hold up to contact with the real world.
The freedom to "say what we want" has always been dependent on whomever is able to enforce their blasphemy laws at any given time.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1128831On topic, I did a little digging and found this interview (https://www.pigames.net/store/blog.php?entry=2465) with Winninger from four years ago. Might be of interest to people.
He does have good game design credentials.
Personally, I see this as a sign that that releasing a 6e on the 50th anniversary of D&D is too big of a lure for WOTC to pass up.
It will not be as radical a shift as 4e was to 3.x. But I just can't see them passing the opportunity up. Especially since 5e will be 9 years old around then, and I think that they are waiting for just a slight slip in sales to justify pulling the trigger.
Quote from: CRKrueger;1128919So basically you shoot the shit without having endless threads of "What the Twitter Mob and the Outrage Brigade did today", or people coming in to just troll the place over political nonsense and all the disingenuous forum warrior crap that goes along with it. The RPGsite has slowly morphed from being about Gaming to being about the Gaming Culture War. With all the ridiculous shit being spouted on all the other forums, it is refreshing to have a place where you have the freedom to talk about the culture war, but it's also refreshing to have a place where you can stow all that shit and just talk about gaming.
That'd be nice if they actually practiced what they preach. But Pub likes to get in its little political digs as well so they come across as false.
Quote from: Jaeger;1128920He does have good game design credentials.
Personally, I see this as a sign that that releasing a 6e on the 50th anniversary of D&D is too big of a lure for WOTC to pass up.
It will not be as radical a shift as 4e was to 3.x. But I just can't see them passing the opportunity up. Especially since 5e will be 9 years old around then, and I think that they are waiting for just a slight slip in sales to justify pulling the trigger.
When he took over the Dungeoncraft column in Dragon, I thought he did a good job of being true to the established purpose of the column while putting his own slightly improved stamp on it. If he could do that for 5E, it would be fine. We could get a lot worse.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1128924When he took over the Dungeoncraft column in Dragon, I thought he did a good job of being true to the established purpose of the column while putting his own slightly improved stamp on it. If he could do that for 5E, it would be fine. We could get a lot worse.
System wise I think that you are correct. He probably couldn't help himself from doing tight mechanics.
So I don't think that there is much to worry about for the system side.
It's the fact that he will not be beholden to any editor for the written content and setting side. And the people at the big purple love him.
I would expect a bit in the rulebooks, but more especially, I expect the setting and modules to get a full SJW double down in language and tone.
Quote from: CRKrueger;1128919Hey Shark. Some of the people at the Pub might be SJWs or Alt-Right or Control-Left, you'd really never know because of the No Politics rule, not even Politics in Gaming. So the talk's all about gaming, or other shit. So basically you shoot the shit without having endless threads of "What the Twitter Mob and the Outrage Brigade did today", or people coming in to just troll the place over political nonsense and all the disingenuous forum warrior crap that goes along with it. The RPGsite has slowly morphed from being about Gaming to being about the Gaming Culture War. With all the ridiculous shit being spouted on all the other forums, it is refreshing to have a place where you have the freedom to talk about the culture war, but it's also refreshing to have a place where you can stow all that shit and just talk about gaming.
Greetings!
Interesting, my friend! Your thoughts and analysis is always appreciated!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: S'mon;1128890There are some pet SJW posters and some (quite a lot of) bad moderation, but it is if anything better than a couple years ago in that since Chris Helton (a true hardcore SJW of the Jessica Price variety) left, there is again more emphasis in talking about games and less in using games as a pretext to push SJW ideology. Morrus, Umbran & co are more like "Sunday Anglican" SJWs - Social Justice is their political religion, but they are lay believers, not priests. So it feels quite different from RPGnet, which is more the Islamic State of RPG Social Justice. It's more like Erdogan's Turkey - non-believers can sort of get along there, but need to be careful.
Well that is not true, you can almost feel the foam being spat at the screen by the mods like Umbran. He is one of those believers that are even worse then the Priests because they think that it is actually real.
Quote from: Omega;1128922That'd be nice if they actually practiced what they preach. But Pub likes to get in its little political digs as well so they come across as false.
There's been a couple times where I've made a huge ruckus over what's Political or not when that definition is Political itself. We've also had big discussions about how refereeing the elbows can lead to Passive Aggressive posters. They usually shut it down fairly quick if someone starts with the politics. I've wrangled with them a lot trying to keep the place honest and I think the founders are pretty committed about trying to keep it clean.
Quote from: Shasarak;1128942Well that is not true, you can almost feel the foam being spat at the screen by the mods like Umbran. He is one of those believers that are even worse then the Priests because they think that it is actually real.
Umbran's also a cowardly shitheel who will jump into an argument, attack, then stealthban you from the thread so you can't reply.
Quote from: Shasarak;1128942Well that is not true, you can almost feel the foam being spat at the screen by the mods like Umbran. He is one of those believers that are even worse then the Priests because they think that it is actually real.
I didn't say they weren't strongly committed! But you agree they're not part of the clergy.
Quote from: S'mon;1128948I didn't say they weren't strongly committed! But you agree they're not part of the clergy.
Gawd man, it has been a while, names that I remember were people like Jesterdavid, Lowkey, Hussie would start wailing and crying about how Orcs are racist and then the true believers like Umbran would come in behind them and run overwatch defence.
Quote from: Shasarak;1128956Gawd man, it has been a while, names that I remember were people like Jesterdavid, Lowkey, Hussie would start wailing and crying about how Orcs are racist and then the true believers like Umbran would come in behind them and run overwatch defence.
Hope Lowkey doesn't do that in the PBP I'm running with him over on Dragonsfoot (he seems a cool player) -I'm using '80s pig-faced 'minions of the Dark Lord' type Orcs, so maybe I'll be ok. :D
Quote from: CRKrueger;1128919The RPGsite has slowly morphed from being about Gaming to being about the Gaming Culture War. With all the ridiculous shit being spouted on all the other forums, it is refreshing to have a place where you have the freedom to talk about the culture war, but it's also refreshing to have a place where you can stow all that shit and just talk about gaming.
TheRPGsite can (and should) be both.
I wonder if people should tag their threads [NO POLITICS] or [GAMING ONLY] in the thread title. That way we don't need to segment the Main Forum into Gaming Politics Threads and Gaming Only Threads. And then, everyone can wail the fuck on anybody (including and most especially ME) who brings up anything political in a Gaming Only thread.
Posters who want Gaming Only discussions should also feel welcome here.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1128909I seriously doubt that anyone's ever going to stop you from playing the way you want, with your own select group of people, in the privacy of your own home with the curtains rolled all the way down. Anything beyond that is getting fucked to hell.
I must have imagined all those open game tables I held which got more people than the 5e AL games did.
QuoteYou can't even voice unapproved opinions in most gaming forums, which is why a lot of us are here.
"I have no place to express my ideas, except this place where I am expressing my ideas. OPPRESSION!!!"
QuoteWe just lost a recent member yesterday cuz he couldn't stomach our politics and he bought into woke nonsense.
That's like saying Catpissman stormed out. Your loss was actually a gain. Alternately: why were you discussing politics at the game table? What does tariff policy on iron ore have to do with my to-hit roll? FOCUS. You're there to game, goddamnit! So hey, maybe it was Wokester's gain after all.
QuoteThe ones most affected are people who want to step beyond their private gatherings to publish their own stuff or participate in public events to promote their stuff or network with people in the industry.
You seem to be unaware of these things called the internet and self-publishing. By the by, self-publishing is how the hobby started. And no kickstarter was needed, they just ponied up their own cash, and the first place they sold was a gaming con they'd helped set up. You can do these things.
As Yoda said, do or no do, there is no whine.
Quote from: S'mon;1128959Hope Lowkey doesn't do that in the PBP I'm running with him over on Dragonsfoot (he seems a cool player) -I'm using '80s pig-faced 'minions of the Dark Lord' type Orcs, so maybe I'll be ok. :D
They are all cool players until the time comes to cancel you.
QuoteGygax was a bit of a grumpy old man grouch.
- Ed C.
It was really the other way around in my experience. Arneson was cold and grumpy, Gary was warm and effusive.
what the fuck happened to this site
edit:
oh it was the mobile theme lmao
Quote from: thedungeondelver;1128969It was really the other way around in my experience. Arneson was cold and grumpy, Gary was warm and effusive.
Greetings!
Interesting, Dungeondelver! I never had a chance to meet Arneson. However, I did get an opportunity to meet Gary Gygax. Gary was always absolutely friendly, gracious, and encouraging.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1128964I must have imagined all those open game tables I held which got more people than the 5e AL games did.
You did! Fosters Lager is hallucinogenic! :)
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1128964Alternately: why were you discussing politics at the game table? What does tariff policy on iron ore have to do with my to-hit roll? FOCUS. You're there to game, goddamnit!
Even if you enforce "no politics at the game table" (and I do), what do you do about pre/post game table talk or social media posting in-between games? AKA, many gamers have social media ties to each other, and with the culture war permeating everything, there's always potential minefields of ideological arguments that could affect the game group.
While my answer would be "just game with adults who can leave their bullshit at home", I know that's very hard to achieve in the real world. That was how our local home group functioned, but based on the recent social media of several members during lockdown, I suspect that won't be possible after CoronaChan.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1128964You seem to be unaware of these things called the internet and self-publishing. By the by, self-publishing is how the hobby started. And no kickstarter was needed, they just ponied up their own cash, and the first place they sold was a gaming con they'd helped set up. You can do these things.
I agree, however in the future, dissidents to the dominant ideology will have to somehow carve out their own spaces, both online and offline. Companies have proven quite afraid of SJWs and willing to do their bidding, even when its proven there's financial loss by pandering to them.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1128964As Yoda said, do or no do, there is no whine.
That drunken little muppet had plenty of wine.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1128964Alternately: why were you discussing politics at the game table? What does tariff policy on iron ore have to do with my to-hit roll? FOCUS. You're there to game, goddamnit! So hey, maybe it was Wokester's gain after all.
I play with my friends, so we spend half the time talking about real-world bullshit. I know it's sacrilegious to some people on this board, but gaming isn't always about "gaming".
Quote from: CRKrueger;1128919Hey Shark. Some of the people at the Pub might be SJWs or Alt-Right or Control-Left, you'd really never know because of the No Politics rule, not even Politics in Gaming. So the talk's all about gaming, or other shit. So basically you shoot the shit without having endless threads of "What the Twitter Mob and the Outrage Brigade did today", or people coming in to just troll the place over political nonsense and all the disingenuous forum warrior crap that goes along with it. The RPGsite has slowly morphed from being about Gaming to being about the Gaming Culture War. With all the ridiculous shit being spouted on all the other forums, it is refreshing to have a place where you have the freedom to talk about the culture war, but it's also refreshing to have a place where you can stow all that shit and just talk about gaming.
Right... "no culture war" except repeatedly talking about how horrible I am, how horrible this site is, how I'm no different than rpgnet mods, etc etc ad nauseum.
"Never Mind the Bollocks, Here's the Sex Pistols!!!"
This is a pretty cool RPG site. Don't be a phallus, and you'll get along just fine.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1128976Right... "no culture war" except repeatedly talking about how horrible I am, how horrible this site is, how I'm no different than rpgnet mods, etc etc ad nauseum.
That's the second thread I've seen you mentioned in there ever.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1128964I must have imagined all those open game tables I held which got more people than the 5e AL games did.
I was being hyperbolic.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1128964"I have no place to express my ideas, except this place where I am expressing my ideas. OPPRESSION!!!"
Yes, pointing out facts is people crying about oppression. That word was totally in that post.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1128964You seem to be unaware of these things called the internet and self-publishing. By the by, self-publishing is how the hobby started. And no kickstarter was needed, they just ponied up their own cash, and the first place they sold was a gaming con they'd helped set up. You can do these things.
As Yoda said, do or no do, there is no whine.
Ah, yes. The "Build Your Own Infrastructure!" argument.
I'm talking about the possibility of people getting cancelled for wrongthink or similar, which could include being banned from cons or public events (something that has happened to various degrees to people before in gaming and culture war in general), and you're telling me about selling stuff in conventions.
I haven't followed game crowdfunding campaigns specifically, but people in indi comics have had their crowdfunding campaigns suspended do to cancel culture BS. Kickstarter has denied people service for having the wrong politics alone. But I suppose that the solution is to build my own crowdfunding platform then get traffic to it somehow and raise up a whole new crowdfunding business, just so I could crowdfund my own stuff.
There have even been incidents of people in the greater culture war (not gaming related) who have been banned from Patreon for politics as well. And when a Patreon alternative came up they managed to shut it down. Sites like GAB have gone through numerous domain registrars cuz they keep denying them service as well. Obviously the solution is to build your own domain registrar just to keep your own domain secure so you can have a site on the internet to begin with.
People have had their MasterCard suspended without notice. Laura Loomer (and others who's name I forget) got dropped by their banks and were left without access to funds overnight. Obviously they should build their own banks. But Laura Loomer's an idiot, so I guess it's OK to remove her from all economic activity.
I don't recall the specific incidents now but people have had their products taken down from DTRPG as well. And no, people won't go to a random nobody's site that just got made yesterday to randomly discover their new game so they can buy it from that site specifically. That's not how things operate in the real world. If you can't go to cons or have an online presence in sites people actually visit you're done.
Had you been the guy who wrote OD&D, it never would have gone anywhere, VisionStorm. "But the pictures aren't on the boxes, what should we do? Wargame stores aren't interested, what should we do? I am a poor timid and helpless frail individual who is incapable of doing anything without anyone holding my hand!"
(https://media.giphy.com/media/l0Iy6pb2KAfW0eevS/giphy.gif)
It's the rank hypocrisy and double standards of the platform providers right now that really rankles. They aren't even trying to hide it anymore, either. Not to mention, what Facebook/Twitter/etc. are doing right now is against US law, and it's only a matter of time before it bubbles up to a case. Whether that case will be tried according to the law or some idiot leftist judge's view of "right outcomes" is an open question at the moment. Right now, those platform enjoy the privileges of being private business platforms (not subject to 1st amendment jurisdiction in any real sense) and public platforms (not subject to libel laws in any real sense). By exercising editorial control over the content, they are setting themselves up for a libel case. Or an anti-trust or 1st amendment case that they manage to dodge with arguments that set them up for a libel case.
What the various gaming sites are doing along those lines is only following the lead of the bigger tech communication world.
Oh, and Kyle, nice way to avoid his points without addressing them for real. Go fuck your self.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1128976Right... "no culture war" except repeatedly talking about how horrible I am, how horrible this site is, how I'm no different than rpgnet mods, etc etc ad nauseum.
honestly they barely talk about you really.
Your also not going to change any people perception about you doing the internet equivalent of hiding in your bunker and surrounding yourself with people who only post what you want to hear.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1128964I must have imagined all those open game tables I held which got more people than the 5e AL games did.
What a surprise a gamers favored version of an rpg "always" has full tables and the ones the hate always have "empty" when they run games. I like PF and 5E and can say the same about 1E and 2E version of D&D except I won't because like your post it would be an absolute load of bullshit. One time you saw less players for a 5E game does not mean that no one plays or your favored version is better. Gamers try to pass off as what is being played at their tables is what truly is popular.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1128964why were you discussing politics at the game table? What does tariff policy on iron ore have to do with my to-hit roll? FOCUS. You're there to game, goddamnit! So hey, maybe it was Wokester's gain after all.
It's called socializing with other people at the gaming table before the game starts. If the game starts at 8 pm and the players want to chat about other stuff than gaming why not. Obviously and I enforce a no politics rule before and after the game starts. Not every table does so and it's no one business mine or yours what we are talking about before the game starts. Unless the game is being run from the DM home said DM very limited authority does not extend further than gaming table.Hat or no stupid hat. If no restrictions are in place in terms of topics most people responses would " you don't like politics fine, mind your own business and get back to setting up the game".
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1128992Had you been the guy who wrote OD&D, it never would have gone anywhere, VisionStorm. "But the pictures aren't on the boxes, what should we do? Wargame stores aren't interested, what should we do? I am a poor timid and helpless frail individual who is incapable of doing anything without anyone holding my hand!"
The guy who is essentially saying that anything past his favored edition sucks really is not the best person to be the judge of how can innovate or not. If I want to create something new who do you think I am going to hire for an rpg, the guy who is going to be saying everything new sucks and those who like or want something do suck even more. Or the guy with an open mind who does the opposite. Your the LAST person to be telling anyone on how to build or sell an rpg.
Quote from: Brad;1128975I play with my friends, so we spend half the time talking about real-world bullshit. I know it's sacrilegious to some people on this board, but gaming isn't always about "gaming".
I suspect this is the case for 9 of 10 game groups. I am in the same boat. I would not play with anyone I did not consider a friend already, or at least I would not GM for strangers. My concern with games becoming politicized, is not so much a worry they will spread their wokeness, it is the games will kill themselves off at some point.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1128976Right... "no culture war" except repeatedly talking about how horrible I am, how horrible this site is, how I'm no different than rpgnet mods, etc etc ad nauseum.
Two things to note:
1. One can be indifferent to or even on your general side of the culture war and still find you abrasive and irritating.
2. They don't talk about you
nearly as much as you'd like to think they do. :)
Quote from: VisionStorm;1128985I'm talking about the possibility of people getting cancelled for wrongthink or similar, which could include being banned from cons or public events (something that has happened to various degrees to people before in gaming and culture war in general).
It happened to me. (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?39135-GEEK-Is-Now-Helping-With-A-Convention)
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1128992Had you been the guy who wrote OD&D, it never would have gone anywhere, VisionStorm. "But the pictures aren't on the boxes, what should we do? Wargame stores aren't interested, what should we do? I am a poor timid and helpless frail individual who is incapable of doing anything without anyone holding my hand!"
(https://media.giphy.com/media/l0Iy6pb2KAfW0eevS/giphy.gif)
I know man. I always admired Gary Gygax's grit and perseverance, and the way he had to build his own bank just to finance his start up business despite the odds. Then built his own convention center to host his own conventions cuz the moral crusaders of his day kept shutting him down every time he tried to show off his new game. The man was truly a legend.
Quote from: jeff37923;1128999It happened to me. (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?39135-GEEK-Is-Now-Helping-With-A-Convention)
You should've foreseen that AL would screw you over with nepotistic crap and started your own convention instead. If the genesis of the RPG hobby would have been left up to you we wouldn't have a hobby. :p /sarc
Quote from: sureshot;1128994honestly they barely talk about you really.
Yeah pundit may wish they repeatedly talked about him over at the pub, but I've seen very little evidence of that. His name hardly ever comes up. Maybe that's what really rankles.
Quote from: sureshot;1128995The guy who is essentially saying that anything past his favored edition sucks really is not the best person to be the judge of how can innovate or not. If I want to create something new who do you think I am going to hire for an rpg, the guy who is going to be saying everything new sucks and those who like or want something do suck even more. Or the guy with an open mind who does the opposite. Your the LAST person to be telling anyone on how to build or sell an rpg.
To be fair, you don't have to play OD&D or be a fan to see the truth in what Kyle Aaron is saying about how it all began. Gygax clearly believed in the game, and worked with limited resources to make it happen. Maybe, given his financial circumstances, he had little choice but to believe, to have faith, and clutch at that one straw.
Obviously, his faith was justified by the buzz that arose when it came out, and maybe that colours our retrospective view. But the fact is, it was launched on a wing and a prayer to a wargaming hobby that had never seen anything quite like it and was potentially hostile to some of its basic precepts. It was a big personal gamble, especially for a guy who at that point had very, very shallow pockets.
Quote from: Zirunel;1129010To be fair, you don't have to play OD&D or be a fan to see the truth in what Kyle Aaron is saying about how it all began. Gygax clearly believed in the game, and his faith was justified by the buzz that arose when it came out, but the fact is, it was launched on a wing and a prayer to a wargaming hobby that had never seen anything quite like it. It was a big personal gamble.
Except that this side argument isn't about whether Gygax took a risk like every single person in history starting a new business ever did, but about specific challenges that didn't exist at the time, but do now, and Kyle couldn't be bothered to address them so he had to refute a straw man instead. And there is no "truth" in straw men.
Absolutely NO ONE was preventing Gygax from starting his own thing. There was no political de-platforming going on at the time. All he had to do was take the exact same risks anyone starting a new venture normally did, without the possibility of extraneous circumstances like neon haired freaks trying to shut him down at every turn
in addition to those normal risks, which was the actual point of the actual argument.
Quote from: TJS;1128983That's the second thread I've seen you mentioned in there ever.
How many have you read there? Because when they opened, EXPLICITLY as a "we're therpgsite but without the pundit!!" site, they had quite a lot. I haven't bothered looking at them since then for the most part, occasionally hearing something and being surprised they haven't shut down yet, but their
entire reason for being is about ME.
Quote from: sureshot;1128994honestly they barely talk about you really.
Your also not going to change any people perception about you doing the internet equivalent of hiding in your bunker and surrounding yourself with people who only post what you want to hear.
You get that this is EXPLICITLY what all the people on the rpgpub have done, right? "We don't want to hear anything about how our hobby is being taken over by a group of ideologically obsessive insurgents so we're leaving therpgsite and will claim rpgpundit is an alt right bigot and lalalalalalalala we can't hear you lalalalala we're going to hide here and make passive-aggressive posts about how much better we are than the pundit!!"?
You also get that this is explicitly NOT what theRPGsite does, where (contrary to the LIES that they were telling on the pub) no one has EVER been banned for their political ideology or for disagreeing with me?
Quote from: Zirunel;1129009Yeah pundit may wish they repeatedly talked about him over at the pub, but I've seen very little evidence of that. His name hardly ever comes up. Maybe that's what really rankles.
yeah, it hardly ever comes up at all except in a 10 page long thread where they can't stop talking about me, on a site they created explicitly to make a clone of therpgsite just without me running it (so they didn't have to worry about that pesky free speech and could ignore anything about the attacks on our hobby). Full of people who talk about me all the time on social media, including posters who have actively doxxed me, sockpuppeted to attack me, and lied about my politics with the intent of defaming me.
Quote from: TJS;1128983That's the second thread I've seen you mentioned in there ever.
One thread about Pundit should have been enough. Then again his ego is really big so two might have been needed to encompass it in all its grandeur. :cool:
Quote from: sureshot;1128994honestly they barely talk about you really.
Your also not going to change any people perception about you doing the internet equivalent of hiding in your bunker and surrounding yourself with people who only post what you want to hear.
Wait? Someone here actually agrees with Pundit? :eek:
Quote from: RPGPundit;1129014a site they created explicitly to make a clone of therpgsite just without me running it (so they didn't have to worry about that pesky free speech and could ignore anything about the attacks on our hobby).
You could see the ostrich head in the sand reaction coming from how a few were posting here before and during PUBs inception. "There is nothing bad going on! Everyone is just making it all up!"
Back on topic. Such as it is.
After reading up more on Mearls' transfer. I get the impression it probably was spurred on by an urge for better pay with family to look after as the incentive.
But as usual. We will likely never know for sure.
Quote from: Omega;1129017Wait? Someone here actually agrees with Pundit? :eek:
Pundit once chewed my ass off on Twitter over me favoring point-buy systems over random generation. Called me names and told me to just take the rolls like a man instead of whining about them like a little bitch, or something to that effect (don't remember the exact words but it was something very similar in tone). I took it as part and parcel of interacting in social media, and moved on with my life.
Quote from: Omega;1129019Back on topic. Such as it is.
After reading up more on Mearls' transfer. I get the impression it probably was spurred on by an urge for better pay with family to look after as the incentive.
But as usual. We will likely never know for sure.
But people need to believe that their little e-drama has to be at the crux of the decision. So they'd rather speculate he got canned due to social media fallout from hiring "controversial figures" once upon a time more than half a decade ago to create the most successful edition of D&D in history rather than consider the possibility the reason for the decision may have ultimately been something else.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1129021But people need to believe that their little e-drama has to be at the crux of the decision. So they'd rather speculate he got canned due to social media fallout from hiring "controversial figures" once upon a time more than half a decade ago to create the most successful edition of D&D in history rather than consider the possibility the reason for the decision may have ultimately been something else.
Actually its the bad blood over the stuff hes done within the last year or so that pissed some people off. No one really bothered much with his early antics as it was pretty small stuff as noted prior.
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1128792Spite is a remarkable motivator.
[video=youtube;fP0MXJAQhmo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fP0MXJAQhmo[/youtube]
Quote from: VisionStorm;1129021Pundit once chewed my ass off on Twitter over me favoring point-buy systems over random generation. Called me names and told me to just take the rolls like a man instead of whining about them like a little bitch, or something to that effect (don't remember the exact words but it was something very similar in tone). I took it as part and parcel of interacting in social media, and moved on with my life. ...
This.
I think lots of people take Pundits Bombastic Hyperbole wayyyy too personally.
Many years ago Pundit posted in a thread I started blasting me a bit; I just fired right back. Everyone moved on. No big deal.
If you are one of those people that gets butt hurt/defensive on social media when people are mean to you, Pundit will roll you over.
If you cannot string together a coherent argument, Pundit will roll you over.
If Pundit says: "Blah.. Blah... like a little bitch." The correct reply is always: " Blah... *something resembling an actual counterpoint*... Blah... you puffed up arrogant jackass."
If your reaction is always: "Blah... *insert passive aggressive ad-hominem attack here*...Blah... Pundit is just jealous!" You're gonna' get jumped.
It's really not that hard if you have something resembling a thick skin. Just fire back with an actual coherent argument. Pundit may not agree with you (probably not), but at least you'll get more respect than if the only offense you can muster are varying forms of personal attacks.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1129013You get that this is EXPLICITLY what all the people on the rpgpub have done, right? "We don't want to hear anything about how our hobby is being taken over by a group of ideologically obsessive insurgents so we're leaving therpgsite and will claim rpgpundit is an alt right bigot and lalalalalalalala we can't hear you lalalalala we're going to hide here and make passive-aggressive posts about how much better we are than the pundit!!"?
Get over it not all of them. That kind of talk is something I expect from someone over at TBP not here.
You don't have to go defend yourself at the other forum and many will not change their opinion of you. One can at least correct their version of events about you publishing nothing beyond Lion and Dragon.
It means going into enemy territory so to speak and again you don't have to go, at the same time you can't bitch and moan that they talk shit about you while you refuse to try and defend yourself. Simply because it means leaving the protection of this forum. If you want an echo chamber and screw everyone else so be it. Don't get pissed then if people accuse this forum of being your own personal echo chamber.
Quote from: RPGPundit;1129014yeah, it hardly ever comes up at all except in a 10 page long thread where they can't stop talking about me, on a site they created explicitly to make a clone of therpgsite just without me running it (so they didn't have to worry about that pesky free speech and could ignore anything about the attacks on our hobby). Full of people who talk about me all the time on social media, including posters who have actively doxxed me, sockpuppeted to attack me, and lied about my politics with the intent of defaming me.
One thread does not mean talking about you a lot. That like some in the hobby who insist that Rifts is popular and everyone plays it simply because they play it at the table.
Quote from: sureshot;1128995What a surprise a gamers favored version of an rpg "always" has full tables and the ones the hate always have "empty" when they run games.
Not at all. I didn't say the 5e tables were empty, I said mine had
more people. 5e/AL is - or was, before this madness - doing very well.
QuoteIf I want to create something new who do you think I am going to hire for an rpg
If
you want to create something new, why would you hire anyone? Write it yourself!
Quote from: VisionStorm;1129011Absolutely NO ONE was preventing Gygax from starting his own thing. There was no political de-platforming going on at the time.
Not when he started, but ten years later... Bothered About D&D (https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26328105). And this happened in the context of an America facing a satanic ritual child abuse (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-care_sex-abuse_hysteria) hysteria, with made-up allegations sending innocent people to prison.
In every era, anyone who wants to produce anything useful and interesting will face obstacles. Every time. It's only a matter of degree.
At least nowadays you don't have to pay upfront for a 1,000 print run. There's never been an easier time to publish things. Now,
getting an audience for it is another matter. But quality will win out in the end. That's the free market. Pundit ain't exactly popular with the SJWs, but he's published some good books - I've a copy of
Lion & Dragon right here.
I would observe, too, that Pundit was banned from rpg.net, and his response was not merely to cry oppression, which he certainly did a lot of, but as well to start therpgsite. In any group there are people who complain, and people who act. Usually the complainers don't act, he's unusual in that way. But he acted - which you and others would say is impossible.
And yet here we are.
Quote from: sureshot;1129044It means going into enemy territory so to speak and again you don't have to go, at the same time you can't bitch and moan that they talk shit about you while you refuse to try and defend yourself. Simply because it means leaving the protection of this forum. If you want an echo chamber and screw everyone else so be it. Don't get pissed then if people accuse this forum of being your own personal echo chamber.
They could come here, and argue it with me if they like, on the older and original forum rather than a pale imitation. They'd have a guarantee of free speech here, unlike there.
RPGPundit, go post on the RPGPub thread and have some fun.
I see no problem with theRPGsite and the RPGPub both existing. They serve different audiences. However, if they're going to keep their No Culture War / No Politics pledge, they need to walk the walk or get called out for it.
And...you'll have fun calling them out on it on their own site.
Quote from: Brad;1128975I play with my friends, so we spend half the time talking about real-world bullshit. I know it's sacrilegious to some people on this board, but gaming isn't always about "gaming".
Brad, how do you keep the real world bullshit chatter from melting down your gaming group?
Has real world bullshit talk caused you to lose any members or cause group division?
Kyle Aaron, same questions for you.
As I mentioned, I use my STFU! voice when anything political pops up at the table, but between games, social media posts due which identify ideological differences are probably going to shred the group, especially with the politicization of CoronaChan.
Regarding future RPG creation, I agree with Kyle Aaron.
Innovators find a way. If you have a passion for something, you push no matter what and discover ways to reach your audience.
Gygax had obstacles that don't exist today, but we have obstacles today that didn't exist for Gary.
I don't believe freedoms and rights have a long term future in this world, but in the short term, RPG creators can carve out a niche.
It won't be easy, but nothing worth doing is easy.
Quote from: S'mon;1128890There are some pet SJW posters and some (quite a lot of) bad moderation, but it is if anything better than a couple years ago in that since Chris Helton (a true hardcore SJW of the Jessica Price variety) left, there is again more emphasis in talking about games and less in using games as a pretext to push SJW ideology. Morrus, Umbran & co are more like "Sunday Anglican" SJWs - Social Justice is their political religion, but they are lay believers, not priests. So it feels quite different from RPGnet, which is more the Islamic State of RPG Social Justice. It's more like Erdogan's Turkey - non-believers can sort of get along there, but need to be careful.
I know I'm awfully late to the discussion, but I just wanted to say that, in my opinion, you perfectly nailed it, S'mon.
Re-Chris Helton, since a good part of this SJW nonsense is about power, and power play, I noticed just like you did that the atmosphere at ENWorld cleared a little after the departure of that schmuck.
I'm somewhat fascinated with the complex dynamic of posters in an internet forum board, like kind of A Game of Thrones thing, but with no deaths, "merely" humiliation, shaming and shunning, and many more (ho boy !) sicophancy. The fuckers in chief are annoying enough, but it's like the major villains in a movie or a novel: you love to hate them [I don't hate anyone, just being hyperbolic here]. But the endless brigade of kow-towing nincompoops who think it's their duty to support the prevailing twisted and sanctimonious orthodoxy by loudly agreeing with moderators... aarggh :-) !!
I remember, years ago, when the Paizo boards were a pleasant place, before they were wrecked by Jessica Price - what havoc a single maladjusted person in "power" can wreck !
Regarding The RPG Pub (in case it's still part of the thread), I think it's a lovely place and a breath of fresh air , really - but while the RPG Pub is a somewhat lily-scented place, the RPGSite has the strong aroma of braying contrarian Barbarians -and I like it just that way :-D !
Quote from: Spinachcat;1129094Brad, how do you keep the real world bullshit chatter from melting down your gaming group?
Has real world bullshit talk caused you to lose any members or cause group division?
I'll answer this question in good faith as I'll assume you're asking sincerely; hard to tell anymore with some people, though...
Anyway, here's how Monday night went (Roll20 session for buddies who live in scattered locations):
-We talked about random crap, like what our kids are doing or some nonsense. I went into a diatribe about how my 18 month old son decided that 4AM is his preferred time to get up every day and I can't even go to the gym because they're all closed. One of my buddies said his son did that until he was almost two, now he's three and it's normal sleeping...blah blah blah. Joked about Chinamanvirus, wondered how long this bullshit was going to go on. Buddy #1 said I was entering into the CT-zone because I keep calling it a psyops campaign, Buddy #2 is laconic for the most part, so when #1 and I got into it he just laughed. This was about 5-10 minutes.
-Asked what had happened last session since we skipped last week and I was looking for my notes. Couple minutes recapping, someone said they wanted a drink, so we all went to get one. Came back, talked about how alcohol kills the virus. Maybe 5 minutes.
-Played for an hour, pretty solid gaming.
-Buddy #2 starts complaining about how all my NPCs are dicks because they always try to undermine the PCs. I remind him that it's PSEUDO-AUTHENTIC MID-EVIL (we're playing C&S using Dark Albion) and the nobles are self-serving bastards. He says all my NPCs for every game have always been that way. I remind him about the time years ago when we were playing B3 how he said "I bet they're thieves" when the party encountered two female thieves in the palace and how he always metagames using Gygaxian tropes as his basis for doing anything. That's maybe 10 minutes because we all got another drink.
-Two hours of gaming. Almost no commentary outside of the game.
-Cliffhanger, decide to stop because it's late. 10-15 minutes of bs about random stuff, like schools being closed, someone was moving, more Chinamanvirus, etc.
So basically, we all police ourselves. There are some heated debates, especially between my best friend and I (I am almost hyper-conservative and he's become more and more liberal since getting married), but when it starts to get out of control, we both just stop and get on to business. Typically one of us will just say this is stupid, let's get a drink and play, and that's that.
RE: losing members, hasn't happened in years because again, I typically only play with people who are my friends. The worst incident with someone quitting had more to do with his incessant whining and powergaming to such a degree that the game wasn't fun for anyone, so I just told him to GTFO and he did. That was that. Game was great after he left. Never had an instance of "real world talk" causing any true division...well once we had a makeshift group with some people we recruited from the gaming store, half friends, half new blood. One was a 30-ish lady who seemed nice enough but she found out I was single and started emailing me. I was not interested, and she didn't like it that much. Otherwise, it's almost always been catpissmen nonsense that causes problems, not politics.
Maybe this doesn't answer your question, but it's not easy to spill my guts on this topic without it becoming a disjointed mess of anecdotal bullshit that I can't even keep straight half the time. SO many weird things have happened over the years, they all just sort of meld into this morass of stupidity. Makes me laugh, at least.
Quote from: Lychee of the Exchequer;1129098Regarding The RPG Pub (in case it's still part of the thread), I think it's a lovely place and a breath of fresh air , really - but while the RPG Pub is a somewhat lily-scented place, the RPGSite has the strong aroma of braying contrarian Barbarians -and I like it just that way :-D !
In my opinion, when people are TOO polite, you never really get to know them or their opinions. It's only after you've had a few drinks and the screaming matches begin over trivial matters like best basketball player ever that you can truly make any friends.
In my House any reunion has the rule not to discuss politics. We put our good relationship over anything. Same goes for my gaming table, not before nor after the game.
In one of my games, very closed, invitation only--we talk a little politics, sometimes, during breaks--because we know there aren't serious divisions among the whole group about the basic ideas of how things should work. We disagree on effective means and sometimes on stuff around the edges. Of course, if there is no disagreement, there really isn't much to talk about, is there? We've got enough disagreement to have a conversation and enough agreement for the conversation to be productive. In the same way we might talk religion or any number of "not polite dinner table" conversation. However, we keep it to a minimum, and 98% only in breaks. I can think of maybe two times in the last 10 years when the discussion used up any gaming time, and not more than 15-20 minutes even then. But even during breaks, that's not the main conversation. Politics would eat into our social times.
In my other game, there are no politics, and I'll nip anything that even resembles it before it can get started. The game is more open, and I know for a fact that some of the politics of the members are not compatible, including with mine. I'm fine running for that group as long as there is no politics--but would end it in a heartbeat if politics became a thing. (Or more likely, exclude the person that was dragging it in.) We've got a rotating cast of 13-15 players (it varies), and every last one of them is mature enough to leave all that stuff behind when they show up. No one even had to be told. They figured it out by having some modicum of a clue.
There is even some overlap in the two groups. Amazing, players that are in both groups know that the rules are different, and manage to function well in both places despite that. (That was sarcasm, just in case that wasn't evident.)
Quote from: Lychee of the Exchequer;1129098I remember, years ago, when the Paizo boards were a pleasant place, before they were wrecked by Jessica Price - what havoc a single maladjusted person in "power" can wreck !
Yeah, I felt that was a terrible shame. I think Stevens & Wertz really did want their boards to be a 'fun and happy place' - and they were, for a good while, until wrecked from the inside by their own employee. They eventually got rid of her but it was too late.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1129065Not when he started, but ten years later... Bothered About D&D (https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-26328105). And this happened in the context of an America facing a satanic ritual child abuse (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Day-care_sex-abuse_hysteria) hysteria, with made-up allegations sending innocent people to prison.
In every era, anyone who wants to produce anything useful and interesting will face obstacles. Every time. It's only a matter of degree.
At least nowadays you don't have to pay upfront for a 1,000 print run. There's never been an easier time to publish things. Now, getting an audience for it is another matter. But quality will win out in the end. That's the free market. Pundit ain't exactly popular with the SJWs, but he's published some good books - I've a copy of Lion & Dragon right here.
I would observe, too, that Pundit was banned from rpg.net, and his response was not merely to cry oppression, which he certainly did a lot of, but as well to start therpgsite. In any group there are people who complain, and people who act. Usually the complainers don't act, he's unusual in that way. But he acted - which you and others would say is impossible.
And yet here we are.
Yes, but like you mentioned, the Satanic Panic wasn't going on around the time that D&D came out. It happened a decade later, after D&D had already been established and TSR had been making money publishing stuff for years. And just because something is common or rears its head every few decades that doesn't mean it's right or that we have to accept it. Or that if only we ignore it, it will go away, and we should never even talk about it.
I was a pre-teen kid around the time that the Satanic Panic was going on and my reaction to it wasn't just to accept it, but to reject it to the point that it became part of my identity. I used to
hate the Religious Right as a kid and the era of religious authoritarianism I grew up in contributed to shaping my political views to the point I became an anarchist and even an anti-theist since an early age (though, I'm neither anymore). I even delved into far left politics (left-anarchism) and only left them after they became the same type of authoritarian nitwits that drew me to left-anarchist politics to begin with.
But circumstances are different now because the same technology that grants us easy access to all of these publishing opportunities also amplifies the voices of these new religious nuts. And the giant tech corporations (larger and more influential than anything that existed in the 80s) that produce a lot of this technology has also taken the authoritarian's side--helping purge wrongthinkers and trying to remove them from economic activity. People can't even say the "wrong" thing anymore (or even something merely interpreted as the wrong thing) without some woke nitwit making their name public online and dragging them into some worldwide witch-hunt were people across the globe who aren't even in the same country as where the supposed infraction took place can pile onto the mob and opine about things they can't possibly know anything about.
A group I used to listen to regularly in YouTube (Honey Badger Radio, whom Pundit interviewed with recently) was once thrown out of con without refund and permanently banned because someone not even in the same country saw a picture of their booth with a GamerGate logo and started spreading rumors on Twitter that they were harassing people. It wasn't even a complaint from someone in the actual con--just social media BS from people thousands of miles away. None of this stuff happened in the 80s, specially not on this scale. People wrongfully got hurt (and I also complained about it back then), but it was mostly fringe cases. Now anyone with a phone can stir up a social media mob and get someone cancelled on a whim.
Anyways the point of my post that kicked this off wasn't that publishing stuff is impossible, but rather that just because you can play on your home or within your own circles and nothing has happened to you (yet) that doesn't mean that there aren't far reaching things going on that could continue to escalate and impact people's ability to operate within the hobby. And ignoring them won't make them go away. If anything it helps empower them and normalize this sort of behavior as just "the way things always have been".
Brad, I never ask you
or anyone else any question that I'm not sincerely interested in hearing the answer.
Thanks for the input and I will follow up later with thoughts and probably more questions for several of you guys.
Quote from: Jaeger;1129033Many years ago Pundit posted in a thread I started blasting me a bit; I just fired right back. Everyone moved on. No big deal.
One thing I've learned about RPGPundit over the years is that he LOVES to joust.
The reciprocal blasting, especially with actual ideas attached, appears to be his idea of fun.
He really enjoys the back and forth (for whatever reason). To me, Twitter seems like hell. To Pundy, it's home!
Twitter is the greatest multiplayer Android game of all time!
Quote from: RPGPundit;1129980Twitter is the greatest multiplayer Android game of all time!
Twitter is a disease. The afflicted mostly appear to have narcissistic personality disorder. And clearly self-esteem and addiction problems. Although those who choose to wallow in its muck deliberately may be suffering from other disorders as well.
Apparently Mearls is back on the D&D TTRPG full-time now, and it sounds like the Twitterati may already be upset about it.
Since neither side wants me to have anything to do with Official D&D, I have no real interest in the squabble beyond "it's a shame they can't both lose." ;)
This is currently the funniest shit to watch on twitter. :D
Quote from: Shasarak;1128956Gawd man, it has been a while, names that I remember were people like Jesterdavid, Lowkey, Hussie would start wailing and crying about how Orcs are racist and then the true believers like Umbran would come in behind them and run overwatch defence.
Lowkey left Enworld 2+ months ago and asked for all his posts to be removed.
4e agenda-pushing crowd subverted one his threads and he lashed out in comedy and got modded. He took it to the meta forum, was unhappy with the answers and left.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1130879Apparently Mearls is back on the D&D TTRPG full-time now, and it sounds like the Twitterati may already be upset about it.
Since neither side wants me to have anything to do with Official D&D, I have no real interest in the squabble beyond "it's a shame they can't both lose." ;)
So Mearls is off the project, and then back on the project?
That's interesting. I can imagine some SJW twit being all gleeful, and shouting "Yes!!! We finally got him out of there!!! Wait......what??? Oh hell no!!!".
Go on Twitter, search for #mearls. The shrieking is on all day, every day. ;)
Quote from: Melan;1130911Go on Twitter, search for #mearls. The shrieking is on all day, every day. ;)
I can't see shit. Maybe it's because I don't have an account.
Got any juicy screenshots to share? :) Good drama is always welcome.
Try this:
https://www.twipu.com/tag/FireMikeMearls
Quote from: Sadras;1130892Lowkey left Enworld 2+ months ago and asked for all his posts to be removed.
4e agenda-pushing crowd subverted one his threads and he lashed out in comedy and got modded. He took it to the meta forum, was unhappy with the answers and left.
Was it Fat Tony? That guys loves him some 4e.
Quote from: Melichor;1130916Try this:
https://www.twipu.com/tag/FireMikeMearls
Wow. Now I remember why I avoid twitter (although the linked tweets are hilarious).
Don't these people have lives? Don't bother answering that.:D
Quote from: Dimitrios;1130921Wow. Now I remember why I avoid twitter (although the linked tweets are hilarious).
Don't these people have lives? Don't bother answering that.:D
No. If you live on Twitter then you don't have a life. But you likely spend an inordinate amount of time trying to convince an uncaring world that you do.
I'll extend that to the people that troll Twitter looking for stuff to get outraged about. they are no different. Same problem, same narcissism, same pointless. Basically the same kinda people but claiming that somehow they aren't.
The Social Mob Media.
Virtual Lynching anyone?
Quote from: Melichor;1130916Try this:
https://www.twipu.com/tag/FireMikeMearls
I am in awe...
*Grabs popcorn*
I think that what these people do not realize is that Mike Mearls has probably been able to demonstrate to his employer that any allegations of "enabling an abuser" are patently false.
And WOTC might be stuck between the rage of the twitterati and a wrongful termination lawsuit...
Quote from: Zirunel;1130926I'll extend that to the people that troll Twitter looking for stuff to get outraged about. they are no different. Same problem, same narcissism, same pointless. Basically the same kinda people but claiming that somehow they aren't.
That is oft pushback. These sociopaths love to point their fingers and accuse, or declare their hallucination of the day "problematic". And people will only put up with this so far before they start fighting back one way or another. We've seen this in the artists circles way the hell back and this is really nothing new, unfortunately. Just another turn of another damn cyclic infestation and more damage done. Often lasting damage. Is it any wonder some flip out when they see this stuff?
Quote from: Jaeger;1130943I am in awe...
*Grabs popcorn*
I think that what these people do not realize is that Mike Mearls has probably been able to demonstrate to his employer that any allegations of "enabling an abuser" are patently false.
And WOTC might be stuck between the rage of the twitterati and a wrongful termination lawsuit...
Considering WOTC erased its consultant credits over accusations... Hate to say it. But Mearls getting some of his own medicine might be karma. Mearls courted these maniacs and now theyve started to turn on him.
I am totally confused, but totally amused as well.
Why do the SJW freakjobs hate Mearls who championed SJW nonsense?
What did he do that woke their woke ire?
Has Mearls responded to the freaks?
PS: how can we use this to burn the freaks out of the hobby??
Better question might be. Is Mearls really back on D&D or is this just more backlog work being finished?
I think the root cause might actually be 5th edition. A lot of this hatred seems to originate from the sad mutants on SA's game forum (and its Twitter diaspora), and those guys hate 5e. The rest is more like justification. Looking at that Twitter aggregator, I see this is the supposed damning evidence about Mearls:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EYozI-XVAAEWXiN.png)
Unless there is more and there is worse, it is nothing.
Quote from: Melan;1130960I think the root cause might actually be 5th edition. A lot of this hatred seems to originate from the sad mutants on SA's game forum (and its Twitter diaspora), and those guys hate 5e.
Good God, yes. Those guys blew a fuse when 5e dropped.
Wow. Having scrolled through a few dozen of those tweets I have but one thing to say: all these people are literally insane.
But I hope they get what they want. Mearls has had it coming ever since he "fired" players from D&D.
e. Thanks for the link, Melichor!
Quote from: Omega;1130946... Mearls courted these maniacs and now theyve started to turn on him.
They always eat their own.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1130953PS: how can we use this to burn the freaks out of the hobby??
The pessimist in me wants to say that their conquest was assured once WotC absorbed TSR.
Looks like his absence had nothing to do with this incident at all. He was over working on the Video Game section, and once that project completed he returned to the D&D division.
Quote from: Melan;1130960I think the root cause might actually be 5th edition. A lot of this hatred seems to originate from the sad mutants on SA's game forum (and its Twitter diaspora), and those guys hate 5e. The rest is more like justification. Looking at that Twitter aggregator, I see this is the supposed damning evidence about Mearls:
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EYozI-XVAAEWXiN.png)
Unless there is more and there is worse, it is nothing.
There is an accusation that Mearls sent confidential emails accusing Zak of wrong doing to Zak. That said emails came from newly created email addresses which the accuser had created just to send that complaint and the proof Mearls forwarded the emails to Zak is that Zak sent emails back to that unique email address harassing the accuser.
The evidence supporting this allegation seems to not be out there aside from "A friend said they talked to the victim and the victim said or implied that's what happened so that must be what happened".
If you ask to see this evidence that's what happened, you're accused of defending Zak and therefore enabling abuse and you must be a horrible person.
At least that has been my experience, the three times I've asked to see this evidence. I also cannot find the evidence "out there on the net" despite trying to find it multiple times.
Quote from: Mistwell;1130985There is an accusation that Mearls sent confidential emails accusing Zak of wrong doing to Zak. That said emails came from newly created email addresses which the accuser had created just to send that complaint and the proof Mearls forwarded the emails to Zak is that Zak sent emails back to that unique email address harassing the accuser.
The evidence supporting this allegation seems to not be out there aside from "A friend said they talked to the victim and the victim said or implied that's what happened so that must be what happened".
If you ask to see this evidence that's what happened, you're accused of defending Zak and therefore enabling abuse and you must be a horrible person.
At least that has been my experience, the three times I've asked to see this evidence. I also cannot find the evidence "out there on the net" despite trying to find it multiple times.
This whole mess against Mearls stems entirely out of imaginary wrongdoing pilled on top of imaginary wrongdoing. A guy (Zak Smith) was accused of doing something--which, if I recall correctly he was later exonerated for--then, a social media mob accused Mearls of aiding the accused party by sharing information with him about his accusers, for which there was no evidence that Mearls ever did, assuming that such a thing is even a bad thing even if he did do it (I would think people would have the right to face their accusers if they're out to destroy him, but apparently not).
Now the social media hate mob is out for Mearls' job (again), over accusations against him that were never proven (of something that is arguable was even such a bad thing to begin with), involving accusations against another guy who was exonerated. But they still want blood and feel justified of having it because...reasons.
This whole mess is truly some human centipede ouroboros going up its own asshole type of thing.
Quote from: Mistwell;1130985At least that has been my experience, the three times I've asked to see this evidence. I also cannot find the evidence "out there on the net" despite trying to find it multiple times.
That seems to be my impression as well. If there was concrete screenshotted evidence (for what a screenshot is worth), it would be posted on Twitter 24/7, but it isn't. That's telling.
In Zak's case, there is Mandy's testimony, corroborated by multiple others (which may or may not hold up in court - this is not easy stuff), and made plausible by, well, Zak's online
oeuvre.
With Mearls, it is a game of Chinese whispers all the way back.
Quote from: Morblot;1130966But I hope they get what they want. Mearls has had it coming ever since he "fired" players from D&D.
Ehh? When did he fire the D&D players, and how? Somehow I missed getting a pink slip from WOTC.
Here ya go:
https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/955153201434525696?lang=en
Because that's not gatekeeping.
Quote from: Melichor;1130992Here ya go:
https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/955153201434525696?lang=en
Because that's not gatekeeping.
I'm still waiting to receive my long overdue payroll, from the time prior to my termination by Mike Mearls. Pay up Mike!!!
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1130972The pessimist in me wants to say that their conquest was assured once WotC absorbed TSR.
The WOTC that picked up TSR was, if I recall right, not yet taken over by feminists and turned into the slowly, ever increasing, mess it is today.
Quote from: Melichor;1130992Here ya go:
https://twitter.com/mikemearls/status/955153201434525696?lang=en
Because that's not gatekeeping.
What's hilarious is that the tweet strongly suggests that women just aren't smart enough to handle rules complexity and lore density.
That too.
SJWs are the PushmePullyyou of political correctness. Which was allready a mess right out the gate two iterations ago.
Quote from: Omega;1131003The WOTC that picked up TSR was, if I recall right, not yet taken over by feminists and turned into the slowly, ever increasing, mess it is today.
WOTC was always woke before there was a term for it.
Just watch the youtube series: Fireside with Peter Adkison: History of Dungeons & Dragons
Tons of info about what they did with 3e.
And they explicitly mention that they wanted to make a more "inclusive" game with 3e.
The rot had set in early...
Quote from: Jaeger;1131022WOTC was always woke before there was a term for it.
Just watch the youtube series: Fireside with Peter Adkison: History of Dungeons & Dragons
Tons of info about what they did with 3e.
And they explicitly mention that they wanted to make a more "inclusive" game with 3e.
The rot had set in early...
The original WotC DnD department was essentially all the old TSR DnD staff so... not sure how woke you think that they were.
Now Peter Adkison is a different story.
Quote from: Omega;1131003The WOTC that picked up TSR was, if I recall right, not yet taken over by feminists and turned into the slowly, ever increasing, mess it is today.
And as Shasarak points out, most of their staff was TSR personnel at first. But given the location and the demographics, I think the drift was, while not immediate, was inevitable without some countervailing ethos.
Quote from: Jaeger;1131022WOTC was always woke before there was a term for it.
Just watch the youtube series: Fireside with Peter Adkison: History of Dungeons & Dragons
Tons of info about what they did with 3e.
And they explicitly mention that they wanted to make a more "inclusive" game with 3e.
The rot had set in early...
Inclusive like they wanted to include women as well as men in the fanbase? That they wanted it to be more than just a white boys fanbase?
Yes clearly "rot" has set in now that it's more popular than ever. How dare they include a wider fanbase!
Quote from: Mistwell;1131047Inclusive like they wanted to include women as well as men in the fanbase? That they wanted it to be more than just a white boys fanbase?
Yes clearly "rot" has set in now that it's more popular than ever. How dare they include a wider fanbase!
Women and minorities were always in the hobby long before TSR switched over to WotC. What is even your argument?
Quote from: Mistwell;1130984Looks like his absence had nothing to do with this incident at all. He was over working on the Video Game section, and once that project completed he returned to the D&D division.
Well, it looks like your Messiah is back from the dead. You will be able to champion WotC some more.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131047Inclusive like they wanted to include women as well as men in the fanbase? That they wanted it to be more than just a white boys fanbase?
Yes clearly "rot" has set in now that it's more popular than ever. How dare they include a wider fanbase!
It is the charge of the White Knight!!Go get them!! Respond to that thar Virtue Signal!!
Quote from: Snowman0147;1131051Women and minorities were always in the hobby long before TSR switched over to WotC. What is even your argument?
I assume that when you target your books for ages 11 years+ that obviously means that women and minorities are excluded by default.
Quote from: Shasarak;1131053I assume that when you target your books for ages 11 years+ that obviously means that women and minorities are excluded by default.
Jesus, somebody needs to tatoo this on foreheads....
Women and minorities weren't excluded. They could play just like anybody else. The problem was that being a nerd wasn't cool in the beginning, so a lot of women and minorities (and guys) weren't interested in RPGs because they were considered nerd games.
Quote from: jeff37923;1131055Jesus, somebody needs to tatoo this on foreheads....
Women and minorities weren't excluded. They could play just like anybody else. The problem was that being a nerd wasn't cool in the beginning, so a lot of women and minorities (and guys) weren't interested in RPGs because they were considered nerd games.
Ha, yeah being a Nerd Gamer was often a minority of one where I grew up.
Quote from: jeff37923;1131055Women and minorities weren't excluded. They could play just like anybody else. The problem was that being a nerd wasn't cool in the beginning, so a lot of women and minorities (and guys) weren't interested in RPGs because they were considered nerd games.
Exactly.
Gatekeeping was certainly done in the early days of gaming. It was done by women and the cool kids.
They wanted nothing to do with
us. I never once encountered a gaming group turning away anyone. Today's SJW narrative is completely backwards.
I suspect most of the people bemoaning the lack of inclusiveness in past gaming are simply too young to know better. They weren't there, don't remember, and operate from a default assumption that the past simply must have been less inclusive. Because...The past.
Those of us who do remember know the truth was rather different. When D&D was released with great fanfare in the 70s (to a tiny wargaming community), part of the buzz around the game was that it was "wargaming that women and girls were actually interested in." Near as I can recall that was universally lauded as a good thing. Wargamers were pretty excited about that, and keen to welcome women to their tables. And we did. Now it's important not to overplay this, female participation was probably still only maybe 5% of gamers, but still, a huge increase over traditional wargaming where it was probably 0.001%.
In my own ttrpg experiences in the 70s and 80s, 5-10% female is probably about right, although in general female players were more likely to be casual than hardcore. And that may be an important point. But always welcome to play, even if only casually.
Wrt ethnic diversity, I don't recall anyone even talking about that. Our wargaming group included one poc (and considering we lived in one of the least diverse places in North America, that meant poc were hugely over-represented in our group). In fact he was the one who first picked up D&D and introduced it to the group.
Now all of that said, gaming was still mostly a white, male hobby. I don't think that can be denied. Nowadays, female participation is vastly higher than it was in the 70s or 80s (ethnic diversity too? Possibly, not sure).
Yes, it's irritating when people with no understanding of the past mischaracterize it. Yes, the greater diversity today is more a product of mainstreaming in the present rather than gatekeeping in the past. But the greater diversity and reach today has to be a good thing, even if it does mean that yes, gaming will change because of that greater reach.
Quote from: jeff37923;1131055Jesus, somebody needs to tattoo this on foreheads....
Women and minorities weren't excluded. They could play just like anybody else. The problem was that being a nerd wasn't cool in the beginning, so a lot of women and minorities (and guys) weren't interested in RPGs because they were considered nerd games.
Exactly this. We didn't exclude women or minorities at all. I still remember the look on the Cheerleaders face in high school when I told her I liked playing D&D, and asked her to play with our gaming group. That didn't happen. I did find several girlfriends later that did like playing D&D though and they played in my gaming group from about 1979 on...
Minorities were welcome to play. There just weren't many where I happened to live at the time, Colorado.
No one excluded anyone from gaming, even before the Satanic Picnic, there were a lot of people that refused to play Wargames, as well as D&D. All that was considered as "egghead" activities unsuitable by normal people. The reality was that normal people were afraid of appearing stupid (Very understandable while playing in Wargames by the way, when one makes a grievous tactical or strategic error), and so avoided gaming like a plague. Which suited us gamers just fine. On the flip side of the coin, losing in a wargame, usually meant learning how to play better, and we replayed avoiding making the same mistakes which actually improved our tactical and strategic decision making skills, and not just for wargames, by the way. Even back then young women were busy gold digging, and climbing the social ladder, and your social status, income, and future prospects were there primary focus, and anything else they avoided in their quest. (See also -
Stairway to Heaven by Led Zeppelin, and Frank Zappa Albums for reference to common attitudes at the time by the muggles.
Early on, D&D had a stigmata not because of religious views, but because it was a "new" form of entertainment that alot of folks didn't understand. Traditional publishing and news media subtly put down, quashed, or otherwise suppressed new ideas, innovations, and concepts, because they didn't want any competition. One was expected to enjoy sports (as a non-active spectator, ...more often than not), and hero worship was actively encouraged, with a focus on "The cult of personality". Gaming didn't focus on just one type of hero, but many types of hero. D&D let geeks experience what it was like, to actually be a hero, and a participant instead of a spectator.
For many normal people at the time, it was inconceivable that a gaming group could get together, just to have a good time and enjoy the company of friends and kinfolk in a completely different social setting than was common and normal at the time. Gaming was uncommon, fun, exciting, and inspiring. People observing gamers didn't know what to make of that because they were brainwashed.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4493[/ATTACH]
They Live (1988)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTK8eff1Zsk
The sanguinity to start again from your beginnings, never breathing a word about your loss, and roll up a new char after you get pasted by a shockingly random trap.
I don't know to what degree it's a white male thing...but it does seem to be kind of a male thing?
Certainly any respectable psychologist would agree that one of the most salient, scientifically verifiable differences between men and women is that women are more prone to neuroticism. This does seem to come out during a classic-style dungeon crawl. Women tend to find Fantasy Vietnam too intense for their taste, whereas men tend to enjoy it, if not unironically at least from a Retro-Stupid angle.
Quote from: Libramarian;1131089The sanguinity to start again from your beginnings, never breathing a word about your loss, and roll up a new char after you get pasted by a shockingly random trap.
I don't know to what degree it's a white male thing...but it does seem to be kind of a male thing?
Certainly any respectable psychologist would agree that one of the most salient, scientifically verifiable differences between men and women is that women are more prone to neuroticism. This does seem to come out during a classic-style dungeon crawl. Women tend to find Fantasy Vietnam too intense for their taste, whereas men tend to enjoy it, if not unironically at least from a Retro-Stupid angle.
I wouldn't put it that way. The dungeon crawl is rarely a natural taste, and one that will only be acquired by a subset of people. It's one that is far more likely to be acquired by a random male than a random female. However, a female that acquires it will be just as gung ho as any male. I think there are probably some subtle difference in risk assessment and gambling too, though I doubt my sample of experiences is broad enough to draw any conclusions. Both sexes make boneheaded decisions and don't always learn from them, but the intent and reasoning behind such events appears to me to be somewhat different. You might summarize it as: Female--"Oops, that didn't work, better try something different next time." versus Male--"Haha, that didn't work, maybe we will have better luck next time we try it." Either attitude can be supported or not by the particular situation, but those appear to be the defaults, all else being equal.
Obviously, the hobby was a lot more inclusive than it it is given credit for. Where it was bad, it was mostly bad due to ignorance, teenage douchebaggery, and the "different times" factor, not actual malevolence or a conscious desire to keep out undesirables. But that truth does not matter, because SJWs are not interested in clearing anyone's name. Their self-confessed mission is to fight injustice in every sphere of life, and they will find something bad anywhere they look. You can't be innocent, because there is no standard of innocence, only perpetually shifting, escalating standards of guilt. Guilt always starts where you are right now, and goes all the way. If you are not white, you are straight, if you are not straight, you are still a man, and if you are not a man, you are probably benefitting from some overlapping facet of structural oppression. You can't prove your innocence in Twitter court, only confirm your guilt. No apology is ever good enough, no act of penance ever sufficient.
It is no accident "Innocent until proven guilty by the law of the land" became the legal standard in modern democracies. Because every other approach was some horrid shit.
Quote from: Zirunel;1131072I suspect most of the people bemoaning the lack of inclusiveness in past gaming are simply too young to know better. They weren't there, don't remember, and operate from a default assumption that the past simply must have been less inclusive. Because...The past.
TBH, I don't think many of them even care, though, plenty are definitely old enough to know better (like Mearls). I've gotten into plenty of arguments with people who believe this on social media and it all stems from a "if Predominantly White Male, therefore exclusionary" and "if Minority, therefore Oppressed; if not Minority, therefore Not Oppressed" core set of assumptions in the prevailing narrative that must always take precedence above evidence, demographic realities (RPGs started out in the US and the UK, which are majority white, so OBVIOUSLY whites would be primarily represented) or historical realities (geeks were anathema and the ones excluded, not the other way around).
They won't even discuss the topic on any other terms and any mention of geeks being historically and factually treated like garbage will get you laughed at because in their conception of reality any historically mistreated group of people is by definition an Oppressed Class, which is a title that in their view is reserved only for "Womyns and Minorities". And predominantly white males can't be an oppressed class, therefore they can't have been mistreated, therefore they must have been gatekeepers, therefore gaming is exclusionary, because "predominantly white and males (fuck the women and minorities who were always in it, they are honorary white males)".
And like many online discussions the objective is not understanding or to intelligently exchange ideas, but to promote and reinforce a certain narrative and worldview, like claiming things to be so, makes them so, which also seems to be a core part of their mindset. It's all performative wokeness practiced in blindness. Not a matter for discussion, but a matter for assertion and acceptance.
Quote from: DocJones;1131007What's hilarious is that the tweet strongly suggests that women just aren't smart enough to handle rules complexity and lore density.
Not what that means.
Rules complexity and lore density keeps ALL new players out (or at least meaningfully reduces picking up new players, of all genders races and creed) to feed the preferences of existing players who for the most part long ago entered the hobby (when there were far fewer dense books). It's the "wall of thick books just to start" concept which is the gate-keeping.
Since women had not previously been as prevalent in the hobby before, if you essentially "freeze" the hobby at existing player levels with walls of thick complex rule books full of dense lore discouraging new players, it means you also don't ever meaningfully increase the percentage of women in the hobby (as they need to come through new players).
Hence, rules complexity and lore density reduces the amount of new players, which means you get fewer women in the hobby as well. Not because women in particular don't like rules complexity and lore density, but because it's a deterrent to all new players (as a generalization).
And that's not me speculating, it's the silliness of Twitter reducing thoughts down to single sentences. Mike Mealrs has gone on at quite some length about that wall of complex and dense books being the gate-keeping deterrant to new players. He's referring back to arguments he's made numerous times in the past, including during that debate.
Quote from: Snowman0147;1131051Women and minorities were always in the hobby long before TSR switched over to WotC. What is even your argument?
My argument, which you knew despite your feigned ignorance, is that the percentage of women and minorities in the hobby were incredibly low relative to the population. That it was disproportionately unappealing to those groups and targeted to white boys. That if you were to stick an ad for D&D in front of any psychologist and ask them what kinds of people the ad was targeted to attract, they would answer younger white males.
That's changed now. And it's at least as popular as it ever was. Now white boys like it, AND women and minorities like it. Which I'd say is not a sign of "rot".
Quote from: jeff37923;1131055Jesus, somebody needs to tatoo this on foreheads....
Women and minorities weren't excluded. They could play just like anybody else. The problem was that being a nerd wasn't cool in the beginning, so a lot of women and minorities (and guys) weren't interested in RPGs because they were considered nerd games.
Jesus you're seriously ignorant about these kinds of issues aren't you? Yes Jeff, Gate-keeping doesn't mean people are not ALLOWED to play with something. It means it's intentionally targeted away from them. Sort of like boys are not barred from playing with barbie dolls and some few do, but they are targeted at little girls. And plenty of minorities and women were nerds - it's just they were attracted to nerd hobbies which were more targeted to them like Renaissance Faires and LARPing.
Why is you think so many more women and minorities are now playing D&D than before? Just coincidence?
Quote from: Zirunel;1131072I suspect most of the people bemoaning the lack of inclusiveness in past gaming are simply too young to know better. They weren't there, don't remember, and operate from a default assumption that the past simply must have been less inclusive. Because...The past.
I started in 1978. I think it's you re-writing history. Do you seriously not remember the ads for D&D were "white boys" and "scantily clad white women"? That the covers of the magazines were men, and the women were often portrayed in chain-mail bikinis? Naw man I doubt you forgot.
It's not so much re-writing history so much as pushing a narrative. Despite what anyone says their was and is still a concentrated effort to keep out non-white, non-male, non-straight players in the hobby.
Don't bother mentioning that up until the 1990s most female gamers would laugh and/or mock a gamer for playing rpgs let alone give them the time. Many that did to be part of the cool kids club would pretend to never have played and throw gamers under the bus. That one can ask non-white gamers to join yet if none of them respond or can not be bothered to make an effort to join well it's not them it's you for not trying hard enough you damn racist.
Yes this is somewhat sexist yet comes from personal experience like most male gamers they were not the healthiest or attractive of female gamers and were pretty much the female version of a stereotypical male gamer.
What gets me is that they get turned away from one game session one time and it immediately constitutes gate-keeping and one cannot say otherwise or one is a bad person with "go go white knight rangers" suddenly swooping in to defend them if you call them out for having given up too easily on the hobby. That is like me saying that all women hate men simply because one women 15 years ago turned me down because I asked her on a date. Followed by many who seems to be offended by everything and anything insisting on joining campaigns where they main enemies they fight are part of a phobia they suffer from. Either real or imagined.
They hate Spiders lets join the D&D campaign which include Drow and Spiders and accuse every and any gamer of gate-keeping when they say either adapt or find another campaign. TBP is an eye opener on mental health issues and entitlement. They not only are going to join the game, everyone else has to accept their terms especially the DM, even if it means re-writing the entire campaign from scratch as it's no longer about how the entire table feels it's all about the one individual player and their demands. It's embarrassing sometimes reading product reviews as their has to trigger warning including before the start of every page. For fucks sake if one needs that many trigger warnings how do they function in the real world without either on or the other parent not holding their hands.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131107My argument, which you knew despite your feigned ignorance, is that the percentage of women and minorities in the hobby were incredibly low relative to the population. That it was disproportionately unappealing to those groups and targeted to white boys. That if you were to stick an ad for D&D in front of any psychologist and ask them what kinds of people the ad was targeted to attract, they would answer younger white males.
That's changed now. And it's at least as popular as it ever was. Now white boys like it, AND women and minorities like it. Which I'd say is not a sign of "rot".
Pssst. Your racism is showing. Thought you may want to know.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131109I started in 1978. I think it's you re-writing history. Do you seriously not remember the ads for D&D were "white boys" and "scantily clad white women"? That the covers of the magazines were men, and the women were often portrayed in chain-mail bikinis? Naw man I doubt you forgot.
Many people still like those things, they just don't admit it for fear of the mob. Besides, what looks better on the cover of Barbarians of Hackslashica? A bare-chested Chris Hemsworth holding a near-nude Gal Gadot or Adam Koebel kneeling in front of Zoe Quinn wearing the same?
Quote from: Mistwell;1131109I started in 1978. I think it's you re-writing history. Do you seriously not remember the ads for D&D were "white boys" and "scantily clad white women"? That the covers of the magazines were men, and the women were often portrayed in chain-mail bikinis? Naw man I doubt you forgot.
Many people still like those things they just don't admit it for fear of the mob. Besides, what looks better on the cover of Barbarians of Hackslashica? A bare-chested Chris Hemsworth holding a near-nude Gal Gadot or Adam Koebel kneeling in front of Zoe Quinn wearing the same?
At least there is no more Dragon magazine cover to be racist against minorities and sexist against women.
We really are living in the Golden Age.
Quote from: Shasarak;1131033The original WotC DnD department was essentially all the old TSR DnD staff so... not sure how woke you think that they were.
Now Peter Adkison is a different story.
Peter Adkison was in charge of it all, and he put his fellow travellers in places of importance over the brand.
We are now
starting to see the results.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131047Inclusive like they wanted to include women as well as men in the fanbase? That they wanted it to be more than just a white boys fanbase?
Yes clearly "rot" has set in now that it's more popular than ever. How dare they include a wider fanbase!
LOL, see these:
Quote from: jeff37923;1131055Jesus, somebody needs to tatoo this on foreheads....
Women and minorities weren't excluded. They could play just like anybody else. The problem was that being a nerd wasn't cool in the beginning, so a lot of women and minorities (and guys) weren't interested in RPGs because they were considered nerd games.
Quote from: Crusader X;1131068Exactly.
Gatekeeping was certainly done in the early days of gaming. It was done by women and the cool kids. They wanted nothing to do with us. I never once encountered a gaming group turning away anyone. Today's SJW narrative is completely backwards.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131107My argument, which you knew despite your feigned ignorance, is that the percentage of women and minorities in the hobby were incredibly low relative to the population.
So?
Is there some moral imperative here I'm missing?
The demographics of Wargaming and model train enthusiasts are mostly white men - yet they do not exclude anyone. In fact you will find both groups highly friendly to newcomers of any kind.
Do Wargaming and model train enthusiasts have a problem?
Quote from: Mistwell;1131107That it was disproportionately unappealing to those groups and targeted to white boys. That if you were to stick an ad for D&D in front of any psychologist and ask them what kinds of people the ad was targeted to attract, they would answer younger white males..
So what?
Is there some moral imperative here I'm missing?
Quote from: Mistwell;1131107That's changed now. And it's at least as popular as it ever was. Now white boys like it, AND women and minorities like it. Which I'd say is not a sign of "rot".
But they have also welcomed in the SJW's. And according to a recent WOTC survey the largest % of the player base is still male and white. Which the SJW's HATE.
SJW = Rot.
You have seen their antics for yourself on the EN world thread when they got outraged at you daring to ask for actual evidence of Mearls email malfeasance.
Is the outrage brigade SJW mentality good for the hobby?
Is it worth changing the way the game was "marketed" to get all the new and casuals fans to like D&D if you also have to let these wolves in the door?
Quote from: Jaeger;1131116Peter Adkison was in charge of it all, and he put his fellow travellers in places of importance over the brand.
If we look at the important fellow travellers in charge of DnD: Monte Cook, Jonathan Tweet, and Skip Williams. I would say Tweet would be the one who drank deeply from the Well of Wokeness.
QuoteWe are now starting to see the results.
Yes, 20 years after Peter left WotC with no original staff remaining at the company, now we are seeing the results.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131105Not what that means.
Rules complexity and lore density keeps ALL new players out (or at least meaningfully reduces picking up new players, of all genders races and creed) to feed the preferences of existing players who for the most part long ago entered the hobby (when there were far fewer dense books). It's the "wall of thick books just to start" concept which is the gate-keeping.
Since women had not previously been as prevalent in the hobby before, if you essentially "freeze" the hobby at existing player levels with walls of thick complex rule books full of dense lore discouraging new players, it means you also don't ever meaningfully increase the percentage of women in the hobby (as they need to come through new players).
Hence, rules complexity and lore density reduces the amount of new players, which means you get fewer women in the hobby as well. Not because women in particular don't like rules complexity and lore density, but because it's a deterrent to all new players (as a generalization).
And that's not me speculating, it's the silliness of Twitter reducing thoughts down to single sentences. Mike Mealrs has gone on at quite some length about that wall of complex and dense books being the gate-keeping deterrant to new players. He's referring back to arguments he's made numerous times in the past, including during that debate.
If that's not what that means then why where women and minorities singled out in that Tweet when rules complexity and lore density is potentially an issue for
everyone, even older players who don't like rules complexity or might be sick of bookkeeping?
Even if the assumption is that women and minorities were always less represented in the hobby, therefore they would (arguably) be disproportionately affected by factors that limit an influx of new people into the hobby, that still doesn't address the implicit intentionality behind framing these factors as "Gatekeeping", like those evil white male gamers are purposefully standing at the trenches with their strong barriers made out of thick tomes barring all entries to keep those smelly womynz and minorities out of their game.
It also fails to acknowledge the fact that RPGs grew out of the US and the UK, which are majority white countries, so OBVIOUSLY those evil wypipo would be the most numerous people in the hobby, cuz they're also the most numerous people in the countries where the hobby was born, period. And even as the hobby expanded beyond those countries, it was mostly European countries that adopted it (moar wypipo!). But when you look at statistics selectively and in a vacuum you can find instances of racism and "gatekeeping" everywhere.
Quote from: Jaeger;1131116Peter Adkison was in charge of it all, and he put his fellow travellers in places of importance over the brand.
We are now starting to see the results.
LOL, see these:
So?
Is there some moral imperative here I'm missing?
The demographics of Wargaming and model train enthusiasts are mostly white men - yet they do not exclude anyone. In fact you will find both groups highly friendly to newcomers of any kind.
Do Wargaming and model train enthusiasts have a problem?
So what?
Is there some moral imperative here I'm missing?
I am not the one who brought up morals, you guys did. The implication of "rot" is "immoral". I am saying it was not immoral to try and attract a wider audience to the game than just one segment. Not that it was moral to do it - that it wasn't "rot" to do that.
QuoteBut they have also welcomed in the SJW's. And according to a recent WOTC survey the largest % of the player base is still male and white. Which the SJW's HATE.
SJW = Rot.
I don't think welcoming in women and minorities equates with welcoming in social justice warriors. I'd say a lot of social justice warriors started the game in the TSR days. They're louder now because of the Internet, not because the 5e wizard is a cool looking African guy.
QuoteYou have seen their antics for yourself on the EN world thread when they got outraged at you daring to ask for actual evidence of Mearls email malfeasance.
Is the outrage brigade SJW mentality good for the hobby?
Is it worth changing the way the game was "marketed" to get all the new and casuals fans to like D&D if you also have to let these wolves in the door?
Those wolves were always there. Most of the social justice warriors I am aware of are...white guys. Some are younger, but some are older and started with 1e or 2e. Are you seriously claiming it's mostly women and minorities who are arguing at ENWorld that Mearls is guilty for having been accused anonymously? They're not.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1131120If that's not what that means then why where women and minorities singled out in that Tweet when rules complexity and lore density is potentially an issue for everyone, even older players who don't like rules complexity or might be sick of bookkeeping?
I answered this question in the quote you quoted. You you create a game which appeals almost exclusively to the existing player base, then you get players composed of that same old player base. So anyone who was not part of that old player base is also not part of the player base for the new game. As women and minorities were not part of that old player base, they remain not part of the new player base.
Rules complexity and lore density is most attractive to those who have played the game for a long time, are bored with the thinner complexity and lore, and want to add more to what they already had. It's therefore not "potentially an issue for everyone" it's "potentially an issue for NEW PLAYERS".
Quotethat still doesn't address the implicit intentionality behind framing these factors as "Gatekeeping", like those evil white male gamers are purposefully standing at the trenches with their strong barriers made out of thick tomes barring all entries to keep those smelly womynz and minorities out of their game.
Oh no I don't think this stuff is done by intention. People mock the phrases of "woke" and "check your privilege", for good reason, but both imply something was being done without conscious intention. That people simply were not thinking about it at all. They had not "woken up" or "examined if maybe they were operating based on their unconsidered privileges". I do think these phrases are mock-worthy now, but the entire concept is it's not intentionally bad behavior which resulted in chain mail bikinis and white male heroes on the cover of everything. And I think Mearls wasn't saying "you're intentionally being bad" as opposed to "you should consider why it is these things line up because I don't think they're a coincidence".
QuoteIt also fails to acknowledge the fact that RPGs grew out of the US and the UK, which are majority white countries
They're not majority male countries, and they're also NOW no longer about to be majority white countries (at least the US). And you keep tossing around the word "evil" despite the only ones even mentioning morality in this thread are you and the guys on your side. I was not moralizing at all - I was saying it's not rot to want to appeal to a wider audience. It's that term "rot" which implies something being done which was "immoral" and I think that's silly. It's not immoral to want to appeal to a wider audience. It's capitalism, which I don't happen to think is immoral.
Mearls is Back...
He' still a senior rpg designer. I doubt Ray Winninger will discourage him from participating in whatever D&D project he wants to be a part of. For the record, Mike always did a good job as Executive Producer, and I never took his tweet firing older D&D players seriously because he was always hanging out with senior D&D people playing old school games. At GaryCon he was running and playing in 1e games. He has also been careful to avoid the stupidity that is twitter and internet forums, but somehow got dragged in, not too long ago. I'm sure he'll be fine, and will be working on new D&D stuff. You think he is working on the new D&D campaign setting on that WOTC is unsuccessfully trying to secretly work on?
Quote from: Shasarak;1131119I would say Tweet would be the one who drank deeply from the Well of Wokeness.
.
Tweet has used the Bundle of Holding to fundraise for Planned Parenthood, and was one of the leaders of 2016's #Gamers4Her movement. I'd say that's a safe bet.
But I think location, demographics, and lack of countervailing factors had more to do with the general trend than any specific personnel picked at the start of WotC's dominion.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131105Not what that means.
Rules complexity and lore density keeps ALL new players out (or at least meaningfully reduces picking up new players, of all genders races and creed) to feed the preferences of existing players who for the most part long ago entered the hobby (when there were far fewer dense books). It's the "wall of thick books just to start" concept which is the gate-keeping.
Since women had not previously been as prevalent in the hobby before, if you essentially "freeze" the hobby at existing player levels with walls of thick complex rule books full of dense lore discouraging new players, it means you also don't ever meaningfully increase the percentage of women in the hobby (as they need to come through new players).
Hence, rules complexity and lore density reduces the amount of new players, which means you get fewer women in the hobby as well. Not because women in particular don't like rules complexity and lore density, but because it's a deterrent to all new players (as a generalization).
And that's not me speculating, it's the silliness of Twitter reducing thoughts down to single sentences. Mike Mealrs has gone on at quite some length about that wall of complex and dense books being the gate-keeping deterrant to new players. He's referring back to arguments he's made numerous times in the past, including during that debate.
Saying that I 100% accept your explanation here because I'm too lazy to try to track down these statements from Mearls: I don't care. So the people who would've treated people like me like shit back in the day are suddenly interested in my hobby now that it's popular, but are kept away because they can't be bothered to understand the concepts I handled when I was 10? Fuck 'em. Better off without them. I can certainly see from a business standpoint Mearls sure would like all of these people to start buying books and playing, but I have zero desire or need for them to do so.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131125Rules complexity and lore density is most attractive to those who have played the game for a long time, are bored with the thinner complexity and lore, and want to add more to what they already had. It's therefore not "potentially an issue for everyone" it's "potentially an issue for NEW PLAYERS".
I partly disagree. I think rules complexity and lore density tends to appeal most to a particular subset of players that likes complex rules and/or options, and takes the lore seriously, which may include some, but not all (or necessarily even most) older players, and could potentially include some newer players as well (though, those admittedly are likely to be less numerous). I have even seen some posters in these forums remark about how they've come to prefer simpler rules as they've grown older, but used to be way more into crunch as kids.
I'm an older player, and while my position on crunch is complicated (I hate excessive bookkeeping, but love loads of options and customization) I have grown to care less and less about D&D lore with every passing edition. So I really don't think that this is an issue exclusive to new players.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131125They're not majority male countries,
And they're also not majority female countries (actually, they technically are by a small margin, but that's neither here nor there) but I don't see anyone demanding more male representation in the market for Tea Party sets or Barbie dolls. Not every demographic needs to be equally represented in the purchase of every product sold across every nation in the world. Gender preferences for certain types of products or activities are a thing, despite feminist's claims to the contrary.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131125...and they're also NOW no longer about to be majority white countries (at least the US).
That's beside the point and also something that's not happening "NOW" but rather it's projected to happen in "THE FUTURE". NOW those countries are still majority white, so finding that the majority of an audience for a certain product is mostly white people in a country that's still mostly white people is not a huge surprise or evidence that they're gatekeeping minorities.
A lot of these games are also based on worlds that try to emulate ancient Europe, which is part of reason why the characters in the covers are white. Most D&D settings don't even include any prevalent stand-ins for African cultures.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131125And you keep tossing around the word "evil" despite the only ones even mentioning morality in this thread are you and the guys on your side. I was not moralizing at all - I was saying it's not rot to want to appeal to a wider audience. It's that term "rot" which implies something being done which was "immoral" and I think that's silly. It's not immoral to want to appeal to a wider audience. It's capitalism, which I don't happen to think is immoral.
I'm just mocking the overall concept of always blaming whity from this crowd of people (meaning SJWs, not you specifically). But even if you didn't bring up morality the basis for their claims is still moralistic in nature, and the insistences behind this particular topic does imply that there's some type of "moral imperative" to bring women and minorities into gaming. Because the real reason this is even a topic is ideological, not monetary.
If the reason was truly monetary and trying to arbitrarily make every product appeal to a wider audience worked and made sense, then we would see a bigger push to sell Barbie dolls to boys. But we don't, cuz this isn't about trying to appeal to a wider audience, but the insistence that women specifically need to be equally represented in every activity that appeals mostly to men.
Looking over social media and seeing the "new gamers" brought in by Mearls and WotC show there has been no value added to the hobby by the alleged push for "inclusivity" because all we seem to have gathered are the most worthless douchebags. We got the freaks no other hobby would want anywhere near their community. Even the DNC doesn't want the SJW brigade (except their vote).
We needed to get rid of the catpissmen and lawncrappers, not draw in more and allow these losers to declare themselves the arbiters of the hobby.
But hey, it's increasingly their hobby as the companies bow to them.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131124I am not the one who brought up morals, you guys did. The implication of "rot" is "immoral". I am saying it was not immoral to try and attract a wider audience to the game than just one segment. Not that it was moral to do it - that it wasn't "rot" to do that.
I reject that definition.
Rot = nonsense; rubbish.
That "wider audience" was always welcome.
The idea that they weren't, is nonsense.
The idea that "inclusive marketing" needed to be done to reach them is nonsense.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131124I don't think welcoming in women and minorities equates with welcoming in social justice warriors.
Women and minorities were/are always welcome. Saying different is revisionism.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131124I
I'd say a lot of social justice warriors started the game in the TSR days. They're louder now because of the Internet, not because the 5e wizard is a cool looking African guy.
Yes and they use the championing of "inclusion" (Of groups of people who were
already welcome to the hobby.) To agitate for their other nonsense.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131124I
Those wolves were always there. Most of the social justice warriors I am aware of are...white guys. Some are younger, but some are older and started with 1e or 2e. Are you seriously claiming it's mostly women and minorities who are arguing at ENWorld that Mearls is guilty for having been accused anonymously? They're not.
I claimed no such thing, and you know it.
Stop putting words in my mouth. Stop reading things into peoples posts that they did not write.
SJW's, are arguing at ENWorld that Mearls is guilty for having been accused anonymously. You should know, you ran right into them.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1131091I wouldn't put it that way. The dungeon crawl is rarely a natural taste, and one that will only be acquired by a subset of people. It's one that is far more likely to be acquired by a random male than a random female. However, a female that acquires it will be just as gung ho as any male. I think there are probably some subtle difference in risk assessment and gambling too, though I doubt my sample of experiences is broad enough to draw any conclusions. Both sexes make boneheaded decisions and don't always learn from them, but the intent and reasoning behind such events appears to me to be somewhat different. You might summarize it as: Female--"Oops, that didn't work, better try something different next time." versus Male--"Haha, that didn't work, maybe we will have better luck next time we try it." Either attitude can be supported or not by the particular situation, but those appear to be the defaults, all else being equal.
That's a fair observation. Men are certainly more prone to a gambling addiction.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131108Jesus you're seriously ignorant about these kinds of issues aren't you? Yes Jeff, Gate-keeping doesn't mean people are not ALLOWED to play with something. It means it's intentionally targeted away from them. Sort of like boys are not barred from playing with barbie dolls and some few do, but they are targeted at little girls. And plenty of minorities and women were nerds - it's just they were attracted to nerd hobbies which were more targeted to them like Renaissance Faires and LARPing.
Why is you think so many more women and minorities are now playing D&D than before? Just coincidence?
Just like boys were not barred from playing with Barbie dolls (except by social stigma of the times), girls and minorities were not barred from playing RPGs (except by social stigma of the times - RPGs are nerd games). The times have changed and the social stigmata has lessened considerably.
You are the one White Knighting here, Virtue Signaler - not me.
Quote from: Armchair Gamer;1131132Tweet has used the Bundle of Holding to fundraise for Planned Parenthood, and was one of the leaders of 2016's #Gamers4Her movement. I'd say that's a safe bet.
But I think location, demographics, and lack of countervailing factors had more to do with the general trend than any specific personnel picked at the start of WotC's dominion.
I disagree, IMHO they are all completely intertwined.
The specific personnel Picked at the start of WOTC's dominion Set the location, and social demographics, that began the woke trend that has been slowly overtaking D&D.
They exclusively hire fellow travelers that make up the pool of their replacements when they move on or are kicked out.
Rinse and repeat.
Quote from: Jaeger;1131116Do Wargaming and model train enthusiasts have a problem?
According to some loons over at BGG... Yes.
Quote from: GameDaddy;1131126I never took his tweet firing older D&D players seriously because he was always hanging out with senior D&D people playing old school games. At GaryCon he was running and playing in 1e games. He has also been careful to avoid the stupidity that is twitter and internet forums, but somehow got dragged in, not too long ago.
Mearls was chirping trendy SJW buzzwords before 5e even saw print. Yes, he meant what he said, because far as I can tell he just parrots things he has heard without checking half the time.
That said. The incidents of foot-in-mouth disease for Mearls have been very few compared to so many others. He's had that one big incident and a few little ones. But it is that big one that is going to haunt him. After that one I think he was a little more careful and I do not recall anything troublesome from him since.
Quote from: GameDaddy;1131126For the record, Mike always did a good job as Executive Producer, and I never took his tweet firing older D&D players seriously because he was always hanging out with senior D&D people playing old school games.
Do you mean the tweet you weren't aware of?
Quote from: GameDaddy;1130990Ehh? When did he fire the D&D players, and how? Somehow I missed getting a pink slip from WOTC.
Don't play at being disingenuous. You can like him and defend his work, but ultimately he is responsible for what he says.
Especially if he shrieks it out into the interwebs for everyone to see.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131107That's changed now. And it's at least as popular as it ever was. Now white boys like it, AND women and minorities like it. Which I'd say is not a sign of "rot".
It's definitely more attractive to females now. I'm not sure attraction to 'minorities' has changed much - I don't think I've seen the proportion of non-white players in games change much since I moved to London in 2000. Possibly more black players with 5e; playing Tomb of Annihilation at the Meetup I think was the first time I'd seen a table with two black players (1m 1 f). There was also a grey haired white female and a younger white female, with 2 white male players inc me from 6 players total, putting white males in the minority, which is historically unusual. The GM was a male white German. But the numbers of Arab, south-Asian and east-Asian players* here seem pretty consistent over time, and pretty common. Obviously outside London UK demographics will be different.
*and Latino players, which I guess is a 'minority' group too. From UK perspective a US Latino player seems less foreign than a Spanish player, at least to me, so it's easy to overlook 'minorities'. I'm assuming my Egyptian & Gulf Arab players are 'minority' but my French Italian & Spanish players are not, even if they all seem much alike to me (generically 'foreign'). :D
Edit: I've not seen a single non-white/'minority' gamer behave in anything like a SJW manner, ever. The SJWs all seem to be white males and white females (inc 'non-binaries' etc). So I disagree strongly with someone upthread who indicated that more minority gamers = more SJWs. SJWs are their own demographic. I know there are non-white career/professional SJWs working in the media, especially the US media, but I've never seen one in RPG-dom. Not only not in person in the UK, I can't even think of any in the US RPG industry. I think "non white gamers are all SJWs" actually would be 'gatekeeping', and worth pushing back against.
More non-white gamers =/= more SJW clowns in the hobby. But the "inclusion brigade" doesn't actually give a shit about non-white or female gamers. What they care about is the hobby being a SJW safe space where they rule the roost.
And they most certainly don't want non-white gamers who aren't submissive to their Oppression Olympics narrative.
To paraphrase Dementia JoJo, those gamers ain't black.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131108Gate-keeping doesn't mean people are not ALLOWED to play with something. It means it's intentionally targeted away from them.
Uhh... what? Since when? Seems the meaning of some words has changed overnight... again.
(Actually, after this I just found it easier to skip all of Mistwell's posts than try to decipher what is actually said between the lines and under the newspeak.)
Quote from: Spinachcat;1131148But hey, it's increasingly their hobby as the companies bow to them.
It certainly does seem that way, doesn't it? Well, for what I care, they might as well keep it. (*) I'm actually considering giving away all my 5e stuff (except maybe the Essentials Kit, which is just really neat) since I don't like the system anyway and the culture surrounding it disgusts me more and more. In the future I'll just focus my spending on products by people who don't hate my very guts, and if at some point none exist, I'll just use what I have already and can cobble together myself.
(*) For what little time it exists without people like me that are actually meaningfully employed and have money to spend on their products, that is. :cool:
Quote from: Libramarian;1131089Fantasy Vietnam
Thanks for mentioning this! Reading these two simple words strung together in this order gave me a pretty big inspiration on what kind of campaign I want to run next.
Morblot, not liking 5e is a good reason to ditch it. Lamenting the culture around it isn't. I try to never let SJWs ruin my fun. Don't let them win any ground in your mind.
Also, barring any dislike of the mechanics I highly recommend looking at Band of Blades if you want a “fantasy Vietnam” feel. Even if the system isn’t to your taste the tone and overall vibe is damn fine inspiration.
Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1131197Morblot, not liking 5e is a good reason to ditch it. Lamenting the culture around it isn't. I try to never let SJWs ruin my fun. Don't let them win any ground in your mind.
I agree. I have lots of Pathfinder 1e stuff I intend to keep and use, even if the culture is what it is.
Quote from: Alderaan Crumbs;1131197Also, barring any dislike of the mechanics I highly recommend looking at Band of Blades if you want a "fantasy Vietnam" feel. Even if the system isn't to your taste the tone and overall vibe is damn fine inspiration.
Thank you, I'll check it out!
edit: Yeah so I checked it out. I almost stopped as soon as I saw it was by Evil Hat, who literally do not want my money (https://twitter.com/EvilHatOfficial/status/1219358435935809536), but the page count of
464! was the last straw. Not gonna happen, I'll do without.
Quote from: S'mon;1131180Edit: I've not seen a single non-white/'minority' gamer behave in anything like a SJW manner, ever. The SJWs all seem to be white males and white females (inc 'non-binaries' etc). So I disagree strongly with someone upthread who indicated that more minority gamers = more SJWs. SJWs are their own demographic. I know there are non-white career/professional SJWs working in the media, especially the US media, but I've never seen one in RPG-dom. Not only not in person in the UK, I can't even think of any in the US RPG industry. I think "non white gamers are all SJWs" actually would be 'gatekeeping', and worth pushing back against.
Yah, This. Interesting observation! I think the observation of Spinachcat is spot on as well, and the SJW want an enclave where they can rule without being questioned. Problem is, that enclave is not RPG gaming, which has been traditionally open for all, from even the very earliest days.
Quote from: Morblot;1131201I agree. I have lots of Pathfinder 1e stuff I intend to keep and use, even if the culture is what it is.
Thank you, I'll check it out!
edit: Yeah so I checked it out. I almost stopped as soon as I saw it was by Evil Hat, who literally do not want my money (https://twitter.com/EvilHatOfficial/status/1219358435935809536), but the page count of 464! was the last straw. Not gonna happen, I'll do without.
No worries! Glad you peeked nonetheless.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1131185More non-white gamers =/= more SJW clowns in the hobby. But the "inclusion brigade" doesn't actually give a shit about non-white or female gamers. What they care about is the hobby being a SJW safe space where they rule the roost.
And they most certainly don't want non-white gamers who aren't submissive to their Oppression Olympics narrative.
To paraphrase Dementia JoJo, those gamers ain't black.
Exactly!
The SJW's use the rally cry of "inclusion" (And say we have to change the hobby to make minorities/women "feel" welcome to a hobby that they were
always welcome to.) to create a "community" where their narrative may reign unopposed.
Quote from: S'mon;1131180It's definitely more attractive to females now.
I have two quibbles with this:
1 - To the extent that your point is that this is due to the changing targeting/portrayal of the hobby (I'm not sure how much it is, but it seems like you've got it in your realm of possibilities), I want to point out that I think that's substantially because it's social cachet now that geek/nerd culture is "cool" rather than a social liability. The internet also makes it much, much easier to get into, e.g. by watching other people play to see how it's done and by making it easier to talk to people about it. It is not at all clear to me that the "inclusion" movement has made things better; I think the big shift is that a) geeks in society are now rich and powerful which b) makes them cool and c) geek hobbies are actually really, really fun.
2 - I've been a gamer since age 9. Where once I was immediately accepted by other gamers as a whole person and as a gamer by virtue of being interested in and a player of games, now I have to go way out of my way to find people who will treat me like a human being rather than a victim group (partly because of where I live/work). I have never been as belittled by anyone in gaming as I have by the self-righteous woke crowd, and their well-intentioned but psychologically-wrecked victims. The "inclusion" movement, ostensibly in my defense, has made my experience of my hobbies uniformly worse, and pushed me out of some entirely.
I also feel bad complaining, because as much as it sucks for me, men of every race catch much more explicit and destructive flak from the woke mob. Though I'm not exactly safe making these points either.
Shit sucks, yo.
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1131213I have two quibbles with this:
1 - To the extent that your point is that this is due to the changing targeting/portrayal of the hobby (I'm not sure how much it is, but it seems like you've got it in your realm of possibilities), I want to point out that I think that's substantially because it's social cachet now that geek/nerd culture is "cool" rather than a social liability. The internet also makes it much, much easier to get into, e.g. by watching other people play to see how it's done and by making it easier to talk to people about it. It is not at all clear to me that the "inclusion" movement has made things better; I think the big shift is that a) geeks in society are now rich and powerful which b) makes them cool and c) geek hobbies are actually really, really fun.
Sure, I don't disagree at all. Like I say about EN World, it was a lot more inclusive before it was Inclusive (and RPGnet is infinitely worse, with normal women often victimised by SJW freaks for wrongthink).
FWIW, I saw a lot of female players with 4e D&D in particular. 4e was terrible at bringing in new players, but a high proportion of those it did bring in were female - and
pace Mearls they weren't deterred by 4e's insane levels of combat rules crunch. 5e continues to bring in many female players, but is also vastly vastly more attractive to new players in general.
Quote from: S'mon;1131219Sure, I don't disagree at all. Like I say about EN World, it was a lot more inclusive before it was Inclusive (and RPGnet is infinitely worse, with normal women often victimised by SJW freaks for wrongthink).
FWIW, I saw a lot of female players with 4e D&D in particular. 4e was terrible at bringing in new players, but a high proportion of those it did bring in were female - and pace Mearls they weren't deterred by 4e's insane levels of combat rules crunch. 5e continues to bring in many female players, but is also vastly vastly more attractive to new players in general.
Yeah, sounds like we're on the same page. RPGs are fun, having it not be social suicide to play helps significantly, along with the surge of interest in analog games in the age of extremely online. I found Mearls' tweet re: crunch to be incredibly insulting in the "bigotry of low expectations" sort of way, not that it really matters. I certainly have seen nothing that makes him deserve the mistreatment he's incurred. I finally found my first group during the 4e run, so I was riding some of that resurgence wave myself. (But my GM ran 1e instead.)
Those poor wahmens. Incapable of figuring out the complex canon of Forgotten Realms, but somehow able to remember and discuss the twists, turns and myriad characters of their favorite shows and various series of books. Wahmens. What poor souls.
Its even worse for the non-whites. Can they even remember details about things that interest them? Watching sportsball must be so hard as they can not know, comprehend or learn the history, drama and rivalries of various teams and players. So sad.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131109I started in 1978. I think it's you re-writing history. Do you seriously not remember the ads for D&D were "white boys" and "scantily clad white women"? That the covers of the magazines were men, and the women were often portrayed in chain-mail bikinis? Naw man I doubt you forgot.
All memory is selective. But I resent the implication that I am selecting deliberately to "re-write history."
So here goes.
1) My memory tells me I started in 1978 as well. Or possibly 1977. My memory is not only selective but also hazy. I do know that what I now know as "Holmes Basic" was out, and so was the Monster Manual. But the AD&D PHB was not. So 77 or 78, whatever, I started ballpark the same time as you.
2) No, I do not remember that "the ads for D&D were "white boys" and "scantily clad white women" or that the covers of the magazines were men, and the women were often portrayed in chain-mail bikinis. " Now, none of us subscribed to party organs like Dragon Magazine, so maybe we missed some stuff, but the ads
we saw for D&D (in wargaming magazines, that generally featured ECW or Napoleonic mini battles on the covers) were nothing like that. The D&D ads were quite prim and proper, really. For sure the kind of images you're talking about were endemic in fantasy s/f literature, e.g. every Conan book cover ever, but in D&D? Not so much.
A brief anecdote. One of the two girls who first joined us playing D&D in 77 or 78 was kind of a junior feminist ( she is in her 50s now, but we were all teens or tweens at the time so I don't hesitate to say "girl" or "junior" for back in the day). I remember at the time she had beef about Princess Leias depiction on the movie poster for Star Wars (or one of the posters anyway, I suspect it was this one: https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/s--s24cks6n--/c_scalef_autofl_progressiveq_80w_800/19fk32sw3nt1wjpg.jpg). "Lips, lungs and legs," is how she described the Leia image. She had no problem with the movie mind you, but the marketing bugged her. She felt it rather objectified the Leia character and misrepresented her role in the movie. Fair point, I agreed in part. But she had no complaint whatsoever about any of the D&D imagery that we were seeing. Whatever you may be describing, somehow we missed it.
But there is something I do remember that might have made your point more strongly. When D&D took the wargaming world by storm and "fantasy wargaming" became a thing, a number of the mini manufacturers started to produce these "naked chicks in dungeon torture chamber" figures. Also the "naked carousing tavern chicks" figures. Remember those? It caused a bit of a backlash in the wargaming community, people did not like their hobby being associated with stuff like that. and even as a teen boy I found that shit to be prurient, embarrassing and cringeworthy. Not to mention that they had no purpose for gaming, they were just pewter porn. Now
that I remember. It wasn't D&D's fault or TSRs fault, their own ads were staid, but wargaming magazines were full of
those other ads, and they were definitely "D&D adjacent." Although none of the girls who joined us in D&D back then ever came from a wargaming background and never had to confront that stuff, I can well imagine if they ever did they would have found that a most unwelcoming welcome to rpgs.
I was quite surprised to read Jessica Price defending Mike. A lot of D&D Twitter are losing their shit right now, while simultaneously bemoaning the fact they've just destroyed any hope they might have had being hired by WotC in the future. I'm getting through a lot of popcorn.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1131234Those poor wahmens. Incapable of figuring out the complex canon of Forgotten Realms, but somehow able to remember and discuss the twists, turns and myriad characters of their favorite shows and various series of books. Wahmens. What poor souls.
Its even worse for the non-whites. Can they even remember details about things that interest them? Watching sportsball must be so hard as they can not know, comprehend or learn the history, drama and rivalries of various teams and players. So sad.
anecdotal i know, but in my experience its my female players that love FR while the males really only follow dragonlance or LotR if at all. my female players are realms novel addicts and love the silverhand sister mary sue crap and the dram filled elf stuff. the boys just want to sword beasties. i find the males want grounded realistic grim and historical and the ladies want fanciful and high magic and drama. i just want it all to weave together somehow coherently. The best compromise game of published stuff i ever ran was FR set in netheril, that seemed to please both sides of the gender divide in my own group.
Quote from: mightybrain;1131243I was quite surprised to read Jessica Price defending Mike. A lot of D&D Twitter are losing their shit right now, while simultaneously bemoaning the fact they've just destroyed any hope they might have had being hired by WotC in the future. I'm getting through a lot of popcorn.
If ypu can call that defending, sheesh.
Quote from: Zirunel;1131072Wrt ethnic diversity, I don't recall anyone even talking about that. Our wargaming group included one poc (and considering we lived in one of the least diverse places in North America, that meant poc were hugely over-represented in our group). In fact he was the one who first picked up D&D and introduced it to the group.
Now all of that said, gaming was still mostly a white, male hobby. I don't think that can be denied. Nowadays, female participation is vastly higher than it was in the 70s or 80s (ethnic diversity too? Possibly, not sure).
That American gaming groups were largely made up of white males doesn't mean they were white male clubs intended to keep non-white males out. That seems to be the basis of most of these arguments.
American society in 1980 was almost 80% non-Hispanic White (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_racial_and_ethnic_demographics_of_the_United_States), and the remaining 20% wasn't evenly distributed across the country.
Quote from: Zirunel;1131072Yes, it's irritating when people with no understanding of the past mischaracterize it. Yes, the greater diversity today is more a product of mainstreaming in the present rather than gatekeeping in the past. But the greater diversity and reach today has to be a good thing, even if it does mean that yes, gaming will change because of that greater reach.
RPGs are one of a number of nerd hobbies that were popular among young White males. So were the earliest home video games and most arcade games. It would be interesting to see gender statistics for various mainstream board games, but I recall when I started our high school's first RPG club in 1980 that the Chess club, model railroading club and computer club were mostly white males. Over the decades, video and computer games industries also tried different methodologies to attract a broader demographic. I didn't pay that much attention to it, but I also believe that Pokemon card game also drew in more girls into competitive card games in Japan - a hobby which mostly had a user base of boys. I do think there were many attempts (some successful, some not) to broaden the RPG user demographic, but I think that was also going in parallel with other changes.
Quote from: Shasarak;1131261If ypu can call that defending, sheesh.
Yeah, that's the most back-handed defense I think I've seen, since it boils down to, "Sure, he
deserves to be fired for the made-up reasons with zero actual proof, but really what good will that do when we should be getting rid of the people above him?"
That is probably the shortest time she ever took to bite the hand that feeds her.
Quote from: Slipshot762;1131254anecdotal i know, but in my experience its my female players that love FR while the males really only follow dragonlance or LotR if at all. my female players are realms novel addicts and love the silverhand sister mary sue crap and the dram filled elf stuff. the boys just want to sword beasties. i find the males want grounded realistic grim and historical and the ladies want fanciful and high magic and drama. i just want it all to weave together somehow coherently. The best compromise game of published stuff i ever ran was FR set in netheril, that seemed to please both sides of the gender divide in my own group.
That certainly describes substantial demographics IME, yes. I think FR is popular with both sexes, but does have some particularly female-friendly tropes, where eg Greyhawk really does not. Very few female Greyhawk fans. I see female players enjoy 'high fantasy' like Forgotten Realms or Karameikos/Mystara with the uber-Wizard(esse)s & melodrama, and other female players enjoying swords & sorcery like Hyborea and Wilderlands where they can play a bare-breasted amazon warrior kicking butt (Red Sonja is very definitely NOT just a male-attractive character!), but grimmer more pseudo-historical settings are the least attractive, these often have at least implicitly patriarchal norms & I've had female players complain they find these restraining - whereas in a Conan type setting you just cleave the judge's head and jump on the first boat out of town. :cool:
Quote from: Valatar;1131270Yeah, that's the most back-handed defense I think I've seen, since it boils down to, "Sure, he deserves to be fired for the made-up reasons with zero actual proof, but really what good will that do when we should be getting rid of the people above him?"
Glorious isn't it. See also Tracy Hurley. The sandwich stuff has me in stitches.
Quote from: Zirunel;1131235All memory is selective. But I resent the implication that I am selecting deliberately to "re-write history."
So here goes.
1) My memory tells me I started in 1978 as well. Or possibly 1977. My memory is not only selective but also hazy. I do know that what I now know as "Holmes Basic" was out, and so was the Monster Manual. But the AD&D PHB was not. So 77 or 78, whatever, I started ballpark the same time as you...
This didn't change much in the '80s. Heck, next to hobby stores, the big venue for buying D&D was the Sears Christmas catalog. And I know it sold, because Sears didn't monkey around with those spaces, when they had plenty of other "toys" to put in there, and regularly replaced things. (That was back before Sears was run by idiots, when they knew that almost all of their business outside of tools was to rural communities through the catalogs.)
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1131287(That was back before Sears was run by idiots, when they knew that almost all of their business outside of tools was to rural communities through the catalogs.)
Never bought from a chain store back in the day. Did buy directly via mail order from
SPI beginning in late 1975 with an annual subscription to
Strategy & Tactics and
Avalon Hill in 1977 with the first purchase being a mail order copy of the newly released
Squad Leader. For RPGs our go to RPG game store was the local
Mile High Comics located on old highway 85/87 just across from the bowling alley in the strip mall. I never bought comics, even once from there, but did buy my first copy of D&D and Judges Guild games. Second go-to spot was
Levine's Toy Store on Platte Avenue in Colorado Springs. There is still a pretty good game store
Poor Richard's Bookstore on North Tejon. There is where I bought my first copy of
Twilight 2000 as well as
Traveller:2300.
Once we started going to gaming conventions in Denver in 1979 we quickly learned about
Bonnie Brae's hobbyshop, which closed in 2018, and that was an awesome fully stocked FLGS with the best RPGs, wargames, books, and minis.
Always looked over the
Sears catalog though, just to see what kind of RPGs and Games they were selling.
Maybe WotC should make it clear that D&D is open to all ages, ethnicities, and sexualities, but not to people who harass their staff and demand firings. I almost feel sorry for them but, having aggressively courted the pronoun people for the last few years, this is a bed of their own making.
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;11312132 - I've been a gamer since age 9. Where once I was immediately accepted by other gamers as a whole person and as a gamer by virtue of being interested in and a player of games, now I have to go way out of my way to find people who will treat me like a human being rather than a victim group (partly because of where I live/work). I have never been as belittled by anyone in gaming as I have by the self-righteous woke crowd, and their well-intentioned but psychologically-wrecked victims. The "inclusion" movement, ostensibly in my defense, has made my experience of my hobbies uniformly worse, and pushed me out of some entirely.
Welcome to the club. Iteration 3 or 4 at this point. (possibly 5 or 6).
And its been the same every time. These sociopaths idea of "help" does so much harm. Sometimes lasting harm.
Quote from: Omega;1131329Welcome to the club. Iteration 3 or 4 at this point. (possibly 5 or 6).
And its been the same every time. These sociopaths idea of "help" does so much harm. Sometimes lasting harm.
This club sucks. Let's ditch those no-fun assholes and play D&D instead.
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1131331This club sucks. Let's ditch those no-fun assholes and play D&D instead.
Are you talking about the game that was LITERALLY made to explore NAZISM by SUBJUGATING BLACK PEOPLE AKA ORCS?!!?
Quote from: Valatar;1131142Saying that I 100% accept your explanation here because I'm too lazy to try to track down these statements from Mearls: I don't care. So the people who would've treated people like me like shit back in the day are suddenly interested in my hobby now that it's popular, but are kept away because they can't be bothered to understand the concepts I handled when I was 10? Fuck 'em. Better off without them. I can certainly see from a business standpoint Mearls sure would like all of these people to start buying books and playing, but I have zero desire or need for them to do so.
1) It's not the people who treated you badly. They were, for the most part, not even born back then. You're literally blaming them for what, being born the same gender as people who treated you badly 30 years ago?
2) It has nothing to do with being bothered by concepts you handled when you were 10 because there wasn't a wall of books back when you were 10. In fact, there were few books, and the adventures published were literally a few pages long, and there were not massive tombs of lore and massive dense multi-book shelves of rules.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1131147but I don't see anyone demanding more male representation in the market for Tea Party sets or Barbie dolls.
Then you have not looked. Because those markets also changed to try and attract more boys to them. We now have Barbie Galactic Adventure Prince Doll, Barbie Babysitter Boy Doll, Barbie Keb Fashionista Doll, , Barbie Club Chelsea Boy Doll, Barbie Careers Ken Barista Doll, Barbie Ken Camo Comeback doll, Barbie Careers Ken Firefighter Doll, and on and on.
Expanding the marketplace to include more people in your customer base is a good thing for sales.
QuoteI'm just mocking the overall concept of always blaming whity from this crowd of people (meaning SJWs, not you specifically). But even if you didn't bring up morality the basis for their claims is still moralistic in nature, and the insistences behind this particular topic does imply that there's some type of "moral imperative" to bring women and minorities into gaming. Because the real reason this is even a topic is ideological, not monetary.
Baloney. It's people here and elsewhere inferring morality when normally they're pretty quick to realize "Corporations Do Shit For Profit".
5e is wildly successful. One reason is they expanded the marketplace and increased the types of people who are willing to buy their products. That's capitalism, not moralism. It's the people whining about it who are moralizing the most about it.
QuoteIf the reason was truly monetary and trying to arbitrarily make every product appeal to a wider audience worked and made sense, then we would see a bigger push to sell Barbie dolls to boys. But we don't,
Except we do. It's a big push. You just missed it because your bubble apparently doesn't include a lot of younger boys? This is real, and among dozens of Barbie dolls made to appeal to boys these days, you were just unaware and assumed it was not happening when it was:
(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81W1%2BOf%2BKxL._AC_SL1500_.jpg)
Quote from: Mistwell;1131336Then you have not looked. Because those markets also changed to try and attract more boys to them. We now have Barbie Galactic Adventure Prince Doll, Barbie Babysitter Boy Doll, Barbie Keb Fashionista Doll, , Barbie Club Chelsea Boy Doll, Barbie Careers Ken Barista Doll, Barbie Ken Camo Comeback doll, Barbie Careers Ken Firefighter Doll, and on and on.
Expanding the marketplace to include more people in your customer base is a good thing for sales.
...
Except we do. It's a big push. You just missed it because your bubble apparently doesn't include a lot of younger boys? This is real, and among dozens of Barbie dolls made to appeal to boys these days, you were just unaware and assumed it was not happening when it was:
Some top reviews from over at Amazon (https://www.amazon.com/Barbie-Galactic-Adventure-Prince-Doll/dp/B01ARGC12Q)..
QuoteI got a good deal on this doll. He has a nice face, and while the blue top is molded on, his vest, pants, and boots can be removed and replaced with other Ken clothes. His arms swivel, and his shoulders and hips are jointed. The vest is only a front chest piece, and the gloves are not removable. However, the girlwho received him as a gift was very pleased!...
QuoteMy daughter loves dolls. We have a huge number of them. Now this doll is her favorite...
QuoteI got this for my 7 year old and she loves it. Once we watched the corresponding Barbie movie that this Prince is in, she REALLY likes it.
Looks like this doll is really popular with the
actual target demographic.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1131343Some top reviews from over at AMAZON:
Quote from: ...Girls liking girly stuff...*shocker* Nary a review from a boy to be found...In other News: Water is Wet...
Looks like this doll is really popular with the actual target demographic.
Exactly.
The real reason More Girls/Minorites are playing D&D is not because of gay gnome kings, or POC illustrations in a D&D core book.
Because the only people who really care about that nonsense are SJW's.
It is actually much more simple:
Quote from: jeff37923;1131164... girls and minorities were not barred from playing RPGs (except by social stigma of the times - RPGs are nerd games). The times have changed and the social stigmata has lessened considerably.....
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1131213... I want to point out that I think that's substantially because it's social cachet now that geek/nerd culture is "cool" rather than a social liability. The internet also makes it much, much easier to get into, e.g. by watching other people play to see how it's done and by making it easier to talk to people about it. ...and c) geek hobbies are actually really, really fun...
The social stigma for admitting in public that you play "D&D" / RPG's is at an all time cultural low.
So more young people of all walks of life are willing to give it a go.
Boys do not play with Dolls! They play with *cough** Action Figures.
Completely different.
Quote from: Shasarak;1131348Boys do not play with Dolls! They play with *cough** Action Figures.
Completely different.
Every Twelve year old boy knows this to be true! LOL
Way back, one of my female players actually went on a bit how the unrealistic proportions of Barbie dolls could cause some girls to have body issues blah, blah, blah, and how it was unfair to project such an ideal on to impressionable young girls...
My retort was: "Have you ever actually seen a He-Man action figure?"
In the 80s, my gaming group in high school were all PROUD WHITE MALES!!!
Especially the non-white guys, our Japanese supremacist, and the girls.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131336(https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/81W1%2BOf%2BKxL._AC_SL1500_.jpg)
That is a really really gay doll. I thought Ken was straight.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1131350In the 80s, my gaming group in high school were all PROUD WHITE MALES!!!
Especially the non-white guys, our Japanese supremacist, and the girls.
Thas funny, my High School group was all white males as well. At first I thought that it was because my High School was a segregated boys school but now I realise it was because ADnD was a sexist dumpster fire.
Quote from: Mistwell;11313341) It's not the people who treated you badly. They were, for the most part, not even born back then. You're literally blaming them for what, being born the same gender as people who treated you badly 30 years ago?
What? No. Women didn't treat me badly, trend-chasing assholes did because beating down on nerds was the trendy thing to do. I wasn't referring to any sex or race, but a personality type.
Quote from: Mistwell;11313342) It has nothing to do with being bothered by concepts you handled when you were 10 because there wasn't a wall of books back when you were 10. In fact, there were few books, and the adventures published were literally a few pages long, and there were not massive tombs of lore and massive dense multi-book shelves of rules.
You don't need more than the core rulebook to get by in almost any game nowadays, any more than you did in 1980. There are advantages to reading splatbooks and setting books, but it's hardly mandatory. Anyone genuinely interested in joining this hobby should be able to handle the relatively low bar of reading the core rulebook, and if that's too much effort for them to put in, we're better off without them.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1131343Some top reviews from over at Amazon (https://www.amazon.com/Barbie-Galactic-Adventure-Prince-Doll/dp/B01ARGC12Q)..
Looks like this doll is really popular with the actual target demographic.
Seriously, you're citing a few amazon reviews of girls buying boy toys as evidence Mattel didn't try to expand their marketplace to attract boys as customers?
You knew that was weak when you typed it. Just fucking concede the point like a real man :)
Quote from: Jaeger;1131347Exactly.
The real reason More Girls/Minorites are playing D&D is not because of gay gnome kings, or POC illustrations in a D&D core book.
Because the only people who really care about that nonsense are SJW's.
It is actually much more simple:
The social stigma for admitting in public that you play "D&D" / RPG's is at an all time cultural low.
So more young people of all walks of life are willing to give it a go.
No man, seeing people who look like you on the cover of something does increase interest in buying that thing. That's pretty well proven psychologically. Marketing figured this out long ago.
But if you actually believed what you're saying, you wouldn't give a crap if black women appeared on the cover of your game books, right? But you do care. So obviously it does have an impact.
Quote from: Valatar;1131376What? No. Women didn't treat me badly, trend-chasing assholes did because beating down on nerds was the trendy thing to do. I wasn't referring to any sex or race, but a personality type.
You don't need more than the core rulebook to get by in almost any game nowadays, any more than you did in 1980. There are advantages to reading splatbooks and setting books, but it's hardly mandatory. Anyone genuinely interested in joining this hobby should be able to handle the relatively low bar of reading the core rulebook, and if that's too much effort for them to put in, we're better off without them.
Yes you don't need them, but the impact of them being there on the shelves is real. Pathfinder figured this out. WOTC figured this out. Why have you not figured out that seeing a wall of tomes has a negative impact on acquiring new players to the game, regardless of what you "need" to play the game, because you don't even get as far as figuring out what is and is not needed. You walk away, because the apparent investment to begin is too great.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131378No man, seeing people who look like you on the cover of something does increase interest in buying that thing. That's pretty well proven psychologically. Marketing figured this out long ago.
Women and minorities have been playing Tabletop RPG's for years, and it's nothing to do with Current Dungeons and Dragons becoming more woke.
It's everything to do with Whitewolf games though. Vampire and it's related products brought more minorities and women into gaming than anything else ever has.
Much as Jaeger has said, all that's happened now, is things like Marvel and shows such as Stranger Things have made geek stuff mainstream. Dungeons and Dragons has pivoted off of that and brought in a bigger audience. The two are different causes.
You're completely ignoring the fact Minorities and Women were here in great numbers before hand, and specifically because of products released in the 90s.
D&D itself has a bigger audience now because of the zeitgeist of nerd culture having exploded on the mainstream, drawing in more people from everywhere. It wasn't like suddenly minorities looked at a copy of D&D and said, "AT LAST! I AM REPRESENTED! NOW I WILL PLAY!" They were already playing. No it's simply more people are playing, whites and minorities both because of Iron Man and Netflix.
Has anyone in the rpg industry spoke up in defense of Mike Mearls? It must suck knowing that none of the people he worked with for so long are either cowards or not really his friends.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131377Seriously, you're citing a few amazon reviews of girls buying boy toys as evidence Mattel didn't try to expand their marketplace to attract boys as customers?
You knew that was weak when you typed it. Just fucking concede the point like a real man :)
You have yet to make a point for me to concede to and my counter was iron tight. All you did was post a picture of a male Barbie doll and assume that was evidence that Mattel was trying to expand their market to attract boys, like Ken dolls weren't always a thing (marketed to girls) since back in the day.
Even if you were to provide actual evidence that Mattel was specifically trying to market this doll to boys (which you haven't) my point still stands, because the fact that it's girls these dolls are being bought for means their efforts failed. Which is precisely the sort of thing I was talking about in the post you replied to by bringing up this doll. Arbitrarily trying to make a product appeal to a "wider" audience that wouldn't be interested in it regardless doesn't work.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131378No man, seeing people who look like you on the cover of something does increase interest in buying that thing. That's pretty well proven psychologically. Marketing figured this out long ago.
Damn, I didn't know Buffy was a Hispanic guy with black hair.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131378But if you actually believed what you're saying, you wouldn't give a crap if black women appeared on the cover of your game books, right? But you do care. So obviously it does have an impact.
Nobody cares that a black woman appears in the cover of a game book. They care that characters that have absolutely nothing to do with the game world appear in the cover.
Quote from: Valatar;1131376Anyone genuinely interested in joining this hobby should be able to handle the relatively low bar of reading the core rulebook, and if that's too much effort for them to put in, we're better off without them.
Given the size of many core rulebooks, I'd definitely disagree. If a player can grasp the core mechanic and note down their to-hit and damage dice/modifiers, I'm happy enough.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131377Seriously, you're citing a few amazon reviews of girls buying boy toys as evidence Mattel didn't try to expand their marketplace to attract boys as customers?
You knew that was weak when you typed it. Just fucking concede the point like a real man :)
Extraordinary claims (Mattel is seriously targeting Barbie at boys) need extraordinary evidence!
Quote from: Mistwell;1131378But if you actually believed what you're saying, you wouldn't give a crap if black women appeared on the cover of your game books, right? But you do care. So obviously it does have an impact.
I had a favourite PC in a
Midnight campaign back around 2002 who looked a lot like Pathfinder's Seelah
(https://pathfinderwiki.com/mediawiki/images/thumb/9/9c/Seelah_2nd_edition.jpg/250px-Seelah_2nd_edition.jpg)
So she doesn't look like me but she could appeal to me in buying the product.
I think more diverse art can be more attractive to a broader market than everyone looking like a corn-fed Midwesterner in the 1990s TSR style. Paizo 2007-9 were smart to include Valeros the white human male Fighter in there among the iconics, though, and not make him too much of a laughing stock (unlike WoTC's Regdar). Compared to those eras (or 4e) I find 5e D&D art extremely bland and inoffensive, it doesn't really do anything to attract or repel. I've never seen anyone mention it as an attractive element, nor does it get complaints.
Quote from: S'mon;1131404I had a favourite PC in a Midnight campaign back around 2002 who looked a lot like Pathfinder's Seelah
So she doesn't look like me but she could appeal to me in buying the product.
Wel whaddayaknow, she's actually on the cover of a book!
(https://cdn.paizo.com/image/product/catalog/PZO/PZO1125_500.jpeg)
And there's also a (DIFFERENT!) black woman on the cover of another book!
(https://cdn.paizo.com/image/product/catalog/PZO/PZO1117_500.jpeg)
Here's one from nearly 20 years ago!
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4504[/ATTACH]
For some balance, here's one that's also quite old with a black dude who I guess is a wizard of some kind!
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4505[/ATTACH]
And these are just from my bookshelf (except for Sword and Fist, which I don't have), and I'm as pasty as a guy can be.
I really like that Complete Arcane cover.
Quote from: Morblot;1131411Wel whaddayaknow, she's actually on the cover of a book!
And there's also a (DIFFERENT!) black woman on the cover of another book!
Yes, but did a black female paint those? If not, it's just cultural appropriation.
Rules Cyclopedia for D&D had a fairly diverse spread of people depicted in it without being a SJW circle jerk.
Quote from: S'mon;1131402Given the size of many core rulebooks, I'd definitely disagree. If a player can grasp the core mechanic and note down their to-hit and damage dice/modifiers, I'm happy enough.
In fact, I'd argue that rulebooks are much shorter and more approachable today than ever before. More people understood Einstein's tensor equations in 1981 than understood every rule in the AD&D DMG! Most RPGs were dense, poorly organized, with disparate mechanics for most situations. They required more intellectual investment than modern iterations, hands down. Anyone who can't be bothered to learn the mechanics in a modern RPG isn't a potential player; they are just another trend chaser...
Quote from: Morblot;1131411Wel whaddayaknow, she's actually on the cover of a book!
(https://cdn.paizo.com/image/product/catalog/PZO/PZO1125_500.jpeg)
And there's also a (DIFFERENT!) black woman on the cover of another book!
(https://cdn.paizo.com/image/product/catalog/PZO/PZO1117_500.jpeg)
Did Pathfinder at least bother to include at least one prominent African-like land and culture that wasn't just one island added in a campaign supplement almost like an afterthought? It always bugged me that whenever someone wanted to make a black human character in D&D worlds I didn't know WTF they came from.
That to me has always been the real issue with "diversity" in D&D. Cuz the books have always told us that human characters can be any color/ethnicity we want them to be. It's figuring out where tha hell they emerged from that's the problem.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1131560Did Pathfinder at least bother to include at least one prominent African-like land and culture that wasn't just one island added in a campaign supplement almost like an afterthought? It always bugged me that whenever someone wanted to make a black human character in D&D worlds I didn't know WTF they came from.
That to me has always been the real issue with "diversity" in D&D. Cuz the books have always told us that human characters can be any color/ethnicity we want them to be. It's figuring out where tha hell they emerged from that's the problem.
Yes, as part of the main setting, the southern part is Fantasy Africa, with more than one country as part of it. The northern part being fantasy Europe, with a few completely fantastical countries thrown in on both sides.
I'm not an expert on Golarion, but I think they also have a Fantasy Egypt somewhere there. And of course the obligatory Fantasy Asia as well.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1131560Did Pathfinder at least bother to include at least one prominent African-like land and culture that wasn't just one island added in a campaign supplement almost like an afterthought? It always bugged me that whenever someone wanted to make a black human character in D&D worlds I didn't know WTF they came from.
That to me has always been the real issue with "diversity" in D&D. Cuz the books have always told us that human characters can be any color/ethnicity we want them to be. It's figuring out where tha hell they emerged from that's the problem.
They are from everywhere, of course. Because they belong anywhere. Ethnic homelands are racist, except for Wakanda.
Quote from: Orphan81;1131563Yes, as part of the main setting, the southern part is Fantasy Africa, with more than one country as part of it. The northern part being fantasy Europe, with a few completely fantastical countries thrown in on both sides.
Quote from: Morblot;1131564I'm not an expert on Golarion, but I think they also have a Fantasy Egypt somewhere there. And of course the obligatory Fantasy Asia as well.
Awesome! I may scrounge Pathfinder's setting for ideas at some point. D&D at least had Oriental Adventures/Kara-Tur, cuz of course people are obsessed with Asian culture. But there's always been a serious dearth of African cultures in fantasy (specially black-African; Egypt occasionally gets a mention).
Quote from: RandyB;1131565They are from everywhere, of course. Because they belong anywhere. Ethnic homelands are racist, except for Wakanda.
That's pretty much my issue with the presentation of non-whites, specially black peoples in D&D. It's this assumption that "of course they're from everywhere! Why wouldn't they, you racist?!?" Like people would be able to preserve their ethnicity when 99% of the people they have available to marry are from another race.
The total silence from anyone connected to WotC on the calls for Mearls firing is encouraging. Are they finally developing a spine?
Instead we get Jeremy Crawford bemoaning the fact that he gets accused of being 'cishet' a couple of times a year. Which is interesting, as it shows a thinning patience for the kinds of people who would use the term 'cishet.' That's a very small group of people by my reckoning.
Greetings!
Cishet? Geesus, I have no idea what the fuck that is. *Laughing* With society at large, though, the whole foundation of SJW's power is because too many normal people, over the years--didn't collectively have the balls to tell the whining SJW's to shut the fuck up, and then proceed to ruthlessly mock them, deride them at every opportunity, and socially isolate them into oblivion.
Yeah, there was a time in this country where people crying and spewing the SJW bullshit would have been rejected swiftly and shut the fuck down hard. Historically, there's always been the "Bohemians", the "avante garde", and whatever pseudo-intellectual, social misfits and rebels lurking in the gutters, the sewers, and under the fucking bridges. That's essentially where most of them were forced to exist, because they were socially and professionally rejected and isolated. No normal people accepted their bullshit, or "respected them" for their corrosive, stupid views about society and life. A few wealthier elites embraced them, but even they were socially and professionally isolated. History books and social histories are full of a long trainwreck of these people's failed lives of debauchery, rebellion, drug abuse, and poverty. It's only when normal society got fat and lazy, and more "open minded" that these poisonous troglodytes were able to infest every major center in society, and after thirty years of conniving and worming their way into the system, they have been running the show and dictating from on high.
Society needs to reject the SJW's *hard* like a fucking blow torch.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
A cishet sounds like something you might find in an antique store.
In case you guys really don't know, cis is the opposite of trans; I was born with a penis and I identify as a man, so I'm cis. Don't ask me where "cis" comes from, I don't know.
Het is short for heterosexual.
Quote from: Morblot;1131606Don't ask me where "cis" comes from, I don't know.
In Latin, the prefix 'cis' means 'on the same side' and 'trans' means 'on the other side'.
Example: [from Wikipedia] Gallia Narbonensis (Latin for 'Gaul of Narbonne', from its chief settlement) was a Roman province located in what is now Languedoc and Provence, in southern France. It was also known as Provincia Nostra ('Our Province'), from its having been the first Roman province north of the Alps, and as Gallia Transalpina ('Transalpine Gaul'), distinguishing it from Cisalpine Gaul in northern Italy.
Quote from: Morblot;1131606In case you guys really don't know, cis is the opposite of trans; I was born with a penis and I identify as a man, so I'm cis. Don't ask me where "cis" comes from, I don't know.
Het is short for heterosexual.
Quote from: Anselyn;1131607In Latin, the prefix 'cis' means 'on the same side' and 'trans' means 'on the other side'.
Example: [from Wikipedia] Gallia Narbonensis (Latin for 'Gaul of Narbonne', from its chief settlement) was a Roman province located in what is now Languedoc and Provence, in southern France. It was also known as Provincia Nostra ('Our Province'), from its having been the first Roman province north of the Alps, and as Gallia Transalpina ('Transalpine Gaul'), distinguishing it from Cisalpine Gaul in northern Italy.
So 'cishet' comes from Western civilization and its history. How racist! :D
That it's Latin tells you all you need to know: it comes from academia.
Good thing is we are starting to see pushback in many forms. Want to write comics only for SJws and nothing but we vote with out wallets.
Market and promote a movie and insult straight white people mostly men by saying it's not for them then also say they better go watch it or insert a wort that ends with "ist" or "phobic". Guess what we are not going to watch it.
I maintain their is pushback just not to the level of "reee" style SJW way of doing things.
Quote from: Morblot;1131606In case you guys really don't know, cis is the opposite of trans; I was born with a penis and I identify as a man, so I'm cis. Don't ask me where "cis" comes from, I don't know.
Het is short for heterosexual.
Cis means what one is born as. It seems strange that we even need a special term to refer to that. Anyway, I don't mean to offend or distract from the original thread topic.
I'm curious to see how WOTC treats the rest of Mearls' career with them. Others in the industry will certainly take note.
https://www.change.org/p/hasbro-fire-mike-mearls (https://www.change.org/p/hasbro-fire-mike-mearls)
QuoteFire Mike Mearls
James Hargrove started this petition to Hasbro
Mike Mearls, former lead D&D developer, when contacted in confidence by self-identified harassment/abuse victims of Zak S. (aka Zak Sabbath, Zak Smith) who were concerned about your company's business relationship with this individual, dismissed their concerns, publicly attacked the veracity of their claims, and seemingly forwarded their personal contact information to the alleged harasser/abuser, directly facilitating more abuse.
In the not-too-distant past (end of April), it was formally announced by Jeremy Crawford via Twitter that Mike Mearls was no longer working on D&D and had not been "since sometime last year".
Yesterday, we learned that this was not true and that Mike Mearls is absolutely still working on D&D, but had been temporarily reassigned to work on video games.
This is unacceptable.
From both a human rights perspective (the seeming enabling of abuse and full on display of attacking victims publicly) and a security/trust perspective (seemingly forwarding, to an alleged abuser, emails and contact information provided to the company in confidence), this should end with the firing of Mike Mearls. Full stop.
Expecting his co-workers and subordinates to shoulder the responsibility of endorsing Mike Mearls, either explicitly or by omission, is not only unfair but actively hostile. Imagine having to choose between supporting your co-worker/boss and feeding your family, or standing up for decency. This should end with the firing of Mike Mearls. Full stop.
Fire Mike Mearls.
[Edit: Language of this petition has been slightly modified on advice of legal counsel.]
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4510[/ATTACH]
I don't know how many people play D&D (I saw a figure of 9 million quoted somewhere.) So 400 signatures on a petition represents less than 1/100th of 1 percent of their audience. And of those 400, I suspect more than half are sock puppets.
Who the hell is James "Karen" Hargrove?
Quote from: mightybrain;1131688I don't know how many people play D&D (I saw a figure of 9 million quoted somewhere.) So 400 signatures on a petition represents less than 1/100th of 1 percent of their audience. And of those 400, I suspect more than half are sock puppets.
Those 400 signatures are worth even less when you consider that the entire premise of the petition is based on bullshit accusations of collaborating with someone else who (AFAIK) was also a victim of bullshit accusations. But unfortunately the internet has empowered mongoloids to believe that they're entitled to make bullshit demands based entirely on fantasies they
want to believe are true despite lacking any corroborating evidence to back them up.
Quote from: Morblot;1131564I'm not an expert on Golarion, but I think they also have a Fantasy Egypt somewhere there. And of course the obligatory Fantasy Asia as well.
FR has Chult and possibly other lands. Where was Living Jungle set?
In Greayhawk, depended on the iteration as could one or more of the migration waves were of the african type or egyptian, or mediterranian, etc.
Mystarra had some as well, one of the two types of Thaytians was dark skinned, the other very pale skinned in RC I believe.
BX never says so like with the rest of it you can do whatever you want with the bare frame they provide.
BECMI I havent read through enough yet. But odds are they are the diametric opposite and hammer down every little detail and fill in every little space.
No clue what the hell Eberron has to offer.
Quote from: DocJones;1131689Who the hell is James "Karen" Hargrove?
As far as I can tell, absolutely nobody. He's super stunning and brave though, because he made a petition and then went and tried to delete basically everything he had on twitter.
https://twitter.com/akajdrakeh/status/1263783785687965702
QuoteI'm currently attempting to delete ALL of my tweets, except this thread. I'm not willing to court the "play dirty" anti-WotC brigaders or indulge the staunch Mearls/Zak defenders. And I'm not opening myself up to abuse by either group for those decisions.
Quote from: Omega;1131708FR has Chult and possibly other lands. Where was Living Jungle set?
In Greayhawk, depended on the iteration as could one or more of the migration waves were of the african type or egyptian, or mediterranian, etc.
Mystarra had some as well, one of the two types of Thaytians was dark skinned, the other very pale skinned in RC I believe.
BX never says so like with the rest of it you can do whatever you want with the bare frame they provide.
BECMI I havent read through enough yet. But odds are they are the diametric opposite and hammer down every little detail and fill in every little space.
No clue what the hell Eberron has to offer.
Yeah, "Chult" is what I meant when I said "that wasn't just one island added in a campaign supplement almost like an afterthought" in the post that prompted that response.
Chult wasn't originally a standard part of the FR setting (IIRC), but rather a campaign supplement that was added later and you had to buy separately. It always seemed pitiful to me considering it was only an island cut off from the rest of the world, when Africa in real life is one of the largest continents in the planet, as well as part of a geographic location that included chunks of the classical world. But in FR if you want black people you have to go to some out of the way island to find them.
And everywhere else in FR when they mentioned "dark skinned" people usually what they meant was "Arab-looking". So there was no explicit mention of actual black people that were African-looking for sure (not merely "dark skinned") anywhere in D&D that I know of, outside of Chult.
Quote from: DocJones;1131689Who the hell is James "Karen" Hargrove?
Some whiny fuck...I recognize his name from an RPG Facebook group. Just another one of those "concerned citizens", i.e. brainwashed moron.
Quote from: Morblot;1131661James Hargrove started this petition to Hasbro
Of course he did! :D
(He used to be a poster here, you know. Same personality. Username 'jdrakeh')
Quote from: Brad;1131430Yes, but did a black female paint those? If not, it's just cultural appropriation.
LOL. You can only paint yourself, otherwise you're waycist!! But if your art isn't diverse, you're waycist!
Fuck it, let's burn down a game store for justice. I need some 40k reparations!
Quote from: VisionStorm;1131568That's pretty much my issue with the presentation of non-whites, specially black peoples in D&D. It's this assumption that "of course they're from everywhere! Why wouldn't they, you racist?!?" Like people would be able to preserve their ethnicity when 99% of the people they have available to marry are from another race.
As D&D is fantasy, you could decide "races of humans" weren't able to crossbreed. AKA, you could have a culturally homogeneous world, but only humans of the same skin color could breed together. Or maybe everyone's baby comes out a random ethnicity? Maybe skin color can skip generations? Black grandfathers might have white daughters and black grandchildren. Maybe skin color is passed down via divine blessing or curse? Maybe skin color depends on the month of your birth? Moon phase? Astrological sign? Or who reigns on the throne?
Quote from: Melan;1131738Of course he did! :D
(He used to be a poster here, you know. Same personality. Username 'jdrakeh')
And on rpg.net before that. Wrote some game stuff, though I don't recall what. Always seemed angry.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1131710Yeah, "Chult" is what I meant when I said "that wasn't just one island added in a campaign supplement almost like an afterthought" in the post that prompted that response.
Chult wasn't originally a standard part of the FR setting (IIRC), but rather a campaign supplement that was added later and you had to buy separately. It always seemed pitiful to me considering it was only an island cut off from the rest of the world, when Africa in real life is one of the largest continents in the planet, as well as part of a geographic location that included chunks of the classical world. But in FR if you want black people you have to go to some out of the way island to find them.
And everywhere else in FR when they mentioned "dark skinned" people usually what they meant was "Arab-looking". So there was no explicit mention of actual black people that were African-looking for sure (not merely "dark skinned") anywhere in D&D that I know of, outside of Chult.
er. Far as I can tell Chult was previously connected to the mainland and was not cut off from that till the Spellplague and 4e it seems. In the original module from the 90s that fleshed it out it is a peninsula, not an island.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1131739LOL. You can only paint yourself, otherwise you're waycist!! But if your art isn't diverse, you're waycist!
Meanwhile in Spain: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMc0jhIxnVQ
Where would this fall on the racism spectrum?
Quote from: Morblot;1131564I'm not an expert on Golarion, but I think they also have a Fantasy Egypt somewhere there. And of course the obligatory Fantasy Asia as well.
Multiple flavors, actually; Tian Xia (the far east continent) has over a dozen nations ranging from communists to pseudo-feudal Japan.
The Egypt expy is Osirion, and ironically was once dominated by the Fantasy Arabs (Qadira) before throwing them out and restoring their monarchy.
Quote from: mightybrain;1131614That it's Latin tells you all you need to know: it comes from academia.
When academics produce a vaccine for Covid, please do feel free not to take it.
Quote from: Anselyn;1131764When academics produce a vaccine for Covid, please do feel free not to take it.
When Humanities academics produce a vaccine for Covid, I'll be very surprised.
Quote from: S'mon;1131765When Humanities academics produce a vaccine for Covid, I'll be very surprised.
I would be frighten as vaccines are not their study.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1131739As D&D is fantasy, you could decide "races of humans" weren't able to crossbreed. AKA, you could have a culturally homogeneous world, but only humans of the same skin color could breed together. Or maybe everyone's baby comes out a random ethnicity? Maybe skin color can skip generations? Black grandfathers might have white daughters and black grandchildren. Maybe skin color is passed down via divine blessing or curse? Maybe skin color depends on the month of your birth? Moon phase? Astrological sign? Or who reigns on the throne?
That's sort of a weird take for a world where humans can crossbreed with elves and potentially other non-human races. I'm also not sure about human skin color working like a recessive gene or some other random occurrence. It's just so random, inconsistent and (worst of all) "handwavy". I'm really not a fan of any notion that "it's Fantasy, therefore random nonsense". I'm firmly in the Verisimilitude > Fiction camp. I'd rather not allow black people in my game than say "I don't know where they come from, so lets just say stuff like skin color is completely random".
Quote from: Omega;1131756er. Far as I can tell Chult was previously connected to the mainland and was not cut off from that till the Spellplague and 4e it seems. In the original module from the 90s that fleshed it out it is a peninsula, not an island.
You're right. Chult just stuck as an island in my head cuz it sort of looked like one. But looking back at old material it was always stuck at its southeast end to the mainland through a small strip of land.
Quote from: mightybrain;1131614That it's Latin tells you all you need to know: it comes from academia.
There is already a Latin word for it, '
normal' from 'normalis'.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1131772That's sort of a weird take for a world where humans can crossbreed with elves and potentially other non-human races. I'm also not sure about human skin color working like a recessive gene or some other random occurrence. It's just so random, inconsistent and (worst of all) "handwavy". I'm really not a fan of any notion that "it's Fantasy, therefore random nonsense". I'm firmly in the Verisimilitude > Fiction camp. I'd rather not allow black people in my game than say "I don't know where they come from, so lets just say stuff like skin color is completely random".
You're right. Chult just stuck as an island in my head cuz it sort of looked like one. But looking back at old material it was always stuck at its southeast end to the mainland through a small strip of land.
As far as I can tell, the original black FR ethnicities are the Durpari and Turami, while Chult was more 'Lost World Full of Dinosaurs Land" that was retconned a bit recently.
Edit: looking at the maps & Wiki, Durpari are the people of Durpar Estagund & Var the Golden in the far south-east of Faerun. Turami are the people of Turmish on the Sea of Fallen Stars, in central Faerun. They're a racial isolate which initially looks odd, but it looks like they originally lived further east where Mulhorand is now, ie not far west of Durpari lands, and were displaced by the extraplanar invasion of the Egyptians/Mulhorandi and Sumerians/Unther, fleeing west until they settled in modern Turmish.
It looks like if you want to play a black Forgotten Realms PC from a civilised quasi-Ethiopian society, you can play a Turami, and it makes reasonable sense.
Dug out my old Living Jungle RPGA booklet. Malatra was a plateau surrounded by jungle and dinosaurs that was settled by a race of very tall dark brown skinned aliens. Eventually one of Torils gods laid their utopia to ruin and all thats left is those ruins mostly. The current Nubari race are the decendants of Shuo from Kara-tur and Nubari it seems.
Is this review of a game that was written by the same guy who started the petition?
https://retroroleplaying.com/gates-and-glamours/james-hargroves-free-zip-rpg/
I note all the links to the rpg are long broken.
Quote from: mightybrain;1131759Meanwhile in Spain: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JMc0jhIxnVQ
Where would this fall on the racism spectrum?
It's a Mega-Trudeau-fest!
Quote from: VisionStorm;1131772That's sort of a weird take for a world where humans can crossbreed with elves and potentially other non-human races. I'm also not sure about human skin color working like a recessive gene or some other random occurrence. It's just so random, inconsistent and (worst of all) "handwavy". I'm really not a fan of any notion that "it's Fantasy, therefore random nonsense". I'm firmly in the Verisimilitude > Fiction camp.
If its a fantasy world, then it can easily have its own rules regarding human genetics that don't correspond to our Earth.
Also, human skin color could be very non-random if its based on factors in that world. AKA, those born under a certain moon, those born under a certain king, those born in the land ruled by a certain god, etc.
As for crossbreeding with non-humans, there's no requirement for half-elves to have a human parent in every setting. Maybe half-elves are what happens when True Elves have children on this material plane instead of the Fey Realms. And if those half-elves have a human parent, what's the kid's skin color?
In regards to Verisimilitude vs. Fiction, I want my Norse Fantasy to conform to what we know about the Norse both historically and their myths. But if a GM creates an explicitly "Not-Norse, But Vikings" game, then the verisimilitude I want is the rules of his Not-Norse Vikings to make sense in their own context in that setting.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1131849As for crossbreeding with non-humans, there's no requirement for half-elves to have a human parent in every setting. Maybe half-elves are what happens when True Elves have children on this material plane instead of the Fey Realms.
I had a setting where the half-elves were of fully human descent, but were from the bloodlines of humans that had been taken (as slaves to the elves) to the Feywild generations ago. When they rebelled and made it home, the 'typical' humans referred to them as half-elves.
Quote from: S'mon;1131780As far as I can tell, the original black FR ethnicities are the Durpari and Turami, while Chult was more 'Lost World Full of Dinosaurs Land" that was retconned a bit recently.
Edit: looking at the maps & Wiki, Durpari are the people of Durpar Estagund & Var the Golden in the far south-east of Faerun. Turami are the people of Turmish on the Sea of Fallen Stars, in central Faerun. They're a racial isolate which initially looks odd, but it looks like they originally lived further east where Mulhorand is now, ie not far west of Durpari lands, and were displaced by the extraplanar invasion of the Egyptians/Mulhorandi and Sumerians/Unther, fleeing west until they settled in modern Turmish.
It looks like if you want to play a black Forgotten Realms PC from a civilised quasi-Ethiopian society, you can play a Turami, and it makes reasonable sense.
Yeah, I looked them up, and Turami appear to be Ethiopian-looking. Though, most of the art that came up in the search appears to be from the WotC era of D&D. Looking at the old source material it really isn't clear what human ethnicities exist and what they're supposed to look like. In the entry on "Humanity" they focus too much on "humans come in every color" and too little on what parts of the Realms people of X or Y color come from.
Granted, some of these details sometimes appear in the descriptions of the various lands of the Realms, but the specifics aren't always present or are sometimes vague. So it's really difficult to discern what different actual human groups of the Realms looks like, unless they mention culture-specific terms like "pharaoh" or "pashas", then you can go "Oh, Mulhorandi are like Egyptians. And Calishites are like Turks."
Quote from: Spinachcat;1131849If its a fantasy world, then it can easily have its own rules regarding human genetics that don't correspond to our Earth.
Also, human skin color could be very non-random if its based on factors in that world. AKA, those born under a certain moon, those born under a certain king, those born in the land ruled by a certain god, etc.
As for crossbreeding with non-humans, there's no requirement for half-elves to have a human parent in every setting. Maybe half-elves are what happens when True Elves have children on this material plane instead of the Fey Realms. And if those half-elves have a human parent, what's the kid's skin color?
In regards to Verisimilitude vs. Fiction, I want my Norse Fantasy to conform to what we know about the Norse both historically and their myths. But if a GM creates an explicitly "Not-Norse, But Vikings" game, then the verisimilitude I want is the rules of his Not-Norse Vikings to make sense in their own context in that setting.
Yes, I'm aware that in fiction you can make stuff up and that if you keep your made up stuff internally consistent, then within the context of that world whatever you made up will be verisimilar. But that doesn't really tell me what ethnicities actually exist in established D&D worlds, like FR, or where do black people in the Realms come from, which was more what this side discussion was about. That just tells me to make things up, and if I have to make things up to determine where specific human ethnic groups come, I'm probably just gonna make up my own world, with stand-ins for African lands, Arabic lands, etc. Which is what I usually do anyways, and why I tend to look down on most D&D worlds other than Dark Sun (which also didn't specify anything about human ethnicities, but at least was cool and original, and completely without fault until the metaplot fucked it up).
The stuff about people's skin color being determined by things like astrological or astronomical factors only really works if the world is actually about that and there's an entire rationale behind it. Which would open up a whole bunch of other questions about the nature of that world, why do people's skin color vary based on their time of birth, what about purple people, what about green, etc. And would probably alter the entire landscape of what that world is like or about.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1131860The stuff about people's skin color being determined by things like astrological or astronomical factors only really works if the world is actually about that and there's an entire rationale behind it. Which would open up a whole bunch of other questions about the nature of that world, why do people's skin color vary based on their time of birth, what about purple people, what about green, etc. And would probably alter the entire landscape of what that world is like or about.
For me, the dropping of a rock in a pond and watching the ripples is what I love best about setting design. You're quite right. Any of those changes would create a dozen questions which would need to be answered and become the canon background of the setting. Which to me is awesome because now you're in something fresh, new and fantastical.
But it wouldn't necessarily become the focus of the setting. If blue skinned humans are born under the Blue Moon, that's an oddity and a chargen option, but is really just tossing a couple jelly beans into a vanilla D&D world for a bit of unusual flavor.
One thing I love about the Wilderlands is the green (Viridian/sea), blue (Avalonian/cold) and red (Altanian/fire?) human races. OTOH it doesn't really have anywhere for black people to come from. Indians Mongolians Chinese & Japanese can all come from Karak.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131378No man, seeing people who look like you on the cover of something does increase interest in buying that thing. That's pretty well proven psychologically. Marketing figured this out long ago.
WOTC better get down on it then! They must be really missing out from attracting some very lucrative new player demographics:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4522[/ATTACH]
Wait a minute.... still #1 rpg...
Quote from: Mistwell;1131378But if you actually believed what you're saying, you wouldn't give a crap if black women appeared on the cover of your game books, right? But you do care. So obviously it does have an impact.
Putting words in my mouth again. It doesn't help your argument.
I can give a crap about whatever is on the cover of some game, D&D has had females on the cover of their games from early on:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4523[/ATTACH]
Do you know what was every 12 year old white male who had this boxed set was outraged about when they saw a "female" on the cover of D&D...???
Absolutely Nothing!
Woke nonsense is exactly that: Woke nonsense.
You can tell yourself they do it for marketing reasons all you want, but the problem with that argument is that these people tend to spill their actual motivations all over social media.
Quote from: Mistwell;1131378No man, seeing people who look like you on the cover of something does increase interest in buying that thing. That's pretty well proven psychologically. Marketing figured this out long ago.
That's complete garbage of course. No one buys fantasy RPGs because the illustration "looks like you". They buy it because the illustration is cool. People don't play Viking games because the they have white skin (you know,
just like the Vikings!), they play those games because Vikings are fun.
I can honestly say no RPG I've ever purchased contains illustrations that look like anything like me. In fact, people frequently tend to play characters that are other than their own physical type. The 400-pound zit-faced nerd voicing a falsetto halfling is a thing. The expansion of female imagery in gaming books
followed an increase in female gamers; it didn't
cause it.
(Of course, if you think what's "like you" comprises only ethnicity and gender, then you have a terribly narrow and generic view of your own person. But that's another issue.)
Quote from: Jaeger;1131918WOTC better get down on it then! They are really missing out from attracting some obviously very lucrative new demographics.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4522[/ATTACH]
Wait a minute.... still #1 rpg, OK, whew...
Putting words in my mouth again. It doesn't help your argument.
I can give a crap about whatever is on the cover of some game, D&D has had females on the cover of their games from early on:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4523[/ATTACH]
Do you know what was every 12 year old white male who had this boxed set was outraged about when they saw a "female" on the cover of D&D...???
Absolutely Nothing!
Woke nonsense is exactly that: Woke nonsense.
You can tell yourself they do it for marketing reasons all you want, but the problem with that argument is that these people tend to spill their actual motivations all over social media.
I was pissed over that cover because that Fighter with the spear is a badass, and spears only got 1d6 :mad:
Quote from: JeffB;1131929I was pissed over that cover because that Fighter with the spear is a badass, and spears only got 1d6 :mad:
Well, now we are getting into the heart of the matter.
Spears have been continually short changed in every edition of D&D due to Pro-Sword "Heroic-Privilege" discrimination...
Spears were the real weapon of battle, and D&D has continually underrepresented them so that people can have their "hero" armed with a sword and not feel like they are picking a second-class weapons option.
This kind of historical revisionism is extremely problematic. Catering to players "feelings" about what type of weapon is more heroic is the opposite of having true multi-weapon representation in ALL RPG's.
The anti-spear prejudice in D&D is wrong and it needs to stop. Player character concepts are literally being hurt by this right now.
Join me in the twitter fight to bring truly diverse weapon representation to D&D!
#SpearDream
Quote from: Jaeger;1131930Spears were the real weapon of battle, and D&D has continually underrepresented them so that people can have their "hero" armed with a sword and not feel like they are picking a second-class weapons option.
I'd rather have a sword in close quarters, like a typical dungeon combat.
Spears fight in two ranks, get double damage when set against a charge, and can be thrown. Swords just do 1-2 points more damage.
Quote from: Libramarian;1131969I'd rather have a sword in close quarters, like a typical dungeon combat.
Same.
But spears are better in an open field, and swords are actually kinda crap against armor. Yet neither of these factors are accounted for in D&D. Especially in older editions were spears just suck so badly it's just out of sync with reality. Spears simply do NOT inflict less damage than a sword IRL, yet somehow in D&D they do.
Quote from: Jaeger;1131930Spears were the real weapon of battle, and D&D has continually underrepresented them so that people can have their "hero" armed with a sword and not feel like they are picking a second-class weapons option.
This kind of historical revisionism is extremely problematic.
Lindy Beige is here to help us!
[video=youtube;afqhBODc_8U]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=afqhBODc_8U[/youtube]
Quote from: VisionStorm;1132005Spears simply do NOT inflict less damage than a sword IRL, yet somehow in D&D they do.
Maybe every weapon could do 1d6? Some edition or other did that...
Now that's a worthy subject!
Swords or axes for the front ranks, spears for the second rank, missiles in the middle, and a rear guard with melee weapons - that's the real deal.
I saw that WotC sent out a tweet saying how all black lives matter and the very first reply under it said, well that is all very well and good but how about firing Mike Mearls.
So welcome back, Mike.
Quote from: Shasarak;1132033I saw that WotC sent out a tweet saying how all black lives matter and the very first reply under it said, well that is all very well and good but how about firing Mike Mearls.
So welcome back, Mike.
Beautiful, in its own way.
Quote from: Shasarak;1132033I saw that WotC sent out a tweet saying how all black lives matter
And they were browbeaten into that by the minority fandom they deliberately cultivated. The people whose motto is "silence is violence" when it suits them and "free speech is violence" when it doesn't. They continue to play themselves. Which is going to make the inevitable walk back ever longer and more embarrassing.
Some of this commentary reminds me of my reaction to the first issue of Dragon Magazine I owned. #126.
Link to image here: https://tinyurl.com/yasbk76e
And my reaction was not 'ew a girl', it was 'holy crap lady, that last arrow better be something REALLY GOOD or that giant skeleton is gonna mash you into salsa'.
Quote from: Shasarak;1132033I saw that WotC sent out a tweet saying how all black lives matter and the very first reply under it said, well that is all very well and good but how about firing Mike Mearls.
So welcome back, Mike.
This post made me legit laugh out loud. Thanks, I needed that.
Btw, re: spear damage, didn't all weapons do 1d6 damage equally in OD&D? I know variable weapon damage is an optional rule in B/X (and thus OSE).
Quote from: Zalman;1131927In fact, people frequently tend to play characters that are other than their own physical type.
Well maybe you do. I always play dwarf fighters and I'm a short, stocky and bearded guy with a short temper IRL.
Granted, sometimes it may say stuff like "human wizard" or "psychic with biopsionics" or "knight of the round table" or whatever on the sheet, but basically the character's still a dwarf fighter.
Quote from: Morblot;1132128Well maybe you do. I always play dwarf fighters and I'm a short, stocky and bearded guy with a short temper IRL.
Granted, sometimes it may say stuff like "human wizard" or "psychic with biopsionics" or "knight of the round table" or whatever on the sheet, but basically the character's still a dwarf fighter.
Ha, definitely not everyone. I know I have played both male and female characters from the beginning myself. The notion that people are
only inspired to play what they already are is ludicrous.
Quote from: Zalman;1132131The notion that people are only inspired to play what they already are is ludicrous.
I agree, and I wasn't super duper serious anyway. I've played at least one female character (and countless NPCs) as well, although I can't say I did a good job of it.
Anyway, now that I think about it, I don't think I own a single gamebook with a fat bearded white guy on the cover. What the hell, man. Where's my representation?
Quote from: Orphan81;1131380Women and minorities have been playing Tabletop RPG's for years
This is a vapid reply. You know, I know, and everyone reading this knows that the issue isn't "did a couple of people do X" it's about percentages of a population base. Of course you will find a token number of all peoples into all different things. And yet it used to be when you'd go to a gaming convention the ratio of men to women was about 95% men to 5% women. And now it's much closer to 50-50. And that's a meaningful difference which cannot be seen it "well some women were always interested in it!".
Quoteand it's nothing to do with Current Dungeons and Dragons becoming more woke.
Of fucking course this change in the number of minorities and women playing D&D has to do with the conscious effort to include women and minorities in the artwork of D&D more. You don't even need to "trust me" on that one, FUCKING ASK A DECENT NUMBER OF NEW PLAYERS WHAT THEY THINK. They will tell you it had an impact. Just as so many black women actors will tell you seeing Ohura on Star Trek inspired them to get into acting. Seeing people who look like you engaged in an activity makes you think more about joining that activity. I know you know this, so why are you pretending you don't?
QuoteYou're completely ignoring the fact Minorities and Women were here in great numbers before hand, and specifically because of products released in the 90s.
They'd gone from about 5% attendance at gaming cons to about 15%. Nothing close to the about 50% now. There was a HUGE leap in the past 5 years. Just truly massive! I just wonder if some of the guys here are not getting out to cons as often as they used to? To game stores?
Quote from: VisionStorm;1131391Even if you were to provide actual evidence that Mattel was specifically trying to market this doll to boys (which you haven't) my point still stands,
Ah yes, the declaration of conspiracy theorists around the world and throughout history. Even if those who disagree with me provide evidence they are right, I will still be able to warp my vague point around any new evidence!
Quotebecause the fact that it's girls these dolls are being bought for means their efforts failed.
Because you show literally 3 people posted reviews saying X, out of literally hundreds of thousands of sales of said products, you would declare the three reviews disproves any claims! Ah yes, the conspiracy theory of the fucking idiot type! Well done! I know when I am fighting an unarmed man in a battle of wits, and shall bow out. You "win". :)
Quote from: S'mon;1131403Extraordinary claims (Mattel is seriously targeting Barbie at boys) need extraordinary evidence!
Uh, they ANNOUNCED they were targeting them to boys, put out a boys line, and now there are pages and pages of sites debating which are the best top 10 lists of them for boys? It's not an extraordinary claim, THEY FUCKING SAID THEY WERE DOING IT.
Quote from: Hakdov;1131599A cishet sounds like something you might find in an antique store.
Sounded like a new D&D race to me.
Quote from: Morblot;1131661https://www.change.org/p/hasbro-fire-mike-mearls (https://www.change.org/p/hasbro-fire-mike-mearls)
Fucking James Hargrove. That little shit was chapping my hide before the term woke became a popular term.
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1132056And my reaction was not 'ew a girl', it was 'holy crap lady, that last arrow better be something REALLY GOOD or that giant skeleton is gonna mash you into salsa'.
Looks like her sword got stuck too. She should have used a spear!
Quote from: Shasarak;1132033I saw that WotC sent out a tweet saying how all black lives matter...
I read that as please don't come down to Renton to burn and loot.
Quote from: DocJones;1132193Looks like her sword got stuck too. She should have used a spear!
Why, so she could lose that too? :)
Quote from: Zalman;1131927That's complete garbage of course. No one buys fantasy RPGs because the illustration "looks like you".
Yes, they do - at least in terms of gender and race. Not that you'd realize it because they've always been white and so they looked like you. And yes, I am making an assumption about your race. I'm betting on it in fact, because a non-white person would never say anything as silly as what you just said.
How many black actors need to say "I saw this black actor in roles in the 1960s and it inspired me to go into acting" for this concept to sink in? How many female astronauts need to say they saw a female astronaut and it inspired them to go into that field? How many studies showing people seeing those who are of their similar background become inspired to go into the same field as those people is enough?
There are many good arguments against affirmative action. NONE of those good arguments are "because seeing people like you in a field doesn't inspire you to also go into that field". Because that's the only part of affirmative action which turns out to be unquestionably, objectively, verifiably correct. It's all the other stuff surrounding affirmative action which is questionable. But that part - damn dude, how are you not even aware of that by now?
Quote from: Morblot;1132134Anyway, now that I think about it, I don't think I own a single gamebook with a fat bearded white guy on the cover. What the hell, man. Where's my representation?
Right? For every virtue-signaling actor there are 1000s of D&D players who look nothing like any picture in a game book.
Quote from: Mistwell;1132184Uh, they ANNOUNCED they were targeting them to boys, put out a boys line, and now there are pages and pages of sites debating which are the best top 10 lists of them for boys? It's not an extraordinary claim, THEY FUCKING SAID THEY WERE DOING IT.
Well gimme some links to more than a gay Ken doll!
Quote from: Mistwell;1132217Yes, they do - at least in terms of gender and race.
Yes, I think you're right, though it could be overstated. More art depictions of black adventurer characters = more black players. I once had a South Asian player lamenting that nearly all the swarthy folk in Tolkien & CS Lewis were baddies. He'd have liked to see more good-guy Calormen & Haradrim.
Female players are also attracted by depictions of PC types they can identify with - while a good proportion do actually want to play Red Sonja given half a chance, many more want a fully dressed Wizardess with impeccable fashion sense and a smallish bust. :D I think the general perception of D&D as more socially acceptable these days also attracts a higher proportion of female players, though - Matt Mercer is a great recruiting tool for female players. :D
Quote from: S'mon;1132287Well gimme some links to more than a gay Ken doll!
Your opinion that "he looks gay" is not an argument.
See for example:
[video=youtube;TULVRlpsNWo]https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=30&v=TULVRlpsNWo&feature=emb_logo[/youtube]
And if you think trying to get boys to buy Barbies is objectionable, you're going to be thrilled with this move:
https://www.kidsnews.com.au/humanities/new-range-of-genderneutral-dolls-launched/news-story/3294b090ca11d7b4e42b726e36f1d291
Quote from: Mistwell;1132217How many black actors need to say "I saw this black actor in roles in the 1960s and it inspired me to go into acting" for this concept to sink in? How many female astronauts need to say they saw a female astronaut and it inspired them to go into that field? How many studies showing people seeing those who are of their similar background become inspired to go into the same field as those people is enough?
How much of that applies to a game where the whole idea is to play the role of someone else?
Quote from: mightybrain;1132319How much of that applies to a game where the whole idea is to play the role of someone else?
Good point - except for the recently shown inability of some alleged roleplayers on this site to imagine what it might be like to walk a mile in the shoes of people from their own country, let alone a fantasy race in a fantasy world.
Wouldn't you agree that historically the first babystep in roleplaying is often to play an idealised version of oneself?
Quote from: Mistwell;1132180Because you show literally 3 people posted reviews saying X, out of literally hundreds of thousands of sales of said products, you would declare the three reviews disproves any claims!
I also posted a link with many more reviews. You are free to look for a single one that bought that doll for a boy. Just like you are free to keep pretending that you actually made a point, when you didn't. But I suppose the former takes more effort than the latter.
Quote from: Mistwell;1132180You "win". :)
Many posts ago. And so did everyone else arguing with you... about the points the were arguing, not this discussion. Arguing with your disingenuous ass is a waste of time. In that regards we all lost and you won. Congrats!
Quote from: Anselyn;1132321Good point - except for the recently shown inability of some alleged roleplayers on this site to imagine what it might be like to walk a mile in the shoes of people from their own country, let alone a fantasy race in a fantasy world.
Wouldn't you agree that historically the first babystep in roleplaying is often to play an idealised version of oneself?
Why do we have to imagine walking a mile in someone elses shoes?
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4532[/ATTACH]
Oh.
Quote from: Morblot;1132128Well maybe you do. I always play dwarf fighters and I'm a short, stocky and bearded guy with a short temper IRL.
My grandmother played a mutant radioactive polar bear. :cool:
Quote from: Omega;1132327My grandmother played a mutant radioactive polar bear. :cool:
Not sure if that makes the point or refutes it...
Quote from: Anselyn;1132321Wouldn't you agree that historically the first babystep in roleplaying is often to play an idealised version of oneself?
I wouldn't know. I think my first character was an elf. I can't be sure, it was a long time ago when I was about 13. I don't recall ever playing as myself. Does anyone do that?
I'm currently playing a chonky redhead human female trained in drunken kung fu.
Quote from: Anselyn;1132321Wouldn't you agree that historically the first babystep in roleplaying is often to play an idealised version of oneself?
No. Not at all. Theres immense variance in what people want to play and what they want to play turns out to not be prediminantly themselves. I've lost track of the threads bitching about how no one plays a human for example.
It's funny how the "representation" nonsense only works one way. If seeing yourself in entertainers was all important, how did K-pop possibly become popular with teens outside of Korea? And how will rappers, Oprah and the NBA ever get non-black fans?
The "representation" demand smells of the bigotry of lowered expectations. AKA, white liberal 101. Those poor non-whites lack something deep in their DNA so they can not discover things they might enjoy without the intervention of the heroic SJWs.
Quote from: Jaeger;1131918Do you know what was every 12 year old white male who had this boxed set was outraged about when they saw a "female" on the cover of D&D...???
Mom catching them wanking to the cover?
Or maybe, emotional conflict over what the inclusion of robes, but lack of panties in the Equipment list really means?
Quote from: Ghostmaker;1132056And my reaction was not 'ew a girl', it was 'holy crap lady, that last arrow better be something REALLY GOOD or that giant skeleton is gonna mash you into salsa'.
Arrow of Undead Slaying or she's rolling up a new PC.
Quote from: Mistwell;1132179They'd gone from about 5% attendance at gaming cons to about 15%. Nothing close to the about 50% now. There was a HUGE leap in the past 5 years. Just truly massive! I just wonder if some of the guys here are not getting out to cons as often as they used to? To game stores?
Here's the photo gallery of the last Los Angeles game convention. Even in LA, the SoCal Cesspool of Virtue, there isn't a 50% ratio.
https://www.strategicon.net/photo_galleries/index.php?cat=48
And remember, if anybody even THINKS "hey, I wonder how many are wives and girlfriends?", you're a totally naughty Nazi.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1132348Here's the photo gallery of the last Los Angeles game convention. Even in LA, the SoCal Cesspool of Virtue, there isn't a 50% ratio. https://www.strategicon.net/photo_galleries/index.php?cat=48
And remember, if anybody even THINKS "hey, I wonder how many are wives and girlfriends?", you're a totally naughty Nazi.
50% ratio at my table for the past 20 years, as well as at any game I've been a player in. Oh, and wives and girlfriends count -- they are still players (unless you're a misogynist!). Could be women hate conventions more than they hate D&D.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1132348It's funny how the "representation" nonsense only works one way. If seeing yourself in entertainers was all important, how did K-pop possibly become popular with teens outside of Korea? And how will rappers, Oprah and the NBA ever get non-black fans?
Cultural appropriation? White entitlement knows no bounds... smfh
Quote from: mightybrain;1132330I wouldn't know. I think my first character was an elf. I can't be sure, it was a long time ago when I was about 13. I don't recall ever playing as myself. Does anyone do that?
I'm currently playing a chonky redhead human female trained in drunken kung fu.
I actually tried to play a somewhat idealized version of myself for my second character, but my first character was also an elf that didn't even look like me (think I went with a traditional blond haired green eyed elf). I've played mostly hot chicks of every race (human and non-human) since then, mostly cuz I like hot chicks of all races.
Disclaimer: I'm not a hot chick of every race IRL, just FYI.
I play as myself a lot, but that's because I'm the GM and I like to roleplay the monsters.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1132353Disclaimer: I'm not a hot chick of every race IRL, just FYI.
I must say I'm a bit disappointed. :(
Quote from: Zalman;113235250% ratio at my table for the past 20 years, as well as at any game I've been a player in. Oh, and wives and girlfriends count -- they are still players (unless you're a misogynist!).
I have one group where a female player brought in her husband (and son), and a male player brought in his girlfriend/partner. AFAICS they are all equally valid players! Notably with the male player who brought in his girlfriend, she is a lot better at rules stuff than he is.
Greg Tito, Senior Communications Manager for WOTC, said today during an interview with Screenrant Magazine (https://screenrant.com/dungeons-dragons-dd-live-reality-rp-tv-mafia-werewolf-in-reality/):
Question: Along with the sales data released last year, it was also revealed that 39% of the D&D player base is now women, and that's a pretty big leap from the days when the game was considered to be a bit of a boy's club. What do you think has caused such a drastic shift in interest in the game?
Answer: That data is from a few years ago so I think it's potentially trending toward 50/50, which is our goal. We've been collecting survey data on that now and I don't think we'll be satisfied until it is up to what the population numbers actually are. And I think it has to do with a lot of factors, I think that you mentioned the boys club attitude that has been eroding over time with the more mainstream acceptance of the game as a whole. Folks like Joe Manganiello who has been very vocal about "hey he's a jock, he's a gym brat", but he likes playing Dungeons & Dragons and I think that broke down that barrier and I think that a lot of women are seeing themselves on streaming shows like Critical Role, I think it was really instrumental in showing role-players, you know, people who enjoy different facets of the game, can find the appeal in it and if you enjoyed playing with dolls as a child, you're kind of gonna like playing D&D. I think a lot of that had been ignored by women for a long time and now that they got to see they can do that as adults and as kids, but especially adult women are seeing the joys and beauty of the game and spreading it and playing it with their children, I think all of those factors contributed to the growth of the player base and not just women. I'm also seeing a huge increase in people of color who are wanting to join this game, and not to get to treacly about this, but I think that more people playing D&D and putting themselves in the shoes of others can do a lot for how people are approaching hot topics about racism right now. It's really encouraging to see people who have experimented with playing different characters, and different ways of experiencing the world and having their eyes opened and to saying "I've never really realized this is what people were feeling" and it's really eye-opening to think that the more it's done, it can help the world as a whole.
Quote from: Mistwell;1133306Greg Tito, Senior Communications Manager for WOTC, said today during an interview with Screenrant Magazine (https://screenrant.com/dungeons-dragons-dd-live-reality-rp-tv-mafia-werewolf-in-reality/):
Question: Along with the sales data released last year, it was also revealed that 39% of the D&D player base is now women, and that's a pretty big leap from the days when the game was considered to be a bit of a boy's club. What do you think has caused such a drastic shift in interest in the game?
Answer: That data is from a few years ago so I think it's potentially trending toward 50/50, which is our goal. We've been collecting survey data on that now and I don't think we'll be satisfied until it is up to what the population numbers actually are. And I think it has to do with a lot of factors, I think that you mentioned the boys club attitude that has been eroding over time with the more mainstream acceptance of the game as a whole. Folks like Joe Manganiello who has been very vocal about "hey he's a jock, he's a gym brat", but he likes playing Dungeons & Dragons and I think that broke down that barrier and I think that a lot of women are seeing themselves on streaming shows like Critical Role, I think it was really instrumental in showing role-players, you know, people who enjoy different facets of the game, can find the appeal in it and if you enjoyed playing with dolls as a child, you're kind of gonna like playing D&D. I think a lot of that had been ignored by women for a long time and now that they got to see they can do that as adults and as kids, but especially adult women are seeing the joys and beauty of the game and spreading it and playing it with their children, I think all of those factors contributed to the growth of the player base and not just women. I'm also seeing a huge increase in people of color who are wanting to join this game, and not to get to treacly about this, but I think that more people playing D&D and putting themselves in the shoes of others can do a lot for how people are approaching hot topics about racism right now. It's really encouraging to see people who have experimented with playing different characters, and different ways of experiencing the world and having their eyes opened and to saying "I've never really realized this is what people were feeling" and it's really eye-opening to think that the more it's done, it can help the world as a whole.
Until women are exactly 50% of prisoners, workplace deaths, and workers in dirty, dangerous jobs like sanitation and logging, I don't care about criticisms about representation in other areas, like gaming populations.
Quote from: Mistwell;1133306Folks like Joe Manganiello who has been very vocal about "hey he's a jock, he's a gym brat", but he likes playing Dungeons & Dragons and I think that broke down that barrier and I think that a lot of women are seeing themselves on streaming shows like Critical Role...
I'm sure that women "seeing themselves" (like all women are just interchangeable with each other, like a fucking hive mind) on shows like Critical Role had a bigger impact on more women joining gaming than a hunky, well-built jock actor telling everyone that D&D is cool now and women could now meet guys like him playing D&D.
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1133307Until women are exactly 50% of prisoners, workplace deaths, and workers in dirty, dangerous jobs like sanitation and logging, I don't care about criticisms about representation in other areas, like gaming populations.
The fact that men constitute more than 90% of the workplace deaths and those that do the toughness, shittiest jobs in the world, 75% of homeless, are the majority suicides and prisoners with longer sentences than women for the same crimes, and have become the minority of college students, yet (some) women still complain about being "oppressed" cuz they're not equally represented in a fucking hobby, like men are not also less represented in hobbies that primarily appeal to women as well, is the height of unbridled privilege.
But as feminists like to constantly remind us, privilege is often invisible to those who have it.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1133318I'm sure that women "seeing themselves" (like all women are just interchangeable with each other, like a fucking hive mind) on shows like Critical Role had a bigger impact on more women joining gaming than a hunky, well-built jock actor telling everyone that D&D is cool now and women could now meet guys like him playing D&D.
The fact that men constitute more than 90% of the workplace deaths and those that do the toughness, shittiest jobs in the world, 75% of homeless, are the majority suicides and prisoners with longer sentences than women for the same crimes, and have become the minority of college students, yet (some) women still complain about being "oppressed" cuz they're not equally represented in a fucking hobby, like men are not also less represented in hobbies that primarily appeal to women as well, is the height of unbridled privilege.
But as feminists like to constantly remind us, privilege is often invisible to those who have it.
Oh good lord, parroting a bunch of mens-rights stuff while simultaneously ranting about feminists? Lovely.
Do you think the changes 5e made, both in the books themselves and the marketing they've engaged in, has increased the number of women play the game?
Quote from: Mistwell;1133319Oh good lord, parroting a bunch of mens-rights stuff while simultaneously ranting about feminists? Lovely.
Go fuck off Mistwell. People like you are the problem.
Does it really matter more women are playing D&D since the only gate keepers I see are the SJWs? It doesn't matter if your a woman. If you got viewpoints that runs counter to SJW idealology they will try to remove you.
About time that women discovered how fun RPGs are.
Shame that they had to wait until it was "popular" before jumping on the band wagon though.
Quote from: Snowman0147;1133321Go fuck off Mistwell. People like you are the problem.
I don't care (much) if you (or VisionStorm or Ratman) support mens-rights. It's not really my thing, but I see some legit issues there and I can't fault people for the causes they choose to focus on among legit causes in the world. My comment was more the "while simultaneously ranting about feminists". All feminists are doing are focusing on THEIR cause. It might not be your thing, but I am sure you see some legit issues here and there in some feminist topics too. So choosing to rant about your cause (mens-rights) while also ranting about some other people's cause (womens-rights) seems both silly and a bit hypocritical. What, people can't support their cause if it's not your cause?
Quote from: Mistwell;1133325I don't care (much) if you (or VisionStorm or Ratman) support mens-rights. It's not really my thing, but I see some legit issues there and I can't fault people for the causes they choose to focus on among legit causes in the world. My comment was more the "while simultaneously ranting about feminists". All feminists are doing are focusing on THEIR cause. It might not be your thing, but I am sure you see some legit issues here and there in some feminist topics too. So choosing to rant about your cause (mens-rights) while also ranting about some other people's cause (womens-rights) seems both silly and a bit hypocritical. What, people can't support their cause if it's not your cause?
Facts are racist.
Quote from: Brad;1133327Facts are racist.
Non-response is non-responsive. It's vacuous too. You going for ditsy robot?
Quote from: Mistwell;1133319Oh good lord, parroting a bunch of mens-rights stuff while simultaneously ranting about feminists? Lovely.
People parroting facts! I know, right? Like, ERMAHGERD! Who do these people think they are? Ya, kno?
Quote from: Mistwell;1133319Do you think the changes 5e made, both in the books themselves and the marketing they've engaged in, has increased the number of women play the game?
I think that geek media in general going mainstream and uber-nerd stuff like RPGs no longer being something people get socially ostracized for, coupled with the broad appeal of fantasy in particular brought, more women to D&D. 5e just happens to coincide with that period. And technically so do 4e and to a certain extent 3e. But 4e was shit, and 3e was probably too crunchy to appeal to the average non-geek woman. While 5e is the easiest and most dumb down modern edition of D&D.
Quote from: Mistwell;1133329Non-response is non-responsive. It's vacuous too. You going for ditsy robot?
Beats the hell out of idiotic strawman arguments...
Quote from: VisionStorm;1133338People parroting facts! I know, right? Like, ERMAHGERD! Who do these people think they are? Ya, kno?
Sure a stream of facts without context, while ignoring any facts which run contrary to the biased theme trying to be portrayed. I could do the same with feminist-leaning facts, or pro-vegetarian facts, and I suspect you wouldn't react to them with "Just parroting facts!" even if every one of them were facts. Which is why I said parroting. It's listing only facts which support your cause without the context of anything which might tend to not support your cause. It's what activists do. There is nothing righteous about it, mang.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1133318like men are not also less represented in hobbies that primarily appeal to women as well, .
That too. We don't hear about the under-representation of men in knitting or fandom of steamy bodice rippers.
I attribute the rising numbers of X in RPGs simply due to the fact that it's become "cool" or at least socially acceptably nerdy. "Progressive activism" has just made the topic toxic and insufferable to talk about.
Quote from: Mistwell;1133363Sure a stream of facts without context, while ignoring any facts which run contrary to the biased theme trying to be portrayed. I could do the same with feminist-leaning facts, or pro-vegetarian facts, and I suspect you wouldn't react to them with "Just parroting facts!" even if every one of them were facts. Which is why I said parroting. It's listing only facts which support your cause without the context of anything which might tend to not support your cause. It's what activists do. There is nothing righteous about it, mang.
But we already know Mistwell - no amount of facts would change your mind that letting people self-govern in terms of participation and association without some penalty levied by appropriate authorities, to those that are deemed "undesireable" based on skin-color or sex or any other convenient excuse to get people to bend the knee to those self-same authorities is what is really going on. Social engineering is what is going on here - not "Social Justice"
So let's not pretend any of this "discussion" will ever be more than post-sniping.
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1133364I attribute the rising numbers of X in RPGs simply due to the fact that it's become "cool" or at least socially acceptably nerdy.
More importantly, computer games. Because people can buy a CD or download a game at will, they can try something they haven't tried before without the trouble of finding someone to play with or having embarrassment at being a newbie, whether it be fantasy roleplaying games or scrabble or chess. And after trying a solo computer version of something, some people will want to graduate to a tabletop version.
Computer games were supposed to destroy our hobby. In fact they've boosted it, because while the games are fun, people quickly see their inadequacies - even the dumbest GM is smarter than a computer, there are no three foot walls blocking your character's way in a tabletop game, and so on. The inadequacies of computer games have driven people to tabletop games.
As well, there's a backlash against screen-only stuff. I've mentioned before expressing surprise a year or two back at how many people were coming to my open game tables, and one of the players saying, "It's because people don't have friends any more." The inadequacies of social media as a means of social connection have driven people to tabletop games.
The cover of an RPG should look like what the game is about.
39% of gamers are female? Y'all single gamers better be balls deep in dice tossing poonanny!
Quote from: Spinachcat;113338839% of gamers are female? Y'all single gamers better be balls deep in dice tossing poonanny!
Female gamers are still nerds, by and large, with the same self confidence & social skills as the male variety. :D
Quote from: RPGPundit;1133377The cover of an RPG should look like what the game is about.
Then explain the Swords & Wizardry 3rd edition cover...
Quote from: Mistwell;1133306Greg Tito, Senior Communications Manager for WOTC, said today during an interview with Screenrant Magazine (https://screenrant.com/dungeons-dragons-dd-live-reality-rp-tv-mafia-werewolf-in-reality/):
Question: Along with the sales data released last year, it was also revealed that 39% of the D&D player base is now women, and that's a pretty big leap from the days when the game was considered to be a bit of a boy's club. What do you think has caused such a drastic shift in interest in the game?
Answer: That data is from a few years ago so I think it's potentially trending toward 50/50, which is our goal. (snip)
Oh no.
How long before Greg Tito is targeted for implying with his 50/50 statement that there are only two genders and specifically referring to men/boys and women?
Maybe someone on Twatter can ask him to clarify? :)
Quote from: Brad;1133397Then explain the Swords & Wizardry 3rd edition cover...
Is that the one with Avatar Aang,'s giant fish monster form on the cover?
Quote from: tenbones;1133365But we already know Mistwell - no amount of facts would change your mind
Right because a listing of facts is informative communication but not persuasive communication. You'd have to actually attempt to engage in persuasive communication to change minds.
Few try to persuade people here, unless it's regarding RPGs. Persuasion regarding topics like mens rights isn't even attempted here. Your own response is a good example of that - you just go in assuming I cannot be persuaded an so dive right for the ridiculous accusations and spinning of imagined foes with mustache twirling intent. This despite the fact (and it is a fact) that I said up front I have some sympathy for mens-rights issues and I don't dismiss them it's just not my thing. Unless someone has already been persuaded to support the cause you support, they're the enemy to you, at least in this forum and context.
Which I accept, for an RPG forum. Just don't pretend it's righteous to engage in discourse like that. It's not. You're here in your bubble of like-minded people beating your chest like those people repeating words that get you back pats from your team. It's the same behavior you can find for the Left online.
Quotedo that here. that letting people self-govern in terms of participation and association without some penalty levied by appropriate authorities, to those that are deemed "undesireable" based on skin-color or sex or any other convenient excuse to get people to bend the knee to those self-same authorities is what is really going on. Social engineering is what is going on here - not "Social Justice"
So let's not pretend any of this "discussion" will ever be more than post-sniping.
What complete tripe. Nobody was suggesting a penalty for not playing with women or minorities. What a blatant, ridiculous strawman. But again, that's how these discussions go. Say something clearly erroneous but in line with your teams cause, get some back pats, never have to self-analyze and question if what you said was in any way even vaguely accurately describing the position of those you disagree with, and move on to the next thread where you again dare dissent from your tribe's orthodoxy.
Quote from: Mistwell;1133414What complete tripe. Nobody was suggesting a penalty for not playing with women or minorities. What a blatant, ridiculous strawman.
Off the top of my head: https://archive.fo/cY1kU / https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/7ru583/misc_getting_tired_of_misogyny/dt04l9f/
That's Nolan T. Jones of Roll20 [1] threatening to "nuke off the site" any group that attempts to be male-only. The original post content is deleted but here's the archive. https://archive.fo/OYpdy and the original screenshots https://archive.fo/Vw6l4
Note that LGBTQ-exclusive and female-exclusive Roll20 groups were and (as far as I know) continue to be permitted.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roll20#Reddit_controversy (different controversy)
Quote from: Slambo;1133412Is that the one with Avatar Aang,'s giant fish monster form on the cover?
I thought it was a giant uterus (seriously...)
Quote from: Brad;1133397Then explain the Swords & Wizardry 3rd edition cover...
Heresy. Seriously that cover is heresy.
Quote from: tenbones;1133365But we already know Mistwell - no amount of facts would change your mind that letting people self-govern in terms of participation and association without some penalty levied by appropriate authorities, to those that are deemed "undesireable" based on skin-color or sex or any other convenient excuse to get people to bend the knee to those self-same authorities is what is really going on. Social engineering is what is going on here - not "Social Justice"
Quote from: Mistwell;1133414What complete tripe. Nobody was suggesting a penalty for not playing with women or minorities. What a blatant, ridiculous strawman. But again, that's how these discussions go. Say something clearly erroneous but in line with your teams cause, get some back pats, never have to self-analyze and question if what you said was in any way even vaguely accurately describing the position of those you disagree with, and move on to the next thread where you again dare dissent from your tribe's orthodoxy.
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1133415Off the top of my head: https://archive.fo/cY1kU / https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/7ru583/misc_getting_tired_of_misogyny/dt04l9f/
That's Nolan T. Jones of Roll20 [1] threatening to "nuke off the site" any group that attempts to be male-only. The original post content is deleted but here's the archive. https://archive.fo/OYpdy and the original screenshots https://archive.fo/Vw6l4
Note that LGBTQ-exclusive and female-exclusive Roll20 groups were and (as far as I know) continue to be permitted.
I think you're talking about different things here. There's a difference between requiring women or minorities to be in all play groups compared to not allowing an explicit "no girls allowed policy". The latter is quite rare, in my experience, and wouldn't affect 99.9% of all groups, while groups that happen to be all-white and/or all-male are pretty common.
One can still complain about how it's not fair to not allow "no girls allowed" groups -- but the distinction is still important.
I might be able to accept 39 percent of D&D buyers of maybe the PHB are female, but I am not so sure about that many players. I am sure there are plenty of home games with spouses and Girl friends getting pulled in over time. I do not think there are many rolling into the game shops and getting into games. I have a feeling the shows and Joe admitting he played had much effect, at least directly on female players. I think lots of the nerds who have always played, or played and took a break were more influenced by seeing pop culture reminders of enjoying playing in their younger years, and now these nerds are older, many married or have steady GF, probably work with nerds that played or still play and got back into it. Their significant others were influenced by them. I could be wrong there, but I think most of the women playing were likely recruited by significant others versus marketed to in the sense of watching a video or walking into a game store and deciding to join one of the open games there from pop culture.
Now I do not doubt for a second that many of these same women hopped onto the internet and read up on their new favorite hobby, maybe even starting blogs all about the hobby could be so much better too (The BJJ blue belt curse, they sure love to tell all the old hands how it should be)
I do not feel the table top growth is so much growth of people never playing RPGs to now playing as much as players returning from longer hiatus, whether that break is a couple years or 4 decades. That is a HUGE number of people, the total number touched by D&D over the years.
Quote from: jhkim;1133461I think you're talking about different things here. There's a difference between requiring women or minorities to be in all play groups compared to not allowing an explicit "no girls allowed policy". The latter is quite rare, in my experience, and wouldn't affect 99.9% of all groups, while groups that happen to be all-white and/or all-male are pretty common.
One can still complain about how it's not fair to not allow "no girls allowed" groups -- but the distinction is still important.
jhkim, I'm not sure that we are talking about different things. Mistwell's assertion as he wrote it was that "suggesting a penalty for not playing with women or minorities" is a "blatant, ridiculous strawman". tenbones' post was, in my read, centrally about "letting people self-govern in terms of participation and association without some penalty levied by appropriate authorities". The links I provided are a concrete example of a significant player in the largest/default virtual tabletop system personally promising in strong language to kick out one type of exclusionary group / self-governing association while permitting other types of exclusionary groups / self-governing associations. That strikes me as a pretty direct counterexample to the idea that this is a "blatant, ridiculous strawman" and "clearly erroneous", and that there are no encroachments onto a group's right to choose how and with whom they associate. We can debate how much the incident matters, what justice looks like, whether Roll20's behavior has changed, etc., but it did happen.
I don't understand how you came to "requiring women or minorities to be in all play groups" out of this discussion; "letting people self-govern in terms of participation and association without some penalty" seems like it is the core of what we are discussing here, and the Roll20 example is exactly about that. Even if Roll20 banned all exclusionary groups and not only some, it would still be about that. (I did a quick search, and Roll20 does appear to continue to allow groups to self-filter on some identity groups.)
Yes, you're right that it'd be different to mandate female and/or minority membership in private play groups. But I don't see where that's being discussed in this subthread. Did I miss it?
"No girls allowed" clubs = dudes playing poker, their wives are usually "good riddance!"
I like how magically dudes getting together to play D&D with their buddies somehow is terrible if they don't want to be around any women...
Quote from: jhkimI think you're talking about different things here. There's a difference between requiring women or minorities to be in all play groups compared to not allowing an explicit "no girls allowed policy". The latter is quite rare, in my experience, and wouldn't affect 99.9% of all groups, while groups that happen to be all-white and/or all-male are pretty common.
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1133465jhkim, I'm not sure that we are talking about different things. Mistwell's assertion as he wrote it was that "suggesting a penalty for not playing with women or minorities" is a "blatant, ridiculous strawman". tenbones' post was, in my read, centrally about "letting people self-govern in terms of participation and association without some penalty levied by appropriate authorities".
OK, I've made the mistake of falling into talking for other people. My apologies.
Just from my own point of view, I feel a convention or play site (like Roll20) is within its bounds to regulate explicit game policies like "no girls allowed" or "no boys allowed" or "gays only" or "whites only" or whatever. I would not describe that as not allowing people to self-govern their own games as long as people can still have groups with such a make-up. Likewise on this board, I believe Pundit doesn't allow posting nazi symbols or links to white supremacy sites. I don't think that's a significant restriction on self-expression as long as people can still express nazi and/or white supremacist views. (I've disagreed with some of his mod calls, but that particular policy doesn't bother me.)
I don't know for sure what either Mistwell or tenbones intended to talk about, and they should clarify for themselves.
Quote from: Brad;1133466"No girls allowed" clubs = dudes playing poker, their wives are usually "good riddance!"
I like how magically dudes getting together to play D&D with their buddies somehow is terrible if they don't want to be around any women...
Or married men whose wives don't play, and whose wives are totally not cool with their husbands playing games with other women. That group exists, and it is a sizeable one.
Quote from: Brad;1133466"No girls allowed" clubs = dudes playing poker, their wives are usually "good riddance!"
I like how magically dudes getting together to play D&D with their buddies somehow is terrible if they don't want to be around any women...
My Group closely resembles your example.
Quote from: Razor 007;1133482Or married men whose wives don't play, and whose wives are totally not cool with their husbands playing games with other women. That group exists, and it is a sizeable one.
We have had a couple wives play, but you can sure as hell believe, no way in hell our wives (who do not play much) would be OK with a random female playing with us, and if she were 20-something someone might get hurt.
Quote from: oggsmash;1133486We have had a couple wives play, but you can sure as hell believe, no way in hell our wives (who do not play much) would be OK with a random female playing with us, and if she were 20-something someone might get hurt.
How dare you put the harmony and well-being of your family above an outsider who wants to play elf games. You monster.
Quote from: Spinachcat;113338839% of gamers are female? Y'all single gamers better be balls deep in dice tossing poonanny!
Always have been, even since the earliest days. This is nothing remarkable. You ladies like Romantic Chivalry ever much, in every place it truly exists.
Quote from: jhkim;1133461I think you're talking about different things here. There's a difference between requiring women or minorities to be in all play groups compared to not allowing an explicit "no girls allowed policy". The latter is quite rare, in my experience, and wouldn't affect 99.9% of all groups, while groups that happen to be all-white and/or all-male are pretty common.
One can still complain about how it's not fair to not allow "no girls allowed" groups -- but the distinction is still important.
Is there or not a policy on Roll20 and many conventions, about not allowing such groups? On the other hand do or do not the same roll20 and conventions happily promote women only, gays only, non-whites only groups?
Mind you my problem is with the double standard, while you are happy to try and conflate groups forming at random with blatant discriminatory policies. In order to defend such policies.
Quote from: jhkim;1133475Just from my own point of view, I feel a convention or play site (like Roll20) is within its bounds to regulate explicit game policies like "no girls allowed" or "no boys allowed" or "gays only" or "whites only" or whatever. I would not describe that as not allowing people to self-govern their own games as long as people can still have groups with such a make-up. Likewise on this board, I believe Pundit doesn't allow posting nazi symbols or links to white supremacy sites. I don't think that's a significant restriction on self-expression as long as people can still express nazi and/or white supremacist views. (I've disagreed with some of his mod calls, but that particular policy doesn't bother me.)
I can see that point, and I was previously more sympathetic to it than I am today, since the internet got weird with centralization and deplatforming. There is a grey area of acceptability, and since absolutes are hard to define correctly and without unwanted side-effects, as far as I can tell the grey area with the minimal banlist is the best option: consider context, and try to limit exclusion as much as possible, and to the most egregious behaviors only (like actual Nazism).
Also, to extend your analogy, the position that Roll20 is effectively taking in those links is contrary to people being able to express one kind of preference that is analogous to - but different from - another. It'd be like saying men's rights activists are free to express their views on the site, but not feminists. That's really the core of my personal objection: I don't think it should be a rule, because letting people find their D&D groups based on their personal preferences seems correct to me on the face of it. But if it's going to be a rule that thou shalt not exclude, it should apply to everyone equally and the same way. And it was especially inappropriate for Jones to self-righteously grandstand against his customers. Talk about criticizing people for daring to have badwrongfun.
Quote from: Brad;1133397Then explain the Swords & Wizardry 3rd edition cover...
Well 3rd ed was about bleeding plant deer skulls that are on fire. oh. And butterflies.
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1133415Off the top of my head: https://archive.fo/cY1kU / https://old.reddit.com/r/DnD/comments/7ru583/misc_getting_tired_of_misogyny/dt04l9f/
That's Nolan T. Jones of Roll20 [1] threatening to "nuke off the site" any group that attempts to be male-only. The original post content is deleted but here's the archive. https://archive.fo/OYpdy and the original screenshots https://archive.fo/Vw6l4
Note that LGBTQ-exclusive and female-exclusive Roll20 groups were and (as far as I know) continue to be permitted.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roll20#Reddit_controversy (different controversy)
Yeah... @mistwell. This is the tip if a mighty iceberg you ignore.
So this is where you say "Roll20? that's not some legitimate component of the gaming space! That's Nolan's private opinions!" as if others in gaming industry don't hold true to this idiotic standard too.
You're making my point for me. You don't really care about discussion, you're blind to your own biases either willfully or purely for ego's sake. Go on and tell me a poor POC how I'm wrong (I'm teasing you here - I don't really give a shit if you do). And I'm certainly not speaking for Men's Rights only. I'm talking about anything that doesn't march in step with whatever current goalpost the Left is standing for. There is zero consistency on their ideas because ultimately there are no principles they actually adhere to, other than what gives them power, or the ego-stroke to make them feel right. This goes from the top of the social structure, even down to posting on internet forums.
It's ego-stroking and the desire to feel in control AT BEST, at worst... and increasingly more common - it seems to be about undermining anything and everything to destroy it.
Quote from: jhkimI think you're talking about different things here. There's a difference between requiring women or minorities to be in all play groups compared to not allowing an explicit "no girls allowed policy". The latter is quite rare, in my experience, and wouldn't affect 99.9% of all groups, while groups that happen to be all-white and/or all-male are pretty common.
One can still complain about how it's not fair to not allow "no girls allowed" groups -- but the distinction is still important.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1133504Is there or not a policy on Roll20 and many conventions, about not allowing such groups? On the other hand do or do not the same roll20 and conventions happily promote women only, gays only, non-whites only groups?
Mind you my problem is with the double standard, while you are happy to try and conflate groups forming at random with blatant discriminatory policies. In order to defend such policies.
I don't know what the official Roll20 policy is. What I am saying is that there is virtually no practical difference here between any of:
1) Site doesn't allow any explicit group restrictions like gays-only or no-gays.
2) Site allows gays-only groups but not no-gays groups.
3) Site allows any group restrictions.
For 99% of gamers, they wouldn't even notice the difference. Further, even for the groups who want such a rule, they just have to reject applicants without stating that as their explicit reason (for cases #1 and #2).
Quote from: jhkim;1133638I don't know what the official Roll20 policy is. What I am saying is that there is virtually no practical difference here between any of:
1) Site doesn't allow any explicit group restrictions like gays-only or no-gays.
2) Site allows gays-only groups but not no-gays groups.
3) Site allows any group restrictions.
For 99% of gamers, they wouldn't even notice the difference. Further, even for the groups who want such a rule, they just have to reject applicants without stating that as their explicit reason (for cases #1 and #2).
Do you think you can make a NO GAYS group on Roll20? Give it a shot. For science's sake.
It's not about the 99% of clueless people. It's about the 1% that gatekeeps for the Correct Narrative. C'mon man, YOU can put your own points to the TEST. If you stand by your claim, aren't you the slightest bit curious to see if Roll20 would ban your ass for making a NO GAYS gaming group on their platform? Or you know... start soft and go GAYS ONLY. I'll bet that would ride quite nicely.
Quote from: jhkim;1133638I don't know what the official Roll20 policy is. What I am saying is that there is virtually no practical difference here between any of:
1) Site doesn't allow any explicit group restrictions like gays-only or no-gays.
2) Site allows gays-only groups but not no-gays groups.
3) Site allows any group restrictions.
For 99% of gamers, they wouldn't even notice the difference. Further, even for the groups who want such a rule, they just have to reject applicants without stating that as their explicit reason (for cases #1 and #2).
But there is a difference and a big one.
1) Site doesn't allow any explicit group restrictions like gays-only or no-gays. (No discrimination, so I'm okay with it)
2) Site allows gays-only groups but not no-gays groups. (Fucking discrimination)
3) Site allows any group restrictions. (No discrimination as to how you make your group, I like that, not so sure about allowing the GMs to discriminate tho, but from a freedom point of view only this is the more free of your 3 examples.
That you can even say there's no difference between those 3 speaks lots of you.
Quote from: tenbones;1133641Do you think you can make a NO GAYS group on Roll20? Give it a shot. For science's sake.
What the fuck, tenbones? Please reread what I wrote. Nowhere do I make any claims about what is or is not allowed on Roll20.
The point is that it doesn't matter in a practical sense. If someone bought out Roll20 and changed it so that no-gays groups were allowed, it's not like users lives would be changed and they would cry out "Finally, we can live in freedom!"
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1133648That you can even say there's no difference between those 3 speaks lots of you.
There's a *philosophical* difference, but for 99% of gamers, there is no *practical* difference.
If you want to get outraged over Roll20 engaging in wrongthink, be my guest.
Quote from: jhkim;1133653What the fuck, tenbones? Please reread what I wrote. Nowhere do I make any claims about what is or is not allowed on Roll20.
The point is that it doesn't matter in a practical sense. If someone bought out Roll20 and changed it so that no-gays groups were allowed, it's not like users lives would be changed and they would cry out "Finally, we can live in freedom!"
I know you didn't say that. I'm saying that if you believe there is no practical difference there is a way to TEST that. So you know exactly what I'm talking about, and you know how they (Roll20) would react. So they're not the same thing. The impact that Roll20 has on the hobby is disproportionate to the 99% (yeah I know you're just tossing that number out there) in terms of what their political ideology is catering to.
And if someone did buy them out - AND allowed "No Gays groups"... it would attract news far beyond the confines of this hobby. Likewise I contend if you made a Roll20 "No Whites Allowed"group it would stand.
Hmm... maybe we should test this out together?
Thus, the question is what is the alternative to Roll20? And does it pander to the same idiocy?
I just heard Origins Online convention was cancelled because they didn't joint the Burn Loot Murder race pandering fast enough to appease the freaks. Which got me thinking.
There's so little money in gaming that without ideology, there's little motivation to put the work into creating an alternative. AKA, this is the perfect moment for a new online convention to rise and use FB/IG to scoop up Origins and GenCon attendees (especially with the judicious usage of scraping tools). But there isn't enough ROI (return on investment) present to justify the expense.
Quote from: jhkimWhat the fuck, tenbones? Please reread what I wrote. Nowhere do I make any claims about what is or is not allowed on Roll20.
The point is that it doesn't matter in a practical sense. If someone bought out Roll20 and changed it so that no-gays groups were allowed, it's not like users lives would be changed and they would cry out "Finally, we can live in freedom!"
Quote from: tenbones;1133688I know you didn't say that. I'm saying that if you believe there is no practical difference there is a way to TEST that. So you know exactly what I'm talking about, and you know how they (Roll20) would react.
The practical way to test that is just to use Roll20 normally and see if one runs into problems when doing the stuff one normally does. I'm using Roll20 now for a Call of Cthulhu campaign I'm playing with my usual group - playing through Masks of Nyarlathotep. It's the first time I've used it - obviously motivated by the lockdown. Also, I was thinking about running Ravenloft II for my family this summer (using 5E).
If I were to pretend that I wanted a no-gays gaming group just to see, that would be an artificial test searching for trouble that doesn't represent real play.
Quote from: jhkim;1133702If I were to pretend that I wanted a no-gays gaming group just to see, that would be an artificial test searching for trouble that doesn't represent real play.
I think there is a special term for that type of experiment.
Something....
Tip of my tongue...
Got it: Scientific Method!
Nah, you are right, lived experience is the new science.
Quote from: jhkimIf I were to pretend that I wanted a no-gays gaming group just to see, that would be an artificial test searching for trouble that doesn't represent real play.
Quote from: Shasarak;1133708I think there is a special term for that type of experiment.
Something....
Tip of my tongue...
Got it: Scientific Method!
Nah, you are right, lived experience is the new science.
I'm not sure what you're looking for here. Let's say I did pretend that I wanted a no-gays gaming group and posted so explicitly, and I found that Roll20 didn't allow it. So what? That doesn't dispute anything that I said.
You're welcome to try the experiment if you like. If that's what you want to find out, then I approve of the experiment. But personally, I don't care about the outcome. It doesn't affect my gaming either way.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1133695Thus, the question is what is the alternative to Roll20? And does it pander to the same idiocy?
I just heard Origins Online convention was cancelled because they didn't joint the Burn Loot Murder race pandering fast enough to appease the freaks. Which got me thinking.
There's so little money in gaming that without ideology, there's little motivation to put the work into creating an alternative. AKA, this is the perfect moment for a new online convention to rise and use FB/IG to scoop up Origins and GenCon attendees (especially with the judicious usage of scraping tools). But there isn't enough ROI (return on investment) present to justify the expense.
Open Source, 100% free as in freedom and as in free beer, with everything Roll20 and the like hide behind a paywall but without the paywall, only con is it has a steep learning curve, mainly for the GM, but such alternative already exists. Its called RPTools (https://www.rptools.net/)
YES, we need an online convention free of ideology, or better said with a libertarian bent as far as the organizers go but no proselytizing.
What I wonder is, is it possible to do it and break even? Could we as volunteers make it happen without expecting to earn anything? I'm willing and able to donate some time/work towards it.
Quote from: jhkim;1133657There's a *philosophical* difference, but for 99% of gamers, there is no *practical* difference.
If you want to get outraged over Roll20 engaging in wrongthink, be my guest.
Nope, there's a philosophical and IRL difference, and a big one.
Say I wanted a no women's allowed group for whatever reason, I'm not allowed to do it, while a only women group is even encouraged. It's not only philosophy once it impacts you on the real world.
Quote from: jhkim;1133712I'm not sure what you're looking for here. Let's say I did pretend that I wanted a no-gays gaming group and posted so explicitly, and I found that Roll20 didn't allow it. So what? That doesn't dispute anything that I said.
You're welcome to try the experiment if you like. If that's what you want to find out, then I approve of the experiment. But personally, I don't care about the outcome. It doesn't affect my gaming either way.
So you don't know their official policy and do not want to find out what said policy is... WHY? Would you be forced to admit you're wrong and stop defending those asshats?
Quote from: jhkim;1133712I'm not sure what you're looking for here. Let's say I did pretend that I wanted a no-gays gaming group and posted so explicitly, and I found that Roll20 didn't allow it. So what? That doesn't dispute anything that I said.
You're welcome to try the experiment if you like. If that's what you want to find out, then I approve of the experiment. But personally, I don't care about the outcome. It doesn't affect my gaming either way.
Dont worry, after all it is just an artificial test.
Quote from: jhkim;1133702The practical way to test that is just to use Roll20 normally and see if one runs into problems when doing the stuff one normally does. I'm using Roll20 now for a Call of Cthulhu campaign I'm playing with my usual group - playing through Masks of Nyarlathotep. It's the first time I've used it - obviously motivated by the lockdown. Also, I was thinking about running Ravenloft II for my family this summer (using 5E).
To me, the real test is to cut straight to the heart of the matter: if we all agree that people are equal in their capacity to shit on one another over their perception of another based on race and it has nothing at all to do with actual "power" - then one merely needs to create a group on Roll20 and make it "POC Only".
I'd be willing to be no one from Roll20 would say anything.
Quote from: jhkim;1133702If I were to pretend that I wanted a no-gays gaming group just to see, that would be an artificial test searching for trouble that doesn't represent real play.
I disagree.
If the context of this discussion, which I think it is pretty salient, that the degree of leftist political infestation in this hobby is so rampant (I'm actually mildly surprised we're even discussing it, but as always I'm down. I mean it's pretty readily apparent) but unknown to the blind masses (your "99%"), I'm not disagreeing with you that the vast majority of the RPG market is blind, deaf and dumb. But for me - as part of the 1% I'm contending the 99% got this way because of the actual gatekeepers of the industry that allow this bigotted behavior to continue.
All tests are artificial. The question as always are the controls and the results. Making a Roll20 group for the express purposes to be "POC Only" is perfectly in line with SJW's line of reasoning. And yes it's racist at its core. Don't you think in the interests of the myriad of discussions that happen here about this very topic, it wouldn't be of interest? It's not about real play, it's about what is tolerated as the premise in light of what "they" say they represent.
It doesn't even take the satisfaction of this test to predict that I'm right. Search your feelings! You know it's true. Whether you care or not... is a different story.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1133716So you don't know their official policy and do not want to find out what said policy is... WHY? Would you be forced to admit you're wrong and stop defending those asshats?
and you said it in 1/10 the words that I did...
Quote from: tenbones;1133727and you said it in 1/10 the words that I did...
I tend towards being an asshole, and that makes me more direct and yes "offensive" tm.
Quote from: jhkim;1133712I'm not sure what you're looking for here. Let's say I did pretend that I wanted a no-gays gaming group and posted so explicitly, and I found that Roll20 didn't allow it. So what? That doesn't dispute anything that I said.
You're welcome to try the experiment if you like. If that's what you want to find out, then I approve of the experiment. But personally, I don't care about the outcome. It doesn't affect my gaming either way.
No, reality is some zealot would doxx you. You want no part of such an experiment and you know it. If you make a gay only group, no issue no doxx. Make a no-gays group, you probably end up in some blog or article, and probably have your name leaked out, fired, and out of work for....well forever. Over selling I know, but only a fool would take the chance of having that happen. You do not strike me as a fool.
Quote from: oggsmash;1133755No, reality is some zealot would doxx you. You want no part of such an experiment and you know it. If you make a gay only group, no issue no doxx. Make a no-gays group, you probably end up in some blog or article, and probably have your name leaked out, fired, and out of work for....well forever. Over selling I know, but only a fool would take the chance of having that happen. You do not strike me as a fool.
Obviously... so why *pretend* it's NOT true those things would happen. You don't see me volunteering to do that either.
But we ALL know the truth.
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1133465jhkim, I'm not sure that we are talking about different things. Mistwell's assertion as he wrote it was that "suggesting a penalty for not playing with women or minorities" is a "blatant, ridiculous strawman". tenbones' post was, in my read, centrally about "letting people self-govern in terms of participation and association without some penalty levied by appropriate authorities". The links I provided are a concrete example of a significant player in the largest/default virtual tabletop system personally promising in strong language to kick out one type of exclusionary group / self-governing association while permitting other types of exclusionary groups / self-governing associations. That strikes me as a pretty direct counterexample to the idea that this is a "blatant, ridiculous strawman" and "clearly erroneous", and that there are no encroachments onto a group's right to choose how and with whom they associate. We can debate how much the incident matters, what justice looks like, whether Roll20's behavior has changed, etc., but it did happen.
I don't understand how you came to "requiring women or minorities to be in all play groups" out of this discussion; "letting people self-govern in terms of participation and association without some penalty" seems like it is the core of what we are discussing here, and the Roll20 example is exactly about that. Even if Roll20 banned all exclusionary groups and not only some, it would still be about that. (I did a quick search, and Roll20 does appear to continue to allow groups to self-filter on some identity groups.)
Yes, you're right that it'd be different to mandate female and/or minority membership in private play groups. But I don't see where that's being discussed in this subthread. Did I miss it?
1) I was saying nobody in this thread was saying that,
2) Being penalized for posting a public game of "White players only" is not the same as "Being penalized for not having a black player in your game". It's the later I was saying didn't happen. The former is blatant racism and commonly banned in society.
Similarly, a site saying they will respond to complaints about "No women allowed" public games solicitation isn't the same as a penalty if you don't have women in your games. A huge number of games on Roll20 have no women in them - nobody is threatening them in any way for that.
You're just not supposed to specifically exclude women in the public posting soliciting a new game from strangers - same as any retail store. Nobody is going around saying there will be a penalty if a Starbucks happens to have no women in it, but they couldn't post a sign saying women are not allowed to be customers at Starbucks.
You can do whatever you want in the privacy of your own home, and you can choose to play with your friends regardless of who they are, and nobody is penalizing you from having just men over to play at your house.
But those are public games soliciting complete strangers on their site to play games, and their rules are you can't exclude people for the same reasons any store cannot exclude people - race, gender, religion, national origin, etc.. The normal protected classes in our society. And even then, they're not seeking out those postings to penalize, just responding to complaints if someone else files one.
So no, nobody is penalizing you for not having women in your games. It's a strawman, and nonsense claim. You're not a victim because someone can complain about you for posting a "Men only" public solicitation for a game. Stop playing the victim. You want to play with a specific type of person, seek them out and invite them to your game (even on Roll20). But public open solicitations for games can't do that on their platform and that isn't a penalty for "not having women in your game" it's a penalty for "being a dickhead and violating a normal rule of our society about which strangers are allowed to enter".
Quote from: Mistwell;11337631) I was saying nobody in this thread was saying that,
2) Being penalized for posting a public game of "White players only" is not the same as "Being penalized for not having a black player in your game". It's the later I was saying didn't happen. The former is blatant racism and commonly banned in society.
Similarly, a site saying they will respond to complaints about "No women allowed" public games solicitation isn't the same as a penalty if you don't have women in your games. A huge number of games on Roll20 have no women in them - nobody is threatening them in any way for that.
You're just not supposed to specifically exclude women in the public posting soliciting a new game from strangers - same as any retail store. Nobody is going around saying there will be a penalty if a Starbucks happens to have no women in it, but they couldn't post a sign saying women are not allowed to be customers at Starbucks.
You can do whatever you want in the privacy of your own home, and you can choose to play with your friends regardless of who they are, and nobody is penalizing you from having just men over to play at your house.
But those are public games soliciting complete strangers on their site to play games, and their rules are you can't exclude people for the same reasons any store cannot exclude people - race, gender, religion, national origin, etc.. The normal protected classes in our society. And even then, they're not seeking out those postings to penalize, just responding to complaints if someone else files one.
So no, nobody is penalizing you for not having women in your games. It's a strawman, and nonsense claim. You're not a victim because someone can complain about you for posting a "Men only" public solicitation for a game. Stop playing the victim. You want to play with a specific type of person, seek them out and invite them to your game (even on Roll20). But public open solicitations for games can't do that on their platform and that isn't a penalty for "not having women in your game" it's a penalty for "being a dickhead and violating a normal rule of our society about which strangers are allowed to enter".
And yet, those same sites with rules against excluding people on the basis of their: race, gender, religion, national origin, etc.. are perfectly fine with groups that openly ask for players and openly say no men, no straights, no whites.
And you still don't see a problem?
Quote from: tenbones;1133726If the context of this discussion, which I think it is pretty salient, that the degree of leftist political infestation in this hobby is so rampant (I'm actually mildly surprised we're even discussing it, but as always I'm down. I mean it's pretty readily apparent) but unknown to the blind masses (your "99%"), I'm not disagreeing with you that the vast majority of the RPG market is blind, deaf and dumb. But for me - as part of the 1% I'm contending the 99% got this way because of the actual gatekeepers of the industry that allow this bigotted behavior to continue.
Quote from: tenbones;1133726It doesn't even take the satisfaction of this test to predict that I'm right. Search your feelings! You know it's true. Whether you care or not... is a different story.
I've already said that I don't care. In general, I don't consider RPGs to be effective as political propaganda in either direction. While my personal politics are left-leaning, I don't consider it important to counter any opposing politics within RPGs or try to promote RPGs based on similar politics. I'm happy to discuss politics -- it's interesting to see some of the range of opinions here -- but I don't think the content of RPG publications has a significant effect on people. RPGs are too DIY and self-selecting for that.
I think the majority of RPG players also don't care. If they were shown absolute proof that Roll20 allowed games with "gays-only" explicit policy but didn't allow a "no-gays" explicit policy, they'd just shrug or nod, and not consider it a big deal.
Quote from: jhkimI'm not sure what you're looking for here. Let's say I did pretend that I wanted a no-gays gaming group and posted so explicitly, and I found that Roll20 didn't allow it. So what? That doesn't dispute anything that I said.
You're welcome to try the experiment if you like. If that's what you want to find out, then I approve of the experiment. But personally, I don't care about the outcome. It doesn't affect my gaming either way.
Quote from: oggsmash;1133755No, reality is some zealot would doxx you. You want no part of such an experiment and you know it. If you make a gay only group, no issue no doxx. Make a no-gays group, you probably end up in some blog or article, and probably have your name leaked out, fired, and out of work for....well forever. Over selling I know, but only a fool would take the chance of having that happen. You do not strike me as a fool.
As I said, I'm not interested in any such experiment -- so I'm in agreement here. Online, I say what I actually think. I can't be doxxed -- or perhaps I dox myself -- because I use my real name and information.
Quote from: jhkim;1133768As I said, I'm not interested in any such experiment -- so I'm in agreement here. Online, I say what I actually think. I can't be doxxed -- or perhaps I dox myself -- because I use my real name and information.
Then why claim places with these obvious and oft blatant discriminations posing as "equality" is not true when you know it
is true?
Quote from: jhkimAs I said, I'm not interested in any such experiment -- so I'm in agreement here. Online, I say what I actually think. I can't be doxxed -- or perhaps I dox myself -- because I use my real name and information.
Quote from: Omega;1133769Then why claim places with these obvious and oft blatant discriminations posing as "equality" is not true when you know it is true?
Huh? I've never made any claims about what the policy is at Roll20, or any other site.
I feel like some sort of claim is being attributed to me, when that's completely contrary to what I've said.
From what I've seen, "LBGT friendly" is common, "Women Only" is rare but exists - but they have to let in Trans, so you can always claim to Identify as a Lady. :p "LGBT only" is not really a thing, since the letters don't really have anything in common, and I suspect "Gay Men Only", which isn't uncommon in private groups that want some 'adult' play, is Not Okay in a public-facing group. I've never seen anyone want Lesbian Only or Trans Only; my experience with non-SJW lesbian players (the vast majority of lesbian players) is that they like playing with men, as long as no one is hitting on them, indeed they prefer playing with male geeks to playing with girly-girls who can't even build a 4e D&D level 16 Deva Paladin without assistance. :D
I expect Roll20 would be fine with "POC only", I can imagine some SJW POCs doing that, but never seen it myself. Like gays and lesbians, obviously the vast majority of non-white players are just regular gamer nerds, happy to play with fellow nerds of any race.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1133714YES, we need an online convention free of ideology, or better said with a libertarian bent as far as the organizers go but no proselytizing.
What I wonder is, is it possible to do it and break even? Could we as volunteers make it happen without expecting to earn anything? I'm willing and able to donate some time/work towards it.
RPGPundy got me thinking. He mentioned his hobby is his business now, and I believe him. AKA, he's able to get enough sales in US dollars to make living nicely in Uruguay happen. AKA, leveraging the cost of living ratio.
If you live in the USA or other high cost nation, the ROI math for an online convention is bad. You can't charge much for an online con, but you have a bunch of baseline costs to make it happen, plus marketing.
Thus, the answer is you need the organizers to live in a cheaper region so the small profit potential in US dollars translates into mid-to-high profit in their region. And how do you cover the startup costs? Crowd funding.
Literal fucking LOL @ the hoops being jumped through to justify discrimination as long as it's the "right kind".
Can't be doxxed, is nice. I guess as long as you make sure what you really think always lines up with things HR approves of, but it is strange how what is ok to think can swing around really fast.
Quote from: jhkim;1133768I've already said that I don't care. In general, I don't consider RPGs to be effective as political propaganda in either direction. While my personal politics are left-leaning, I don't consider it important to counter any opposing politics within RPGs or try to promote RPGs based on similar politics. I'm happy to discuss politics -- it's interesting to see some of the range of opinions here -- but I don't think the content of RPG publications has a significant effect on people. RPGs are too DIY and self-selecting for that.
I think the majority of RPG players also don't care. If they were shown absolute proof that Roll20 allowed games with "gays-only" explicit policy but didn't allow a "no-gays" explicit policy, they'd just shrug or nod, and not consider it a big deal.
See. I think you're doing your disingenuous thing you do here. Well at least you care enough to have the discussion in your own disingenuous way - even enough to fly off the handle and tell me to "fuck off" (or thereabouts) based on your thinking that I'm misreading you - which I didn't. So I dunno, I think after all these threads you care *enough*. Certainly to where you've qualified your position as you do here "I'm a lefty" - but rather than just admit what we all know, including yourself, that in the context of our conversation, it does matter.
YOU even insist that "bah! this is no big deal, 99% of the RPG playerbase doesn't care". Pretty bold unsubstantiated claims. But even HERE I'll grant you that you're probably closer to correct... BUT... that's not really the issue is it? *
We* in this conversation, on this forum, are the 1% having this discussion. I'd say 99% of the memberships of this forum and TBP and every other forum have been, and are affected by this Leftist bullshit in the hobby. So why even try to deflect that reality? This is why you're disingenuous. WE are the ones having the conversation. Sure, toss in the unwashed masses to flood the zone of the discussion and make yourself feel good. But denying that there is no impact? c'mon man. I *really* want you to stop being obtuse and just cop to it.
My problem is when you say "I don't care" and then suddenly you try to be Mr. Populist and dive into this rhetorical point of hiding with the 99% not caring in their ignorance argument, when *YOU* know the problem and were 5-minutes earlier speaking with us, the rest of the 1% and *vocally* offering your opinion. Then the moment you get called on a fairly obvious point - Roll20 would almost certainly allow a Gay-Only, POC-Only group... you suddenly retreat. Dude, stop being a pussy. You can maintain your lefty status and own up to this point. It's not like YOU own Roll20. This is how we all see through your bullshit. It's cliche for people in your camp. Fuck man, we're looking for honest Lefties to call balls and strikes when they happen in conversation. By saying you don't care - you're ceding your position that bigotry is wrong.
Because we all goddamn well know they would let their bigotry ride.
Quote from: jhkim;1133768As I said, I'm not interested in any such experiment -- so I'm in agreement here. Online, I say what I actually think. I can't be doxxed -- or perhaps I dox myself -- because I use my real name and information.
So this is as close as you can get to admitting that it is a problem? You know... because Doxxing is not something worth worrying about when it comes to being honest in a discussion. dude... that's some weak-ass position. OF COURSE ITS A PROBLEM. Stop pretending you don't care - you care enough to not tempt the wrath of the twatards on your political side of the fence but you don't have the basic decency to just say it. Ironically by you claiming "You don't care" - you're implying that you're down with selective bigotry.
I'll take my "Fuck you" in Candy Red.
Quote from: Brad;1133822Literal fucking LOL @ the hoops being jumped through to justify discrimination as long as it's the "right kind".
jhkim has been training for Cirque for years.
Quote from: Mistwell;11337631) I was saying nobody in this thread was saying that,
OK, well, then I misunderstood your claims. I agree that TheRPGSite is not the first place I'd look to find people advocating for one type of exclusion being permitted while another is not. Edit: Nor against letting game groups choose their membership however they want.
Quote from: Mistwell;11337632) Being penalized for posting a public game of "White players only" is not the same as "Being penalized for not having a black player in your game". It's the later I was saying didn't happen. The former is blatant racism and commonly banned in society.
Similarly, a site saying they will respond to complaints about "No women allowed" public games solicitation isn't the same as a penalty if you don't have women in your games. A huge number of games on Roll20 have no women in them - nobody is threatening them in any way for that.
You're just not supposed to specifically exclude women in the public posting soliciting a new game from strangers - same as any retail store. Nobody is going around saying there will be a penalty if a Starbucks happens to have no women in it, but they couldn't post a sign saying women are not allowed to be customers at Starbucks.
You can do whatever you want in the privacy of your own home, and you can choose to play with your friends regardless of who they are, and nobody is penalizing you from having just men over to play at your house.
But those are public games soliciting complete strangers on their site to play games, and their rules are you can't exclude people for the same reasons any store cannot exclude people - race, gender, religion, national origin, etc.. The normal protected classes in our society. And even then, they're not seeking out those postings to penalize, just responding to complaints if someone else files one.
So no, nobody is penalizing you for not having women in your games. It's a strawman, and nonsense claim. You're not a victim because someone can complain about you for posting a "Men only" public solicitation for a game. Stop playing the victim. You want to play with a specific type of person, seek them out and invite them to your game (even on Roll20). But public open solicitations for games can't do that on their platform and that isn't a penalty for "not having women in your game" it's a penalty for "being a dickhead and violating a normal rule of our society about which strangers are allowed to enter".
I'm not sure we're going to be able to debate effectively since it seems like we're talking past each other a bit, but I'll try. For one, I think it's worth distinguishing between groups of private individuals on a platform (the Roll20 case) and the platform itself (your Starbucks example). Freedom of private association and assembly and entities operating as businesses are rightly distinct. Also, if you read the links that I provided, the original complaint was a private group telling a specific person, privately, that the GM would rather not take on that new member for $filtering_reasons, and the reaction of a leader of the platform was a promise to punish that group and any others that try to exclude THAT way -- but other (let's call them) pro-marginalized-people filters are fine, under the logic that marginalized people are victims and need protection from the majority identities. To the extent that you're talking about private groups being forced to include members they don't want to in general, including off-grid in-person games, sure, that's not an example. However, it is an example of asymmetry and an example of a platform intruding into the composition of its private groups, as well as demonstration of behavior/logic that permits asymmetric filters and uneven rules enforcement.
Anyhow. Don't know if I can convince you to consider the point. But I like letting people assemble how and as they wish, and I think we'd be best off leaving people alone to self-organize for private games, even on hosted internet platforms, without applying any external pressure. Personally, I'd rather not play with a group that doesn't really want me there for any reason, but is too afraid to tell me so.
Quote from: tenbones;1133847YOU even insist that "bah! this is no big deal, 99% of the RPG playerbase doesn't care". Pretty bold unsubstantiated claims. But even HERE I'll grant you that you're probably closer to correct... BUT... that's not really the issue is it? *We* in this conversation, on this forum, are the 1% having this discussion. I'd say 99% of the memberships of this forum and TBP and every other forum have been, and are affected by this Leftist bullshit in the hobby. So why even try to deflect that reality?
Thank you for at least agreeing that I'm close to correct on that point.
I'm not trying to speak about all possible leftist influence in the hobby. There are some issues that I'm sympathetic about -- like doxxing, false accusations, and de-platforming. I can see those as important issues, and I don't mean to downplay them. I'm sorry if I came across as dismissive on those points. I'm not worried about doxxing for myself, but I know that it is a major concern for others, and rightly so.
But there are other issues that I'm not sympathetic about -- like getting upset over other gamers using the X-card. Or group restrictions on sites like Roll20, where it seems like if someone wants a no-gays group, for example, they can't explicitly post that, but instead have to reject gay players individually on some other excuse. I don't see that as an important issue.
Quote from: jhkim;1133887Thank you for at least agreeing that I'm close to correct on that point.
I'm not trying to speak about all possible leftist influence in the hobby. There are some issues that I'm sympathetic about -- like doxxing, false accusations, and de-platforming. I can see those as important issues, and I don't mean to downplay them. I'm sorry if I came across as dismissive on those points. I'm not worried about doxxing for myself, but I know that it is a major concern for others, and rightly so.
But there are other issues that I'm not sympathetic about -- like getting upset over other gamers using the X-card. Or group restrictions on sites like Roll20, where it seems like if someone wants a no-gays group, for example, they can't explicitly post that, but instead have to reject gay players individually on some other excuse. I don't see that as an important issue.
Personally I find this an odd response. I get you can pick and choose which issues you care about - I'm totally down for that. But what I don't quite understand is this idea I feel you're ignoring on purpose.
That is: all of these things are one and the same.
No one here is seriously suggesting that it's good to have a "No Gays" or "All POC" group. But the way you couch it back as being "unsympathetic" belies the credit literally all of us are giving you for your intelligence. You are smart enough to realize, whether you're sympathetic or not is irrelevant (but I hope it really is and you're just playing a game with us) - It's the idea that we all know perfectly well that Roll20 would *allow* you to make an "All POC" or "All Gay" group without incident. Because it's the very leftists that suggest things like X-cards, Orcs are Blacks, Cry Rape-in-Games Is Actual Rape, Racial Slurs-in-Game IS Racism, and they're the ones that engage in public shaming and expulsion of people (many of them on this forum) or worse. They are the ones doing *ALL* of the materially bad things in this hobby, including the slow encroachment into putting their propaganda and Neo-Liberal Puritanical codes on everyone else.
They are the same people. Doing the same things. They are the actual racists because the corollary of allowing a "Gays Only" or "POC Only" group implies that their bigotry is alive and on display against the majority denomination of gamers themselves: Straight White Males. Because you bet your ass that if you did a group consisting of only those qualities in any measure they would descend upon you like the pack of wild hyenas and jackals they are.
That is the the discussion we're really having. That ideology perpetuated in our hobby is on display in our streets right now. You seem to be the only one lost on this. Your position of being unsympathetic... strikes me as intensely obtuse. I give you way more credit than that.
Because unless you believe that the majority of people on this site are actually White Nationalists or Male Rights Activists or we're just a gang of racist randos that roll dice and are unified only under the banner we all like violent games to the exclusion of everything else... I find it hard to have an unsympathetic position, when you and I both know none of this is true. It's an odd forum to hang ones hat on, in the face of what we've collectively been talking/debating/arguing about together for years. Especially in light of the real-life events going on - happening as the very desired outcomes of the folks in this industry whose products we consume. Yeah we're talking about their products, but their ideas are being forced into those products against our will.
The one thing we're united on here is that we have a place to speak plainly about it. That we, many of the members of the RPGsite value free speech, and personal liberty in our gaming and of course in our lives. No one here cares if you an I are Asian, gay or black, or Furry - we care about ideas what they produce, on the table and hopefully what those ideas evolve into in the real world. Even as a Lefty you should be gut-checking your assumptions, sympathetic or not, just because right now we're seeing those ideas (which you may be actually sympathetic to or not) unfold.
Why would we want more of this in our gaming?
Quote from: tenbones;1133895The one thing we're united on here is that we have a place to speak plainly about it. That we, many of the members of the RPGsite value free speech, and personal liberty in our gaming and of course in our lives. No one here cares if you an I are Asian, gay or black, or Furry - we care about ideas what they produce, on the table and hopefully what those ideas evolve into in the real world. Even as a Lefty you should be gut-checking your assumptions, sympathetic or not, just because right now we're seeing those ideas (which you may be actually sympathetic to or not) unfold.
Why would we want more of this in our gaming?
Hear, hear! :D
Quote from: tenbones;1133895Personally I find this an odd response. I get you can pick and choose which issues you care about - I'm totally down for that. But what I don't quite understand is this idea I feel you're ignoring on purpose.
That is: all of these things are one and the same.
No one here is seriously suggesting that it's good to have a "No Gays" or "All POC" group. But the way you couch it back as being "unsympathetic" belies the credit literally all of us are giving you for your intelligence. You are smart enough to realize, whether you're sympathetic or not is irrelevant (but I hope it really is and you're just playing a game with us) - It's the idea that we all know perfectly well that Roll20 would *allow* you to make an "All POC" or "All Gay" group without incident. Because it's the very leftists that suggest things like X-cards, Orcs are Blacks, Cry Rape-in-Games Is Actual Rape, Racial Slurs-in-Game IS Racism, and they're the ones that engage in public shaming and expulsion of people (many of them on this forum) or worse. They are the ones doing *ALL* of the materially bad things in this hobby, including the slow encroachment into putting their propaganda and Neo-Liberal Puritanical codes on everyone else.
They are the same people. Doing the same things. They are the actual racists because the corollary of allowing a "Gays Only" or "POC Only" group implies that their bigotry is alive and on display against the majority denomination of gamers themselves: Straight White Males. Because you bet your ass that if you did a group consisting of only those qualities in any measure they would descend upon you like the pack of wild hyenas and jackals they are.
That is the the discussion we're really having. That ideology perpetuated in our hobby is on display in our streets right now. You seem to be the only one lost on this. Your position of being unsympathetic... strikes me as intensely obtuse. I give you way more credit than that.
Because unless you believe that the majority of people on this site are actually White Nationalists or Male Rights Activists or we're just a gang of racist randos that roll dice and are unified only under the banner we all like violent games to the exclusion of everything else... I find it hard to have an unsympathetic position, when you and I both know none of this is true. It's an odd forum to hang ones hat on, in the face of what we've collectively been talking/debating/arguing about together for years. Especially in light of the real-life events going on - happening as the very desired outcomes of the folks in this industry whose products we consume. Yeah we're talking about their products, but their ideas are being forced into those products against our will.
The one thing we're united on here is that we have a place to speak plainly about it. That we, many of the members of the RPGsite value free speech, and personal liberty in our gaming and of course in our lives. No one here cares if you an I are Asian, gay or black, or Furry - we care about ideas what they produce, on the table and hopefully what those ideas evolve into in the real world. Even as a Lefty you should be gut-checking your assumptions, sympathetic or not, just because right now we're seeing those ideas (which you may be actually sympathetic to or not) unfold.
Why would we want more of this in our gaming?
Greetings!
Entirely agree, Tenbones! Excellent commentary!
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: tenbones;1133895Personally I find this an odd response. I get you can pick and choose which issues you care about - I'm totally down for that. But what I don't quite understand is this idea I feel you're ignoring on purpose.
That is: all of these things are one and the same.
No one here is seriously suggesting that it's good to have a "No Gays" or "All POC" group. But the way you couch it back as being "unsympathetic" belies the credit literally all of us are giving you for your intelligence. You are smart enough to realize, whether you're sympathetic or not is irrelevant (but I hope it really is and you're just playing a game with us) - It's the idea that we all know perfectly well that Roll20 would *allow* you to make an "All POC" or "All Gay" group without incident. Because it's the very leftists that suggest things like X-cards, Orcs are Blacks, Cry Rape-in-Games Is Actual Rape, Racial Slurs-in-Game IS Racism, and they're the ones that engage in public shaming and expulsion of people (many of them on this forum) or worse. They are the ones doing *ALL* of the materially bad things in this hobby, including the slow encroachment into putting their propaganda and Neo-Liberal Puritanical codes on everyone else.
They are the same people. Doing the same things. They are the actual racists because the corollary of allowing a "Gays Only" or "POC Only" group implies that their bigotry is alive and on display against the majority denomination of gamers themselves: Straight White Males. Because you bet your ass that if you did a group consisting of only those qualities in any measure they would descend upon you like the pack of wild hyenas and jackals they are.
That is the the discussion we're really having. That ideology perpetuated in our hobby is on display in our streets right now. You seem to be the only one lost on this. Your position of being unsympathetic... strikes me as intensely obtuse. I give you way more credit than that.
Because unless you believe that the majority of people on this site are actually White Nationalists or Male Rights Activists
If you're talking about Men's Rights Activists, Pundit recently did an interview with Honey Badger Radio, a prominent MRA youtube channel.
[video=youtube;lYUy3SEcNy4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYUy3SEcNy4[/youtube]
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1133911If you're talking about Men's Rights Activists, Pundit recently did an interview with Honey Badger Radio, a prominent MRA youtube channel.
[video=youtube;lYUy3SEcNy4]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lYUy3SEcNy4[/youtube]
And on a related note...
Quote from: tenbones;1133895Because unless you believe that the majority of people on this site are actually White Nationalists or Male Rights Activists or we're just a gang of racist randos that roll dice...
...I just wanna say that one of these is not like the others, one of these is just not the same.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1133920...I just wanna say that one of these is not like the others, one of these is just not the same.
I could forgive almost anything except being a Male Rights Activist.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1133767And yet, those same sites with rules against excluding people on the basis of their: race, gender, religion, national origin, etc.. are perfectly fine with groups that openly ask for players and openly say no men, no straights, no whites.
And you still don't see a problem?
Have you tried filing a complaint against one and seeing if something happens? I bet you have not.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1133920And on a related note...
...I just wanna say that one of these is not like the others, one of these is just not the same.
I know. But to the people that go to other forums that talk about RPGsite - they believe this forum is filled with those disparate groups (and many others in-between) all of which are "undesireables" in CHAZISTAN's Utopian vision. When nothing could be further from the truth. But how would anyone outside of this forum actually know that?
Outside of Pundit's channel, I don't know of many other avenues of letting others know what this forum is actually about (not that I'm worried about it). But you know... WE exist in this oasis because ultimately we have been forced to cede ground elsewhere and basically everywhere. Both privately and commercially.
Quote from: Mistwell;1133945Have you tried filing a complaint against one and seeing if something happens? I bet you have not.
I have on TBP. Right before I was removed permanently from TBP. I was told I was "concern trolling" and despite having been there since 2002 actively, I was part of one of their early purges.
Mistwell, I give you far less credit than jhkim, who is actually reasonable despite his occasional willful ignorance. You could should learn to ratchet down your bullshit rhetoric when you know damn well that's a dumb question because we all know even if he did - as I have - it would not matter one bit for all the reasons we know.
I guess the big takeaway, is stay left and doxxing is no issue? The problem becomes, are you sure you will always be left enough?
Quote from: oggsmash;1133964I guess the big takeaway, is stay left and doxxing is no issue? The problem becomes, are you sure you will always be left enough?
And the answer is, if you don't eat the others, they will eat you.
Quote from: tenbones;1133952I have on TBP. Right before I was removed permanently from TBP. I was told I was "concern trolling" and despite having been there since 2002 actively, I was part of one of their early purges.
Mistwell, I give you far less credit than jhkim, who is actually reasonable despite his occasional willful ignorance. You could should learn to ratchet down your bullshit rhetoric when you know damn well that's a dumb question because we all know even if he did - as I have - it would not matter one bit for all the reasons we know.
And since not many gamers are willing to invest the time into learning to use RPTools, you're fucked and have to stay silent or get banned for being "toxic".
But we all know that, it's just an inconvenient truth our leftie friends would rather not acknowledge so they bury their heads in the sand while making excuses for the blatant discrimination being perpetrated in the name of being "inclusive".
Thus putting more coal in the fire and doing everything they can to ensure they (and most of us sane political dissenters) won't like the backlash when it finally happens.
Quote from: oggsmash;1133964I guess the big takeaway, is stay left and doxxing is no issue? The problem becomes, are you sure you will always be left enough?
Because in their minds they've bought into the Ends Justifies the Means mentality of conflict. A core of them are nihilistic scorched earthers. And collateral damage among their own is perfectly fine as long as whomever has the most pull gets their way.
A retarded version of Jacobinism all over again (at least in terms of what it will produce if it keeps going this direction). But they're too fucking stupid to realize it.
Are we really arguing that a "No Gays" or "Whites Only" group on Roll20 would be just as accepted as a "Gays Only" or "No Whites" group on Roll20? Because that's insane. Roll20 is a SJW shithole.
Everyone can (and should) make whatever gaming group they want in the privacy of their own home.
But any public gaming space should always be "All Gamers Welcome".
Quote from: tenbones;1133952I have on TBP.
Yeah, we're not talking about TBP though, right? I mean, that's a pretty wide non-sequitur there buddy. TBP is shit at almost everything they do so nobody is surprised if they're shit at that too. Roll20 on the other hand has a better reputation than that - a reputation being bashed in this thread, hence the discussion.
QuoteMistwell, I give you far less credit than jhkim, who is actually reasonable despite his occasional willful ignorance. You could should learn to ratchet down your bullshit rhetoric when you know damn well that's a dumb question because we all know even if he did - as I have - it would not matter one bit for all the reasons we know.
Most of what you say is bullshit tenbones. Even here you're barely tolerated by a third of the users because you spew so much bullshit.
Roll20 would quite possible take down other games which say "women only" or something like that if you reported it. You're wrong in assuming you know the answer. Not everyone fits neatly in your conspiracy theory SJW box. But maybe I am wrong - my point is, why don't you try it if you're so concerned? I mean fuck, they didn't even take down the "men only" game you're so worked up about. You're all atwitter about a theoretical take-down which never happened. It's weak tenbones. Like most of your bullshit.
AFAICT from a quick check, Roll20 has no easy way to exclude whites, males, straights etc when recruiting - the standard descriptions menu is free/not free and 18+/child-friendly. Has anyone seen an eg Women Only group recruiting there?
Quote from: S'mon;1134053AFAICT from a quick check, Roll20 has no easy way to exclude whites, males, straights etc when recruiting - the standard descriptions menu is free/not free and 18+/child-friendly. Has anyone seen an eg Women Only group recruiting there?
But you know Mistwell says this just doesn't happen.
https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/388507/looking-for-fellow-lady-players-interested-in-an-all-girl-campaign (https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/388507/looking-for-fellow-lady-players-interested-in-an-all-girl-campaign)
Quote from: Mistwell;1134049Yeah, we're not talking about TBP though, right? I mean, that's a pretty wide non-sequitur there buddy. TBP is shit at almost everything they do so nobody is surprised if they're shit at that too. Roll20 on the other hand has a better reputation than that - a reputation being bashed in this thread, hence the discussion.
I draw no distinction. They operate from the same ideology. You know this too. As I said - I give you no credit, way to pretend to be stupid. Mission accomplished.
Quote from: Mistwell;1134049Most of what you say is bullshit tenbones. Even here you're barely tolerated by a third of the users because you spew so much bullshit.
So? And are you implying there is some Anti-Tenbones conspiracy group that grinds their teeth on my virtual mutterings? That's kind of flattering. I don't care? But have fun anyhow.
Quote from: Mistwell;1134049Roll20 would quite possible take down other games which say "women only" or something like that if you reported it. You're wrong in assuming you know the answer. Not everyone fits neatly in your conspiracy theory SJW box. But maybe I am wrong - my point is, why don't you try it if you're so concerned? I mean fuck, they didn't even take down the "men only" game you're so worked up about. You're all atwitter about a theoretical take-down which never happened. It's weak tenbones. Like most of your bullshit.
So on one hand you call my question a conspiracy - YOU can go determine this for yourself. You don't need me to confirm it for you. Then you sit there and tell me I'm full of shit and 66% of the site thinks I'm full of shit... (which makes me wonder why you even respond to me?...) then you say I may be right, then in the next sentence you try to convince yourself I'm wrong.
This is why I give you no credit. You're all over the map. Just because you pick one isolated thing which you have ZERO evidence for - you support them in their hypocrisy. YOU prove they're consistent. Go make an ALL GAY group. Go make an ALL POC only group. You know damn well what we're talking about, just like jhkim, but you have less credit and honesty to admit it. /shrug. It's your problem not mine. I'm cool and the gang.
I'm not all "atwitter" about anything - I'm merely pointing out what you already know, and like a good leftist goose-stepping twat, you fall right in line. But feel free to prove it beyond your flailing here. Go make an All Gay Only group. Do it on TBP. No one will stop you. And you know it. You'll probably get some virtual cookies.
Google 30 seconds this were all in the first result of the first page.
http://archive.is/eI4PL (http://archive.is/eI4PL)
http://archive.is/pTCS2 (http://archive.is/pTCS2)
Second search, this time for gays only groups
http://archive.is/KhSLP (http://archive.is/KhSLP)
Like I said before, the problem it's not that they allow people to choose who to play with, it's that they have said rejecting women for being women is a no-no. So fucking double standards.
Also I dare you to find a post like those asking for men only, straights only etc.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1134056But you know Mistwell says this just doesn't happen.
https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/388507/looking-for-fellow-lady-players-interested-in-an-all-girl-campaign (https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/388507/looking-for-fellow-lady-players-interested-in-an-all-girl-campaign)
LOL c'mon, Mistwell is a fucking dumbass. He knows this shit. He just can't admit it and would rather go on about personal attacks, or recruit for the apparent Anti-Tenbones club in his fantasies. Whatta loser.
Quote from: tenbones;1134059LOL c'mon, Mistwell is a fucking dumbass. He knows this shit. He just can't admit it and would rather go on about personal attacks, or recruit for the apparent Anti-Tenbones club in his fantasies. Whatta loser.
Damn! If you have an Anti-Tenbones club it means you're famous and they are fans of yours. I feel sooooooooooooo Jealous!
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1134060Damn! If you have an Anti-Tenbones club it means you're famous and they are fans of yours. I feel sooooooooooooo Jealous!
We need a GoFundme for Geeky to get his own haters.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1134056But you know Mistwell says this just doesn't happen.
https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/388507/looking-for-fellow-lady-players-interested-in-an-all-girl-campaign (https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/388507/looking-for-fellow-lady-players-interested-in-an-all-girl-campaign)
Yeah, Shay doesn't seem like a bad sort - I'd be fine with that ad if guys were allowed to have all-male groups too. I wouldn't play in a no-girls group myself (& honestly I might mock the guy posting in an Internet forum that he won't play with females); but some guys do want an all-male space for chilling out, and they ought to be allowed free association the same as female players get.
Quote from: S'mon;1134063Yeah, Shay doesn't seem like a bad sort - I'd be fine with that ad if guys were allowed to have all-male groups too. I wouldn't play in a no-girls group myself (& honestly I might mock the guy posting in an Internet forum that he won't play with females); but some guys do want an all-male space for chilling out, and they ought to be allowed free association the same as female players get.
Greetings!
I agree with you, S'mon. As usual. I normally love playing with women. Women are *often* better roleplayers, and generally take the game world seriously, as well as their characters, of course. Women are great fun to have in whatever group.
However, I have also played in just groups of men, where for whatever reasons, women just hadn't gotten around to joining with us. It became a sort of male bonding club, like a poker game, except with D&D. Awesome gaming and fun, too. It's all good. I figure women are always welcome, but if the current group getting together happen to be all men, that's cool too.
For others that somehow get political about it, I'm not quite sure I understand them. If you have a group where half the players are nice, sweet, sane and reasonable women that are cool--watch what kind of campaign develops after three or four months of dedicated, regular play. Good women definitely bring something special to the game table. Guys who want to say "NO" to that experience don't know what the fuck they are missing out on. Likewise, a guy--or woman, I guess also--who thinks there can't possibly be anything rewarding about a campaign made up of a group of all men, likewise doesn't understand the kind of fun a group of men gamers can have in a campaign. The men's competitiveness, organization, system mastery, dedication to roleplaying, enjoyment of violence, joy of conquest and glory, men also bring something different and valuable to the campaign. It's all good stuff. People need to appreciate each other and just stay open minded, mature, and reasonable.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1134056But you know Mistwell says this just doesn't happen.
https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/388507/looking-for-fellow-lady-players-interested-in-an-all-girl-campaign (https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/388507/looking-for-fellow-lady-players-interested-in-an-all-girl-campaign)
That's a weird read. It says the posts are all from 2008...and it says "6 years ago" too, so some kind of weird timekeeping or...?
Quote from: Mistwell;1134049Most of what you say is bullshit tenbones. Even here you're barely tolerated by a third of the users because you spew so much bullshit.
You telepathically know the opinions of theRPGSite users now, do you?
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1134060Damn! If you have an Anti-Tenbones club it means you're famous and they are fans of yours. I feel sooooooooooooo Jealous!
Don't feel jealous. As someone who'd been waging an ongoing war with a covert little hate group thats followed me from one venue to another for 20+ years now... Its not very funny. I've had two role play gathering places pretty much destroyed from within, a friend driven to suicide and been banned from places these sociopaths have gained control of on fake charges.
And to bring this back on topic. Such as it is now that its been pretty much undone...
So Mearls is back. Then what was the point of announcing Winninger? And what happened to him now that Mearls is back? Is he a co manager or was it just a temp job and hes moved on?
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1134056But you know Mistwell says this just doesn't happen.
https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/388507/looking-for-fellow-lady-players-interested-in-an-all-girl-campaign (https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/388507/looking-for-fellow-lady-players-interested-in-an-all-girl-campaign)
It's not so much that he claims it does not happen so much that it does not fit the posters carefully constructed personal narratives. When it comes to that anythign that goes against the almighty narrative does not exist. Or if it's something Mistwell likes it gets a free pass.
Quote from: Mistwell;1134049Most of what you say is bullshit tenbones. Even here you're barely tolerated by a third of the users because you spew so much bullshit.
One of the few times I will speak for the members of this site. We like Tenbones. We tolerate you and your bullshit because unlike your requested echo chambers that call thems rpg forums, you can spew your revionist narrative filled bullshit here.
Quote from: Mistwell;1134049Roll20 would quite possible take down other games which say "women only" or something like that if you reported it. You're wrong in assuming you know the answer. Not everyone fits neatly in your conspiracy theory SJW box. But maybe I am wrong - my point is, why don't you try it if you're so concerned? I mean fuck, they didn't even take down the "men only" game you're so worked up about. You're all atwitter about a theoretical take-down which never happened. It's weak tenbones. Like most of your bullshit.
In case you pretended to miss it with your personal narrative shielding in place: https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/388507/looking-for-fellow-lady-players-interested-in-an-all-girl-campaign (https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/388507/looking-for-fellow-lady-players-interested-in-an-all-girl-campaign)[/QUOTE]
So what are your thoughts on this since apprently you states it does not happen.
Quote from: Omega;1134076So Mearls is back. Then what was the point of announcing Winninger? And what happened to him now that Mearls is back? Is he a co manager or was it just a temp job and hes moved on?
Twitter profiles list Mearls as "D&D franchise creative director" and Winninger as "Head of D&D." Mearls hasn't been active on the platform in a year, while Winninger was active just two days ago. Other sources like Winninger as "Executive Director." So it sounds like Winninger's the head of the corporate side (given his work as a "senior platform strategist at Microsoft" according to Wikipedia, that would make sense) while Mearls does creative work and was on other projects for a while before coming back to the TTRPG side. But that's all guesswork, and I can't seem to track down a WotC org chart. (I'd be more interested to know who's working as Evil High Priest and Doctrinal Enforcer, myself. ;) )
Quote from: tenbones;1133895Personally I find this an odd response. I get you can pick and choose which issues you care about - I'm totally down for that. But what I don't quite understand is this idea I feel you're ignoring on purpose.
That is: all of these things are one and the same.
I'm not ignoring that -- I'm disagreeing with it. Fundamentally, I believe that there are different issues, and people don't neatly divide into two monolithic groups of liberal and conservative. Both liberal and conservative partisans tend to lump everyone on the other side into a big negative stereotype. But I think pure partisanship is wrong. It's an emotional trap that sucks people into accepting a bunch of positions without thinking, because it's "us vs them".
Quote from: tenbones;1133895That ideology perpetuated in our hobby is on display in our streets right now. You seem to be the only one lost on this. Your position of being unsympathetic... strikes me as intensely obtuse. I give you way more credit than that.
Because unless you believe that the majority of people on this site are actually White Nationalists or Male Rights Activists or we're just a gang of racist randos that roll dice and are unified only under the banner we all like violent games to the exclusion of everything else... I find it hard to have an unsympathetic position, when you and I both know none of this is true. It's an odd forum to hang ones hat on, in the face of what we've collectively been talking/debating/arguing about together for years. Especially in light of the real-life events going on - happening as the very desired outcomes of the folks in this industry whose products we consume. Yeah we're talking about their products, but their ideas are being forced into those products against our will.
The one thing we're united on here is that we have a place to speak plainly about it. That we, many of the members of the RPGsite value free speech, and personal liberty in our gaming and of course in our lives.
Part of endorsing free speech is that you have to accept hearing things that you don't want to hear. I'm struck particularly by your phrase
"we're talking about their products, but their ideas are being forced into those products against our will". That's exactly the free market and the free marketplace of ideas. If you don't like their products, don't buy them and/or create other products that express other ideas.
I think violence and threats like doxxing are absolutely wrong -- but sadly, they're used by both liberals and conservatives as well as all-around assholes. I have some personal experience with Internet threats. Twelve years ago, I had a bunch of conservative assholes come after me after they posted a picture of my eight-year-old son at a convention and I responded. They made various threats using my personal information, but I ignored them. (Actually, I had collected some names and addresses for them, but my wife didn't want to escalate things with them, so I didn't use it.)
Quote from: S'mon;1134063Yeah, Shay doesn't seem like a bad sort - I'd be fine with that ad if guys were allowed to have all-male groups too. I wouldn't play in a no-girls group myself (& honestly I might mock the guy posting in an Internet forum that he won't play with females); but some guys do want an all-male space for chilling out, and they ought to be allowed free association the same as female players get.
My point exactly, I'm all in favor of freedom of association, allow it for everyone or for no one.
Quote from: Omega;1134076Don't feel jealous. As someone who'd been waging an ongoing war with a covert little hate group thats followed me from one venue to another for 20+ years now... Its not very funny. I've had two role play gathering places pretty much destroyed from within, a friend driven to suicide and been banned from places these sociopaths have gained control of on fake charges.
And to bring this back on topic. Such as it is now that its been pretty much undone...
So Mearls is back. Then what was the point of announcing Winninger? And what happened to him now that Mearls is back? Is he a co manager or was it just a temp job and hes moved on?
I'm sorry you had to endure that, and I'm sorry for your loss, as I'm sure you know I was joking, which is why I try to remain anonymous.
LOL, Mearl's is back? OH, the salt mining will be delicious!
Quote from: Mistwell;1134049Most of what you say is bullshit tenbones. Even here you're barely tolerated by a third of the users because you spew so much bullshit.
I barely tolerate everyone here. :D
My curiosity is Piqued now, what did these conservative marauders want with you? No specifics, if it would lead to too much info on any party, but what in the world was the basis of a beef the A-holes would threaten to visit your home address?
Quote from: oggsmash;1134104My curiosity is Piqued now, what did these conservative marauders want with you? No specifics, if it would lead to too much info on any party, but what in the world was the basis of a beef the A-holes would threaten to visit your home address?
I posted some about it back at the time here, since back in 2008 we had a "Off Topic" forum here (it's the forum now changed to "Media and Inspiration"). So the short form is, I went to a feminist science fiction convention with my family. Someone went and took pictures to mock some of the people there, and it expanded to include posting pictures of my son there. At that point, I pushed back and told them off about how that was shitty - and argued with them when they gave childish responses.
https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?10572-Anyone-Familiar-With-Something-Awful
To get the other side of the story, the incident also documented on "Encyclopedia Dramatica" which is their wiki,
QuoteThe thread in SASS exploded past 25 pages instantly after the angry pack of morbidly obese women discovered it, with a weak attempt on their part to flood the thread with pictures of kittens and puppies and some gay porn. SASS replied to the flood attempt by flooding their own forum with pain and pics of corpses, which effectively ended what was described as the most pathetic board invasion in SASS history. Sad to say, the only member of the WisCon community that managed to get image tags working for the invasion was a 38-year old "male" RPG-enthusiast by the name of jhkim, who also tried to blank ED's SASS page a few times before failing at that too. For the record, his last edit on this page was captioning the picture of him with his gimpwife from "Pussy" to "Gay, Unicorn-loving Pussy". That edit can stay.
https://encyclopediadramatica.wiki/index.php/WisCon
Thanks for the update. How exactly did you discover the trolls's political voting habits and life styles though? I was always under the impression most trolls fall into their own classification (trash), that trends not so political.
Wow, after reading the "other side" I can conclude that retarded is not a political affiliation. Those people seem to try to redefine toxic.
Quote from: sureshot;1134087One of the few times I will speak for the members of this site. We like Tenbones. We tolerate you and your bullshit because unlike your requested echo chambers that call thems rpg forums, you can spew your revionist narrative filled bullshit here.
Put me down for supporting Tenbones.
At least until we get the Elevenbones upgrade.
Quote from: jhkim;1134116I posted some about it back at the time here, since back in 2008 we had a "Off Topic" forum here (it's the forum now changed to "Media and Inspiration"). So the short form is, I went to a feminist science fiction convention with my family. Someone went and took pictures to mock some of the people there, and it expanded to include posting pictures of my son there. At that point, I pushed back and told them off about how that was shitty - and argued with them when they gave childish responses.
https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?10572-Anyone-Familiar-With-Something-Awful
To get the other side of the story, the incident also documented on "Encyclopedia Dramatica" which is their wiki,
https://encyclopediadramatica.wiki/index.php/WisCon
But Something Awful are not conservative or right-wing.
I'm only familiar with them from their attacks on normal, right-minded folk. :D
Quote from: Shasarak;1134124Put me down for supporting Tenbones.
At least until we get the Elevenbones upgrade.
Hey! Our Tenbones is so bad-ass he already goes to ELEVEN!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xgx4k83zzc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xgx4k83zzc)
Quote from: moonsweeper;1134132Hey! Our Tenbones is so bad-ass he already goes to ELEVEN!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xgx4k83zzc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4xgx4k83zzc)
Oriignal Edition Tenbones is the best *bones, anyway. :D
When was SomethingAwful explicitly conservative?
Quote from: jhkim;1134092I'm struck particularly by your phrase "we're talking about their products, but their ideas are being forced into those products against our will". That's exactly the free market and the free marketplace of ideas.
Erm, that's not how free markets or the marketplace of ideas works. A select clique of people infiltrating companies to push their ideas on everyone else through manipulation by creating an atmosphere where those who don't conform get canceled and pushed aside is not the free market. That's a group of people trying to control the market and limit the scope of the ideas that get discussed. I.e. the
opposite of a free market or an open marketplace of ideas. It's a controlled market.
Quote from: jhkim;1134092If you don't like their products, don't buy them and/or create other products that express other ideas.
Easier said than done when those who don't conform to their ideas risk being targeted by hate mobs of slanderous individuals on social media cooking up wild tales of racism and harassment to try to get them canceled or limit the reach of their products, like they've done with varying degrees of success to many people, including Pundit and Grim Jim. And granted Pundit has managed to carve a niche for himself, but he's done that in spite of their efforts, not because people trying to defame him don't exist.
Quote from: jhkim;1134116I posted some about it back at the time here, since back in 2008 we had a "Off Topic" forum here (it's the forum now changed to "Media and Inspiration"). So the short form is, I went to a feminist science fiction convention with my family. Someone went and took pictures to mock some of the people there, and it expanded to include posting pictures of my son there. At that point, I pushed back and told them off about how that was shitty - and argued with them when they gave childish responses.
https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?10572-Anyone-Familiar-With-Something-Awful
To get the other side of the story, the incident also documented on "Encyclopedia Dramatica" which is their wiki,
https://encyclopediadramatica.wiki/index.php/WisCon
Wait a minute...
QuoteOn May 24, 2008, a Something Awful goon by the name of Rachel Moss attended WisCon, a feminist Sci-Fi convention (that caters to morbidly obese women and trannies, not kidding) in Wisconsin. She brought a camera, took a lot of pictures and shared them in a quickly goldmined thread on SA, resulting in much lulz.
...you were doxxed by someone from Something Awful? That's not a conservative group. That's a website populated by a bunch of random internet trolls, that got infiltrated by SJW trash, like Zoe Quinn, over the years, who love to dox people and start shit online.
Quote from: HappyDaze;1134066That's a weird read. It says the posts are all from 2008...and it says "6 years ago" too, so some kind of weird timekeeping or...?
No, it's saying the posts are from October the 8th, 6 years ago, not October 2008.
Quote from: jhkim;1134116I posted some about it back at the time here, since back in 2008 we had a "Off Topic" forum here (it's the forum now changed to "Media and Inspiration"). So the short form is, I went to a feminist science fiction convention with my family. Someone went and took pictures to mock some of the people there, and it expanded to include posting pictures of my son there. At that point, I pushed back and told them off about how that was shitty - and argued with them when they gave childish responses.
https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?10572-Anyone-Familiar-With-Something-Awful
To get the other side of the story, the incident also documented on "Encyclopedia Dramatica" which is their wiki,
https://encyclopediadramatica.wiki/index.php/WisCon
Encyclopedia Dramatica isn't a SA site, they're unrelated entities. The only link is that SA performs trolling and ED documents trolling. And yeah, running in to do battle with the trolls just pleases them by giving them the reactions they're looking for, you're basically always better off ignoring them even if they're doing something shitty like mocking pictures of your kid. Don't go expecting empathy or human decency, you won't find it.
Also, SA is not conservative, it's rather the opposite. The site went crazy in 2016 and burned off a large portion of its membership as anti-Trump mods went after anyone even remotely conservative.
Quote from: Valatar;1134150No, it's saying the posts are from October the 8th, 6 years ago, not October 2008.
Thank you for the clarification. Seems odd to me to date it like that rather than just putting a year in, but I guess they can do it their way if they like.
Hey thanks to anyone tossing some love my way. Big bumps to all of you. There are very very few people I dislike here. But I'm not looking to be the posterboy/whippingboy for a popularity contest.
jhkim - Yeah I actually remember that escapade and it was sobering to me back when it happened. And it wasn't nearly as bad as it is now. That said - as others have said here, while you might find the occasional Alt-Righter engage in this kind of behavior, those people calling themselves SJW's do this stuff online as a matter of *course*. And it might not be every card-carrying SJW, it's only the ones that benefit from that kind of behavior that also gatekeep the hobby by fiat. If you can't bear to bring yourself to see how this happening now, you have my condolences because you will be the one wondering where the support is/was when it happens to you again for not being pure enough in your adherence to the doctrine. I hope you fare well. I refuse to believe you're this obtuse. For the sake of a forum conversation, I can't see your position worth defending in light of the massive evidence to the points raised here. Your points about Free Speech comes from an odd place considering you're defacto standing with people that want to decide when you can exercise your free speech and how you can exercise it. That's not Free Speech. It's the metastasizing of the ideas from the SJWS that *don't* care about Free Speech or any other Right of anyone that doesn't goose-step along with their rules of speech and thought, that have pushed everyone to this point.
In fact - this entire forum exists *because* of this behavior.
All of our entertainment is going to be stained for years by this movement. Art putting their ideology ahead of their art is propaganda first. I plan on saving a lot of money not consuming a lot of this bullshit. But hey - I have 40-years worth RPGs sitting on my shelf to keep me busy for the rest of my life if needs be.
I suspect Tenbones is right about "art as propaganda" becoming the new normal. The woke crowd has become superpowered by the media/DNC so all entertainment being produced will be reviewed based on ideology first, not quality.
Quote from: Valatar;1134152And yeah, running in to do battle with the trolls just pleases them by giving them the reactions they're looking for, you're basically always better off ignoring them even if they're doing something shitty like mocking pictures of your kid.
I can't blame jhkim in the slightest for going off on these fucknuts. I have no problem with them shitposting and having mucho lulz over a "feminist scifi con", but posting pictures of minors and ripping on them is not cool for so many reasons. Jhkim is a dad and I totally get why he'd be furious with these asshats.
Quote from: insubordinate polyhedral;1134133Oriignal Edition Tenbones is the best *bones, anyway. :D
He's a village idiot. But hes our village idiot! God help us all! :rolleyes:
Quote from: Valatar;1134152Encyclopedia Dramatica isn't a SA site, they're unrelated entities. The only link is that SA performs trolling and ED documents trolling. And yeah, running in to do battle with the trolls just pleases them by giving them the reactions they're looking for, you're basically always better off ignoring them even if they're doing something shitty like mocking pictures of your kid. Don't go expecting empathy or human decency, you won't find it.
Also, SA is not conservative, it's rather the opposite. The site went crazy in 2016 and burned off a large portion of its membership as anti-Trump mods went after anyone even remotely conservative.
It's a little like the mayor of Minneapolis blaming the rioting on "white supremacists," when all you could see on TV was Antifa and locals burning and looting. Whenever something bad happens, it must be the other side. That's what got us in this culture war to begin with.
Back on topic: these are the same kind of people (the goons at SA, etc.) who will eventually drag Mearls down, too. Whatever he did or didn't do, they will simply make up his crimes until they are bad enough to get him canceled. Eventually Hasbro will cave, if only to make the noise go away. It's why small businesses are mostly preferrable to consumers; they serve local customers and, as long as they are providing the service those customers want, generally less vulnerable to political garbage. The growth of mega-corporations have just made SJW cancelling much more powerful. It's like living in the precursor to Shadowrun...
Quote from: Eirikrautha;1134184It's a little like the mayor of Minneapolis blaming the rioting on "white supremacists," when all you could see on TV was Antifa and locals burning and looting. Whenever something bad happens, it must be the other side. That's what got us in this culture war to begin with.
Back on topic: these are the same kind of people (the goons at SA, etc.) who will eventually drag Mearls down, too. Whatever he did or didn't do, they will simply make up his crimes until they are bad enough to get him canceled. Eventually Hasbro will cave, if only to make the noise go away. It's why small businesses are mostly preferrable to consumers; they serve local customers and, as long as they are providing the service those customers want, generally less vulnerable to political garbage. The growth of mega-corporations have just made SJW cancelling much more powerful. It's like living in the precursor to Cyberpunk 2020...
Fixed that for you. :)
Quote from: tenbones;1134189Fixed that for you. :)
A more needed fix I have never seen. :D
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1134056But you know Mistwell says this just doesn't happen.
https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/388507/looking-for-fellow-lady-players-interested-in-an-all-girl-campaign (https://app.roll20.net/forum/post/388507/looking-for-fellow-lady-players-interested-in-an-all-girl-campaign)
No (douchebag) I said I bet if you report it (you won't) I bet they'd take your report seriously.
The more you strawman people who dissent from your view, the weaker your view looks. If you can't "win" without feeling the need to "cheat" by misrepresenting the dissenters views as something else which is much easier to knock down, it's a good indication your position is a weak one. Maybe knock that shit off if you want to be persuasive?
Quote from: tenbones;1134057I draw no distinction.
I know, it's a black and white world to you. Those who agree with you, and the enemy. There is no subtlety in your thinking, no nuance of opinion, no range of opinions even. It's all on or off.
QuoteThis is why I give you no credit. You're all over the map
Right. You cannot comprehend someone not viewing the world black and white like you do. You can't even understand my saying, "Maybe I am wrong, so why don't you prove it" because the "maybe I am wrong" part simply doesn't seem to compute in your brain. It's a black and white world and if you said it that must mean that's the correct and white side of the world.
The duty on me to prove your pet theory is wrong - it's YOUR theory dude, so show us you're right. Nobody has to do your homework for you buddy.
QuoteI'm not all "atwitter" about anything - I'm merely pointing out what you already know, and like a good leftist goose-stepping twat, you fall right in line.
I am right of center. But consistently, I am dissenting from your view so I must be the enemy and therefore a leftist. Which is laughable, but in the child-like world view you live by it makes sense because I'm not agreeing with you therefore I must be a Commie bastard.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1134058Google 30 seconds this were all in the first result of the first page.
http://archive.is/eI4PL (http://archive.is/eI4PL)
http://archive.is/pTCS2 (http://archive.is/pTCS2)
Second search, this time for gays only groups
http://archive.is/KhSLP (http://archive.is/KhSLP)
Like I said before, the problem it's not that they allow people to choose who to play with, it's that they have said rejecting women for being women is a no-no. So fucking double standards.
Also I dare you to find a post like those asking for men only, straights only etc.
Someone said "I want to reject this game for being men-only" and they said "report it and we will".
Report the games that are women-only or gay-only and I bet they reject those too.
That's the flaw with your logic - you think "report it and we will boot it" applies just to the one thing you're outraged about. But everyone here is a coward and not willing to see if it's just a consistent policy of "all games need to be open to all people" that they will enforce based on REPORTING THE GAME. I assume because if they did boot that game too, you'd be both kicking a hornets nest AND demonstrating this entire conspiracy theory is nonsense which means all your posts would be embarrassing in retrospect.
Quote from: Valatar;1134152Encyclopedia Dramatica isn't a SA site, they're unrelated entities. The only link is that SA performs trolling and ED documents trolling. And yeah, running in to do battle with the trolls just pleases them by giving them the reactions they're looking for, you're basically always better off ignoring them even if they're doing something shitty like mocking pictures of your kid. Don't go expecting empathy or human decency, you won't find it.
Also, SA is not conservative, it's rather the opposite. The site went crazy in 2016 and burned off a large portion of its membership as anti-Trump mods went after anyone even remotely conservative.
OK, but this was in 2008 long before that change. I'm not making any claims about SA in general -- but the specific trolls that I encountered were full of anti-feminist and anti-gay sentiment. Maybe that isn't how they vote in real life, but that's how they presented themselves online. I don't have any regrets over conflicting with them. (Contrary to the ED site, though, I didn't try to blank out any pages - the only thing I did was post in their forum.)
Quote from: jhkim;1134092Part of endorsing free speech is that you have to accept hearing things that you don't want to hear. I'm struck particularly by your phrase "we're talking about their products, but their ideas are being forced into those products against our will". That's exactly the free market and the free marketplace of ideas.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1134147Erm, that's not how free markets or the marketplace of ideas works. A select clique of people infiltrating companies to push their ideas on everyone else through manipulation by creating an atmosphere where those who don't conform get canceled and pushed aside is not the free market. That's a group of people trying to control the market and limit the scope of the ideas that get discussed. I.e. the opposite of a free market or an open marketplace of ideas. It's a controlled market.
That sounds hopelessly naive to me -- that the free market only works if people come into it with open hearts and warm fuzzies, and don't try to push out their competition.
I think that free markets are more robust than that. In the real world, every free market has people trying to dominate it -- that's kind of the point. People go into the free market trying to control it as much as possible to sell their products or ideas. They will try all sorts of strategies to win out over their competition.
Trying to control the market is expected, and sometimes, winners succeed and control the market by superior strategy.
What crosses the line into a controlled market is if some people use violence, fraud, or other illegal means to dominate.
Quote from: sureshot;1134087So what are your thoughts on this since apprently you states it does not happen.
I don't say it never happens. I say it happens and IF YOU REPORT IT I BET IT'S TREATED THE SAME AS A REPORTING OF A MEN-ONLY GAME.
This is not a hard position to comprehend. Ask yourself why you keep misrepresenting what I've been saying, given it's so easy to understand?
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1134098I barely tolerate everyone here. :D
Well true. I think that goes for most of us :)
Quote from: Mistwell;1134214I know, it's a black and white world to you. Those who agree with you, and the enemy. There is no subtlety in your thinking, no nuance of opinion, no range of opinions even. It's all on or off.
HAHAHAHAH. I told my entire team this at work as an out of context claim about me. The looks were *WORTH IT*. Thank you.
Quote from: Mistwell;1134214Right. You cannot comprehend someone not viewing the world black and white like you do. You can't even understand my saying, "Maybe I am wrong, so why don't you prove it" because the "maybe I am wrong" part simply doesn't seem to compute in your brain. It's a black and white world and if you said it that must mean that's the correct and white side of the world.
But you don't believe you're wrong. You say that to give you cover while you make insane incredulous claims within the same post. You know, like pretending to "know me" and the black-and-white world I live in. HAHAH. This is great.7
Quote from: Mistwell;1134214The duty on me to prove your pet theory is wrong - it's YOUR theory dude, so show us you're right. Nobody has to do your homework for you buddy.
Oh this is where you're now pretending to be discussing *anything* in good faith? See you've already succumbed to your own brain-fart sniffing. I GIVE YOU NO CREDIT. You're not speaking to anyone here in good faith, I owe *nothing* to you.
And if my world is "child-like" since you "know" my "black and white" world... while pontificating about your capacity to be truthful, when literally everything you say about me is literal conjecture without a factual basis in anything. You're the one that made it personal - all points of discussion are off.
I'm doing quite well in my childish black-and-white world you've invented in your mind. Quite well indeed.
Quote from: Mistwell;1134214I am right of center. But consistently, I am dissenting from your view so I must be the enemy and therefore a leftist. Which is laughable, but in the child-like world view you live by it makes sense because I'm not agreeing with you therefore I must be a Commie bastard.
I don't pretend or care what the fuck you think you are. That's the best part. I don't believe you. You've been such a disingenuous for so long, nothing you say on topics like these matter to me. /shrug. Easy peasy.
That said - I do have a couple of friends that are pretty-die hard socialists in their own minds. They're not so sure anymore. People change. At least they're honest about it.
Quote from: tenbones;1134236HAHAHAHAH. I told my entire team this at work as an out of context claim about me. The looks were *WORTH IT*. Thank you.
But you don't believe you're wrong. You say that to give you cover while you make insane incredulous claims within the same post. You know, like pretending to "know me" and the black-and-white world I live in. HAHAH. This is great.7
Oh this is where you're now pretending to be discussing *anything* in good faith? See you've already succumbed to your own brain-fart sniffing. I GIVE YOU NO CREDIT. You're not speaking to anyone here in good faith, I owe *nothing* to you.
And if my world is "child-like" since you "know" my "black and white" world... while pontificating about your capacity to be truth, when literally everything you say about me is literal conjecture without a factual basis in anything. You're the one that made it personal - all points of discussion are off.
I'm doing quite well in my childish black-and-white world you've invented in your mind. Quite well indeed.
I don't pretend or care what the fuck you think you are. That's the best part. I don't believe you. You've been such a disingenuous for so long, nothing you say on topics like these matter to me. /shrug.
To be clear, because you're a child and take everything literally here, I am describing your behavior HERE, at TheRPGsite for your posts. Not your personal life. I have no idea how you behave at home or work - I assume differently, since I assume you're not the child you portray yourself to be here.
Much like I assume Pundit isn't Pundit in real life. It's a personality he assumes for his online life.
There is no question in my mind you would not behave like this in person. Not because I am calling you out, but because I think you literally compartmentalize this place from "the real world" and think behaving like a child who sees the world as black and white here is separate from real life where you know things are not that way.
Quote from: Mistwell;1134237To be clear, because you're a child and take everything literally here, I am describing your behavior HERE, at TheRPGsite for your posts. Not your personal life. I have no idea how you behave at home or work - I assume differently, since I assume you're not the child you portray yourself to be here.
I still don't understand what your point is? You're just wanting to be Ad Hominem for fun? Yeah... I'm the child. LOL you're a wreck. Love it.
Quote from: tenbones;1134238I still don't understand what your point is?
I know. We all know you don't understand. That's been made very clear.
So tenbones, what do you think of Mike Mearls being reinstated on D&D at WOTC?
Quote from: Mistwell;1134239I know. We all know you don't understand. That's been made very clear.
So tenbones, what do you think of Mike Mearls being reinstated on D&D at WOTC?
Oh I understand (if you read the whole post you'd see that - sarcasm isn't your thing). I just don't really care when it comes to you.
As for Mearls - Like you, I don't care about him or WotC specifically either. I haven't talked to Mearls since we worked together. He's thirsty for attention from nameless strangers, like you, but more higher profile.
What's your take?
I'm still waiting for more haters to join in your chorus, too. Where they at?
Quote from: tenbones;1134243I'm still waiting for more haters to join in your chorus, too. Where they at?
The only reason I read Mistwell anymore is to see what your reply is going to be. I used to read in anticipation, but that's too much responsibility to project onto you. So now I wait to see if you are going to rebut him, then I read what he says, then your reply. It's better than TV! Wait, that's too low a bar. It's better than TV back when TV was good!
He used to annoy me. With this setup, it's amusing. So a hearty "thank you" from me for taking the Mistwell lemons dealt to us and turning them into an exotic, amazing lemonade.
Quote from: tenbones;1134242Oh I understand (if you read the whole post you'd see that - sarcasm isn't your thing). I just don't really care when it comes to you.
As for Mearls - Like you, I don't care about him or WotC specifically either. I haven't talked to Mearls since we worked together. He's thirsty for attention from nameless strangers, like you, but more higher profile.
What's your take?
I think he's better for the industry than Crawford, and my hope is he keeps Crawford a bit more in check. I don't think he cares about social issues and D&D as much as Crawford does, and I don't think he's as keen on using D&D as a platform to move social issues "ahead" as much as he's interested in making D&D profitable by appealing to a wide audience.
Quote from: tenbones;1134243I'm still waiting for more haters to join in your chorus, too. Where they at?
In case you had not noticed, I am making an effort to aim the thread more towards being on-topic and less towards you and I having a spat. I don't think most users are here to see us clobber each other, and I am betting Pundit would prefer we talk more about RPGs than we do about each other.
Quote from: Mistwell;1134210No (douchebag) I said I bet if you report it (you won't) I bet they'd take your report seriously.
The more you strawman people who dissent from your view, the weaker your view looks. If you can't "win" without feeling the need to "cheat" by misrepresenting the dissenters views as something else which is much easier to knock down, it's a good indication your position is a weak one. Maybe knock that shit off if you want to be persuasive?
No they won't asswipe, because in those same threads you can find people working for roll20, plus the owner spoke clearly about his stance. Now go back to your circle jerk.
Quote from: Mistwell;1134215Someone said "I want to reject this game for being men-only" and they said "report it and we will".
Report the games that are women-only or gay-only and I bet they reject those too.
That's the flaw with your logic - you think "report it and we will boot it" applies just to the one thing you're outraged about. But everyone here is a coward and not willing to see if it's just a consistent policy of "all games need to be open to all people" that they will enforce based on REPORTING THE GAME. I assume because if they did boot that game too, you'd be both kicking a hornets nest AND demonstrating this entire conspiracy theory is nonsense which means all your posts would be embarrassing in retrospect.
Yeah, asswipe, which is why you can find roll20 employees in those threads, because they exist only because roll20 doesn't know...
Honestly you ARE way worse than jhkim.
Quote from: Mistwell;1134252In case you had not noticed, I am making an effort to aim the thread more towards being on-topic and less towards you and I having a spat. I don't think most users are here to see us clobber each other, and I am betting Pundit would prefer we talk more about RPGs than we do about each other.
Dude, this thread's topic has been exhausted and gone off the rails for like the last ten pages or more. Watching Tenbones clubber you while we wait for that two thirds of the posters on this site who supposedly hate him to finally show up and have your back is the only reason to click on this thread anymore. :p
I do not hate anyone. But I do like popcorn.
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1134260No they won't asswipe, because in those same threads you can find people working for roll20, plus the owner spoke clearly about his stance. Now go back to your circle jerk.
I've read those threads and at no point do the say or imply they wouldn't also yank a womens-only game that was reported. But this is super-easy, go ahead and prove me wrong by filing a genuine report against one of those games that are bugging you for being women-only or gay-only. You're the guy who thinks those are bullshit so why not file a report and see if you're right that they will tell you to go pound sand?
Quote from: GeekyBugle;1134261Yeah, asswipe, which is why you can find roll20 employees in those threads, because they exist only because roll20 doesn't know...
Honestly you ARE way worse than jhkim.
Yes, Roll20 employees are in that thread. So? How does that prove they wouldn't also take a report on a womens-only game seriously?
I think you can play any game you want on Roll20 with whoever you want. But I also think if you advertise for strangers to come and play your game and you specifically exclude some types of people from joining based on their race, gender, sexual preference, religion, etc., AND if someone files a real complaint about you doing that, they will take the real complaint seriously. And if nobody complains, they will let it slide. That seems to be their M.O. and I can't say it's a bad policy as I prefer it to actively searching out for stuff that breaks the rules but doesn't seem to bother anyone.
Quote from: VisionStorm;1134276Dude, this thread's topic has been exhausted and gone off the rails for like the last ten pages or more. Watching Tenbones clubber you while we wait for that two thirds of the posters on this site who supposedly hate him to finally show up and have your back is the only reason to click on this thread anymore. :p
Two-thirds? And hate?
Wow. Don't pretend I am the one with reading comprehension issues ever again my man.
So what do you think of Mearls being back working on D&D?
Quote from: Mistwell;1134284Two-thirds? And hate?
Wow. Don't pretend I am the one with reading comprehension issues ever again my man.
So what do you think of Mearls being back working on D&D?
You might want to re read what you said. I can get with not tolerating is not necessarily hate (well some would say lack of tolerance is hate) but his math is dead on according to what you said. Might be pertinent given you are getting on about reading comprehension.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134286You might want to re read what you said.
Or you might want to re-read it.
Seriously. Look again. I didn't edit it. I said a third. It immediately got repeated back as two-thirds, and everyone parroted that erroneous misstatement by tenbones.
Quote from: Mistwell;1134292Or you might want to re-read it.
Seriously. Look again. I didn't edit it. I said a third. It immediately got repeated back as two-thirds, and everyone parroted that erroneous misstatement by tenbones.
You said barely a third tolerate him. He said you are waiting for two thirds to come hate at him. Are you sure you know what reading comprehension means? Or is math the issue?
Quote from: oggsmash;1134295You said barely a third tolerate him. He said you are waiting for two thirds to come hate at him. Are you sure you know what reading comprehension means? Or is math the issue?
The post is #479 (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?41988-Mearls-(officially)-out-as-D-amp-D-manager-Ray-Winninger-is-in&p=1134049&viewfull=1#post1134049), with the quote being:
Quote from: MistwellMost of what you say is bullshit tenbones. Even here you're barely tolerated by a third of the users because you spew so much bullshit.
It's not "barely a third tolerate" -- it's "barely tolerated by a third". So according to the claim, one-third of posters barely tolerate him - which implies dislike. It's unspecified what the other two-thirds think.
That said, I think sort of ad hominem drags down the level of discussion here. Plus, even if someone was quite popular here, that doesn't make them right. We're Mos Eisley, after all. :-)
Quote from: jhkim;1134299The post is #479 (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?41988-Mearls-(officially)-out-as-D-amp-D-manager-Ray-Winninger-is-in&p=1134049&viewfull=1#post1134049), with the quote being:
It's not "barely a third tolerate" -- it's "barely tolerated by a third". So according to the claim, one-third of posters barely tolerate him - which implies dislike. It's unspecified what the other two-thirds think.
That said, I think sort of ad hominem drags down the level of discussion here. Plus, even if someone was quite popular here, that doesn't make them right. We're Mos Eisley, after all. :-)
I agree on the attacks, but it is pretty easily implied as to what the other 2/3 would think, if a person is barely tolerated by a third, you know this.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134295You said barely a third tolerate him. He said you are waiting for two thirds to come hate at him. Are you sure you know what reading comprehension means? Or is math the issue?
Ha, what I said was:
Quote from: Mistwell;1134049Even here you're barely tolerated by a third of the users because you spew so much bullshit.
The other two-third do not have that issue with him. But one-third barely tolerate him.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134301I agree on the attacks, but it is pretty easily implied as to what the other 2/3 would think, if a person is barely tolerated by a third, you know this.
No man, I was not implying the other 2/3rds are something less than barely tolerating him. That would be an obviously false claim as plenty of people like tenbones. I said what I meant.
Quote from: jhkim;1134299The post is #479 (https://www.therpgsite.com/showthread.php?41988-Mearls-(officially)-out-as-D-amp-D-manager-Ray-Winninger-is-in&p=1134049&viewfull=1#post1134049), with the quote being:
It's not "barely a third tolerate" -- it's "barely tolerated by a third". So according to the claim, one-third of posters barely tolerate him - which implies dislike. It's unspecified what the other two-thirds think.
That said, I think sort of ad hominem drags down the level of discussion here. Plus, even if someone was quite popular here, that doesn't make them right. We're Mos Eisley, after all. :-)
I agree. Which is why I am trying to turn the conversation away from the ad hominem and towards discussing RPGs again. I am not proud of bashing tenbones' popularity here. It doesn't matter if everyone were to dislike him or everyone were to love him. I just hit him there because it seemed that he cared. Which is, admittedly, a low blow particularly to a nerd in their RPG home. Of course, it was in response to a series of low blows from him towards me, but that doesn't mean I am proud of hitting him where it hurts.
Quote from: oggsmash;1134301I agree on the attacks, but it is pretty easily implied as to what the other 2/3 would think, if a person is barely tolerated by a third, you know this.
No man, I was not implying the other 2/3rds are something less than barely tolerating him. That would be an obviously false claim as plenty of people like tenbones. I said what I meant.
[video=youtube;DBITZw5-HWY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBITZw5-HWY[/youtube]
Quote from: Ratman_tf;1134314[video=youtube;DBITZw5-HWY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DBITZw5-HWY[/youtube]
Well played. Your timing is perfect.
Quote from: Mistwell;1134305I agree. Which is why I am trying to turn the conversation away from the ad hominem and towards discussing RPGs again. I am not proud of bashing tenbones' popularity here. It doesn't matter if everyone were to dislike him or everyone were to love him. I just hit him there because it seemed that he cared.
But I don't. If I did, I wouldn't be here. By that thirsty-logic you operate from - which you clearly do since you started this whole idiotic thing, I'd remake an account on TBP and post "nicely" there so I can get people there to like me. You seem to have this interest in presuming what I think and what I'm like, and fly off the handle with your weird projections. Now you half-ass try to back away from it, and you simply couldn't resist doing it yet again.
I don't care what you think about me, Mistwell. You're needy. Maybe you suffer from Tenbones Derangement Syndrome? I dunno?
Quote from: Mistwell;1134305Which is, admittedly, a low blow particularly to a nerd in their RPG home. Of course, it was in response to a series of low blows from him towards me, but that doesn't mean I am proud of hitting him where it hurts.
LOL! Well it sounds like it's alllll my fault now. Who could have seen that coming? Well I'll wait for you rescue party from your fantasy-conspiracy to finish me off... I'm not sure where it is I'm supposed to be hurting? I am getting a nice laugh out of your self-importance and odd "thing" for me...
Greetings!
From what I have heard, Roll20 is run by SJW's, and is also full of SJW's. They may not ban whatever "Only X" games, though I suspect they would naturally cater to the woke ideology, like most good SJW's, and freely embrace the oppression Olympics and only ban games or gamer groups that don't agree with their SJW ideology. That is expected and customary SJW behavior.
I have zero interest in being a customer, fan, or supporter of Roll20 in any way.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
Tenbones Derangement Syndrome, that is classic.
Is there anything that TDS can not explain? Nothing that my conformation bias can not explain away for sure.
Quote from: SHARK;1134336Greetings!
From what I have heard, Roll20 is run by SJW's, and is also full of SJW's. They may not ban whatever "Only X" games, though I suspect they would naturally cater to the woke ideology, like most good SJW's, and freely embrace the oppression Olympics and only ban games or gamer groups that don't agree with their SJW ideology. That is expected and customary SJW behavior.
I have zero interest in being a customer, fan, or supporter of Roll20 in any way.
Semper Fidelis,
SHARK
That's why I don't use it.
I drop a lot of money on things I think are "good". It's their loss. They can be SJW's all they want. As long as they don't push it down my throat or tell me my money is going to causes I find antithetical. It's REALLY easy. Make good things, let me live my life using your good things, profit. Everyone wins!
Everyone (except Mistwell) loves Tenbones. He's like kittens.
Quote from: tenbones;1134341As long as they don't push it down my throat or tell me my money is going to causes I find antithetical. It's REALLY easy. Make good things, let me live my life using your good things, profit. Everyone wins!
This is the thing I miss the most, in Roll20's behavior, in WotC's behavior, in all kinds of corporate political posturing and the political posturing of creators. Make a good product and let me buy it from you if you're selling it. Even better, in some ways, if we don't agree -- here we are having a positive exchange that might not happen if we only ever met in political arguments. With politics in everything, especially with people arguing with righteous fire because they're convinced that their cause is holy and the only moral position, that window gets smaller and smaller. Another source of common ground is lost, and the echo chamber gets stronger.
Both Crawford and Mearls have publicly pushed people around in ways that made me less interested in buying D&D products. Mearls has even said effectively that he doesn't want my money (I'm "fired"). I wonder how much of that feeds in to choosing Winninger, who while a lefty, at least hasn't publicly admonished or fired any customers yet, as far as I know. Perhaps pressure from the Hasbro overlords?
Quote from: S'mon;1134356Everyone (except Mistwell) loves Tenbones. He's like kittens.
Solid agree, tenbones is great. :D One of my favorite posters here, always look forward to his stuff. Even when I disagree, I learn something.
Edit: And tenbones, no I don't care that you told us to stop saying nice things about you. I'm a rebel without a cause, damnit. :D
It's appreciated. Not necessary, but appreciated.
Kumbaya, my lord, kumbaya! :)
I find Roll20 has a steep learning curve of features that I am ambiguous about wanting in the first place. Has a sort of sunk-cost fallacy feel to it: once you get good at it you feel obliged to drag others to its Sissyphean hillside. Never really wanted my TTRPGs to feel like much work; I like session mechanics to fade away and get more 'authentic' responses from my players (obviously because I am an immersion elitist :p).
Kumbaya, my lord, kumbaya! :cool:
Quote from: Opaopajr;1134475Kumbaya, my lord, kumbaya! :)
I find Roll20 has a steep learning curve of features that I am ambiguous about wanting in the first place. Has a sort of sunk-cost fallacy feel to it: once you get good at it you feel obliged to drag others to its Sissyphean hillside. Never really wanted my TTRPGs to feel like much work; I like session mechanics to fade away and get more 'authentic' responses from my players (obviously because I am an immersion elitist :p).
Kumbaya, my lord, kumbaya! :cool:
I'd have seriously used Roll20... but the reality is my group has largely moved away from the battlemat 95% of the time. So the featureset of Roll20 has greatly diminished. I can do everything I need with very little hassle on my Discord channel. Which also now doubles for my video-gaming folks that play online with me.
A big reason I avoid Roll20 is their political asshattery. I'm down for supporting people in my hobbies that are doing good things, even at my own expense. But once you're over the line, I have to pull that funding.
Quote from: tenbones;1134335I'd remake an account on TBP and post "nicely" there so I can get people there to like me.
THAT would be a hysterical piece of performance art.
BTW tenbones, did you play Cyberpunk 2020 at the LA conventions in the 90s with a crew who wore mirrorshades at the table? I was talking to an old friend about the LA cons and he reminded me about that Cyber-RPG crew. Their games were always full, but the odd part was how most of the players wore mirrorshades.
That was back when half (or more) of my Saturday night tables were gamers wearing their goth costumes for the midnight Vampire LARP.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1134529THAT would be a hysterical piece of performance art.
BTW tenbones, did you play Cyberpunk 2020 at the LA conventions in the 90s with a crew who wore mirrorshades at the table? I was talking to an old friend about the LA cons and he reminded me about that Cyber-RPG crew. Their games were always full, but the odd part was how most of the players wore mirrorshades.
That was back when half (or more) of my Saturday night tables were gamers wearing their goth costumes for the midnight Vampire LARP.
I ran CP2020 at Strategicon, OrcCon and Gamex pretty much from 1989-1994. As soon as CP2020 dropped in 88, I was prepping my first convention adventure - which clocked in at over 80-pages long and was designed for a multi-session tournament with three different groups started from three-different starting points that culminated in the survivors of each group forming a super-group for the final day of the convention. That format kind of became a tradition for me specifically for CP2020 for a few years, and it was extremely popular.
I never wore mirrorshades, personally, I usually wore Wayfarers back then, but I occasionally wore Vuarnet's too, LOL but I don't recall ever wearing shades while GMing (maybe they were on top of my head?). However, I did have LOTS of players that did wear their trenchcoats, shades etc. quasi-larping etc. which by the early 90's it was pretty common. I'm 90% sure that it was me you're talking about specifically because during that time, in terms of GM's running CP2020 officially for the Con's, I think there was only *two* other GM's running CP2020, and their games... were not very good. I always had alternate lists from the very start because CP2020 was the "hot ticket" when it landed, and my GM feedback pretty much always made my tournament slots a premium after the first year's game. I had about three groups that *religiously* attended my events all year long for CP2020. Edit: and I'll confess I kept doing CP2020 long after I wanted to stop running it... but expectations were set, and I felt kinda obligated.
And I pretty much *only* ran CP2020 and AD&D, and I ran two four-hour CP2020 sessions for two-days, and one four-hour session on day three. I'd fit ONE 4-hr AD&D slot in there. That was my normal routine. So it was probably me as the GM I'd be willing to bet. Those were very good times.
Second Edit: That's funny, when I wanted to stop running CP2020... it was because I wanted to run Vampire. But alas... my then-budding writing career pulled me out of the convention-scene entirely.
Quote from: Morblot;1131201I agree. I have lots of Pathfinder 1e stuff I intend to keep and use, even if the culture is what it is.
Thank you, I'll check it out!
edit: Yeah so I checked it out. I almost stopped as soon as I saw it was by Evil Hat, who literally do not want my money (https://twitter.com/EvilHatOfficial/status/1219358435935809536), but the page count of 464! was the last straw. Not gonna happen, I'll do without.
Yeah, damnit. I had the same reaction.
Quote from: Omega;1131708FR has Chult and possibly other lands. Where was Living Jungle set?
In Greayhawk, depended on the iteration as could one or more of the migration waves were of the african type or egyptian, or mediterranian, etc.
Mystarra had some as well, one of the two types of Thaytians was dark skinned, the other very pale skinned in RC I believe.
BX never says so like with the rest of it you can do whatever you want with the bare frame they provide.
BECMI I havent read through enough yet. But odds are they are the diametric opposite and hammer down every little detail and fill in every little space.
No clue what the hell Eberron has to offer.
Touv
The Touv are a dark-skinned people from the southern reaches of the continent of Hepmonaland. Over a thousand years ago, the scattered tribes of the hills and savanna joined together to cast off the oppressive yoke of the Olman empire and drive that diabolical people from their homelands. From the ashes of war rose the great nation of Kunda and a legendary age of peace and enlightenment on the southern continent. What may remain of the kingdom of Kunda is a mystery to the scholars of the Flanaess, as the storm-lashed coasts of Hepmonaland have remained mostly impenetrable to northern explorers for centuries.
Very few Touv have ever found their way to the lands of the Flanaess, so their culture and history remain largely unknown outside of their own lands. Tales of seafarers speak of a society of peaceful city-states dotting the southern plains and jungles, a realm of noble savages and wise wizard-kings, but such accounts are difficult to trust with any certainty. The recent incursion of the agents of the Scarlet Sign onto Hepmonaland has done little to dispel or confirm any myths, and as long as war grips the southern straits and waterways, it is doubtful that much will change.
Quote from: tenbones;1134612I ran CP2020 at Strategicon, OrcCon and Gamex pretty much from 1989-1994.
And your games were excellent. Like you, I was running 5-6 events at all those cons (the AD&D tourney, CoC and Traveller mostly) which made playing in anything very difficult to schedule, but my friends and I played in several of your CP2020 games. I hope you've returned to the convention scene since you moved to Texas.
Interesting how everyone who likes the new SJWs mandated plan for the D&D is having an orgasm so to speak because of it. Yet not saying anything when they say " great job WOTC now how about firing Mike Mearls" and they don't get an answer lol.
From the looks of it I highly recommend putting a disclaimer on all ones games when trying to recruit. For example my pwn will no feature something along the lines that I plan to keep the evil races evil and make no changes to core races ( so no halflings as strong as minotaurs) with the caveat of it being non-negotiable or up to any any form of debate.
I guess the thing I find just weird is that Drizzt pretty much illustrates that not all Drow are evil or that Drow aren't inherently evil. And there's been a heroic, noble warrior bent to some orc characters for a long time too. Orcs of Thar or earlier. So, the problem they're pointing and and beating their breasts about really isn't there. I remember a Dragon Magazine guest editorial by Gary Gygax early in the third edition days where he explicitly stated that he'd always intended humanoids as somewhat sympathetic and relatable. I don't recall the issue, I read them for free at the library at the time since they were moving far away from my interests just about as fast as they could go.
Some how it all reminds me of the Doonsbruy (or was it Bloom County?) where they hired Clint Eastwood to handle security problems for the olympic games. "It's a fantasy solution," one talking head declares. "It's a fantasy problem," the other responds.
Quote from: tenbones;1134518I'd have seriously used Roll20... but the reality is my group has largely moved away from the battlemat 95% of the time. So the featureset of Roll20 has greatly diminished. I can do everything I need with very little hassle on my Discord channel. Which also now doubles for my video-gaming folks that play online with me.
A big reason I avoid Roll20 is their political asshattery. I'm down for supporting people in my hobbies that are doing good things, even at my own expense. But once you're over the line, I have to pull that funding.
It's funny, because I moved to Roll20 and have basically become a battlemat guy where as I was theater of the mind since starting as a kid.
What exactly did Roll20 do politically? I've basically gotten to the point, after they blacklisted Terrese Nielsen, that I'm really not keen on supporting Wizards at this juncture. I think its time I put my money where my mouth is.
Quote from: ZetaRidley;1135618It's funny, because I moved to Roll20 and have basically become a battlemat guy where as I was theater of the mind since starting as a kid.
What exactly did Roll20 do politically? I've basically gotten to the point, after they blacklisted Terrese Nielsen, that I'm really not keen on supporting Wizards at this juncture. I think its time I put my money where my mouth is.
They turned away a group of youtibers cause they were all white guys (told them "we dont need another group of white guys" when they asked about a sponsorship) and they dont allow all male groups but allow other all x groups. Not sure what else they've done.
Quote from: ZetaRidley;1135618It's funny, because I moved to Roll20 and have basically become a battlemat guy where as I was theater of the mind since starting as a kid.
What exactly did Roll20 do politically? I've basically gotten to the point, after they blacklisted Terrese Nielsen, that I'm really not keen on supporting Wizards at this juncture. I think its time I put my money where my mouth is.
Slambo nailed it - but there are other "things". The idea is that I don't want any platform telling anyone who can associate with whom based on their notions of what is moral/ethical. That incident is what started it.
As for the battlemat - I've ALWAYS liked the battlemat, even back in 1e. But frankly, we often did away with it because it got in the way of play. When we got into 3e, we got into the Battlemat Madness. It was great. But frankly the rules started killing it for us as they were clearly meant to represent Battlemat play... not the verisimilitude we wanted in our heads. Some of it was good but it was too difficult for us to escape feeling the game was getting a little too meta on top of the fact that after years of play, the cracks in the system were impacting us further.
The Battlemat issues were easy to fix - just stop using it. Worked like a charm. When we converted to Savage Worlds... they have a softer touch, clearly made for Battlemat play, but fully embraces TotM. Roll20/Fantasy Grounds became superfluous for us, because we didn't/don't need the Battlemat, or even desire it. Discord works perfectly fine. We use Dicebots to roll (we do miss rolling dice), plus other Bots for soundeffects, private channels for "Backroom shennanigan" etc. It can do pretty much everything except the Battlemat stuff.
Quote from: tenbones;1135624Slambo nailed it - but there are other "things". The idea is that I don't want any platform telling anyone who can associate with whom based on their notions of what is moral/ethical. That incident is what started it.
As for the battlemat - I've ALWAYS liked the battlemat, even back in 1e. But frankly, we often did away with it because it got in the way of play. When we got into 3e, we got into the Battlemat Madness. It was great. But frankly the rules started killing it for us as they were clearly meant to represent Battlemat play... not the verisimilitude we wanted in our heads. Some of it was good but it was too difficult for us to escape feeling the game was getting a little too meta on top of the fact that after years of play, the cracks in the system were impacting us further.
The Battlemat issues were easy to fix - just stop using it. Worked like a charm. When we converted to Savage Worlds... they have a softer touch, clearly made for Battlemat play, but fully embraces TotM. Roll20/Fantasy Grounds became superfluous for us, because we didn't/don't need the Battlemat, or even desire it. Discord works perfectly fine. We use Dicebots to roll (we do miss rolling dice), plus other Bots for soundeffects, private channels for "Backroom shennanigan" etc. It can do pretty much everything except the Battlemat stuff.
Sounds like we do similar stuff. I'm running 5e at the moment, and the battle mat seems pretty liberating when describing a combat section, though my sessions sometimes just end up being the boys role playing with NPC's and investigating stuff. We roll on roll20, but use discord for voice chat and a discord bot for ambient sound. I could see it going both ways with battlemat stuff. I think if I were able to play again in person, I would probably have a TV to display both maps and the battle mat mounted to the wall, and a couple tablets for players to move tokens and what not. I think I actually use Roll20 more for displaying maps like region, world maps, and town layouts more often than battle mats, and so far it has worked well, I think having a visual of some kind makes the link to the game more tangible.
I also agree with your sentiment. The fact that we now live in a world where corporations are supposed to wear some kind of social, left leaning ethical message on their lapel, I don't really get it. Sell me shit. If you're doing something actually unethical, like actual environmental damage or something, stop it. I don't give a shit what Tide thinks about "white privilege," just give me something to wash my clothes with bitch.
Btw i wouldnt have cared had they not given those youtubers a sponsorship, i dont care for their content, its all in the way they told them. They could have told them no sponsorship any number of ways but didnt.
Exactly. Its like this new MTG card banning. Had WOTC done it any other way it would have been just one more in a long list of card bannings.
But nooooo. We cant have that. The cards are WACIST! Not racist. Wacist. The village idiot idea of what racist is.
Quote from: tenbones;1134612I ran CP2020 at Strategicon, OrcCon and Gamex pretty much from 1989-1994.
Oh man, I think I played that with you at one of those! 1989-1992 I went often to those cons, and I played at least one CP2020 at one of those with a good GM.
Quote from: tenbones;1135624Discord works perfectly fine. We use Dicebots to roll (we do miss rolling dice), plus other Bots for soundeffects, private channels for "Backroom shennanigan" etc. It can do pretty much everything except the Battlemat stuff.
I got to stick with the battle mat one because I love my Minis, 2 because my players is manage to be everywhere at once if it's theater of the Mind and they can't seem to count monsters maybe that was three.
I've cobbled the solution together for the remote gaming we've been reduced to,
https://youtu.be/yvMehQzzF5I
But I really don't like the dice roller I'm using, any recommendations for dice rollers?
Quote from: Mistwell;1135727Oh man, I think I played that with you at one of those! 1989-1992 I went often to those cons, and I played at least one CP2020 at one of those with a good GM.
What happened to you man? what happened to you!?!?!?!?
LOL
Quote from: tenbones;1136014What happened to you man? what happened to you!?!?!?!?
LOL
Hahaha. The truth is, we'd probably have a blast playing together still. I know I think it'd be fun to play with Spinachcat too. The stuff we talk about here...it's not that meaningful to how people actually game.