D&D 5E Speculating about the future of the D&D industry/community in a post-5E world

[payn]

I consider myself to be pretty open minded and accepting. I teach English as a Second Language to immigrant kids who are mostly minorities. There are three different religious traditions in my nuclear family, and my wife and I are of different races. I have a few gay friends and co-workers, one of whom happens to game with us (he's a great guy). I've had several GLBQ students (no T that I know of), and for the most part I've thought they were great kids -- one of them frequently dropped by my class to say hi last year even though she wasn't really in any of my classes.

Out of innocent ignorance -- really meaning no slight to anyone -- I used a word that is apparently controversial in the community as part of a pun joke (the word itself was not used in a derogatory manner, but it is now my understanding that the word itself is considered to be at least controversial in certain circles). Within minutes, a Paizo regular -- who self-identified as "cisgender", which research revealed to basically mean "straight" -- let me have it with a full blast from his flamethrower, a rebuke that included the word "lame" used in a clearly derogatory manner (ie "your lame joke").

This was telling. Words do hurt, and even an accidental broach of etiquette can cause problems, but it was a picture perfect example of hypocrisy for this person to use the word "lame" in a derogatory manner while blasting me for accidentally using another controversial word in a manner that was clearly NOT derogatory. How is a person with difficulty walking due to an accident suffered years prior supposed to take that?

When I pointed this out, complete with a link to a video of a lesbian with MS who was explaining that she found derogatory use of the word "lame" to be as bad as derogatory use of the word "gay", my post was deleted. No one ever called the "cisgender" fellow out on what he had done, and he never apologized for it (I apologized for my own remark even though it had been completely accidental and, again, NOT used in a derogatory fashion).

There have been other incidents but this one left an especially bad taste in my mouth. I spoke to the gay guy I game with and asked him his opinion, and he told me that the word I had used was indeed seen as inflammatory in certain circles, but that it seemed to him that the rebuke and admin's handling of the whole affair had gone a bit overboard.

To the extent that I can, I think I *get* that people who have been hurt can tend to overreact when reminded of that hurt. I've been through my own bumps in life and can sometimes be quick to (over)react or jump to conclusions about the content of someone's mind and heart when they say something that even hints of prejudice that has burned me. So I can be compassionate and forgiving of overreaction -- but this guy was neither G, L, B, T, nor Q! I don't know, it was just... such a perfect example of hypocrisy that I almost wish I had taken a screenshot of it.

I hate incidents like this because they can make me feel irritated with an entire group of people who I genuinely do NOT want to feel irritated by. Ecch.

And now I'm overreacting. And I'll calm down. But too often I end up feeling this way after visiting the Paizo boards.

When I post there I often end up feeling as though I'm viewed as an outsider who hasn't been deemed worthy of having opinions yet. Not yet "one of the gang" who has earned that right, and worthy of scorn for having the audacity to speak out without it having been given.

Insular -- that's a great word for it. Thanks.

Keep in mind the posts were deleted not for content but for being part of a segment of derailing topic posts. The admins even invited you to start a new thread to discuss the topic. This was interesting because typically admins do not discuss moderation at all through thread posting.

As for insular community I have noticed a number of folks making this claim. I have a theory about some of the differences in posting styles between boards. Enworld is a real neutral place people talk about everything here. Since they do its common to have differing opinions and folks seem to be polite when they disagree. Though when you post at a game's homebase you are less likely to find many folks who agree with dissenting opinions. The dissenter feels outnumbered and things start to get antagonistic. I don't think this is a unique quality of the PF community. Ive seen this numerous times with all kinds of products and subjects. When you go into someones home and tell them it sucks they are going to get defensive about it.

 

[Werebat]

It's interesting to note that in both of our groups, there's a strong desire to focus on the fun and enjoyment of spending the gaming session telling a story together. The intensive rules and character optimization are interesting from an academic perspective, but not what I want out of the game at the table. Again, this is where the competition lies. When Mearls and friends say they're asking, "What makes D&D D&D?" I'm hoping they get it right. For me, nothing after 2E seems even close. I sent my group a link to Frog Gods Primer for Old School Gamers tonight.

Bravo for lowering the economic barrier to entry for your players. I can't afford to buy one for everyone, but maybe I'll pick up a loaner copy to share.

Having played through AD&D and 2nd Edition, I am aware of some of the problems those systems presented that I remember thinking 3rd Edition would solve (and it did, to a point). Mainly, arguments between players and the DM on rules adjudication. If a player wanted to try to trip or push a giant in AD&D, the DM had to decide how likely that was to happen, and unpopular rulings could lead to grumpy players.

One thing 3rd Edition seemed to do right (at first) was set up more or less clear rules on many aspects of the game that had previously been left a bit vague (and therefore open to wheedling, cajoling, or even subtle intimidation). I can remember this being a pain in the ass when I was running AD&D and 2nd Edition game ("Whaddya MEAN I need a nat 20 to trip the ogre?!? I rolled 16, that should be enough!"), but not so much in my 3rd Edition games -- although it seems to have been replaced with "optimization" and min/maxing (once the players know the mechanics behind the rules they can easily min/max with full knowledge that on at least some level the DM is "bound by the rules"), which in retrospect probably could have been predicted.

5th Edition is appealing to me, but I hope there is some balance that can be struck between having (potentially exploitable) rules for everything and relying on "the DM can decide how this works" (which is open to players essentially wearing the DM down to get what they want, whether they might see it that way or not).

Just pointing out, I think, that the old systems weren't perfect either -- although to be fair, back when I was playing AD&D and 2nd Edition I and my players were at another stage of life. Moving from our teens and 20s to our 40s has no doubt changed us in ways that might affect how we would deal with a rules set that encouraged the DM to call more of the shots.

 

[Werebat]

As for insular community I have noticed a number of folks making this claim. I have a theory about some of the differences in posting styles between boards. Enworld is a real neutral place people talk about everything here. Since they do its common to have differing opinions and folks seem to be polite when they disagree. Though when you post at a game's homebase you are less likely to find many folks who agree with dissenting opinions. The dissenter feels outnumbered and things start to get antagonistic. I don't think this is a unique quality of the PF community. Ive seen this numerous times with all kinds of products and subjects. When you go into someones home and tell them it sucks they are going to get defensive about it.

You may be right about your theory. Personally, when it comes to my internet identity, I'm a product of Usenet, and I still miss the days when unmoderated Usenet was THE place to talk about gaming and pretty much everything else. I realize that this had its problems, but I still think the benefits far outweighed the problems as you could learn SO much more by even observing a discussion between two or more strongly opposed individuals than you can learn from participating in a "coffee klatch" of like-minded fellows.

But that's me. The internet, in general, has moved on and most people seem to prefer the coffee klatches -- in all areas of discourse, not just gaming. I see that as a shame but that's my opinion. And at times it makes me feel like something of a grumpy relic, which probably exacerbates any problems I may have with it on a personal level.

God, I remember that stage of my life when I was questioning my religious beliefs and the very existence of divinity, and having rich sources of information in newsgroups like talk.origins or alt.religion. People really trashing each other's arguments! You could learn so much. Where will my kids go for that?

The internet started by throwing everyone together without regard to their origins or belief systems. Then it grew enough for people to start building walls and insulating themselves from each other. I...

Well, none of this really has anything to do with the discussion at hand. Y'know, I remember a day when threads grew organically, constantly derailed and even merged back together again, with no one to prune them. It was beautiful.

 

[Erik Mona]

He is right about his theory.

 

[Werebat]

He is right about his theory.

<Blinks>

The head publisher of Paizo replied to my post here within two minutes of my making it?

<Grins>

Well, I suppose you're the best authority on the matter that I'm going to find, Erik, but I do find it interesting that someone so important at Paizo is following this particular thread so closely...



(Edit: Of course I mean the actual thread, not my particular derailing)

 

[Shemeska]

Nevermind

 

[Werebat]

I flagged it, and I was offended by the particular slur.

You apologized and that would have been that, but you keep bringing it back up, acting as if you said nothing wrong at all because X, Y, X (in a very 'I'm not racist but...' way), keep trying to rationalize it and go after other folks' choice of words. It's not helping your case that it was a poor word choice for a completely out of left field bad pun.

I'm genuinely sorry if you were offended. As I have said, I simply didn't realize the controversy about the word. I hope you can believe me when I tell you that I wouldn't have used it if I had been aware. If it was a slur, it was an unintentional one.

Your comment "in a very 'I'm not racist but...' way" makes it look like you believe I am secretly harboring some hatred for one group or another -- would you care to elaborate on that?

It may be that I keep bringing it up because it genuinely irritates me that I could get slammed for making an innocent mistake, in a manner where the person doing the slamming DOES THE SAME THING THEY ARE SLAMMING ME FOR, only worse, because they CLEARLY used the word "lame" in a derogatory manner.

Do YOU think that this was appropriate?

 

[Anselyn]

He is right about his theory.

It's also an increasing feature of the modern world from social media to politicised TV "news" stations. People increasingly tend to interact with and gather information - and a world view - only from people with whom they already have much in common.

 

[Starfox]

Without diving into much of the conversation that's come after the OP, I'd just like to throw this in (which isn't anything really new either, but...):

My personal picks for go-to games are 4e and C&C, and C&C is rapidly being replaced by 5e, at least until such time as the bloat changes that trajectory for me...

At this point it dawned on me that C&C was not Call of Cthulhu.

 

[Nikmal]

Although conversely, the era of a single, dominant name in the mainstream media is still the same as it's ever been. In the roleplaying gamer world... all manner of games have a place and a piece of the pie. But when it comes to the "face" of the industry to those outside of it... it begins and ends with Dungeons & Dragons. And that isn't going to change any time soon.

When even the most "nerd-expansive" mainstream television show out there, The Big Bang Theory, still defaults to D&D when needing to reference the RPG industry... that tells us just how little they feel a "deep cut" of a nerd reference is necessary. D&D *is* the "deep cut" reference for the mainstream. Always has been, probably always will be.

It has already changed. it is no longer the face of RPG's that it is used to be. Just because a show features it once in a while (it is something I appreciate too) does not make D&D number one any longer. Regardless if it is Pathfinder that is number one now or not.. D&D in the industry will no longer be the same. WotC has seen to that on a level that should never have happened and had they truly listened to their fan base and did some testing of the rules system (4E) before they released it then they would have seen that it is not what the industry was ready for. It fractured their fan base so badly that it left a sour taste in peoples mouths that I do not think that a new edition will be likely to truly fix.

So yea there will be a bad taste associated with D&D for a while.