D&D 5E Mearls' "Firing" tweet

[epithet]

Business 101 says do not ever insult or be insulting to your customers.

Business 102 probably says or should probably say dont Tweet it is just not worth it. He got angry and posted publicly, just not a smart thing to do. I am sure he will survive.

To continue with my apparent trend of the day (anecdotes from the last century,) I'm reminded of a burger joint on Guadalupe Street about a block from UT Austin, called the GM Steakhouse. Every day the slacker running the cash register would grab the microphone and insult people passing by on the sidewalk. He wasn't kind. Still, it was great for business because everyone he didn't insult was hugely entertained by seeing the ones he picked on get mocked without mercy.

I figure there are probably a few people who read that tweet and felt like he was barking at them. There are a whole lot more who, smug in the certainty that Mike wasn't talking about them, are tickled pink at the idea of a D&D "firing" some customers (as if that were a thing) that these folks felt superior to. For them, Mike's tweet was validation.

And for those few who do think of themselves as cootiephobe gatekeepers, I don't imagine many of them will quit playing 5e D&D or quit buying the books and stuff. Hell, they might think of it as a victory that they got someone in Mike's position mad enough to hammer out a poorly worded tweet.

 

[epithet]

Well in the beginning I think lots of people were on it to see hot pictures posted by "models" or hot pictures of Demi Moore tweeted by Ashton Kuscher.

For some reason that has morphed into people thinking it is a useful and smart way to send out real world information.

Huh.

Well, now I feel like I missed out.

 

[hawkeyefan]

Is it a bad thing to want to keep the game as you like it?

No, not at all. Is that in jeopardy, do you think? If so, how? Can’t any of us play any edition of D&D we want along with whatever home brewed rules we’d like?


Nothing at all wrong with any of that, in my opinion. But trying to keep others from enjoyig the game how they like it? That seems like a problem.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

aaa

 

[hawkeyefan]

How about people that believe that showing disrespect for others, even when we disagree with them, and even when we think their views are reprehensible, is not a productive way to resolve differences?

Surely such a reasonable person would not be offended by the tweet, no? Disagreement does not need to mean offense, does it?

 

[Flexor the Mighty!]

No, not at all. Is that in jeopardy, do you think? If so, how? Can’t any of us play any edition of D&D we want along with whatever home brewed rules we’d like?


Nothing at all wrong with any of that, in my opinion. But trying to keep others from enjoyig the game how they like it? That seems like a problem.

No, its not in jeopardy, more of a philosophical question.

Though it seems like in tabletop gaming the trend is "streamlined" rules, aka simpler or less of them. I know in non historical wargaming that is a big push, get more people playing by having simpler rules. Then the fans of more complete rules complain that the game is becoming a hairs breath from going pew pew as you move models around the table.

 

[CleverNickName]

Business 101 says do not ever insult or be insulting to your customers.

Business 102 probably says or should probably say dont Tweet it is just not worth it. He got angry and posted publicly, just not a smart thing to do. I am sure he will survive.

It's been a long time since I studied business, so bear with me. I don't remember this being on the syllabus, but it sounds like a corollary to "the customer is always right," which is patently false.

In business, the main idea is to sell your product. You can't sell your product if you don't have customers, or if the customers you do have already own your product. So is it smart to risk alienating people who have already bought your product, in the hopes of gaining more customers who haven't yet bought it? Some would say yes.

But that's a completely different topic, and I don't want to derail the thread. Sorry about that. Back to the matter at hand:

I think that while Mearls only hit a nerve with a very small, specific, and vocal group of people. I doubt it will have a negative impact on his reputation or his leadership; my gut tells me it will have a positive impact instead.

 

[epithet]

Yeah, the whole point of the tweet was to discourage certain people from buying his products. I'm not sure how it can be more clear. He said 'you're fired' to a bunch of his customers.

Of course I think it is very likely that the tweet will result in more players overall.

I think some people here don't realize that 5e is the most popular RPG ever and it isn't due to appealing to the devoted RPG enthusiasts. 5e has brought in a lot of new players and will continue to do so going forward.

You can't "fire" your customers, it doesn't work like that. Basically Mike was just expressing frustration. If you think some rage tweet will make a self-appointed rules/lore gatekeeper quit playing or buying D&D books, you're under the influence of something potent.

D&D 5e became the most popular RPG by appealing to everyone who had ever played D&D, from the Red Box through 4e. Those "devoted enthusiasts" are the ones who brought in the new players. By itself, 5e has almost no ability to reach new players, because most people who have no connection with tabletop gaming would pick up a book and look through it. 5e energized and enthused the D&D devoted, who in turn went out and got their friends to join a party, bought a set of books for their kid, niece, nephew, etc., or in some cases started recording their game to share with the public.

D&D is a social game, and 5e has flourished because it appealed to those "devoted RPG enthusiasts" you seem ready to move beyond. They made more enthusiasts, and as long as we all remain enthusiastic we'll continue to grow the 5e player base moving forward.

That tweet, by itself, will only result in a handful of threads like this one that flare, sputter, and are forgotten.

 

[jgsugden]

Surely such a reasonable person would not be offended by the tweet, no? Disagreement does not need to mean offense, does it?

If you actually want to know, my post answers this question.

 

[JacktheRabbit]

aaa