D&D General On gatekeeping and the 'live-streaming edition wars'

[Monayuris]

CR is ok. I've played and run D&D games that were better than what happens in CR.

But this is subjective.

I will put my own games up against any streaming DM game... any day, any time.

My game is unique to me and there is nothing CR or other streaming games can do to impact that. I work at my craft to improve and develop as a DM and I develop my own personal style of play.

No streaming DM will be better than me at running my style of game.

So, stop worrying. Run the best game you can and you will not have to be afraid of what streaming DM's are doing.

 

[S'mon]

IME Critical Role brings in tons of actual players, so I'm in favour even though I don't enjoy watching streamed games.

"people claiming that livestream viewers "don't play D&D"

If saying that is a banning offence you better ban me though, since obviously watching =/= playing.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

IME Critical Role brings in tons of actual players, so I'm in favour even though I don't enjoy watching streamed games.

"people claiming that livestream viewers "don't play D&D"

If saying that is a banning offence you better ban me though, since obviously watching =/= playing.

They may not be playing while they watch, but what proof is there that they don’t play at all?

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I'm dead in the middle between the Old Guard and the Young Blood in age, experience, and opinions.
Part of me can't wait for my turn to do the "back in my day" bit. I am definitely already feeling the sting of no longer being the primary demographic for a number of my hobbies though.

Take up golf?

 

[S'mon]

They may not be playing while they watch, but what proof is there that they don’t play at all?

Sure, some of my players still watch CR - but they were CR watchers before they were players. The show brought them in to the hobby, got them interested in playing. They were watchers before they were gamers. I think the show is great for the hobby. I don't think it's gatekeeping to say that watching a game is not the same as playing a game, for D&D as for any other game or sport.

I don't really see this as much of an issue. I do feel there is a bit of an issue with people who collect RPG materials, and talk about them a lot on message boards as if with authority, but don't actually play RPGs - they can be damaging to actual-play discussions. But that is a very different demographic from the live stream fans, and they are mostly a relic of the 1990s dark age when publishers focused on material for reading over playing.

 

[S'mon]

Oh, I do think Twitter is the Devil and should be avoided like the plague! It really distorts people's perceptions of what most people are thinking and doing in the real world, and it gives rise to spirals of extremism especially when you get two opposed camps yelling at each other.

 

[BookBarbarian]

The best part is today's bright eyed and up for anything new players are tomorrow's cranky stuck in their ways grognards!

It's the circle of grognard-life!

 

[Acolyte of Zothique]

The answer to your question is both yes, and no. Yes, because a campaign setting made 20, 30 or 40 years ago is obviously "more traditional" than one made a few years ago, because seniority and tradition go hand in hand. Also nostalgia, I suppose.
No, because when I talked about the lack of traditional content, I wasn't just talking about missing campaign settings such as Greyhawk, Planescape, Dark Sun etc, but also about the low influx of basic content.

I'm not saying we should go back to the old days of millions of splatbooks, I'm just saying that's it's been more than 2 years since the excellent Xanathar's guide. Meanwhile, we got 5 cross-promotion products, which I have no reason to buy. Well, I suppose each of those products have some little tidbits of universal content, a few subclasses and such, that are useful for everyone, but I'm not going to buy a 300 pages book just to get 10 of those pages.

Low influx of basic content? You are right but then this is intentional. WotC are striving - and succeeding - at avoiding rapid rules bloat which killed 3.x and harmed 4e. So, either you go 3pp, create your own basic content or admit that 5e is not for you.

Due to all the recent UA sub-classes appearing recently it would be reasonable to assume another player crunch book is due soon. I look forward to that book(s) but I can say that I've been quite satisfied with the slow release of rules. And so has my group, we find there's plenty out there already.

 

[Umbran]

"people claiming that livestream viewers "don't play D&D"

If saying that is a banning offence you better ban me though, since obviously watching =/= playing.

Do we have to lay this out for you?

So, you know they watch a live streams.

Does that mean you know they don't play? Does the act of watching somehow preclude the act of playing? Or have you done an expensive market survey to tell you they don't play?

No?

Then, don't say livestream viewers don't play. It is not an assertion you have a basis to make.

The lengths people will go to demand the right to say something that is not logically supported is astounding sometimes.

 

[S'mon]

Do we have to lay this out for you?

So, you know they watch a live streams.

Does that mean you know they don't play? Does the act of watching somehow preclude the act of playing? Or have you done an expensive market survey to tell you they don't play?

No?

Then, don't say livestream viewers don't play. It is not an assertion you have a basis to make.

The lengths people will go to demand the right to say something that is not logically supported is astounding sometimes.

Watching a live stream is not playing. That remains the case whether or not the person who watches the live stream also plays.