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

[DND_Reborn]

I was responding to the “why not play instead” comment.

it misunderstands why most of us (that I know) watch these shows. They’re long form improv drama using a framework I’m familiar with and enjoy, with characters, worlds, and themes, that I enjoy. Nothing to do at all with watching someone playing dnd, as such.

I know what you were replying to, but my comment is not misunderstanding any thing, people were reading too much into it. Perhaps this was more because the lead into it was "While I find watching live-streaming personally silly..." and they felt the comment afterwards too off-the-cuff and judging?

I assume people watch such shows for a) entertainment/leisure/pass the time, and/or b) to learn what D&D is about (or how to play). For the first, as I said, I find it silly. But as I also said, I know people would find some of by habits and enjoyments silly. No harm there. For the second, if they want to know about D&D or how to play, my offer to show/teach them is entirely understandable.

 

[Beleriphon]

I mean, come on guys, Wizards released a Diablo sourcebook twenty years ago!

I remember that. I remember the whining and the moaning. I think there was an Alternity Star Craft book as well.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I know what you were replying to, but my comment is not misunderstanding any thing, people were reading too much into it. Perhaps this was more because the lead into it was "While I find watching live-streaming personally silly..." and they felt the comment afterwards too off-the-cuff and judging?

I assume people watch such shows for a) entertainment/leisure/pass the time, and/or b) to learn what D&D is about (or how to play). For the first, as I said, I find it silly. But as I also said, I know people would find some of by habits and enjoyments silly. No harm there. For the second, if they want to know about D&D or how to play, my offer to show/teach them is entirely understandable.

I mean, I don’t see anything strange or wrong about someone presenting a counter argument to the notion that an activity is silly.

 

[DND_Reborn]

I mean, I don’t see anything strange or wrong about someone presenting a counter argument to the notion that an activity is silly.

Fair enough, obviously you have the right to defend your interests and activities, but I don't see your initial response to my first post as doing that.

But I am fine with letting the issue rest. You enjoy it, I find it strange; to each their own.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Fair enough, obviously you have the right to defend your interests and activities, but I don't see your initial response to my first post as doing that.

But I am fine with letting the issue rest. You enjoy it, I find it strange; to each their own.

That’s fine, I just can’t figure out what you were trying to say in the parenthetical I first replied to, if not what I replied to.

what else can “Why not play instead” possibly mean?

 

[DND_Reborn]

That’s fine, I just can’t figure out what you were trying to say in the parenthetical I first replied to, if not what I replied to.

what else can “Why not play instead” possibly mean?

It means the same thing it would mean in any other context.

I am playing chess and someone comes up to watch. I would ask if they play or would like to.
I am building a computer and my nephew is watching. I would ask if he wants to learn about it or help.
I am playing D&D at the library, and someone shows interest... I think you get the idea?

If someone tells me they have heard of D&D and watch games online, what else would I do? If they have time to watch then I would naturally want to know if they have played or have interest in playing (we are always looking for people to joint the table after all).

Personally, I always try to promote participation instead of spectating if people want to join in. I hope that answers your question.

 

[OblivionDrive]

True, but it's even ruder that viewers demand that publishers kowtow to their wants and desires over the players and DMs who actually use their books.

This idea is predicated on the assumption that CR viewers are viewers only and don't play. It's a blatantly wrong assumption. Like, orders of magnitude levels of wrong.

Even if, say, totally hypothetically, that 30% of CR viewers don't play at all and have no intention to whatsoever, are you saying the 70% who do play and would be interested in a Wildemount sourcebook aren't valid enough in your eyes to warrant having their needs met too?

Here's the situation: CR viewership cuts across demographics. Yes, it's predominately younger skewing, but it also includes more than a handful of old school folks too (the forums have shown that I'm not the only one and this is just a sliver of a sliver of the hobby).

That includes people who game regularly, people who wish they could but lack a group (for a myriad of reasons) and people who are just fans of the show with zero intention to ever play that would still like to own a cool sourcebook just like they bought the art books and t-shirts and minatures sets and pledged MILLIONS to the Kickstarter for the animated series. And then you have the people who don't really know about CR or who do but haven't watched it who might see the book on the FLGS shelf and go "Huh... a new setting, eh? Lemme check this out..." and end up falling in love with the worldbuilding without having ever watched an episode...

Why is the money and the patronage of all of those people worth less in your eyes than whomever you deem to be "acceptable" fans of D&D? This is what I don't get about your posts. Why are they "lesser" in your eyes?

Don't get me wrong - I would kill to see Dark Sun, Planescape and Spelljammer redone for 5e. Those were my favorite 2e settings and while I know I don't NEED them updated to run them, it does ease things along when you have updated and rules-compliant versions. I honestly don't care about Greyhawk, Dragonlance (though I read the original novel triad), Mystara, Birthright or a number of other settings and while not seeing them redone doesn't affect me, I know there are others who feel about them the way I do about DS/PS/SJ and I know it sucks for them to feel "passed over" just like it does for me with my favs.

But none of this - NONE OF THIS - makes it acceptable or fair or in any way welcoming to incoming fans when you disparage whole swaths of old guard, newcomers and just adjacent fans alike by acting like your money and opinion is magically worth more than that of groups you've decided to broad-brush with weird strawman assumptions.

People do that crap because "other"ing them makes it easier to accept that changes you don't like must be due to some nefarious, nebulous conspiracy or just WotC being apparently boneheadedly stupid enough to court a "non-audience" (like they have been anything less than cautious with their marketing strategy for the first few years of 5e's life cycle) over the fact that there's a HUGE untapped market for this. We spent the last five years dealing with the fallout of exactly this kind of toxic gatekeeping fandom in both video games and comic books and for the most part it's managed to MOSTLY slide off of the back of TTRPGs when they've tried before now. What bothers me is that this time it feels like the duck's back isn't as waterproof as it used to be...

Obviously you have strong feelings about a hobby that one would hopefully be safe in assuming you're passionate about. Otherwise it would just make one a remarkably dedicated/bored troll to carry on banging the drum this long and I would prefer to assume the answer is both the simpler and less nefarious/sad one. But how is leveraging CR's ginormous fanbase ruining the game for you? They're not rewriting the core rulebooks to make everything CR the assumed default setting. Nothing about the core game is changing. So why all this bitterness? For large chunks of the early 90s, I didn't have groups to play with, but I still bought sourcebooks every month, read them, collected them, dreamed about playing... did that make my dollars spent less valid because most of those books didn't get to see actual table time?

 

[Dire Bare]

I remember that. I remember the whining and the moaning. I think there was an Alternity Star Craft book as well.

It's been to long, can't remember details, but I remember WotC publishing Diablo books with chatter that they would also be publishing WarCraft and StarCraft books too . . . . but WotC sublicensed the WarCraft books to White Wolf, and I don't ever remember seeing StarCraft books . . . . but I do remember at the time that WotC bungled the entire licensing deal with Blizzard!

 

[briggart]

Kinda hard for me to understand why anyone would care whether someone else participates in a hobby as a participant versus a spectator.

If you follow Critical Role probably know this already, but for the sake of general discussion: the first season of CR started in the middle of things, because it was the continuation of Mercer & crew home campaign. That campaign used Pathfinder rules, they switched to 5e because they though it would make the game mechanical part of the show easier to follow for people that were not into RPG.

This happened behind the scenes, but is an example in which considerations on how the game would look to a spectator affected how the game is played. Clearly, this would have been be a welcomed change to somebody who likes lighter rule systems and viceversa, but it explains why I think that is reasonable to care why other people are interested in D&D, and how that interest can shape WotC direction.

 

[3catcircus]

But none of this - NONE OF THIS - makes it acceptable or fair or in any way welcoming to incoming fans when you disparage whole swaths of old guard, newcomers and just adjacent fans alike by acting like your money and opinion is magically worth more than that of groups you've decided to broad-brush with weird strawman assumptions.

You are presuming that I think mine is worth more than others. My argument is that it shouldn't be worth less. Mercer's statements reassuring people hold less weight than if WotC were to be the one making the statement - he isn't the one controlling WotC's schedule - WotC is. If WotC wants to chase potential future customers at the expense of existing long term customers, they shouldn't be surprised when we go support companies that produce what we want, especially if their flash in the pan new customer base dries up.