D&D General Rant: Sometimes I Hate the D&D Community

[Thomas Shey]

I’ve never understood why people can’t just play the game they like and let other people (and in the age of the Internet, the other people are often people they will never even encounter IRL, much less play with) play the games they like. Unfortunately there are all sorts of groups online dedicated to telling each other why everyone that plays differently than they do are Dumb And Wrong. Some people want to hate on things that are popular and some people get angry at newcomers to their beloved hobby and even others get angry at any perceived “dumbing down.”

No one is coming to confiscate your Rules Cyclopedia or copy of OSE. Live and let live. If everyone at your table is having fun, it doesn’t detract from my or anyone else’s fun.

The problem with some people is that, whether they think of it consciously that way or not, really expect they're in a struggle for mindspace.

People have, at some point, almost always had trouble getting players together for a game, or notice that they're not getting additional material for the version of the game they use. And the take-home they get from that is that people who want different things out of a game are a passive threat to their enjoyment.

Its hard to even call it completely irrational. Ask anyone who's wanted to get together a game of something other than the current edition of D&D in certain areas how much differences in taste doesn't matter.

But the reality is, getting into a death battle about it is pointless. The fact you're telling people their fun is bad and wrong isn't going to stop them mostly, so what are you doing other than cooking up stress?

 

[James Gasik]

Sometimes though, it isn't so much a question of "play the game you like" it's a query about a specific edition that brings out the toxicity. There's a thread right now which asks what people think is wrong with 5e. I've participated in a thread about 4e and, while it's true that there are many that seem vehemently against anything 4e, there are also those who take any criticism of the edition as a personal attack.

These aren't threads saying that you're wrong to play that edition either, people just get overly worked up about their favourite edition or about the edition that they dislike. Thankfully, I've only experienced these sorts of players online.

What always bothers me is when one side is dismissive, or makes claims that aren't true. And when you step in to clear the air, you get personally attacked for it.

Examples:

"3rd edition was a horrible mess because of Pun-Pun."

(Actually, Pun-Pun was a funny thought experiment about what would happen if all books were legal and you replaced the DM with a machine...a broken machine).

"4th edition was just an MMO and all the classes were the same."

(Most classes already had roles, it was just now that design was built around those roles, giving each class a job. And while there were some similar seeming powers initially, it didn't take long for each class to gain a unique identity- my Ranger could attack three times, with each successful attack giving an opponent more debuffs once per day. My Barbarian could give up a healing surge to dish out a huge attack. And my Warlord could tell all his allies to stop bleeding out and stand the hell up).

Now some might say, there's no reason to engage with these people, but I dislike misinformation- especially since a lot of people will read something erroneous and then continue to parrot it as if it were undeniable fact.

 

[payn]

What always bothers me is when one side is dismissive, or makes claims that aren't true. And when you step in to clear the air, you get personally attacked for it.

Examples:

"3rd edition was a horrible mess because of Pun-Pun."

(Actually, Pun-Pun was a funny thought experiment about what would happen if all books were legal and you replaced the DM with a machine...a broken machine).

"4th edition was just an MMO and all the classes were the same."

(Most classes already had roles, it was just now that design was built around those roles, giving each class a job. And while there were some similar seeming powers initially, it didn't take long for each class to gain a unique identity- my Ranger could attack three times, with each successful attack giving an opponent more debuffs once per day. My Barbarian could give up a healing surge to dish out a huge attack. And my Warlord could tell all his allies to stop bleeding out and stand the hell up).

Now some might say, there's no reason to engage with these people, but I dislike misinformation- especially since a lot of people will read something erroneous and then continue to parrot it as if it were undeniable fact.

Problem is folks cant admit their preferences. It's like the minute you say, "It's fine, but I dont like it", you lost the argument. Like fun can be objectively defined. It cant, its all subjective. The only thing you can argue is if math works the way its supposed to, but again, the math is supposed to make the game fun, so it can really be anything.

 

[kixotiq]

And the people in this hobby that non-jokingly tell people that they're wrong for liking any of that can mind their own goddamn business.

totally agree, unless you wrote that on a Windows PC

 

[Celebrim]

Eh.

Here is the thing. I admire Eberron. It's brilliantly conceived and executed setting that manages to take the D&D kitchen sink and find original places for all the pieces in an imaginative and coherent manner. But I'd never run Eberron. It's not to my taste. I can tell the guy that put it together is a genius and I might play in his campaign, but I'm not going out of my way to play Eberron. Because I understand that things can be of high quality and not be to my taste, because taste is subjective.

But I can also be disappointed when my tastes are left behind by the developers or the community. The thing about being a fan is that part of the fun of being a fan is stuffing cash in your fist, waving it in the air, and going, "Take my money!" We want to be wowed. We want to get the cool new toys. And if the market has turned to making cool new toys to your taste, but not to mine, it's not as simple as saying, "Well, you could always do the work yourself."

I could. I'm a geek. I'm a nerd. I make my own stuff. That's part of the package I think.

But it's not the same thing. I can make my own cake and that's fun, but sometimes - actually in the case of baking most of the time - I want someone else to bake the cake for me. And if for some reason cedar and cinnamon flavored cakes are all the rage for 10 years running, it is a bit disappointing that I can no longer get my fig with goat cheese frosted cakes.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Clearly the solution is to hostilely take over the community and enact minority rule.

Does anyone have advice on excluding people with different preferences then mine? Or should I focus on oppressing them and forcing them to play the game my way??

 

[Reynard]

Clearly the solution is to hostilely take over the community and enact minority rule.

Does anyone have advice on excluding people with different preferences then mine? Or should I focus on oppressing them and forcing them to play the game my way??

Just produce a new edition that forces them to play your way.

 

[TheSword]

Hate is a really strong word, and probably best to fight against it as urges go.

I get annoyed by things, I might get frustrated…. But hate? Nah. That kinda stuff makes you ill.

 

[Haiku Elvis]

Just produce a new edition that forces them to play your way.

There is no new edition OneD&D has always been here.
(Backwards compatible since the dawn of time).
There will be no new editions OneD&D is forever.
(Leading to an endless subscription/ aaS sales model of perfection)
Join us! You will never want to leave! *

* our digital walled garden.**
** Technically you can leave but we hope the sunken costs mean you don't and you stay here forever ***
*** Unless you play bards then we hope nothing of the sort
****Urgh bards.

 

[Fifth Element]

That's still an opinion though, so they should be able to express it.

You see comments like this a lot in this sort of meta-discussion, so this post is not directed at you per se, since you're only expressing a very common idea.

This idea is very reductive and unhelpful. The point of these discussions is not that someone should not be able to express their opinion, it's about how they express that opinion. That matters. Take responsibility for the way you choose to express what you're expressing.

And moreover:

That you have an opinion is trivial. We all have opinions.

What that opinion is, is also generally uninteresting in itself, because

Why you hold that opinion is what matters. Especially since we're in a discussion forum. The only thing that can really be discussed is the reasoning behind an opinion, not the opinion by itself.

And the fact is, many people hold many opinions that are based on misunderstandings, misinterpretations, ignorance, faulty reasoning, and let's face it, prejudice and bigotry.

So if you hold an opinion for one or more of these reasons, it is entirely appropriate for others to point that out. The fact that it's an opinion does not shield it from criticism. Far too often in online discussions you see someone throw out their opinion, and then when it's challenged, retreat to "It's just my opinion! I have a right to my opinion!" Great. But if you express it in a discussion forum, expect it to be discussed. And if others point out why your opinion seems to be based on something other than facts and good reasoning, they're not violating your right to your opinion. They're just expressing theirs.