WotC WotC needs an Elon Musk

[Chaosmancer]

Unless one takes the view that all the various cosmologies exist side-along, and-or that a given plane in one cosmology is simply a re-named version of the same plane in another (and in the case of the Abyss here, not even renamed!). That Bytopia could coexist with the Endless Night Tytherion and that one could get from one to the other via the City of Brass or the Infinite Staircase or whatever. That the deities who rule over the Gray Waste of Pluton in one cosmology are the same deities who rule over Archeron (or wherever) in another.

To me that's way more fun than making the cosmologies all their own exclusive little domains.

Right, but right now it doesn't coexist. It subsumes.

If I want to run the Great Wheel, I read the DMG. If I want to run anything else, I need to use other resources. One of these is getting preferential treatment, and I'm getting really frustrated at everyone telling me that it actually doesn't and they are all equal. They aren't.

 

[Gradine]

The Dawn War had the best cosmology but Eberron's Orrery works well in a pinch (#HanShotBaator). Thought we had all figured that out by now and wouldn't need to hash it out anymore. ¯\(ツ)/¯

 

[Chaosmancer]

I'm not sure I accept the premise that I should be comfortable handing the game to a 13-15 year old, but... I think my answer is roughly "if we can arrange for this not to be a problem any of them are personally dealing with, protecting them may offer advantages, otherwise, I become dramatically less sure." There's a lot of complicated questions here. I personally know people who only found out something that happened to them was considered a problem because they read media where it was referred to and viewed as a problem by people in stories, and it turns out, it was really good for them to have access to that media. So... I don't want an absolute blanket ban on things being present in media, you know?

I mean, I'm basically inclined to agree that it shouldn't be a default element of settings usually? But there are serious reasons to think about wanting things included in media, and having those things available for kids to know about and talk about. Your tone here comes across as implying that you think people who want this content in media must want it for reasons that you would feel comfortable condemning morally, and implying that it's unthinkable that people could think this content is appropriate, and I think it's worth maybe considering that if some people, especially people who have been through some Events, are saying "hey i think this content should exist at all", maybe there's a good reason and you should be a little more curious and a little less judgy about it?

It is hard to not end up a little judgy when a premise I thought was pretty simple (Official DnD material shouldn't include sexual assault) got followed by a pretty simple counter-point (No, violence isn't the same as sexual assault, they are different orders of things) and has now got this constant barrage of what-aboutisms.

Maybe there are benefits to be had by presenting media with sexual assault in it to various age groups. But, as official material, you have to realize there is a chance of a teenager presenting this to a pre-teen. Do you honestly trust them with that? I've had, quite recently, a teenager in a game I was running declare he wanted to thrust his hand up a monster's anus to claw out their insides. Now imagine a game run by only teenagers, finding an official product that sets out a rape town, like was described in the post that sparked this entire discussion.

Would they handle the subject matter in a way that would be useful and good?

Because, I said this before, there is a DIFFERENCE between media like books and shows, and media like a DnD Game. A show or book can handle this material by not only presenting it, but presenting the reactions. A show can deal with the subject matter, and make sure all the characters involved respond in an appropriate manner to get the message across in the correct way. A game can't do that. A game is going to have people reacting based on shallow and fast thoughts, not the types of things that could benefit anyone.

I've never once said "this content should never exist anywhere ever". That's just what people are putting on me, because I've said "this content shouldn't exist in official DnD materials". Those two things are VASTLY different.

 

[Maxperson]

Right, but right now it doesn't coexist. It subsumes.

If I want to run the Great Wheel, I read the DMG. If I want to run anything else, I need to use other resources. One of these is getting preferential treatment, and I'm getting really frustrated at everyone telling me that it actually doesn't and they are all equal. They aren't.

That's not completely accurate, though. The 5e DMG tells you how to run everything else. It just tells you in 5e terms. That means that if you want the world axis or great tree to be anything other than all the same planes with different names and organization, you will need to go to order editions to get it. Or make it up yourself.

 

[FrogReaver]

At least it WOTC had an Elon we would have the D&D files

 

[Zardnaar]

DnD is a game you should be comfortable handing to a 13 to 15 year old. Are you comfortable having cartoons aimed at pre-teens discussing sexual assault in them? Rape? Even as a background element?

AGAIN, the root of this discussion was pointing out that an official setting, which focused on sexual assault, was taken out/altered. No one is saying you can't include it in your home game if you really really must. We are questioning why you feel like you really really must include sexual assault, but that's mostly because you and others keep insisting and trying to argue for its inclusion.

When I was 13/14 I had already read Hiroshima with full colour photos age 10/11 at middle school.

1992 we had holocaust videos in History class and eastern front. Books in our high school Library included Battle of Berlin including what the red army got up to. I turned 14 in 92. Also did classics at school.

Year before I started D&D.

I'm not saying it belongs in game but more what I was getting taught at school. 1991 aged 12 we covered apartheid in social studies.

1993 I was reading Wilber Smith aged 14/15.

So yeah 13 year olds are probably a bit more resilient than you think.

 

[seebs]

But, as official material, you have to realize there is a chance of a teenager presenting this to a pre-teen. Do you honestly trust them with that?

I trust them with it more than I trust someone else to decide what they should be trusted with.

Would they handle the subject matter in a way that would be useful and good?

I don't know. Maybe not. But you know what? That is a good reason for us to consider, perhaps, having the material with guidance on how it should or shouldn't be used, rather than leaving them to invent it for themselves (which I assure you they'll do anyway) and not have that guidance.

A game is going to have people reacting based on shallow and fast thoughts, not the types of things that could benefit anyone.

I don't even know what you're going for here. Games might have people reacting that way, but what makes you so sure that shallow and fast thoughts are "not the types of things that could benefit anyone"? What are your qualifications, exactly, to be an authority on what could benefit anyone, as opposed to what you think most likely to benefit the people you think are most likely to be playing?

I don't think the evidence is there to support this idea that the way people respond to issues like that would be "noot the types of things that could benefit anyone".

I've never once said "this content should never exist anywhere ever". That's just what people are putting on me, because I've said "this content shouldn't exist in official DnD materials". Those two things are VASTLY different.

I've been watching moral panics come and go for a very long time. in practice, no matter what you personally intend, the entirely predictable outcome of advocating such policies is, in fact, sort of bad.

I don't think "absolutely cannot occur in official materials" is a good stance. "Shouldn't occur all over the place" might be pretty good. "Should only occur in official materials that have some kind of age/suitability warning" seems like a good idea, because we want people to be able to make informed choices. But I don't think keeping things out of official materials really solves the problems you want to solve, and I think it could enable problems we should be very wary about.

As a parent, I am all for making it easy for people considering getting things for their kids to vet the material and understand what they're getting into. But honestly, I trust people who don't think that's important more than I trust people who make sweeping proclamations about what "could benefit anyone".

 

[not-so-newguy]

This thread has caused an irritating earworm for me, so I figure that I'd inflict the rest of you...


End sh!tpost
Carry on

 

[MichaelSomething]

Pffff... what WOTC needs is a Senator Armstrong! (Warning: very strong and political language)

 

[Marc Radle]

Kobold Press …sticks to their Midgard wheelhouse in the same way Paizo sticks to Golarion. This isn’t a criticism, it’s just the way they do business. They have a niche they know well, and they target it..

That’s a fairly common misconception, but it’s actually not true. Kobold Press produces a number of non-Midgard products aimed at ALL D&D players each year.

Products like Deep Magic, Tome of Heroes, Vault of Magic, all of the Tome of Beasts books, etc are ALL ‘generic’ 5E D&D releases that are not related to Midgard at all.