WotC WotC needs an Elon Musk

[Faolyn]

So we're protecting against bad actors? Is that what this is about?

It's a game. Why include elements in a game that you don't want people to play with? Especially when individual players are more than capable of adding it in themselves.

 

[Micah Sweet]

So, then you don't really have a dog in this fight. If I go to McDonalds and never order the Chicken Sandwich, do I really have cause to complain if they take it off the menu?

The presence of these elements, in any story with some historical backing, is important to my sense of verisimilitude. I know you know how much  that matters to me.

 

[Alzrius]

It's a game. Why include elements in a game that you don't want people to play with?

Background, world-building, lore; verisimilitude, in other words. A lot of people place a premium on that, because it makes their fantasy worlds more tangible to them. Not everything is measured purely in terms of practicality-of-play.

 

[Umbran]

Because it ties the whole edition together.

No. It ties the settings together. The edition, as a set of rules useful in many settings, doesn't really need it.

 

[Voadam]

Not really, but I don't generally use SA in my games. I would be fine if someone wanted it as a background element for their PC, if the group is cool with it.

Then I would ask the player on question to come up with another idea. This is pretty standard stuff.

Even here I would suggest evaluating the individual situation instead of a blanket rule.

I don't think anyone here wants it to happen on screen in the game, but I am against removing it from existence as a concept. As I said, background elements and references to the evils of the bad guys, if done with prior awareness from the players, shouldn't be a global ban.

Session 0 fixes this issue.

A lot can vary on the specifics, the individuals, and the expected handling of it.

If a SA survivor player wanted to play a Red Sonja type powerful fantasy SA survivor D&D character concept I might want some strong reasons before giving others a veto, particularly if the SA aspect is planned to just be backstory for self ID empowerment fantasy purposes and not planned to be something to be brought up actively or spotlighted as they power fantasy their way through an adventure path.

On the flip side it is also completely reasonable for an individual to want no SA elements in their D&D, particularly if they are a SA survivor or generally feel vulnerable to SA.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Exhibit #192 why 'verisimilitude' is just the worst.

 

[Umbran]

The presence of these elements, in any story with some historical backing, is important to my sense of verisimilitude. I know you know how much  that matters to me.

How does a thing in a game you don't play impact your sense of verisimilitude?

 

[RealAlHazred]

Elon Musk's first day at Wizards of the Coast:

 

[cbwjm]

No. It ties the settings together. The edition, as a set of rules useful in many settings, doesn't really need it.

Yes, the settings in the edition. Just like how 4th edition had the world axis and didn't worry about the great wheel, instead tying the settings to the new cosmology for the edition.

 

[RealAlHazred]

Oh, right. The settings. The settings in the edition, the settings chosen especially to fit the edition, the edition's settings. Those settings?