Not a Conspiracy Theory: Moving Toward Better Criticism in RPGs

[Thomas Shey]

But it could happen, and IMO it should.

I think if you actually believe the first part, you're an incredible optimist.

 

[Emoshin]

I think if you actually believe the first part, you're an incredible optimist.

There is that expression "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results".

(Although I don't think the "insanity" part of this old expression has necessarily aged so well in terms of modern POVs on mental wellness)

 

[Thomas Shey]

The first time I really recall 'map and key' was in a thread where I objected to 'Mother May I' and 'Pictionary' as descriptors of D&D play. Map and Key was proposed as a term to use in place of those. It's certainly a better term than them. It's very likely I've moved all the conceptual baggage of those 2 terms onto the 'map and key' phrase. I think you may be right that it's not the phrase itself - but more that those who would use the phrase still mean 'mother may I' and 'Pictionary' by it.

I think someone earlier referred to this as poisioning the well.

That would have been me, actually.

And I get how that happens, but at the end of the day, and please don't take this wrong, you have to kind of get beyond it, or you've pretty much signaled you can't fairly participate in any discussion of the topic, because any attempt at any terminology related to it is going to evoke the most negative past ones. And once you view any discussion of a specific topic as an attack, there's no conversation; just a battle.

 

[Campbell]

The first time I really recall 'map and key' was in a thread where I objected to 'Mother May I' and 'Pictionary' as descriptors of D&D play. Map and Key was proposed as a term to use in place of those. It's certainly a better term than them. It's very likely I've moved all the conceptual baggage of those 2 terms onto the 'map and key' phrase. I think you may be right that it's not the phrase itself - but more that those who would use the phrase still mean 'mother may I' and 'Pictionary' by it.

I think someone earlier referred to this as poisioning the well.

I certainly do not see map and key as anything like Mother May I. I run trad games all the time that use what I consider a variant of map and key. My social crawl games utilize either a relationship map or set of connecting wiki pages (as prep) that detail individual NPCs that are connected to each other in various ways. In order for the player characters to succeed at their own agendas they need to learn more about these NPCs, find leverage points and build their own relationships.

One of the weirdest things about these conversations to me is that the way I think, talk about and organize my own play basically becomes verboten.

 

[Thomas Shey]

There is that expression "The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results".

On the other hand, expecting people to somehow do more effort in a discussion of RPGs than they do anywhere else is, at some point, not understanding the nature of the beast. Jargon occurs because people are simply not going to unpack a concept every single time they reference it, in contexts where they're going to reference it a lot. Not going to happen. Expecting otherwise is just setting yourself up for disappointment. The best you can do is try to keep the opaqueness of the jargon down to a minimum.

 

[FrogReaver]

Once I had a DM give a menu of choices for what to interact with all of which he intended to be more or less equally challenging and equally beneficial.

To the north undead
To the south orcs
To the east a fey forest
To the west lies the halfling empire

For me personally there was no choice here - i didn't care what creatures I dealt with. So for me the choice was essentially random, but if a character particularly hated undead for example it would have been a meaningful choice for them.

Which is to say, choices are random only if the player doesn't find any meaning in them.

 

[Emoshin]

On the other hand, expecting people to somehow do more effort in a discussion of RPGs than they do anywhere else is, at some point, not understanding the nature of the beast. Jargon occurs because people are simply not going to unpack a concept every single time they reference it, in contexts where they're going to reference it a lot. Not going to happen. Expecting otherwise is just setting yourself up for disappointment. The best you can do is try to keep the opaqueness of the jargon down to a minimum.

To avoid unrealistic expectations and achieving very little in outcome, I think the best thing you (generic you) can do in an online forum is create a + thread with the premise of use as much jargon as you want, and those who want to participate, can, and those who don't, won't.

 

[FrogReaver]

One of the weirdest things about these conversations to me is that the way I think, talk about and organize my own play basically becomes verboten.

I think both sides experience that. I don't think it's intentional at all by anyone.

 

[Thomas Shey]

To avoid unrealistic expectations and achieving very little in outcome, I think the best thing you (generic you) can do in an online forum is create a + thread with the premise of use as much jargon as you want, and those who want to participate, can, and those who don't, won't.

That's essentially trying to herd blink puppies. Jargon inevitably spills out into any discussion where it seems relevant.

 

[FrogReaver]

That's essentially trying to herd blink puppies. Jargon inevitably spills out into any discussion where it seems relevant.

It's not a bad idea for those that don't want the conversation to become about the jargon itself - like many of these conversations seem to do.