What We Lose When We Eliminate Controversial Content

[Hussar]

Then I would ask perhaps what the growth argument here is? If we take it as true that the hobby was 1) fairly homogeneous, and 2) had not experienced growth in a decade, the initial argument of course is that that by making the material less homogeneous then the players will be less homogeneous and there will be growth. But where do all of these arguments go once the player base has achieved "peak representation" ? What does the growth rate of the hobby have to do with anything when we reach the point where you cannot fix stagnation by bringing in dorky people from all races and genders instead of just one? Once that point is reached do you think the hobby will be grown better by clamping down even harder on the features of the settings?

What “clamping down”? They aren’t publishing a revised setting for an out of print product that, other than a few drops and drabs, hasn’t been supported in almost thirty years.

Tell you what. Why don’t we worry about that when it happens?

 

[Hussar]

Wouldn't the simple thing be simply not to play settings with what you find publicly problematic in public?

I mean that guy who got the boot was way off and rightfully shown the door. I doubt there was a section in the game he was running for how to sexually assault player characters. I assume he inserted the problematic content into the game without any published guidance. (I really hope so at least). I guess what I am saying is, bad actors will be bad actors. So, just don't be one of them. Be inclusive and open to setting fair boundaries based on honest open conversation with your players at your table and have fun.

Again, not an option in Adventurers League.

People don’t just game at home with their friends.

 

[Hussar]

This.

Don't conflate you being offended with a crime against you having been committed.

The discussion climate, particularly in the US, is so extremely inflamed, that I worry civilization and liberty is about to thrown out with the bathwater, in a misguided attempt to protect everybody from being disrespected.

Far too few people realize that an oppressive cultural scene can emerge from both ends of the political spectrum.

It simply isn't sustainable to ban or block or avoid any work that someone can be offended by. We absolutely must allow works that are offensive.

The ONLY solution that doesn't derail our Western society is to walk away from things you cannot stand. Not to loudly proclaim you are offended and hurt and the person "doing this" to you needs to be sanctioned. The solution to sanitize society to only include the impossibly small subset of works that nobody can take offense to is a folly.

So, very much this.

So, essentially playing pretend elf is more important to you than the living, breathing people who are telling you that what you are doing makes them uncomfortable and not want to be in the hobby.

Sorry, but this is exactly, 100% everything that is wrong with fantasy fandom since day 1.

And fortunately it’s getting flushed down the toilet where it belongs.

I’m sorry you are losing chainmail bikini pin up art. I’m sorry that not every fantasy protagonist is a white dude anymore. I’m sorry that you feel that losing these things is somehow losing something of value.

But I’d much much rather lose those things than people. People enjoying the hobby are just far more important to me than being able to play a pretend slave.

 

[Lanefan]

I really don't think it is fair to say it is the backdrop. You can't reduce everything in a setting to a central conflict and say anything else is superfluous. Especially when said thing greatly contributes to the core themes of the setting and is likely to play a role in many of the things players are doing.

Further to this: the setting is going to be used (in theory) for a whole bunch of different campaigns, each more or less focusing on different aspects of the setting. Thus, any given element - be it slavery, environmental destruction, the quest for water, or whatever else makes Dark Sun tick - might be the centerpiece of one table's campaign and completely ignored by another's. Just like in a more generic setting where different campaigns focus on different aspects of the game-world.

As Dark Sun is a more specialized setting, a long in-depth campaign might even hit all its distinctive elements.

 

[Hussar]

Yeah that's not equivalent to the joke @MGibster described at all. One is a joke which is ok amongst like-minded friends (not the general public), the other is rape. Making the two equivalent is misleading. The rape of characters is not ok even within a home game. There is no TPR like what happened at that con.

We have a gay player at the table - the players including him make gay jokes and have done the sore butt jokes. I as DM do not rape the characters. That's mad and not comparable at all.

The point being though, the DM in question didn’t see anything wrong with what he did.

Being oblivious to harm is pretty much the core issue here.

 

[Hussar]

I imagine that most 40+ just aren't playing D&D at least in the current version, so aren't appearing on WotC demographics. If you use @Hussar's anecdotes about at convention attendance their are still plenty of people in the 40+ range, even if that seems a small percentage.

But to be honest 20-24 you've got the time and the money to spend on your own hobbies, plus the social circle of friends with the same before you get things like mortgages and families to eat into all those. So no wonder that is so high. Also you have the social media and Critical Role effect, both are really pushing D&D in that age range.

From other polling, such as Dragon’s reader polls, DnD has always been dominated by the early 20’s crowd.

 

[Bagpuss]

Again, not an option in Adventurers League.

People don’t just game at home with their friends.

Which Adventurer's League adventure were you forced to either run or play that had problematic content, and did they hold a gun to your head or just apply electro shock pads?

 

[Lanefan]

Again, not an option in Adventurers League.

People don’t just game at home with their friends.

Which brings up yet another issue, one that's been around since the days of the RPGA; and that's whether the game should be designed for/around, or even care about, "public" play or whether it should be designed with the specific intention of it being a game you play with friends. (ignoring such things as con games and one-offs)

Me, I'd prefer it if they leaned hard into the play-with-friends paradigm; and if people want to play with strangers then fine, but the game's not designed for that and the results might not be ideal.

 

[AnotherGuy]

I feel a DM who likes shock and awe, will shock and awe no matter what the topic.

EDIT: We keep dancing around where everyone's hard lines are. There are some people in this thread who even if

• you appeased the age issue; and/or
• you appeased the label for maturity issue on the product

they still do not want controversial content included within their RPGs, whatever the RPG it is.

 

[Lanefan]

From other polling, such as Dragon’s reader polls, DnD has always been dominated by the early 20’s crowd.

I think the numbers Umbran posted are mostly if not entirely in reference to 5e players, which explains the age-40+ dropoff to some extent in that older players are more likely to be playing older editions.

Now, there may not be enough of us old-edition old-timers to move the needle very much, but I think it'd make a percent or two difference.