D&D General Deborah Ann Woll Teaches Jon Bernthal D&D


log in or register to remove this ad

I know that this is Deb Woll teaching D&D and not Deb Woll teaching TTRPGs, but I probably would have gone with a different approach by using a different game's play process. sigh Y'all knew it was coming, so let's all suffer through my insufferable enjoyment of other non-D&D games together.

I would have used Dungeon World though probably run more akin to World of Dungeons. Fiction-first. Narrative framing centered around "What would you do?" questions and conversations. The GM puts pressure on PCs in the fiction to keep things moving. Don't bother "rolling" until a Move has been triggered by an action declaration by Jon. Don't even bother with playbooks. Just focus on some of the basic moves. That would have removed things like the kind of pointless Perception check at the beginning. Tell Jon the distance but add a sense of threat.
 

I know that this is Deb Woll teaching D&D and not Deb Woll teaching TTRPGs, but I probably would have gone with a different approach by using a different game's play process. sigh Y'all knew it was coming, so let's all suffer through my insufferable enjoyment of other non-D&D games together.

I would have used Dungeon World though probably run more akin to World of Dungeons. Fiction-first. Narrative framing centered around "What would you do?" questions and conversations.
I mean, apart from calling it D&D instead of dungeon world, that’s basically what she did…
The GM puts pressure on PCs in the fiction to keep things moving. Don't bother "rolling" until a Move has been triggered by an action declaration by Jon. Don't even bother with playbooks. Just focus on some of the basic moves.
Again, that’s more or less what happened, although she called for “rolls” in response to questions rather than actions, but that’s because at this point Jon is totally unfamiliar with the game, and more comfortable probing for information than describing his character’s actions.
That would have removed things like the kind of pointless Perception check at the beginning. Tell Jon the distance but add a sense of threat.
I would argue the point of the perception check was to introduce the concept of checks. This was ultimately an attempt to teach the basic concept of an RPG, not necessarily to demonstrate best GMing practices. I think regardless of what question he asked or action he declared, saying to make a check first and then introducing the concept of using dice to resolve uncertainty was the ideal response, even if it wouldn’t really have been an appropriate moment to call for a roll in an actual game.
 

I mean, apart from calling it D&D instead of dungeon world, that’s basically what she did…

Again, that’s more or less what happened, although she called for “rolls” in response to questions rather than actions, but that’s because at this point Jon is totally unfamiliar with the game, and more comfortable probing for information than describing his character’s actions.

I would argue the point of the perception check was to introduce the concept of checks. This was ultimately an attempt to teach the basic concept of an RPG, not necessarily to demonstrate best GMing practices. I think regardless of what question he asked or action he declared, saying to make a check first and then introducing the concept of using dice to resolve uncertainty was the ideal response, even if it wouldn’t really have been an appropriate moment to call for a roll in an actual game.
Not sure if I agree but this isn't something that is worth getting into an argument about.
 

At some point gamers have to accept that the term 'D&D' has pretty much become the genericized term for 'roleplaying game' to anyone outside of the player base. Like people who say 'Coke' when they mean soda.

I know that bugs people who don't like D&D that it's become the stand-in term for the entire hobby... but does it really matter? Worry about getting the uninformed into the headspace of roleplaying first, before worrying about "what type" of roleplaying the person is playing. If a person asks "What's D&D?" when they really mean "What's a roleplaying game?"... don't worry about "correcting" their terminology before even answering their question. Cause that'll just put them off.
 

At some point gamers have to accept that the term 'D&D' has pretty much become the genericized term for 'roleplaying game' to anyone outside of the player base. Like people who say 'Coke' when they mean soda.

I know that bugs people who don't like D&D that it's become the stand-in term for the entire hobby... but does it really matter? Worry about getting the uninformed into the headspace of roleplaying first, before worrying about "what type" of roleplaying the person is playing. If a person asks "What's D&D?" when they really mean "What's a roleplaying game?"... don't worry about "correcting" their terminology before even answering their question. Cause that'll just put them off.
It matters to folks who dont play D&D and see TTRPG as a hobby and not just branches of D&D. So, when asked "what is D&D" I say its a type of role playing game. If the next question is "what is a role playing game" I expand on that. If its a deeper inquiry of what D&D is, I go that way with the discussion.
 

"I love D&D" and "it's the greatest game ever created" are different statements.
What is the purpose of this nit-picky commentary?

It's pretty apparent to me that both are subjective opinions. She's obviously speaking from a raw, emotional level of subjective passion to a friend/acquaintance of hers, even if it is a podcast. She's not shilling. You are being so critically literal. Do you hold yourself and your loved ones to this level of scrutiny?

Do you have a personal example opinion of an "X" being objectively the best version of a thing ever created? Is there an objectively best Star Wars movie? What if someone disagrees with you?

But I don't know you. Maybe your opinions are carefully crafted to never seem like objectivity. That'd be a neat trick.
 

It matters to folks who dont play D&D and see TTRPG as a hobby and not just branches of D&D. So, when asked "what is D&D" I say its a type of role playing game. If the next question is "what is a role playing game" I expand on that. If its a deeper inquiry of what D&D is, I go that way with the discussion.
It’s very much a case of generification of a brand name. Like we eat popsicles instead of ice lollies, blow our noses with kleenex instead of facial tissues, cover our wounds with band aids instead of adhesive plastic bandages, mend things with scotch tape instead of cello-tape, google things instead of typing them into an internet search engine, and my phone’s auto-correct doesn’t capitalize any of those terms despite all of them being proper nouns. To most folks who aren’t haedcore RPG fans, people play “D&D” instead of tabletop roleplaying games, even when the “D&D” they’re playing is Pathfinder, or Call of Cthulhu, or Daggerheart, or Appcalypse World, or even Vampire the Masquerade. It’s not that people literally think of all RPGs as D&D variants, it’s just the leading brand name becoming the generic term for the type of product.
 

Not sure if I agree but this isn't something that is worth getting into an argument about.
Fair enough. For what it’s worth I’d be happy to just listen to your perspective on the matter and not try to argue, if you want to express it, either here or in a direct message.
 

It’s not that people literally think of all RPGs as D&D variants, it’s just the leading brand name becoming the generic term for the type of product.
Actually, I think that is exactly the effect of allowing D&D to be the generification of the hobby. Im fine if it means I have to empty the ocean with a teaspoon on this. Im tired of the ever looming cannibalization of games by D&D and the endless edition wars that dwarf all RPG discussion. YMMV.
 

Remove ads

Top