Did the nerds win?

[TiQuinn]

It’s possible I’m missing something here. The word inclusivity is not regarded as a cuss word now is it? I thought it is a good thing. I will take a stand to protect that it is a good thing.

Did you not see Morrus’ post? It was pretty clear what triggered the flag.

 

[gban007]

How is using the word ‘inclusive’ a sign that the post is anti-inclusive? I was not using the word as a negative thing. I was using the word as a word to mean what it means. Did the post-millennial gaming industry become more inclusive ? Or more to the point; Was there in that time a huge public awareness about the idea of inclusivity?
I argue yes to both.
I did not say I believe it to be a bad thing.
I have my whole life fought for inclusivity.
The comment was about how post-millennial generation of gamers outnumber oldschool gamers. This is a sign the nerds won, if winning involves going mainstream, attracting many more players. However, the idea that there is an OSR as opposed to how the majority of gamers, the younger gamers do it, mean there are two distinct groups - the community has split.
I am asking whover tagged my post to contemplate if discussing that a thing exists is the same as criticising it for existing? I believe I intended to discuss that it exists. I believe I did not insult it for existing. My point was the opposite to that. Thus, I believe the tag is incorrect.

I believe there was a mod post pointing out one piece of wording that is generally against the terms and conditions.
Otherwise, I think above post is possible better portraying your views of the split, where the original post could be taken as you supporting the position that indie RPG is the core RPG position, and implying that newer players / people who like 5e or the like are only playing to be seen as cool, and thus not 'true gamers'. The above post suggests that that isn't your view, you were more portraying views of the differing 'sides' as such to show the splits in the community.

 

[Kromanjon]

I don't think you can say nerds won or lost.

I think the maths nerds lost and theatre nerds won I'll tell you why...

We use to have games like Champions, GURPS, and Rolemaster where you needed to make your own spreadsheet or computer program just to get through character creation. Now it's all about narrative control, playbooks and simple systems, you can be playing a character within minutes without ever even reading the rules, let alone learning about VLOOKUP in Excel. I mean where is the fun in that?

Combat can be over in a couple of dice rolls without the joy of of finding the particular book with the right critical table based on weapon, location hit, amount of damage dealt then cross referencing and percentile result, to discover your spleen is ruptured and how many minutes until you die without medical attention.

Now we have trigger warnings, and X cards so that we can protect peoples feelings. We didn't have them back in the day, not because we didn't care. But because well we didn't know what feeling were or experience them, they just weren't something we would even consider, we just had cold hard logic and random tables to determine how we should react.

You can't just say the nerds won, you need to be specific about your nerds.

I feel like I'm walking a knifes edge here because I have played, and enjoyed Champions and Rolemaster (never tried GURPS), but I also like some of the new storygame mechanics. I tried Heart: City Beneath for instance and found it awesome. My favorite edition of D&D is 3.5 but I just started playing OSE and love the simplicity of it (so easy to GM).

Also I did study theater at one point in my life but never felt like I fit in. In the end I was more playing the part of a theater kid than actually being one. You're really making me question what kind of nerd I am.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Hey could you help me here? Why has my comment been tagged as an anti inclusive comment? It was not intended that way. I can not see how it can be interpreted that way. Perhaps you are projecting onto it for some reason? It’s possible I can edit it if you help me to see how it is perceived as anti inclusive. Anti inclusive of who?

Mod Note:

Commenting on moderation in thread is a violation of ENWorld’s ToS. If you have a problem with moderation, contact a moderator via PM.

 

[Bagpuss]

I feel like I'm walking a knifes edge here because I have played, and enjoyed Champions and Rolemaster (never tried GURPS), but I also like some of the new storygame mechanics. I tried Heart: City Beneath for instance and found it awesome. My favorite edition of D&D is 3.5 but I just started playing OSE and love the simplicity of it (so easy to GM).

Note the winky face at the end, it is part in jest. I am totally with you, I don't think I really have the time for the complex system I liked in the past. And as a GM I enjoy giving players more narrative control as it shares the burden. One of my favourite games now for conventions in Kingdom, that runs without a GM, has about five or six phrases for the character design and off you go. Although saying that I still throw spreadsheets together for skirmish games like Last Days.

Also I did study theater at one point in my life but never felt like I fit in. In the end I was more playing the part of a theater kid than actually being one. You're really making me question what kind of nerd I am.

It truth it doesn't matter, nobody fits neatly in a box, and people change and it's good that we have a boarder group of players and tastes now and games that suit different styles of play.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I don't think you can say nerds won or lost.

I think the maths nerds lost and theatre nerds won I'll tell you why...

We use to have games like Champions, GURPS, and Rolemaster where you needed to make your own spreadsheet or computer program just to get through character creation. Now it's all about narrative control, playbooks and simple systems, you can be playing a character within minutes without ever even reading the rules, let alone learning about VLOOKUP in Excel. I mean where is the fun in that?

Combat can be over in a couple of dice rolls without the joy of of finding the particular book with the right critical table based on weapon, location hit, amount of damage dealt then cross referencing and percentile result, to discover your spleen is ruptured and how many minutes until you die without medical attention.

Now we have trigger warnings, and X cards so that we can protect peoples feelings. We didn't have them back in the day, not because we didn't care. But because well we didn't know what feeling were or experience them, they just weren't something we would even consider, we just had cold hard logic and random tables to determine how we should react.

You can't just say the nerds won, you need to be specific about your nerds.

Or alternatively, the math nerds emigrated to video games so they can calculate the DPS increase between two pieces of two nigh-identical pieces of gear and realize that if they elaborately re-arranged their talents and spent hours re-learning how to play with the different talents, they'd get a 0.2% DPS increase, which is far too big to ignore! So they won too, they just have to win digitally now!

On a slightly more serious note, part of the reason the math nerds lost is that a lot of them were really bad at actual game design! A lot of the very complicated TTRPGs had absolutely terrible balance issues (including the three named), and it's much easier to make more simple RPGs balanced and playable and fun. I'd love to see a really beautifully-designed "complicated" and modern RPG, but 5E is almost as close as it seems like we're going to get! Very few modern RPGs are more complex than 5E, and those that are tend to be a mess! I guess there's PF2, which I think could be easily argued to be more complex than 5E - but not by much. ICON, if it ever gets finished, but I'm not sure that's actually more complex outside of combat.

 

[Bagpuss]

Or alternatively, the math nerds emigrated to video games so they can calculate the DPS increase between two pieces of two nigh-identical pieces of gear and realize that if they elaborately re-arranged their talents and spent hours re-learning how to play with the different talents, they'd get a 0.2% DPS increase, which is far too big to ignore! So they won too, they just have to win digitally now!

Oh the maths nerds haven't gone away if you look at all the optimization posts for everything from the relatively simple 5E D&D to even boardgames like Gloomhaven, they still have a home in tabletop gaming.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Oh the maths nerds haven't gone away if you look at all the optimization posts for everything from the relatively simple 5E D&D to even boardgames like Gloomhaven, they still have a home in tabletop gaming.

Gloomhaven/Frosthaven are a great example. Playing those makes me realize that like, as much as I might like tactics and optimization, there is clearly a line beyond which it becomes deeply tedious to me, and basic competent play in those two is definitely way over that line! But I know the sort of chess club math nerds I used to play D&D with would absolutely love the to-me-incredibly-tedious strategizing and analysis of options the Xhavens are all about.

 

[Bagpuss]

But I know the sort of chess club math nerds I used to play D&D with would absolutely love the to-me-incredibly-tedious strategizing and analysis of options the Xhavens are all about.

Who me?

Although saying that I just play it, where as a friend across the table will read up on which is the best card to pick at each level, which perks to pick, and different build strategies. So even within the same games there are levels you can take your nerdiness too.

 

[Morrus]

How is using the word ‘inclusive’ a sign that the post is anti-inclusive? I was not using the word as a negative thing. I was using the word as a word to mean what it means. Did the post-millennial gaming industry become more inclusive ? Or more to the point; Was there in that time a huge public awareness about the idea of inclusivity?
I argue yes to both.
I did not say I believe it to be a bad thing.
I have my whole life fought for inclusivity.
The comment was about how post-millennial generation of gamers outnumber oldschool gamers. This is a sign the nerds won, if winning involves going mainstream, attracting many more players. However, the idea that there is an OSR as opposed to how the majority of gamers, the younger gamers do it, mean there are two distinct groups - the community has split.
I am asking whover tagged my post to contemplate if discussing that a thing exists is the same as criticising it for existing? I believe I intended to discuss that it exists. I believe I did not insult it for existing. My point was the opposite to that. Thus, I believe the tag is incorrect.

This is the second time in two days you chose to ignore the rules you agreed to just a few days ago. You will, of course, not be posting in this thread again. If you continue to ignore the rules, you will be leaving. If you can't remember them, read them again. But you will follow them. I hope that's clear.