D&D General The New York Times on D&D

[Lakesidefantasy]

Gosh, I would have preferred bloodline or even creature type to species.

 

[Remathilis]

Ancestry, Heritage and Lineage are pretty much synonyms of each other and speak more to family names and relations than it does species. I think if Species sounds too scientific, which I understand since words also help convey a setting and genre despite what they may strictly mean, I prefer Kind as as an alternative.

Ancestry: family or ancestral descent; lineage.
Heritage: something that comes or belongs to one by reason of birth; an inherited lot or portion
Lineage: the line of descendants of a particular ancestor; family.
Species: a class of individuals having some common characteristics or qualities; distinct sort or kind.

Ancestry/Lineage are effectively synonyms and imply a familial origin, which is fine if all your elves are one big family. Heritage is fine if elfdom is something you inherit rather than are. Species (distinct members sharing common characteristics) is the better word unless being an elf means being blood related to all other elves or is something akin to culture or status.

 

[Remathilis]

Personally, it might be an interesting worldbuilding idea that all elves are blood-related to one another and that elf traits are the result of inbreeding for generations, but I don't think that would get past the radar.

 

[TiQuinn]

Ancestry/Lineage are effectively synonyms and imply a familial origin, which is fine if all your elves are one big family. Heritage is fine if elfdom is something you inherit rather than are. Species (distinct members sharing common characteristics) is the better word unless being an elf means being blood related to all other elves or is something akin to culture or status.

I think if the game or setting’s fantasy implied the shared origin, ancestry/heritage is good, but that’s never been a thing for D&D in general.

However, “kind” frequently shows up as part of the definition for species, and I prefer that to kindred, which I also see suggested often.

Regardless, this is just me being in “if I were choosing” mode. I’m ultimately fine with species as well. I just understand the “it sounds scientific rather than fantastical” feeling.

 

[Lakesidefantasy]

Species is a special or specific kind whereas genera is a general or generic kind.

Kind is too generic for me. It trips off the tongue and seems to be begging to be paired up with other words like "of" and "creature" or "species" or "race".

 

[occam]

It really depends how much you care about gauging public opinion versus raising your blood pressure. I always like to read the comments so I know what the general public (at least the general public that reads that website or paper), rather than the people writing the paper/website, think. But it can be quite aggravating at times.

You should be very careful about the extent to which you're assuming that online commentary reflects the views of the "general public". There is a HUGE self-selection bias operating there. (That goes for this place, too, as we've discussed many times; don't assume that ENWorld discussion reflects broad gamer sentiment.)

 

[SteveC]

For this issue we need to remember that the mainstream society knows virtually nothing about D&D and gaming in general. That's even as popular as D&D is right now.

They haven't heard of any of the discussions we've been having, and they are most likely only thinking about this because of what Elon said. They have no idea how much the gaming industry has changed since 5E launched, or even since the game was last popular in the 80s.

So they are going to come to the situation with old information, and talking to the older people who are still around. And they're getting a crash course in changes to the game in the last 5+ years. It's just that simple.

I work in tech. Every once and a while I see an article about something I work with every day. It's truly exceptional in a non tech source for the author to get virtually anything correct. I remember my father, as an economist, having to explain even the most basic ideas to reporters, only for them to get things wrong. That was back in the 80s and 90s.

So this discussion may be old news to us, and the people they're talking with may be the old guard but ... that's how the press just is. It isn't some slight against D&D in particular.

 

[TiQuinn]

For this issue we need to remember that the mainstream society knows virtually nothing about D&D and gaming in general. That's even as popular as D&D is right now.

They haven't heard of any of the discussions we've been having, and they are most likely only thinking about this because of what Elon said. They have no idea how much the gaming industry has changed since 5E launched, or even since the game was last popular in the 80s.

So they are going to come to the situation with old information, and talking to the older people who are still around. And they're getting a crash course in changes to the game in the last 5+ years. It's just that simple.

I work in tech. Every once and a while I see an article about something I work with every day. It's truly exceptional in a non tech source for the author to get virtually anything correct. I remember my father, as an economist, having to explain even the most basic ideas to reporters, only for them to get things wrong. That was back in the 80s and 90s.

So this discussion may be old news to us, and the people they're talking with may be the old guard but ... that's how the press just is. It isn't some slight against D&D in particular.

Which is why quoting Rob Kuntz, even though he was one of the older designers for the game and would seem like a relevant point of comparison to an outsider, strikes very weirdly because he is now as far on the outer fringes of the game as could be. But he was the one who had a standout contrary opinion, and that’s what they needed.

 

[SteveC]

Which is why quoting Rob Kuntz, even though he was one of the older designers for the game and would seem like a relevant point of comparison to an outsider, strikes very weirdly because he is now as far on the outer fringes of the game as could be. But he was the one who had a standout contrary opinion, and that’s what they needed.

It's not unusual if you're coming at it from the Elon perspective or are just lazy. If you don't know much about the hobby, you find someone who's been very vocal, and also checks out as part of the early game design (and is still alive!) You have a perfect source to say what it "used to be." And Kuntz is politically active so it fits with the Elon part of the story.

 

[Clint_L]

Which is why quoting Rob Kuntz, even though he was one of the older designers for the game and would seem like a relevant point of comparison to an outsider, strikes very weirdly because he is now as far on the outer fringes of the game as could be. But he was the one who had a standout contrary opinion, and that’s what they needed.

He represents the point of view that Musk leaped onto, and that's really what is behind the story. It's for normies, not us.