D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[The Firebird]

Sorry, my bad. I thought it was from Mr. Peterson. After all, it was Mr. Peterson who wrote the book.

But, watching people lose their poop over this has been incredibly instructive.

Along with "it's not happening", we've now got "its happening and it's good" and "the real problem is that people are noticing it". Fun.

 

[AlViking]

WOTC was pretty open about their strategy of holding some things back so that people would be more likely to buy a second book. For the PHB it was gnomes for the MM it was metallic dragons. I thought the strategy was crass but it wasn't done in order to belittle gnomes.

As far as Thaco the clown, I thought it was just an Easter egg for grognards, you have to be inventive to consider it an insult. Is the inclusion here and there of the cartoon characters also some sort of insult?

 

[TiQuinn]

The strong version of the claim here is not "there is a nefarious plot to attack a section of players". It's not a nefarious plot; it's just a general atmosphere wherein this section of players is considered backwards or guilty by association or not worth our time.

Treating people as important, treating them with empathy, means considering in advance if our jokes or the things we say might come across poorly. I don't think WotC is doing this.

WotC is not catering to a specific personality. They are taking the sum total of experiences they’ve had with the brand, i.e. past products, design decisions, sales, and feedback, and creating a game that will appeal to the broadest number of people. What they’ve determined is that the game that grognards want is not in line with the game that will meet their goals.

But luckily, this “general atmosphere” you describe is illusory, because a large number of games in the OSR community have been built with grognards in mind. It’s a talented community, well supported with products and adventures, and seems to be growing steadily. Hardly an atmosphere where people are considered backwards. No conspiracy, no nefarious plots to be had. It’s simply that one company is no longer aligned with a subset of gamers, but a ready replacement is there for that same subset.

But of course, this argument is not about having an entire community and multiple systems that support grognards - it’s about this one, single company not devoting their brand to appeasing them.

 

[Micah Sweet]

WotC is not catering to a specific personality. They are taking the sum total of experiences they’ve had with the brand, i.e. past products, design decisions, sales, and feedback, and creating a game that will appeal to the broadest number of people. What they’ve determined is that the game that grognards want is not in line with the game that will meet their goals.

But luckily, this “general atmosphere” you describe is illusory, because a large number of games in the OSR community have been built with grognards in mind. It’s a talented community, well supported with products and adventures, and seems to be growing steadily. Hardly an atmosphere where people are considered backwards. No conspiracy, no nefarious plots to be had. It’s simply that one company is no longer aligned with a subset of gamers, but a ready replacement is there for that same subset.

But of course, this argument is not about having an entire community and multiple systems that support grognards - it’s about this one, single company not devoting their brand to appeasing them.

I dearly wish it were possible to treat WotC the same way as any other game publisher. In so far as choosing what to spend my money on, that's exactly what I do. But the company's IP (and the massive influence they wield because of it) simply exerts too much pressure on the community and the industry to just ignore them if you interact with anyone beyond your own table (if that).

 

[BrokenTwin]

They were in the PHB 2 alongside other D&D classics that never get mentioned as being "removed" from 4e the way that gnomes sometimes are: e.g., Half-Orcs, Barbarians, Bards, Druids, Sorcerers, etc.

I was much more annoyed by the lack of druids and monks (the latter of which I had to wait until PHB3 to get) in the PHB1 than I was the lack of gnomes as a player option. But even then, it wasn't like I had been personally affronted or anything, at least I eventually got them. Unlike the Warlord come 5E, which disappeared entirely despite it being a breakout hit.

 

[TiQuinn]

I dearly wish it were possible to treat WotC the same way as any other game publisher. In so far as choosing what to spend my money on, that's exactly what I do. But the company's IP (and the massive influence they wield because of it) simply exerts too much pressure on the community and the industry to just ignore them if you interact with anyone beyond your own table (if that).

I’m sorry but that’s simply not true. Cairn, Knave, Shadowdark, OSE, Castles and Crusades, DCC, Mothership, XCrawl - how are any of those games pressured or influenced by WotC? They exist because WotC vacated the space - WotC can’t possibly provide a game for the entire market.

 

[Azzy]

Sorry, my bad. I thought it was from Mr. Peterson. After all, it was Mr. Peterson who wrote the book.

But, watching people lose their poop over this has been incredibly instructive.

Right? And then their apologia that came along with it was just as telling.

 

[Remathilis]

Along with "it's not happening", we've now got "its happening and it's good" and "the real problem is that people are noticing it". Fun.

No one at WotC has attacked anyone for their preference in edition, age, or play style.

Someone at WotC DID attack the people who were attacking WotC for calling Gary's writing intentionally sexist. Which it is.

This line of inquiry was started by asking for examples of WotC attacking older fans for being older fans. The three examples given have been 1.) an NPC clown named after a much derided mechanic 2.) a video poking fun fun at gnomes and 3.) a guy at WotC saying that they aren't concerned about people complaining they called out Gary's sexism. Is that it? Is a that ALL the proof you have that WotC harbors ill will towards their older fans?

Because D&D isn't the only fandom I engage in that has been trying to "fire" it's older fans. I see in Star Wars, Doctor Who, and Marvel comics. It's the same story. Veiled threats. Mocking statement. Daggers in every word. And it's always a projection of the fandom wanting to be the oppressed minority.

So I'll ask again: does anyone have any real proof WotC hates older players and longtime fans, or just more innuendo and conspiracy theories?

 

[Hussar]

Of course there's no "real proof". After all, the whole point of all of this is veiled innuendo and dog whistles. "Help, WotC hates me because I'm an older gamer" is utter and complete bollocks. Always has been.

And, of course, no one would ever say, "WotC hates me because I keep trying to drag the game back into the dark ages where we can entertain our preferences freely without all those "other" people coming into the hobby."

 

[The Firebird]

WotC is not catering to a specific personality. They are taking the sum total of experiences they’ve had with the brand, i.e. past products, design decisions, sales, and feedback, and creating a game that will appeal to the broadest number of people. What they’ve determined is that the game that grognards want is not in line with the game that will meet their goals.

I think it's true that market forces are play an important role here. I don't think it's true that they are the only deciding factor. That is, I see statements from people who make decisions at WotC that are not simply "this is where the market is", but imply a kind of moral valence or necessity to the actions they're taking. I don't think that is just marketing.

A hypothesis: if the designers said "we are making change X to meet market demand" rather than "we feel this change is morally correct" they would get less pushback.

But luckily, this “general atmosphere” you describe is illusory, because a large number of games in the OSR community have been built with grognards in mind. It’s a talented community, well supported with products and adventures, and seems to be growing steadily. Hardly an atmosphere where people are considered backwards. No conspiracy, no nefarious plots to be had. It’s simply that one company is no longer aligned with a subset of gamers, but a ready replacement is there for that same subset.

But of course, this argument is not about having an entire community and multiple systems that support grognards - it’s about this one, single company not devoting their brand to appeasing them.

Several thoughts here. First, I think the OSR is a complex community that has more extreme views in many directions than WotC. It's not a haven but it does have more of what people want.

Second, I think the importance of WotC support is hard to deny. It is not just first among equals--it exercises an outsize influence in the space.

No one at WotC has attacked anyone for their preference in edition, age, or play style.

Someone at WotC DID attack the people who were attacking WotC for calling Gary's writing intentionally sexist. Which it is.

This line of inquiry was started by asking for examples of WotC attacking older fans for being older fans. The three examples given have been 1.) an NPC clown named after a much derided mechanic 2.) a video poking fun fun at gnomes and 3.) a guy at WotC saying that they aren't concerned about people complaining they called out Gary's sexism. Is that it? Is a that ALL the proof you have that WotC harbors ill will towards their older fans?

Because D&D isn't the only fandom I engage in that has been trying to "fire" it's older fans. I see in Star Wars, Doctor Who, and Marvel comics. It's the same story. Veiled threats. Mocking statement. Daggers in every word. And it's always a projection of the fandom wanting to be the oppressed minority.

So I'll ask again: does anyone have any real proof WotC hates older players and longtime fans, or just more innuendo and conspiracy theories?

I think I've said what I have to say on this topic already. To reiterate--I think the claims you are making are a strawman. The claim is not that there is a nefarious plot. It's not that WotC hates older players. It's not that they are waving a big banner and saying "over 65s not welcome here".

If that is the claim you're arguing against, then I concede. You win.

If you want to discuss something with a bit more nuance, I've put snips of some of my relevant posts below. I don't feel that anyone has engaged deeply with them.

In general, things rarely have get to the point where someone has to say "you are not welcome here" for people to not feel welcome, right?

Treating people as important, treating them with empathy, means considering in advance if our jokes or the things we say might come across poorly. I don't think WotC is doing this.