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

[Xenolith234]

I don’t think the intended effect from the original statement was that the game should only be for older, educated people in that you have to be of a certain education level, but that the game should be marketed towards college-level age people - 18-21, instead of children. When the D&D storybook I read to my child has beholder art in it that looks suspiciously like one of the images in the new PHB…I can see who they’re trying to market towards.

 

[payn]

During the BG3 early access period there was a lot of gatekeeping language used on the forums with regard to how Larian was handling alignment.

I wish I knew anything about it, but I dont.

 

[mamba]

I don’t think the intended effect from the original statement was that the game should only be for older, educated people in that you have to be of a certain education level, but that the game should be marketed towards college-level age people - 18-21, instead of children.

why should it be marketed at students in the first place, that was never the primary audience and there is no good reason to (and some good ones against) as far as I am concerned

 

[Imaro]

ADEU, tactical combat, lack of open multiclassing, were all barriers to 4E for me. Was that gatekeeping? I dont think so, but it had the effect!

But 4e had essentials... so it did move and evolve to address your issues.

 

[Remathilis]

To me gatekeeping implies intentionality. And sometimes people do raise barriers for no other reason than to exclude. E.g. you aren't a true star wars fan if you don't know what planet Nien Nunb is from. It's good to have a term for this.

Sullust! Do I win?

 

[payn]

But 4e had essentials... so it did move and evolve to address your issues.

Oh, so there is forgiveness period of gatekeeping as long as its addressed at some point? Essentials didn't change the barriers in any significant way. And thats ok, because I dont consider 4E design gatekeeping (although the marketing certainly felt that way where I was stupid for liking past editions). In this instance, it was the brand managers intention that gatekept, not the mechanics themselves becasue of their effect.

 

[Micah Sweet]

It's not about liking things. It's about trying to impose them on others, even if you think it's for the greater good.

Most evil things are done "for the greater good". Very few people get out of bed and decide "I'm going to be evil today".

Who exactly is interested in imposing their preferences on others here, as opposed to wanting as many possible preferences supported and appreciated as can be accomplished? Why can't we have different games, if it's so hard to accommodate multiple styles in the same one? Is it even as hard as people say it is?

 

[Micah Sweet]

Again... IMO... your reason doesn't matter if the effect is to setup barriers for gatekeeping.

Let's try a more extreme example... would you be ok with someone who preferred racially segregated pools because... it made their pool less crowded? Their intent isn't to setup a discriminatory system that causes division and gatekeeps... but their preference still enables and promotes that effect.

I think that example is out of line, and far beyond the scope of this forum.

 

[Micah Sweet]

why should it be marketed at students in the first place, that was never the primary audience and there is no good reason to (and some good ones against) as far as I am concerned

I believe the statement was made above that students absolutely were the original audience. Are you saying that's incorrect? Evidence?

 

[Umbran]

Apparently, though, I'm being too narrow.

No, you apparently missed the previous point, and have then gone on into snarkiness, as if that makes anything better.