Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Aldarc" data-source="post: 7574309" data-attributes="member: 5142">I apologize. I did not think that your post was hostile to other games, styles, or ideas. I do, however, get frustrated sometimes by how D&D sometimes monopolizes discussion on TTRPGs. I suspect that my outburst directed towards you likely came more from that frustration than anything else. About all I said regarding your Frost Giant scenario was that I disliked how you chose to adjudicate it. I was agnostic about whether it constituted MMI. Though at this point you were also trying to drag me into "picking a side" in that discussion between you and pemerton. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm    :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" /> Yes and no. Or at least, I'm of several minds about this. I study in a field drowning in incorrect definitions, inaccurate terms, pejoratives, and the like. We have more "correct" terms that we can use, but then sometimes people have no idea what we are talking about, so the subject becomes more esoteric. So many times we have to "bite the bullet" when discussing anything while tacitly acknowledging the inaccuracies and problematic elements of terms. In our RPG context, this often arises, for example, when talking about "race." (And there is an entire megathread where people debated that kettle of fish, which I will not rehash here.) "Race" is common parlance within gaming circles, but there are a lot of problematic issues related to using the term in the context of RPGs, much as there is outside of gaming. And while Mother-May-I has pejorative undertones, it is also an expression that is fairly easy to conceptualize in terms of the underlying issues being evoked: some form of play entailing players asking persmission from a single authority figure, who may then grant them permission. It asks you to apply your general knowledge of a fairly ubiquitous children's game to a more niche hobby game. So it unquestionably has some descriptive utility. How and where it applies, however, will be the points of contention. Also, I would note that it is not a pejorative that dehumanizes anyone, as it applies to a playstyle. (Playstyles aren't people.) If the term is inaccurate, then usually it becomes incumbent on critics of the term to find a more accurate term for the problem described. No one has really offered one so MMI remains the default term in play and with people's default assumptions of its meaning and scope. Unfortunately, when asked about MMI, I think that some dismiss the MMI phenomenon entirely by saying simply "that's just how the game is played." In other words, it's a complete denial that the problem described exists or could exist, which I also find unhelpful. Weirdly enough, perhaps because enough time has passed and 5e "won," I think that there has been a retrospective warming up to 4e online, where even some of its vocal critics have shown more willingness to play it, to praise its strengths, or to reevaluate their initial stance on 4e as a legitimate part of D&D's legacy. And that has even included people pointing to things that 4e did better than 5e. Sure, but the two of you demonstrate a mutual ability to engage each other respectfully without presuming malice.</blockquote>

Verification