D&D 5E D&D as prophetic social development

[Tony Vargas]

Took longer than I thought it would.

IDK, I empathize with the OP's sentiment, because that was how I felt about the potential of RPGs when I was first getting really enthused about the hobby. It's not groundless, either, RP is used in therapy to try to understand where other people are coming from, for instance, and we've heard testimonials on here from people who did engage in some life-changing self-exploration/discovery through the context of RPing.

But, yes, Rem, it's true: that we're a tiny niche hobby and that, on the current big political issues of the day we're lagging the mainstream rather than driving it. The potential, if it's real, simply hasn't been realized, even after 40 years. We can't even be inclusive within our own esoteric little sphere (people get told "go play that other ed/game" all the time).

 

[hawkeyefan]

I know that playing D&D has certainly made me much more open minded than I was when I was a kid....so that's a positive in my book. I'm sure many others were similarly affected. Sure, plenty haven't been inspired in such a way, but that doesn't mean that D&D can't be or hasn't been a contributing factor to society.

I suppose my anecdote can be dismissed as a drop in the ocean, but I'll go ahead and quote from "Cloud Atlas" and ask "what is an ocean but a multitude of drops?"

Maybe try and let a positive sentiment breath a bit, eh folks?

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[DM Howard]

I suppose I can see where the OP is coming from, but I think they are taking a bit of a leap to come to that conclusion. I DO think that D&D has often become an outlet for those that feel persecuted in society, but I would hope that assuming you are playing a male because one is biologically male will never be seen as a micro-aggression and simply seen as an honest assumption.

 

[BoldItalic]

I've read the post several times to try to figure out what the author is trying to tell us. I've read between the lines, on the lines, above and below the lines and I'm still not sure. But I think there's a fallacy in there somewhere.

Yes, when you make a D&D character, you can choose between lots of options. But that doesn't mean you can escape real-life stereotyping by temporarily adopting a D&D-like persona (which I think is what the OP is enthusing about) because each of the options is itself a stereotype. If you role-play an elf, for example, your character is immediately loaded with all sorts of preconceived notions of what an elf 'is'. Your character will almost inevitably represent a different stereotype from your own in RL, but you haven't escaped stereotyping, you've just exchanged one stereotype for a different one.

Or maybe that wasn't the point the OP was trying to make at all.

The subtext seems to be: I wish RL was more like a game of D&D, so if I post something saying that RL is going to become more like a game of D&D maybe the wish fairy will make it come true. Well, sorry chum, but it doesn't work like that.

 

[Tony Vargas]

The subtext seems to be: I wish RL was more like a game of D&D, so if I post something saying that RL is going to become more like a game of D&D maybe the wish fairy will make it come true.

Also: "be careful what you wish for."

 

[Uchawi]

I am not convinced D&D will change society, but at least it will let you escape for a while.

 

[Remathilis]

Yes, when you make a D&D character, you can choose between lots of options. But that doesn't mean you can escape real-life stereotyping by temporarily adopting a D&D-like persona (which I think is what the OP is enthusing about) because each of the options is itself a stereotype. If you role-play an elf, for example, your character is immediately loaded with all sorts of preconceived notions of what an elf 'is'. Your character will almost inevitably represent a different stereotype from your own in RL, but you haven't escaped stereotyping, you've just exchanged one stereotype for a different one.

That is a very good point. I mean, think about what a "dwarf" is; short, study, hearty con, loves alcohol and axes, miners and craftsmen, surly and dour, makes good warriors. All of those are stereotypes. The rules enshrine them (free craft proficiency, stonecunning, dwarven weapon proficiency) and strongly as the fluff. The game is even more restrictive when you announce your class and all the baggage that goes along with it (weapon/armor proficiency, skill selection, class features). The game runs on easily recognizable archetypes, which are in essence a from of stereotyping. (And is a huge bone of contention for some, witness how many people debate the necessity of a barbarian or monk class). And 5e is far better than older D&D, with its only-LG paladins, race/class restrictions, and gender-based strength caps!

 

[Libramarian]

Interesting.
It's not every day someone brings up the concept of 'economic rent' in this context. I'm curious how you think it applies to D&D. Is it just WotC collecting more than the game's worth from fans, or is it more metaphorical? Maybe 'system mastery,' corresponds to 'entrepreneurship' as a smoke-screen for D&D-game-imbalance-economy 'rents?'

Rent-seeking describes any situation where somebody is transferring wealth to themselves by manipulating the rules rather than creating new wealth. This is bad not only because it's unfair but because it discourages others from creating new things in that space.

The purpose of trademark law is to prevent you from misleading the public as to the source of your product. It therefore clearly would be a violation of trademark law to put "Wizards of the Coast" on your D&D adventure, because people reasonably would take that to mean WotC made your product. But it's a textbook example of Fair Use to say that your adventure is "compatible with the Dungeons & Dragons rules". Nobody is going to take that to mean WotC produced your adventure. You're just saying you've designed your adventure to be mathematically compatible with the D&D game rules. That is not a trademark violation, nor a violation of copyright, because game rules as mathematical ideas are not copyrightable.

The purpose of the OGL (and the even more preposterous DM's Guild license) is and has always been not to give people rights but to get them to sign away rights they already have. We would all have more, and more interesting, D&D stuff to play with if everyone felt free to exercise their legal right to refer to the Dungeons & Dragons rules by name.

This is an example of how powerful entities like to pay lip service to social justice issues (i.e. the couple of sentences of fluff in the PHB about gender and sexual orientation) while still being complete A-holes behind the scenes in areas that actually matter to their bottom line.

 

[Morrus]

The purpose of trademark law is to prevent you from misleading the public as to the source of your product. It therefore clearly would be a violation of trademark law to put "Wizards of the Coast" on your D&D adventure, because people reasonably would take that to mean WotC made your product. But it's a textbook example of Fair Use to say that your adventure is "compatible with the Dungeons & Dragons rules". Nobody is going to take that to mean WotC produced your adventure. You're just saying you've designed your adventure to be mathematically compatible with the D&D game rules. That is not a trademark violation, nor a violation of copyright, because game rules as mathematical ideas are not copyrightable.

Also see third party phone chargers and cases, and printer ink, both of which clearly say on the packaging which devices they are compatible with.