• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

D&D General D&D "influencers" need to actively acknowledge other games.

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
I don't remember anyone saying one page RPGs are terrible. I said they're fun in small doses but aren't anything I could see playing long term.

Plenty of people tell us that we'd be so much better off if we played a wider variety of games and that anything that is as popular as D&D it must therefore be mediocre.
I've certainly seen the first sentiment you mentioned expressed. The second seems like a personal interpretation of others' words.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

jasper

Rotten DM
I really like GinniD. She is a skilled GM, enthusiastic about the hobby, and makes everyone viewing her channel feel welcome. Her most recent video, though, got me thinking about something that has been scratching violently at the back of my mind:

There are other games than D&D, and these influencers surely know that but they generally avoid pointing to those games.

In this video as an example, she is talking about player investment in world building. That problem has been solved by Fate. I feel like a YT GM like GinniD should point that out and point her followers to Fate in order to solve this particular problem.

What do you think? Should D&D influencers acknowledge other games that solve problems they are talking about on their channels? If not, why not?
A lot of the ones i view do talk about other games. One influencer I follow will never talk about D&D. And some topics do carry over to other systems.
But no influencer should be required to mention other game systems.
 



SableWyvern

Adventurer
The problem I have with people preaching "play more games" is the lack of honesty about it.
  • People have a responsibility to the hobby or the industry to ensure it remains strong and that a wide range of games are produced and creators are supported. No, I have a responsibility to the other people at my table, maybe, but I do not have a responsibility to the community, or the industry, or any given creator. I don't want the industry to collapse, but if it did so tomorrow, my gaming would go on uninterrupted.
  • People only stick with one game because they don't realise what they are missing. They would have more fun if they weren't ignorant of what is out there, or afraid to step out of their comfort zone. In some specific cases, this is probably true, but as a general truism it is completely baseless. Believing it does let people feel superior to the ignorant masses, though.
  • If more people were willing to try a wider range of games, then creators would be more likely to create more games that I like, and it would be easier for me to find players to play the games I like. This is a valid reason, and seems to be at the root of what this is really all about, but admitting what are ultimately selfish motivations isn't going to convince random strangers (who are most likely completely happy with what they're doing) to start playing and supporting more games.
 




MerricB

Eternal Optimist
Supporter
The world would be a much better place if (say) Roger Federer didn't mainly concentrate on Tennis.

"But Roger, you should also be participating in motor racing and football and baseball! And cricket! And writing books! And playing video games! And... playing Call of Cthulhu!"
 

Reynard

Legend
Supporter
The world would be a much better place if (say) Roger Federer didn't mainly concentrate on Tennis.

"But Roger, you should also be participating in motor racing and football and baseball! And cricket! And writing books! And playing video games! And... playing Call of Cthulhu!"
I mean, there's only so many Roger Federers. Most everyone else is [that person you have never heard of] and for good reason.
 

Remove ads

Top