D&D General D&D: Literally Don't Understand This

Status
Not open for further replies.
Maybe they didn't know that. I certainly did not.

More than a one second glance shows that the comic was clearly edited from whatever it originally was.

That motives are immediately assigned, with zero engagement of points being made is proof of the intentional bad-faith interpretations and insinuations towards people that disagree with them.


Sometimes it's not an epic battle between good and evil. Often, people get painted as horrible people on these boards because they don't hold the same opinion.

And we are literally seeing it played out in this very thread.

All because I and others dared to call WotC's latest marketing post on X utterly ridiculous.
 

log in or register to remove this ad




Maybe they didn't know that. I certainly did not.
Then it is a great opportunnity to spread awareness and warn them from using works by a literal nazi.
Not really.

I like 5E's combat, prefer Orcs to be as capable of ethical/moral choices as anyone else, and also view certain levels of technology or fashion choices as anachronistic to/wrong for certain settings.
Then I do not think you qualify as someone who hates the idea of modernizing the game - to hate an idea of something means to hate all its aspects and these are all listed as such.
 

Fair enough, but I think it's also fair to expect that making those assumptions every time you see what you consider to be a red flag means you are painting folks with a pretty broad brush. If your situation means you can accept that, well as I said fair enough.
I've been talking about patterns for reason. One red flag is cause for notice, but not necessarily alarm. Lord knows I've said enough ignorant nonsense in my time. Enough of them happen though and the brush, unfortunately, fits just fine.

Hypothetically, if one cared enough to want to be considered an ally, for instance, they would take greater care in showing their support for marginalized communities and learning and avoiding the types of red flags that might signal that they are a less safe person to be around than they might be wanting to be perceived as. Ideally, such an ally would, at the very least, find such a miscommunication understandable and seek to correct the misconception rather than getting defensive and digging in.

Nobody's perfect, least all me, but if somebody is repeatedly demonstrating that they don't have my interests at heart, I'm going listen to their actions far more than their words of protest.
 


They aren't as separate as you may seem - all of them are derided by people who hate the idea of "modernizing" the game.

Whilst some of such strawgrognards might genuinely exist, I'm not sure such generalisations are helpful to conversation. Perhaps there are people who just reactively dislike any change, but I find that more often that not people's preferences are more nuanced than that.
 
Last edited:


That motives are immediately assigned, with zero engagement of points being made is proof of the intentional bad-faith interpretations and insinuations towards people that disagree with them.
If someone is using a meme template made by a well-known literal nazi, and we point it out, then getting defensive about it being pointed out, or getting defensive baout it on someone else's behalf, it makes them look disengenius. Simple "I didn't know, won't use it again" would suffice.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top