Dungeon Crawl Classics What is cool to you from a player perspective?

[Argyle King]

Something cool that I discovered today:

The softcover version of the core rulebook that I have has a different adventure in it than the hardcover version.

The softcover that I have contains "The Portal Under the Stars" (the same funnel that is in my hardcover). However, the other adventure in my softcover is "Keep Off The Borderland," a 2nd level adventure.

Looking into it further, the softcover is the 10th printing, but the hardcover that I have is the 12th printing.

I had previously assumed that both copies I owned were the same (aside from one being a softcover and one being a hardcover).

 

[Voadam]

Have you and @Voadam considered simply not engaging with fiction you don't like?

You seem to be under the misapprehension that because I do not like an element of a piece of fiction and I am critical of that element that I don't like the fiction as a whole.

I really like Firefly, Deadlands, Wheel of Time, etc. though I am not a fan of the elements of them that romanticizes the Confederacy. Deadlands for instance with the Weird West, huckster card magic, demon lords feeding off of fear, steampunk weird mad scientists, are all cool stuff to me. I am glad that I have engaged with the fiction despite the elements that I do not like.

I am hoping DCC turns out to have enough good points for me to be something I enjoy even though I know there are elements of the funnel and easy death game ethos I do not care for.

Fiction I overall do not expect to like, say the torture focus of the Saw and Hostel movie franchises or a lot of full on horror movies, I do avoid.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

Have you and @Voadam considered simply not engaging with fiction you don't like?

I fail to see how not being critical of flawed (and ultimately failed) ideas like the Confederate leads anywhere good.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I fail to see how not being critical of flawed (and ultimately failed) ideas like the Confederate leads anywhere good.

So one is required to call out any piece of storytelling that might be suggestive of a moral failing, or something bad happens? I think people are allowed to enjoy fiction without feeling obligated by internet strangers to pick apart the story elements.

 

[Mannahnin]

So one is required to call out any piece of storytelling that might be suggestive of a moral failing, or something bad happens? I think people are allowed to enjoy fiction without feeling obligated by internet strangers to pick apart the story elements.

I don't think anyone suggested that, no. I think was more making a point about how being deliberately uncritical about bad things and evil ideas can have negative consequences.

Besides that, one can often make useful inferences from what things a person chooses to romanticize and what historical figures or causes they portray as heroic or worthy of emulation.

 

[Micah Sweet]

I don't think anyone suggested that, no. I think was more making a point about how being deliberately uncritical about bad things and evil ideas can have negative consequences.

Besides that, one can often make useful inferences from what things a person chooses to romanticize and what historical figures or causes they portray as heroic or worthy of emulation.

What does "deliberately uncritical" even mean? Who gets to determine that someone's else's appreciation for a work of fiction is too "deliberately uncritical" to pass moral judgement?

And your second comment about "useful inferences" is a not-so-subtle way of saying this is an easy way to pass moral judgement on a content creator and those who like their work.

 

[The Firebird]

What does "deliberately uncritical" even mean? Who gets to determine that someone's else's appreciation for a work of fiction is too "deliberately uncritical" to pass moral judgement?

And your second comment about "useful inferences" is a not-so-subtle way of saying this is an easy way to pass moral judgement on a content creator and those who like their work.

I suppose, it's complicated and it's complicated. People are going to judge for all sorts of reasons, some valid, some not. I know people judge me poorly for some of my opinions. At least online, they don't really know me, so that's ok with me. And likewise, I don't know them or what events in their life make them respond a particular way. If they did have a bad experience and don't want to engage with me because of it, it's all good.

 

[Ralif Redhammer]

So one is required to call out any piece of storytelling that might be suggestive of a moral failing, or something bad happens? I think people are allowed to enjoy fiction without feeling obligated by internet strangers to pick apart the story elements.

I mean, if someone talks about The Turner Diaries as a simple dystopian story, yeah, that's a problem. And yes, something bad does happen. For example, I love the stories of Robert E. Howard, but there's a whole lot of racism and sexism in them, full stop. Not discussing those issues marginalizes people, creating a hostile environment for them in the fandom. You can enjoy stuff while still being critical of it.

 

[Mannahnin]

What does "deliberately uncritical" even mean? Who gets to determine that someone's else's appreciation for a work of fiction is too "deliberately uncritical" to pass moral judgement?

And your second comment about "useful inferences" is a not-so-subtle way of saying this is an easy way to pass moral judgement on a content creator and those who like their work.

If someone writes fan fiction making the pro-slavery and the anti-slavery sides of a conflict morally equivalent, or, worse, the pro-slavery side the good guys, and we choose to completely suspend judgement and shut our eyes to the implications there, that's a moral abdication. As Neil Peart wrote, "if you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice." Desmond Tutu had some words as well, about people who are neutral regarding injustice.

Your choice to take personal insult to a general point is your own. Your choice to assume the most hostile possible interpretation is your own. It's one I've seen you make a lot. Which is a bummer.

It's a big world, there are a lot of different types and degrees of depictions of unsavory content. I'm not saying that it's always an easy black and white line or that liking fiction with morally-dubious stuff in it is inherent immoral, by any means. But ignoring history and context rarely gets us anyplace good. If someone makes their Space Nazis or their Space Confederacy heroic, barring other data to the contrary, you can reasonably infer some things about their worldview. If they make their Space Federation one where slavery is explicitly protected by interplanetary law, likewise.