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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Fanaelialae" data-source="post: 7922136" data-attributes="member: 53980">I don't think such a broad definition of gatekeeping is a useful one. Risk is a more complicated boardgame than Sorry. Are the makers of Risk guilty of gatekeeping, or is their game just different from Sorry?IMO, gatekeeping is when people try to keep other people out of a particular group. The key word there is TRY. The gatekeeper needs to be attempting to make gatekeeping happen, whether through action or inaction.I don't think that's the general case. Obviously, we can point to specific cases that ARE gatekeeping. For example, this hobby has traditionally been pretty bad with gatekeeping women. However, I don't think the same is true of GMs in general.Not having the advice that you (Ovinomancer) would give new GMs in the DMG is not gatekeeping IMO. Maybe you're right, and your advice is the perfect solution to onboarding new GMs. Nonetheless, disagreeing with that advice isn't gatekeeping, unless the intent driving it is to prevent new GMs. A different GM might believe that his advice is much more practical and useful to new GMs. Even if he is wrong and you are right, it still isn't gatekeeping, because he too wants to make the new GMs job easier. Confounding the situation further is that not all advice works for everyone. Some people will have an easier time with one approach than another. We could maybe include all approaches and all the advice in the DMG, but odds are it would be so large that no one would be able to lift it.As for ENWorld, that was an example of GMs not hording their knowledge. I wouldn't recommend it to a new GM either.</blockquote>

Verification