Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8936322" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Okay. That burden involves more than I have seen others be willing to do. Because, instead of pursuing neutral language, once someone has claimed the right to redefine the terms of the discussion, they almost invariably do so in a way that wins the argument before it even begins.Hence why the debates about the terms get so heated. You give someone an inch, they are nearly guaranteed to take a lightyear. You don't give someone an inch, you're a horrible awful person persecuting their beliefs or preferences. That's not reasonable or appropriate debate tactics; it is weaponizing grievance about other people trying to win the debate before it begins in order to win the debate before it begins.There has to be a way to meet in the middle. There has to be responsible use of terminology on both sides. There has to be give AND take. Otherwise we end up with...[SPOILER]<img src="https://64.media.tumblr.com/c9f213d1407071ff8f81cee2fbc009c4/tumblr_nroanfy2v71qjobhbo1_1280.pnj" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " data-size="" style="" />[/SPOILER]Part of the issue with "MMI" is that, to an extent, some amount of negativity in the label is relevant: the person in question is usually commenting on a difficulty that speaks to them, that they have run into logjams with previously. It would seem, to me, that the same sort of thing applies to whatever amount of "guessing game" is implied by "map and key." I, personally, think that "map and key" is not merely neutral (I had heard the term for years without anyone saying anything that sounded negative about it) but one of the more positive ways to view things. Specifically, the whole idea with "trad" D&D was that the map and its key represent the concrete, one might say "earned," player knowledge about the world. The parts that are not and cannot be "guessing," because they are established. That knowledge might be revealed to be misunderstood or deceptive. For example, adding more symbols from the key to the map due to the discovery of a previously-missed secret door. But in some sense the map is the stuff the players know and can reason from, even if it is incomplete. Hence, hearing that this term is inadequate makes me scratch my head; I am confused as to why it's a problem, because I've seen it in so many places, used by fans and critics alike, without issue. I want to know why it's a problem.But, on that subject...I agree that there is some kind of conceptual connection, yes. I don't agree that it is "about" a "guessing game." For contrast, "FFV" is very clearly about portraying lethality as pointless and even inappropriate (given how most folks view the Vietnam War today), where "meatgrinder" is not, because that phrase is used in all sorts of places (not just TTRPGs) to refer to destructive processes and to war specifically, and strongly resembles the self-chosen (and not to my taste) label of "Combat as War."I think people in general don't like any game's failure states being pointed out, when they are fans of that game. It just happens that we're talking about "trad" D&D here. (I say "trad" D&D because there are other approaches to D&D proper besides whatever we're calling this one.)I don't think it is nonsensical, because I have seen lots, and lots, and LOTS, of efforts to (as I said above) "win the debate before it starts" by setting the terms in such a way that the failure states have been defined out. Consider, for instance, how readily people whip out the "well don't you TRUST YOUR DM?" or "Jeez, if you can't trust your DM, you shouldn't be playing!" arguments, which are straight-up an effort to pretend the failure states were never up for discussion to begin with--winning the argument before it even begins.I said I don't know because I was hoping to hear more from you. You then re-stated what you had said before, which I had tried to dig into and analyze, but without actually responding to any of the things I had said. Hence, un-argued.Abductive logic already isn't convincing, and I don't believe this is even the best explanation. It is simply an explanation that has been offered. I don't know why people enjoy ultra-high-lethality TTRPGs; that doesn't mean it is best for me to go with the first explanation someone offers simply because I don't have one myself.It wasn't my intent to. I tend to over-analyze; I tend to dig in any time I have something I don't understand and ask questions to try to determine exactly what the issue is and how it can be addressed. Since this is the first time I had ever heard such issues about this term, I admit I have some bias against your position; when I have heard even stridently pro-("trad"-)D&D folks use this phrase without a second thought as to the term being pejorative or connoting something they dislike, I start primed to wonder why it is a problem here, for you, when it has not in my experience been a problem for anyone else.As for why it matters? You brought it up. I was addressing what I thought was an intentional discussion point, as others had also done. I really don't care that much about it, despite my logorrheic torrent above. I almost never use the term myself because I'm not really in the business of analyzing that particular aspect of TTRPG play, whether in D&D or anywhere else.* I'm perfectly fine just not using it, I just thought that this was a chance to dig into a terminology discussion and make it productive. Hence why I tried to get really specific, and technique-focused, with my discussion of what this sort of play entails and why people find it valuable and engaging (but also why it can easily run into trouble, which I genuinely do think fans of early/"trad" D&D have a tendency to overlook.)It's a form of familiarity blindness. You see something very similar from people immersed in video games when talking to people who have genuinely zero experience with them. Concepts as foundational and nearly-universal as "there's a button you press to jump" or "you can control your motion in midair" or "you don't keep moving if you release the directional controls" are emphatically not trivial, but most gamers think they are. Or if we delve into MMO specifics, the idea of something like "auto attack" is a no-brainer for any MMO fan, but can be a totally unexpected thing for someone who's never touched an MMO in their life. These are points of failure, ones that can be easily overlooked by people who are deeply immersed in a particular method or approach or genre...which are the people we generally expect to design such games.I see "map and key"--which, again, I'm not attached to so I will gladly stop using it after this post--as being similar to "coming of age novel" or "romcom." It is both a description of what is involved in such a work, and a reminder of what responsibilities the creator has when making such a work. A "coming of age" novel is often at increased risk of "Mary Sue" type characters (regardless of gender), because adolescent wish-fulfillment fantasy is a common theme addressed by the process of coming of age, especially since most fiction is focused on protagonists who are special in some way and thus more interesting to read about. Or consider "slice of life" works, which are often maligned for being dull or boring or not going anywhere; one could argue that "slice of life" is pejorative because it puts front and center the lack of coherent plot or any conclusive ending, because a slice out of a real person's life doesn't have a "plot" or an "ending" (other than "person dies" by whatever thing, which will usually be unsatisfying!) Yet that is the accepted, sometimes even celebrated label. Should we stop using it if fans of (say) The Fault in Our Stars dislike the connotation that "slice of life" means lacking in plot, conflict, or satisfying endings?*For the record, I find that "map and key," used slightly more loosely, applies to a ton of other games that emphatically aren't D&D, like most White Wolf adventures I've played. There are right and wrong answers, there's secret knowledge the Storyteller knows and the players are obliged to extract from them, and ultimately the goal is to make the best judgments you can, hopefully with all the pre-existing information actually available to you.</blockquote>

Verification