Oh no Conan just DIDNT!

[Sejs]

My old gaming group, I could always get an NPC killed within fifteen minutes by revealing his name to be "Phil". Of course, that had nothing to do with "geekiness"...

My group has something similar to that, though it's more odd happenstance than anything else. There's one particular miniature we've got in the box-o-minis we use for generic mooks, badguys, etc. He's a scratched up old english Beefeater, which has thusly come to be named... Beefy.

Anyone, anyone represented on the mat by Beefy is just outright doomed. It's not intentional on any part, but it always seems to happen that anytime he's in play Beefy always dies a horrible, horrible death.

We have no idea why this is - fate just friggin' hates Beefy.

 

[Hairfoot]

oh and who is Conan Obrien?

A fictional barbarian created by Robert E. Howard. After facing off against Thulsa Doom, he moved into television, hosting late-evening variety shows.

 

[ssampier]

I think the word is "denigrated." And it's actually fun. It's good to be able to laugh at oneself.

I thought I had it wrong. I looked it up, "degenerated" was close enough, so I left it.

 

[davidschwartznz]

Maybe philosophically, but from a marketing perspective, it's terrible, and part of the reason as a hobby and an industry its in such dire straights.

D&D is the posterboy for the adage, "There is no such thing as bad publicity."

 

[pogre]

I'm just glad people get it. You do not have to explain to people what the game is for the most part. They may still have some misconceptions, but for the most part D&D is still a pretty geeky pursuit.

 

[ssampier]

I think the question remains: Who's the bigger nerd? Conan or Steven Colbert?

A fictional barbarian created by Robert E. Howard. After facing off against Thulsa Doom, he moved into television, hosting late-evening variety shows.

Huh, all this time, I thought he was a librarian in Mesa, Arizona.

Conan... the Librarian...

 

[prosfilaes]

I think the word is "denigrated." And it's actually fun. It's good to be able to laugh at oneself.

There's a difference between laughing at something funny, and laughing at simple abuse. If you find it funny for you or a generic person your group to be abused, it's probably a sign of self-loathing. You'll note these jokes are never made about a group the audience might identify with, or a group percieved to be powerful. Why don't they deserve a laugh?

 

[ColonelHardisson]

There's a difference between laughing at something funny, and laughing at simple abuse. If you find it funny for you or a generic person your group to be abused, it's probably a sign of self-loathing. You'll note these jokes are never made about a group the audience might identify with, or a group percieved to be powerful. Why don't they deserve a laugh?

Really? They don't make jokes about groups who are in power or make such groups look ridiculous? So what about the Daily Show and every. single. monologue. on the various late shows? I think being unable to laugh at oneself and having a persecution complex ("they're only laughing at us!") reveals quite a bit of insecurity.

 

[ThirdWizard]

Conan is awesome. Don't mess with teh Conan. He'll vorpal you to death.

 

[prosfilaes]

Really? They don't make jokes about groups who are in power or make such groups look ridiculous?

They make fundamentally different jokes. Jokes that imply something more about the targetted group then that they are worthy of being beaten upon. We don't make jokes about assasains shooting presidents, or tourists getting mugged, but it's okay to make jokes about geeks getting beat up?