D&D General Rant: Sometimes I Hate the D&D Community

[Maxperson]

If ignorance is bliss, why aren't more people happy?

Because we're all too invested in pointing out the ignorance of others. To try and make them happy of course.

 

[Stalker0]

If something changes in a new printing of the thing I like or a setting is updated in a way I don't like, I can ignore it and use the older version. If they publish more Forgotten Realms adventures, I can just not buy them. If the reprints of 5e's Core Rulebooks change a rule/option I like, I'll use the older version. If they publish a Manual of the Planes and retcon Githyanki and Githzerai into two more elf subraces, I can ignore that and use the older versions. I'm not going to make a big fuss or refuse to buy the book over one minor piece I don't like if it has other parts I can use. If they completely change ability score generation in 6e to only being based around rolling dice, I'm going to ignore it and just use Standard Array/Point Buy.

I am going to disagree with this one because of one specific thing.... Adventurer's League.

For people that only play in home games, I agree there is no reason to get caught up in a lot of this, you can always ignore it/change it. However, for those who play Adventurer's league, they are often bound to the changes that WOTC releases.... and so I feel have a legitimate right to criticize changes they feel will detract from the games they are currently involved in.

 

[Mercurius]

I would further add that there's a line between stating my own preference as a preference, and stating my own preference as a fact. It's one thing to say "I don't like artificers in my games" and another to say "artificers are a terrible class and don't belong in D&D."

I think that's kind of central to the OP's rant, and something we've all experienced (and probably are guilty of, at times).

But that's just kind of how people talk. I'm not saying it is a good thing, but it isn't going to stop here and now. Just as a few people saying artificers don't belong in D&D isn't going to stop artificers from being in D&D, or other people from liking them.

 

[AdmundfortGeographer]

Over years being here I slowly developed an understanding for how specific people engaged. For those who I observed interacting in ways which were clearly unproductive I mentally added them to a list of who to avoid engaging with myself.

I also learned specific subjects which are not worth going into the amount of detail of which I know will bring out unproductive nit pickers which will only waste time and fill up threads with same old retreaded subject matter that is never resolved.

I’m much more in partial lurker mode on EN World than a decade ago because I use it to get out what I want.

 

[beancounter]

You also probably wouldn't believe how often people fail to recognize that they could have expressed the same opinion with slightly different words, and avoided the problem.

The moment you blame someone else is the moment when you maximize your own ability to screw up the situation.

Ok, ok, I promise never to say the "D" word again...

 

[Sacrosanct]

I would further add that there's a line between stating my own preference as a preference, and stating my own preference as a fact.

IME, edition wars almost always come down to two things. The first is what you said. The second? The second thing is when someone says something critical about an edition (even if it's totally legit), and fans of that edition take it personally and start going off about how you're just edition warring.

1e's rules were not easy to follow. Legit. 1e was a giant unplayable mess. Not legit.
3e's system mastery causes balance issues, like casters vs martials. Legit. 3e sucked unless you were a char-opper. Not legit
It seems to take a long time compared to other editions to get through an encounter in 4e. Legit. 4e is just an MMO boardgame. Not legit.
5e doesn't have a true Warlord class nor is it very modular. Legit. 5e is easy mode and the designers all lied to us. Not legit.

Hopefully we can all see how the statements on the right are all meant to create conflict based on an opinion and not fact.

 

[Deset Gled]

Sure. If it's what you like. Why not?

I'm not sure if you're serious or not. Many people believe these mechanics are inherently racist, and that their presence in a rules set is problematic. This means discussions about them shifts from just "what you like in a game" to "what is non-inclusive in a game". Many arguments take a very different tone once that line is crossed.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

I would further add that there's a line between stating my own preference as a preference, and stating my own preference as a fact. It's one thing to say "I don't like artificers in my games" and another to say "artificers are a terrible class and don't belong in D&D."

yeah that is what bugs me... not "I don't like 4e" but "4e failed" or "4e wasn't real D&D" or even when stating you want more complex martial classes alot of the time you get "But that isn't D&D play something else"

 

[beancounter]

I'm not sure if you're serious or not. Many people believe these mechanics are inherently racist, and that their presence in a rules set is problematic. This means discussions about them shifts from just "what you like in a game" to "what is non-inclusive in a game". Many arguments take a very different tone once that line is crossed.

Why shouldn't people be able to play the game the way they want to?

Session 0 is the best way to find out if a group is for you or not.

 

[Parmandur]

I know people who would read the post, agree with it, and then turn around and say "but Robots shouldn't be in D&D, and neither should Artificers". There are quite a few people that are still salty about Eberron.

I don't think anyone would truthfully, willingly admit that they disagree with this post. And there are also people that will say they agree with it but still try to gatekeep the hobby.

I agree. A major part of this is just the nature of the discussions happening online. More controversial posts will get more attention, and it will appear that unpopular opinions are actually popular (and vice-versa) just due to that fact. A thread that says something simple like "I like Gnomes" is almost definitely going to get less posts and reactions than one about how they dislike/hate them (or think they shouldn't be a part of the game). Which can be hard to remember sometimes, and certainly doesn't help make the online community feel less toxic.

Don't get me wrong, I don't completely hate the online D&D community. If I did, I wouldn't be active on this site. However, sometimes, the stuff that I ranted about in the OP happens and overwhelms the positive parts of the community.

It also kind of sucks when most of those angry comments about how other people are playing badwrongfun are almost always directed at your specific playstyle (optimizing/powergaming, mostly, but also the occasional Eberron-hater or person that declares everything after AD&D 2e as not being "true D&D").

I know this whole rant is like the world's smallest violin, but it still sucks.

Yeah, it me. It's human nature, and this applies in any community I've ever seen.