D&D General [rant]The conservatism of D&D fans is exhausting.

[EzekielRaiden]

Again, the last time they tried that, the fandom absolutely crucified them for it.

So, no, they will never go in flags waving again.

Indeed.

The only thing D&D players hate more than not telling them how to play, is telling them how to play.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Talking to WotC won't stop them having so much influence over the hobby and the industry either.

Yet no one here has applied to join my anti-WOTC resistance group??
Or did everyone else form one and didn't invite me??? D: D: D:

 

[cbwjm]

Note: I DO NOT MEAN POLITICAL CONSERVATISM. This is not a thread about politics.

I mean "conservatism" as in resistance to change. You see it all the time -- people complaining about the new art or aesthetics, literally saying things like "if they used the old art I would be in." It is so mind boggling to me.

D&D is a living game. OF COURSE the new books etc are going to adapt to the new market. If you literally won't play a newer version because tieflings or whatever, then it isn't for you. Don't demand it regress to the era you discovered D&D because that is what makes you feel good; play the version you discovered.

I don't liek every artistic or design choice either, but it isn't up to me to demand D&D coddle my unchanging preferences. If I want to re-experience BECMI (the edition I grew up with) I can just play that. And so can you.

/rant

I kind of feel like this is a sadness within long-term players, especially those who have picked up each new edition and had fun playing them, to then reach a point where the current edition of the game, which you've supported for so long, has now passed you by. With social media being what it is, they can easily find an outlet to rant about it, even though this isn't really new. If you look back through old dragon magazines, people thought 1e was perfect and didn't need a 2nd edition. I'm sure there were similar letters for 3rd, 4th and 5th.

So that's my thoughts on this, it's less conservatism, and more being left behind by the current edition and needing an outlet to vent about it.

 

[Gus L]

I don't want them to smuggle different playstyles into D&D. I want them to bring them in with flags waving, each saying "here we are" and "here's how to play us using this rule-set".

Yop - that was the point I was making... Ghost rules lurk in the rules being spooky and confusing, designers should exorcise them and own the play style they want to bring to the table. It helps newcomers and it helps calm edition wars because the game says "I do this, not that".

Now of course fandom will get angry ... but fandoms are always angry ... because fandom is just stalking a IP instead of a person and the IP will never love the fan or let them fully control it. Fandom is bad and should be ignored.

 

[Lanefan]

Again, the last time they tried that, the fandom absolutely crucified them for it.

No, that time they really only brought one playstyle in, flags or not; and that was the issue.

I'd rather see them bring in five or six or eight different playstyles roughly equally, covering a broad range, and highlight them all (that's where the waving flags come in). Modular subsystem-based design really would be their friend here, but for some reason they hitched their wagon to unified design and in so doing rather limited their options.

 

[Aldarc]

If you don't like it, that's fantastic! Tell me about what you do like.

I believe it was @Piratecat that used the phrase, or something close, "I double dog dare you to tell me how great your game is without referencing any other game."

FWIW, I have talked about plenty of games that I like and liked on this forum without referencing D&D. IME, there will be posters who will still make it about D&D because somehow talking about what other games do well or how they are fun is perceived as a slight against D&D.

 

[Lanefan]

Yop - that was the point I was making... Ghost rules lurk in the rules being spooky and confusing, designers should exorcise them and own the play style they want to bring to the table. It helps newcomers and it helps calm edition wars because the game says "I do this, not that".

No.

Instead of saying "I do this, not that", I want it made even more able to do this AND that AND that too, with instructions and guidance along the lines of "if you want playstyle X use modules A,B, and C; if you want playstyle Y use modules A, D, and F; if you want playstyle Z use modules B, E, F, and J; if you want playstyle Q use module G only; etc. for as many playststyles as they can make work.

Why? Because as soon as the designers make the game say "I can't (or won't) do that" they've just split the fanbase and lost some of their market, which seems self-defeating no matter how you look at it.

 

[TiQuinn]

No.

Instead of saying "I do this, not that", I want it made even more able to do this AND that AND that too, with instructions and guidance along the lines of "if you want playstyle X use modules A,B, and C; if you want playstyle Y use modules A, D, and F; if you want playstyle Z use modules B, E, F, and J; if you want playstyle Q use module G only; etc. for as many playststyles as they can make work.

Why? Because as soon as the designers make the game say "I can't (or won't) do that" they've just split the fanbase and lost some of their market, which seems self-defeating no matter how you look at it.

I don’t think that is a very feasible system. What’s more likely is you end up with a game that does one or maybe two of those things well, and the others poorly. You have any examples of any system that does this successfully?

 

[DEFCON 1]

Indeed.

The only thing D&D players hate more than not telling them how to play, is telling them how to play.

[raucous laughter]

Very witty Wilde! Very, very witty!

(AUTHOR'S NOTE: If you are not familiar with Monty Python, please ignore this post.)

 

[Gus L]

No.

Instead of saying "I do this, not that", I want it made even more able to do this AND that AND that too, with instructions and guidance along the lines of "if you want playstyle X use modules A,B, and C; if you want playstyle Y use modules A, D, and F; if you want playstyle Z use modules B, E, F, and J; if you want playstyle Q use module G only; etc. for as many playststyles as they can make work.

Why? Because as soon as the designers make the game say "I can't (or won't) do that" they've just split the fanbase and lost some of their market, which seems self-defeating no matter how you look at it.

Ah, yes, that's where we differ.

I am sure there are fans who want a universal RPG perfectly fit for market forces, a sort of fast food of game design. I don't fall into that camp. I want to see RPGs that do interesting and things and play smoothly, designed with imagination and passion both in their settings and mechanics.