D&D General Supposing D&D is gamist, what does that mean?

[Ondath]

More than that, I think it's actively harmful, as is the elitism that goes with it.

Using terminology that is not understood by a majority "feels very much contrary to the spirit of the community" to me.

First of all, thank you for actively engaging in the discussion. And I can see where the theory can feel elitist (especially the very yikes term of brain damage used early on), but I think it is perfectly possible to think a bit theoretically about the hobby without being elitist. Kind of like how you can like simple action movies while knowing abstract cinema theory.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

I think it is perfectly possibly to think a bit theoretically about the hobby without being elitist.

I think the first thing is to avoid labels. Not only do they not describe how people play in real life, they don't understand that people change from one thing to another basically at random, and when you ask them about it, they don't actually know the answer, so they make it up.

The big strength of 5e, which it shares with 1st edition, is it's loose, and can be whatever the players want it to be.

 

[Scott Christian]

So I wondered, if we say that D&D is gamist, what does that mean?

It means it is a game. Webster's dictionary applies well.

And perhaps more importantly, in what ways is gamism appealing or valuable?

You get to spend time with friends. Selfishly, you get to spend time being creative.

Why is D&D gamist (if it is?)

It is - because it is a game. There are no negative implications, unless of course, you hate games.

 

[soviet]

Yes, gamism is all about game, by which I mean animals being hunted for food or recreation. I assume that's what we're talking about, or should be. Let's have a useful discussion!

 

[Paul Farquhar]

gamey (adjective)

1. (of meat) having the strong flavour or smell of game, especially when it is high.
   "a gamy stew of various meats"
   synonyms:
   smelly · strong-smelling · stinking · reeking · rank · malodorous · going bad · going off · off · rotting · spoiled · tainted · noisome · miasmic
2. NORTH AMERICAN
   racy or disreputable.

 

[Hussar]

More than that, I think it's actively harmful, as is the elitism that goes with it.

Using terminology that is not understood by a majority "feels very much contrary to the spirit of the community" to me.

What. Like the word “story”? Where people are actually actively misusing commonly understood words and complaining about “elitism”?

Seems there’s only a couple of folks here who aren’t understanding exactly what’s being said that are trying to shut down conversation for very personal reasons and trying to justify it by claiming to be acting for the “community “.

 

[Hussar]

I think the first thing is to avoid labels. Not only do they not describe how people play in real life, they don't understand that people change from one thing to another basically at random, and when you ask them about it, they don't actually know the answer, so they make it up.

The big strength of 5e, which it shares with 1st edition, is it's loose, and can be whatever the players want it to be.

No. It really really can’t. That’s the point you keep missing. It really really can’t do a lot of things.

Which is fine. It’s also fine that it does all the things you want it to do.

But claims that 5e DnD is the pinnacle of game design and can be all things for all people is just false.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

But claims that 5e DnD is the pinnacle of game design and can be all things for all people is just false.

I wasn't suggesting that it was "the pinnacle of game design", only that less [design] is more. 4e was a pinnacle of DESIGN, and that was Bollocks.

 

[dragoner]

IIRC, didn't the gns posts say it was simulationist?

 

[Aldarc]

I wasn't suggesting that it was "the pinnacle of game design", only that less [design] is more. 4e was a pinnacle of DESIGN, and that was Bollocks.

Please (1) stop presenting your opinions about 4e as facts, and (2) take your Edition Warring elsewhere.