D&D General Thaco the angry clown... really?

[Bill Zebub]

To pick an arbitrary joke, remember the one about the two hikers who get rushed by a bear, and one of them quickly changes into running shoes. The punchline is “I don’t have to outrun the bear, I just have to outrun you.”

No, that joke is not belittling/denigrating people who are afraid of bears. Or hikers. Or people who run. Or people who don’t run. Or friends who turn on each other. Or bears.

it’s just funny.

 

[the Jester]

Do you think the leadership which releases this book, makes changes to the game which the demographic being targeted complains about, actually identifies with the trope or demographic being targeted here, maliciously or not?

I do. And, to be specific, I think they identify with it non-maliciously. And, to be even more specific, I don't think there is any demographic being targeted here.

 

[the Jester]

I'm not offended. I'm calling out someone (Wotc, in this case) that is acting like a petty bully on their behavior.

This is not bullying behavior. They aren't picking on anyone. They have an npc with a name that's a callback. That's all this is.

 

[Scribe]

This is not bullying behavior. They aren't picking on anyone. They have an npc with a name that's a callback. That's all this is.

If that's all you see, great.

 

[Mort]

This is not bullying behavior. They aren't picking on anyone. They have an npc with a name that's a callback. That's all this is.

Right. And even if you could argue it's "picking" on anyone which, I agree is a stretch, that someone would be older gamers (including the writers themselves). That's punching up - and OK by just about any standards.

 

[Ulorian - Agent of Chaos]

I'm not offended. I'm calling out someone (Wotc, in this case) that is acting like a petty bully on their behavior. I'm pretty sure most (mind: not all!) of the people who are having a laugh at this juvenile attempt at humor, would be much less amused if the mocking stereotyping was directed at them.
I'm well aware that there are people that enjoy deprecating humor, of the self variety or otherwise, so no need to remind me of that fact.

This is honestly a silly response. A bully? Stop and take a deep breath. Not every statement made in the world is some sort of mortal wound delivered personally to you. The attitude that you are exhibiting here smacks of self-centredness. It's precious and thin-skinned.

You are better served by looking at both sides of an argument. Why is this person making this statement? Right or wrong, they have a personal stake in what they've said. You're not going to change their minds by being shocked and offended and over the top. They are making this statement for a reason. Stop being a child and think about what that reason might be. Look at their side of the argument (and yes, there always is one... even if it has fatal flaws). Once you can calmly see both sides, you can make a reasonable and cogent response.

 

[overgeeked]

Right. And even if you could argue it's "picking" on anyone which, I agree is a stretch, that someone would be older gamers (including the writers themselves). That's punching up - and OK by just about any standards.

Ahhh....noooo. It's not punching up. At all. It's punching down. The writers are in a privileged position that none of the gatekeeping grogs they're punching have. Those gatekeeping grogs don't have a platform akin to official D&D modules that go out to millions of people, much less one that surpasses it. That's the definition of punching down. I don't think it's punching at all, but if it is punching, it's definitely down. Some punching down is acceptable, like messing with a heckler at a stand-up comedy show. If this is punching at all, it's that kind of punching. The gatekeeping grogs taking it upon themselves to try to stop the game from changing or denying newer fans a place. If this is anything, this is the writers stepping in and telling the geezers to cool it and that the kids are all right.

 

[Charlaquin]

I'd be similarly unimpressed if they created "Max Min the jester", a pedantic retired lawyer with an encyclopedic knowledge of laws of the universe, that somehow can't tie his own shoes because, in his own words, he "didn't spend enough points on that".

As a minmaxer myself, I would find this amusing. Though, I think it should be a pair of halflings (cause they’re munchkins) named Min and Max. Of Min and Max rules lawfirm.

 

[abirdcall]

Ahhh....noooo. It's not punching up. At all. It's punching down. The writers are in a privileged position that none of the gatekeeping grogs they're punching have. Those gatekeeping grogs don't have a platform akin to official D&D modules that go out to millions of people, much less one that surpasses it. That's the definition of punching down. I don't think it's punching at all, but if it is punching, it's definitely down. Some punching down is acceptable, like messing with a heckler at a stand-up comedy show. If this is punching at all, it's that kind of punching. The gatekeeping grogs taking it upon themselves to try to stop the game from changing or denying newer fans a place. If this is anything, this is the writers stepping in and telling the geezers to cool it and that the kids are all right.

That isn't what punching up or down means.

 

[LongTimeLurker]

That's Wizards of the Coast sending a clear message that they are confident enough in the new fans to keep the game alive. They don't want anything to do with us grogs anymore, so they can afford mocking us.

i tend to agree with you which is why i stopped giving them my money. I'm sure they'll do just fine without it.