Unpopular opinions go here

[Reynard]

I think people think that when they naturally have diverging tastes and opinions from yours.

Again, i was not talking about the book The Lord of the Rings. I was responding to an assertion about the setting Middle Earth. They are not the same thing.

 

[Aldarc]

Again, i was not talking about the book The Lord of the Rings. I was responding to an assertion about the setting Middle Earth. They are not the same thing.

I don’t really see how what I said would make a difference if it was the books, movies, or anything else. Tastes and opinions about these sorts of things differ. We don’t have to go around calling other opinions “shallow” for such differences of opinion.

 

[Maxperson]

Um, again, this isn't about someone saying that they love their game. After all, there is nothing more enjoyable than a person who enthusiastically is telling you how awesome their game is!

This is about telling people, "That thing you are playing? It's not even an RPG." Because that's not conducive to conversation or discussion; that's just trying to badwrongfun people by telling them that what they're doing isn't even an RPG. Moreover, if you're excluding both D&D and a lot of modern games ... you're really saying more about yourself than you are about the games other people are playing.

In all fairness perhaps it is a matter of perspective. None of these games, D&D included is an RPG.

 

[Tony Vargas]

Perhaps the issue isn't the trouble with defining RPGs; perhaps the issue is trying to use definitions to exclude things that you don't like?

I don't think that much would be excluded, entirely, just that it would become easier to evaluate TTRPGs, objectively, with a tighter, more consistent definition. The unofficial/unarticulated definition of TTRPGs is so broad, that exisiting RPGs can be sorted into mutually-exclusive sub-categories, like the unsubtle "ROLE Playing" vs "ROLL Playing" or, obviously, the more intellectualized GNS.
Armed with such esoteric jargon, and misuse of informal fallacies & the like, one can readily paint a good game as bad (in one or two GNS categories) or a bad game as good (in one category) or, simply, if reason ever makes some unwanted inroads in the face of confirmation bias, dismiss all attempts at understanding a game, and assert it's all subjective. (the nice part, no one ever lose an argument, the bad part, no understanding is ever reached)

I suspect a tighter definition of TTRPG would only risk excluding early D&D, it's closest imitators, and freestyle RP. Of course, freestyle RP is still roleplaying and 100% legitimate, it's just, y'know, not a game, let alone a TT game. And D&D, at worst, could be seen as a small scale wargame that crossed a line into TTRPG at some point in it's long & storied history (quite possibly, after my favorite edition, 1e AD&D, and as early as my least-favorite late 2e ). :: (I mean, that alone, speaks to the subjectivity of taste, lol)
It would mean accepting that some games we like aren't actually that good (which, is freeing, if you give yourself a chance for self-reflection as to why you like it) and some that we loathe are actually OK games (which can be more disquieting to reflect upon).
So, yeah, unpopular opinion, indeed.

 

[Snarf Zagyg]

It would mean accepting that some games we like aren't actually that good (which, is freeing, if you give yourself a chance for self-reflection as to why you like it) and some that we loathe are actually OK games (which can be more disquieting to reflect upon).

There's a difference between saying that you don't like some RPGs, and saying that the RPGs you don't happen to like ... aren't RPGs.

Again, using semantic games to define away large parts of the hobby isn't improving anything. It's just trying to elevate your own preferences over those of other people by engaging in word-games that no one other than you agrees with.

 

[Reynard]

Any definition of "RPG" that doesn't include OD&D is obviously, definitionally wrong.

 

[Micah Sweet]

There's a difference between saying that you don't like some RPGs, and saying that the RPGs you don't happen to like ... aren't RPGs.

Again, using semantic games to define away large parts of the hobby isn't improving anything. It's just trying to elevate your own preferences over those of other people by engaging in word-games that no one other than you agrees with.

As I said, the problem is social.

 

[Reynard]

Unpopular Opinion: Arguing against the premise isn't actually contributing to the discussion.

 

[Tony Vargas]

There's a difference between saying that you don't like some RPGs, and saying that the RPGs you don't happen to like ... aren't RPGs.

Again, using semantic games to define away large parts of the hobby isn't improving anything. It's just trying to elevate your own preferences over those of other people by engaging in word-games that no one other than you agrees with.

Again, not doing either of those things. I know early D&D has a special place in our hearts and history, and I certainly feel that, personally, so I'm talking about excluding a game I like, not one I don't happen to like. Because, keeping it classed as a TTRPG is an impediment to understanding, improving, or even discussing TTRPGs.

And early D&D and Freestyle RP are not a large proportion of published TTRPGs out there. The former looms large in history and via the OSR constellation of games (which, like, most may well fit a reasonable definition, too), the latter is not a published game, at all, but a common fall-back or adjunct technique to actual games, that seriously confuses the issue.

 

[Micah Sweet]

Again, not doing either of those things. I know early D&D has a special place in our hearts and history, and I certainly feel that, personally, so I'm talking about excluding a game I like, not one I don't happen to like. Because, keeping it classed as a TTRPG is an impediment to understanding, improving, or even discussing TTRPGs.

And early D&D and Freestyle RP are not a large proportion of published TTRPGs out there. The former looms large in history and via the OSR constellation of games (which, like, most may well fit a reasonable definition, too), the latter is not a published game, at all, but a common fall-back or adjunct technique to actual games, that seriously confuses the issue.

Unless you go the other way, and define TTRPGs to include D&D and games like it. Why are we assuming the modern games have to take priority here?