D&D General Who shouldn't play D&D

[Ruin Explorer]

I never said that the behaviors I pointed out are reasonable or neutral, explicitly the oppositel because it was something seen in "people who shouldn't play d&d". Your reinterpretation is an effort to reinterpret it into a more reasonable or more neutral form by shifting from the actions taken to the mere feeling.

I feel like this is going over my head lol. I must be too dim!

We aren't talking about that. If people are engaging in what could be described as a "hissy fit" because of the circumstances pointed out then they probably fit within the mold of "people who should not play d&d".

We are talking about that.

Anyone who casually throws around the term "hissy fit" like that is someone who misuses the term "hissy fit" frankly.

 

[tetrasodium]

I feel like this is going over my head lol. I must be too dim!

See post one

We are talking about that.

Yes, you keep trying to jump tracks to talking about that instead of the group that was described.

 

[M.L. Martin]

In the spirit of G.K. Chesterton...

I shouldn't.

 

[Lanefan]

A distinction without a real difference. Basically you're saying "Someone who is pissed as hell and hates what is happening but does and says absolutely nothing about it, just fulminates = cool dude" but "Someone who is pissed and dares to show it - thus risking being accused of a 'hissy fit' (note: risk triples if the person is female)" is not cool. It's a nonsense.

Not at all.

When something bad happens in the game (assumed to be an inevitable occurrence at some point), a player who gets annoyed but can and does just roll with the punch is, one would think, far preferable to a player who acts out on that annoyance and grinds things to a halt.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Not at all.

When something bad happens in the game (assumed to be an inevitable occurrence at some point), a player who gets annoyed but can and does just roll with the punch is, one would think, far preferable to a player who acts out on that annoyance and grinds things to a halt.

Yes at all lol.

No-one who describes that as a "hissy fit" can remotely be trusted to be being truthful, that's what I'm saying. I notice you changed "hissy fit" to "grinds things to a halt", which is actually a very different thing. More to the point, no matter how many times you rephrase it, the dude said "hissy fit", and as I said, there's a 70% chance he's describe a very mild complaint. I've literally seen an eyebrow-raise reported as a "hissy fit", for god's sake lol.

 

[Lanefan]

Yes at all lol.

No-one who describes that as a "hissy fit" can remotely be trusted to be being truthful, that's what I'm saying. I notice you changed "hissy fit" to "grinds things to a halt", which is actually a very different thing. More to the point, no matter how many times you rephrase it, the dude said "hissy fit", and as I said, there's a 70% chance he's describe a very mild complaint. I've literally seen an eyebrow-raise reported as a "hissy fit", for god's sake lol.

I was trying to cut to the actual issue and bypass getting hung up on the specific term used.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I was trying to cut to the actual issue and bypass getting hung up on the specific term used.

Ok, but my issue is with the specific quoted piece being repeatedly defended, when the specific criticism was of the specific piece, but the specific piece is AWFUL. And even the person who wrote it kind of acknowledges that - they attempt to lampshade (or however you want to put it) the fact that they're being a reactionary snob by accusing others of accusing them of that lol. But all this does is help to clarify that the people who might say that are right!

If someone wants to completely rephrase it in a less obnoxious and awful way, let them rephrase the whole thing and stop defending the original piece, I'd say.

 

[MichaelSomething]

How about "D&D is like Dark Souls in many way. It is difficult and demanding. If you don't want a Dark Souls like experience, try a different TTRPG."

 

[Scribe]

How about "D&D is like Dark Souls in many way. It is difficult and demanding. If you don't want a Dark Souls like experience, try a different TTRPG."

"The defense rests your Honour."

 

[EzekielRaiden]

I don't know what this means.​

Your comment is discussion-terminating without actually adding anything to the discussion.

That's quite an extreme whitewashed misrepresentation shifting who I pointed out to "anyone who ever gets upset about things hat happen".

Er..."whitewashed"? That usually refers to pretending something is good after the fact, when it's actually bad. Hence the modern term "greenwashing," where people (usually corporate marketing) pretend that something is environmentally-friendly when it is unrelated or even environmentally harmful.

The post you quoted included the entire tyranny of fun explanation back in

I'm aware of the explanation provided. It is both a bad explanation of the actual problem of "tyranny of fun" (which isn't even a great phrase--"instant gratification" is a much better phrase for the actual problem), and a bad, hostile jab at anything the original poster didn't like.

because the nuanced context of who specifically was marked out in bold & why is critical to avoiding this very reaction.

Er, what? There is no nuanced context. I will reproduce the bolded portion here, with relevant hostile or generalizing phrases bolded.

In short, the kind of people older rulebooks (and pardon my edition snobbery, but that’s just how I see it) warned us about. People whose characters got their swords destroyed by a rust monster and who threw a hissy fit over it. People whose characters died to a hold person spell and who wrote angry letters to Dragon magazine. People who didn’t have fun, whose entertainment was destroyed by this monster or that spell. Meet WotC’s focus groups, meet the people who are the target audience for future releases. The people 4e will be designed to accommodate.​

It is quite clear, just from the specific part you bolded, that this poster does not give two craps about why the person was upset--they simply think that anyone who ever got upset, anyone "whose entertainment was destroyed by this monster or that spell", is inherently a whiny complainer. That anyone who ever has their enjoyment of the game damaged by a crappy experience somehow deserves to be treated with, in their own words, "snobbery" and exclusion.

I would clap at the excellent example of parody demonstrating how those people in oost 90's bold section often react but your barb seems serious.

Not at all. I am calling out someone being, in their own words, a "snob." Hence, "pretentious, horrendous attitude."

"The kind of people older rulebooks...warned us about" are people who enjoy playing non-humans, people who don't find timekeeping very interesting, people who have the unbridled temerity to read the rulebooks, and people who have the absolute cheek to DARE question the ironclad, absolute rule of the DM. Such rulebooks then recommend punishing out-of-game behavior with in-game problems, turning players against one another, passive-aggressive displays of favoritism or scorn, and even (almost literally) just outright harming or killing someone's PC with utterly unavoidable and unforeseeable things.

Yeah. I have no patience nor sympathy within the context of TTRPGS for someone who has this kind of attitude.