Why Jargon is Bad, and Some Modern Resources for RPG Theory

[overgeeked]

As Snarf has pointed out more than once, folks on EN World seem to have largely not engaged with newer design schools, and so have not applied their jargon much.

Any pointers or links to those newer design schools?

 

[Charlaquin]

Borrowing this as a jump off point.

These kinds of arguments seem an especially strong version of special pleading that's seeking to protect some jargon as "okay" and other jargon as "bad" with a semantic swap of acceptable jargon to "vocabulary."

I don’t think that’s fair at all. I said that werewolf is vocabulary, not jargon, and I’ll stand by that, because it isn’t shorthand for a complex or technical concept related to a specialized field. Other than this specific instance, I don’t think I’ve ever seen anyone here try to argue that a word or phrase is vocabulary rather than jargon.

 

[prabe]

Any pointers or links to those newer design schools?

There are links to references to information about design schools from many timeframes--including the Forge--in the OP for this thread.

 

[Manbearcat]

When Forge-jargon and its derivatives make up the overwhelming majority of the examples of RPG design theory jargon on the site, it is going to be difficult to tell the difference between a problem with jargon in general, and a problem with Forge-jargon.

As Snarf has pointed out more than once, folks on EN World seem to have largely not engaged with newer design schools, and so have not applied their jargon much.

Umbran...I read this and what it says to me is:

"Traditional jargon essentially isn't meaningfully 'jargon' because tradition <because ENWorld is overwhelmed culturally by traditionally-inclined users>. Alternative jargon that traditionally-inclined users aren't exposed to is meaningfully 'jargon' because not traditional and I and others haven't uploaded it to the point that it has transcended its 'jargon' status."

Is that what you're meaning to convey? That a subculture's jargon transcends jargon status? If that is what you mean, I don't understand its significance. Because the point of all of this (I thought) is its impact upon prospective participants in a new domain. Because those are the folks we're worried about here....this is the proposed barrier to entry/gatekeeping issue...people exposed to foreign ideas/concept struggle <because jargon that they haven't already uploaded because tradition >?

People outside of our hobby and our hobby-adjacent practitioners (eg CRPG players)? They have no idea what we're talking about whether we use traditional jargon or old school jargon or Forge jargon. I've brought so many new people into the hobby and I've tried to have pretty innocuous conversations with them about totally traditional play and concepts. I may as well be Beeker meeping at them. I have as much luck conveying actual meaning around terms like BBEG or Rocket Tog or Nova or Monty Haul or Sandbox or Rocks Fall You Die or Hexcrawl or Wandering Monsters as I do Force.

You must mean something else because that makes no sense.

Jargon can't transcend jargon status. Its still jargon. Its just that the subculture who has practiced it has sufficiently uploaded it so its just "words" to them. What is important is that to new folks who are engaging with new concepts and perhaps trying to onboard...its still jargon. They still have to go through the process of uploading it.

Now...dissident-deemed jargon and "you're a douche for using this jargon" or Wrongspeak are absolutely a thing. I feel like that has proven a historically excellent way for controlling conversation and ensuring hegemony or freedom from the taint of various cultural influence!

 

[overgeeked]

There are links to references to information about design schools from many timeframes--including the Forge--in the OP for this thread.

Yes, I'm aware. I was asking Umbran about which ones he was specifically referring to.

 

[prabe]

Yes, I'm aware. I was asking Umbran about which ones he was specifically referring to.

Fair. Sorry.

 

[Charlaquin]

EDIT: Nevermind, already been addressed.

 

[Xetheral]

A couple theories I have. The first one is that video games enjoy a much much larger user base. With that comes a wide variety of games that go from causal all the way up to hardcore. There is plenty of room for causals and hardcore players to chat about their hobby. The second is that there is no D&D (800# gorilla) equivalent in the video game hobby. Due to D&D's crushing orbit it dominates all discussion fairly or not. TTRPGs attract intellectually and technical minded folks who enjoy comprehensive discussions and arguments. However, due to there can be only one king of TTRPGs, there is often a winner takes all stakes to how the games are described, theorized, and general attitudes towards those of its community. Its a rare combination of low community population, but highly demanding conceptualized theory.

Just my theory.

I think there's an even simpler explanation that accounts for much of the difference. Unlike video games, TTRPGs have complicated logistics, meaning that TTRPG fans can't play on demand. Video games, by contrast are far more readily accessible. Accordingly, of the time fans spend on each hobby, I suspect TTRPG fans spend a far higher proportion of that time talking about their hobby than fans of video games do.

 

[Charlaquin]

I think there's an even simpler explanation that accounts for much of the difference. Unlike video games, TTRPGs have complicated logistics, meaning that TTRPG fans can't play on demand. Video games, by contrast as far more readily accessible. Accordingly, of the time fans spend on each hobby, I suspect TTRPG fans spend a far higher proportion of that time talking about their hobby than fans of video games do.

Counter-proposal: TTRPG discussion is disproportionately concerned with design and theory. You get this kind of jargon and hair-splitting in discussions of video game design, but such discussions are pretty niche, because most people who play video games aren’t hugely interested in game design theory. They’re happy to just play the games and move on. In the TTRPG space though, design theory is a much more prominent topic, because every GM must by necessity engage in game design to some extent or another. And, the people who engage in TTRPG discussion are disproportionately GMs. I think maybe one of my players would have any idea what I was taking about if I started tossing around terms like “simulationism” and “story now.” And she’s the one of my players who also DMs on occasion.

 

[Minigiant]

Hot take

The heavy use of jargon in the D&D community is probably due to the very hands-off approach that many D&D veterans use to teach, the reluctance to tell other what to do and what is correct, and the minor patronizing of new fans by longer timed fans.

Because every table being different is a pillar of the game is everyone is playing a variant of the base sets of rules, rulings, and experience. So the thing many have in common and the stuff commonly changed are sometimes jargonized just for the in group to understand each other.