So, you want wotc, company that has clearly demonstrated its deficiencies, and as you have accurately pointed out, is a private company, to provide a board that DOES enforce like a government or police force.
"The Market" can go **** itself with a Hellfire bear trap. There are reasons I don't trust one single person on this board outside of a pool of roughly six folk to do anything but enthusiastically support racist, sexist, creedist, and elsewise exclusionist content. All they have to do is say "we're bringing back the classic D&D you love!" and people will buy literally anything, by the truckful, no matter what's in it or how explicitly hateful it is. People here want that hatred in their D&D. They protest viciously every time Wizards tries to lessen it.
So, you believe that all but 6 of the posters on this website are bigots, that, and I quote, using your words, " enthusiastically support racist, sexist, creedist, and elsewise exclusionist content".
This is a yes or no question. Is that what you meant?
For the record, I believe all the users of this website, including myself, are bigots and have at one time or another supported harmful ideologies or have harmed people themselves. Bigotry is a human failing that all of us are obligated to root out in both ourselves and others. If being bigoted makes someone a bad person, there isn't a good person in existence. Thus I choose to believe that it does not make someone a bad person, but that it is a ubiquitous weakness in the human brain that we are trying to overcome, some of us less so than others.
I think that formalized policies are tools by which we can help ourselves. They are not the only tools, but they are one and they help us attempt to be accountable to our lofty goals. Just like we use mnemonics to help us overcome weaknesses of memory, we can use other types of tools to help us overcome other weaknesses of the human brain. Like bigotry.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
And again I would like to speak from experience of literally having had my rights subject to the marketplace of local community opinion. "The Market" doesn't care about human rights. It is fundamentally a system that cares about profits and losses over what is right or wrong. We cannot rely on "the market" to take care of people or make them safe. Unregulated market forces would let people starve and die of disease and injury if governing bodies didn't step in to prevent that. So the idea that the marketplace would care to protect people from something like trauma and microaggressions is not only wrong, it is historically exactly the opposite of what happens.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Stopping everything shady is the wrong goal. Read some history books. It goes badly when people do that. Bottom line, there are going to be people with different value systems than yours express themselves in the marketplace and that is normal and acceptable.
Goal, yes. Expectation, no. And that is the biggest issue with any enforcement of anything vs expectations.
Perfection is not possible but that does not mean doing nothing is better than at least trying.
Crusaders often overshoot. I think you are overshooting. The methods you advocate produce too many negative outcomes. That's what experience tells us.
So, you want wotc, company that has clearly demonstrated its deficiencies, and as you have accurately pointed out, is a private company, to provide a board that DOES enforce like a government or police force.
Wizards corrects its issues. It admitted it ****ed up and about-faced on the hadozee, and instituted new production policies to ensure it didn't happen again. it's been steadily reducing and removing legacy harmful content from D&D where and as it can. Wizards, when it's not being an evil amalgamation of profitmongering driven by the market, has been trying.
"The Market", i.e. the faceless mindless gormless gibbering-mouther morass of Internet weirdos that call themselves "the community", has been fighting Wizards every last single step of the god damned way. Every single time Wizards announces that it's removing questionable content from a book and reissuing a patched version, people scourge them for "changing what we bought!" Every single time Wizards announces a change in direction on matters such as drow, orcs, and the rest being genetically evil, we get a thronging multitude of angry jackwaffles on this board and in all the various D&D social media scourging Wizards for "changing classic D&D lore!"
Every. Single. Time.
"The Market" can go **** itself with a Hellfire bear trap. There are reasons I don't trust one single person on this board outside of a pool of roughly six folk to do anything but enthusiastically support racist, sexist, creedist, and elsewise exclusionist content. All they have to do is say "we're bringing back the classic D&D you love!" and people will buy literally anything, by the truckful, no matter what's in it or how explicitly hateful it is. People here want that hatred in their D&D. They protest viciously every time Wizards tries to lessen it.
Maybe a small handful of us don't think that's okay.
DEAR MODS, why do some users on this forum continue to be allowed to use hateful and insulting language like this to smear other forum users the poster disagrees with? if we're supposed to be having a measured debate or conversation, why are these verbal attacks allowed?
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing) You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
I would also bet that Hasbro will create a new license for One D&D like they created a new license for 4e.
They can put anything that they want to put into that new license to protect their brand (not marginalized people, but their brand) from hateful content.
If that happens, third party creators will more than likely move away from One D&D entirely to create under the CC license or the ORC license (unless the new license protects not only Hasbro's brand but third party creators as well).
Third party content to support One D&D will then become next to nil, like during 4e.
That means that third party content could end up being twice removed from the brand of Dungeons and Dragons; once removed by being under the CC license or the ORC license and twice removed by third party creators moving away from One D&D entirely.
Hasbro could get its wish to be by itself on its own private island with Dungeons and Dragons anyway.
I don't see them doing this for a few reasons.
1) The new OGL was meant to run in line with the new version of DnD this whole thing was because of the new DnD edition that is coming, it was not specifically about 5E
2) 6th edition DnD Wizards have confirmed is not an entire new game. Wizards will struggle to create a new SRD and OGL for what they have themselves confirmed is a fully backward compatible system. If they where making a new edition of DnD that was incompatible with 5th edition and required an entirely new SRD to cover the mechanics then they could argue for a new OGL as the game itself is entirely different.
3) Finally the backlash if they did this would kill the new system before it was even printed. People would just stick to 5th edition and 3rd party publishers would continue making material for that keeping it new and updated, meaning that, in terms of fantasy based D20 systems, Wizards would be in competition with both Pathfinder and themselves for the new system. Any one DnD changes that people liked a 3rd party could make a sourcebook to add to 5th edition.
A few things about this.
1. The marketing for 6e has definitely stated that 6e is backwards compatible with 5e. But while many (not all) of the game mechanics can be shared, what we have seen in the UA's clearly prove that in a practical sense, the 2 editions are NOT compatible. Imagine you are playing a Cleric in a long term game, built on 5e, and a new player arrives, and decides to play the new Cleric. Let's not even deal with the fact that the new Cleric is demonstrably more powerful than the original design, which will annoy to no end the player with the older version. Imagine being the DM having to deal with TWO different chars that are supposedly from the same class, with totally different mechanics.
2. Referring to your point 1, do you seriously believe that 5e will still be available for sale after 6e is released? Best case, we get the same situation where we have "Legacy" Mord's and Volo's, which is unavailable to any new DM's and players. We will see players with access to 6e only, while an existing long term group now has to decide how to deal with that fact.
3. Based on these points and your point 3, it is in wotc's best financial interest to shut down any avenue to 5e still being used after 6e is released. That is easy enough to do through any electronic portal wotc controls, but 3rd party sources, or platforms that will continue to support 5e? Not so easy, unless draconian steps are taken....like the stuff we just saw over the last 2 weeks.
Ok we have not seen the plans for making it fully backwards compatible, but in terms of rules it is not a drastic change, the action bonus action process stays the same, magic mechanics are broadly the same with just some tweaks to spell lists. You still have classes and sub classes. I imagine they will, on release, produce a crib sheet of how to bring a 5E character up to one dnd, or how to use a 5E subclass in a one dnd, game. We have not seen those changes yet, but the fact is that this is cosmetic tweaks rather then a wholesale change to the system.
As someone who has lived through complete system overhauls of games I loved this is not that.
Now I do believe that the 5E players handbook, dms guide and monster manual will be replaced, because wizards have told us they will. But this is not a whole new system. The fact is we don’t know what the plan for integrating the 2 systems is and making what of assumptions without information is at best speculative and at worst creates needles anger. The community was right to voice it’s opinion on the OGL (although I know 3rd party creators who feel changes where needed and are not 100% happy that those views have been drowned out by a vocal mob that where, simply as a side effect of being a mob, unable to sit down and discuss the nuances with wizards. Yes Wizards handled this badly. The community rallied round but I actually feel the best option would have been for everyone to take a breath, including wizards, and spend some time really working out the best way forward.
But now, it seems, the mob, as all mobs do, is taking a while to disperse and there are some who want to artificially see issues that are not yet even a thing.
I don't trust anything WotC is doing now. Sure, they backpedaled, but they had to other option. They've already lost millions of dollars and with people still angry, there will millions more lost. They hurt the brand.
This heart-felt lip-service we're getting from them has nothing to do with the company "hearing us". It's straight damage control at this point. Right now they're trying to figure out how to win those of us back that have dropped them as a game system.
WotC WILL FIND A WAY to monetize its new system that will set into place everything outlined in their OGL they structured and abandoned. It's just being delayed ... you'll see it again in the future the same way Magic the Gathering forces you to use ONLY WotC brand Magic cards at sanctioned tournaments.
While I’m glad for the victory. I’m still weary of any future attempts to press on with their original plans. With Hasbro wanting to monetize D&D so much more they’re bound to work any legal loophole they can.
However they’d end up right back in the same spot as now.
DEAR MODS, why do some users on this forum continue to be allowed to use hateful and insulting language like this to smear other forum users the poster disagrees with? if we're supposed to be having a measured debate or conversation, why are these verbal attacks allowed?
Y'know, it's not 'hateful and insulting language'. It's me having an opinion and being willing to use colorful language to express it. A whole lot of people like to get on my case because I'm better with words than they are, but it's never going to stop me from having opinions. If I have to listen to yours, why do you get to take down mine?
But here. Since it was giving you the vapors, I took it down myself. Doesn't change anything I wrote, though. People who've been long-standing and outspoken opponents of every last one of Wizards' efforts to expel exclusionism from D&D, known to take dramatic action to try and rouse public ire against any attempt Wizards embarks on to try and make their game even just a little more inclusive, are not going to earn my glowing praise and admiration. I wrote what I wrote because those people on this board have shown where they stand, and it's not with players who've been historically barred from the game and just want their own fair seat at the table. And all this yabber about "The Market" and how anyone should be able to sell anything they like and if "The Market" supports rampant xenophobic exclusionism then boy howdy hoo I-guess-it's-not-that-bad? Nothing but a meaningless smokescreen for those people to continue trying to force the game to stay mired in its fifty years of terrible baggage and tell all those new players freshly invited to the table that their invite's expired and they're no longer welcome. If you're not a white straight cisgender male ready to sit down and genocide some green people for the crime of not being sufficiently human, you can just go somewhere else and leave D&D for the real fans, right?
Why you think I should praise that sort of stance, and why you think people are going to be happy and supportive of it, I will never understand.
DEAR MODS, why do some users on this forum continue to be allowed to use hateful and insulting language like this to smear other forum users the poster disagrees with? if we're supposed to be having a measured debate or conversation, why are these verbal attacks allowed?
Y'know, it's not 'hateful and insulting language'. It's me having an opinion and being willing to use colorful language to express it. A whole lot of people like to get on my case because I'm better with words than they are, but it's never going to stop me from having opinions. If I have to listen to yours, why do you get to take down mine?
But here. Since it was giving you the vapors, I took it down myself. Doesn't change anything I wrote, though. People who've been long-standing and outspoken opponents of every last one of Wizards' efforts to expel exclusionism from D&D, known to take dramatic action to try and rouse public ire against any attempt Wizards embarks on to try and make their game even just a little more inclusive, are not going to earn my glowing praise and admiration. I wrote what I wrote because those people on this board have shown where they stand, and it's not with players who've been historically barred from the game and just want their own fair seat at the table. And all this yabber about "The Market" and how anyone should be able to sell anything they like and if "The Market" supports rampant xenophobic exclusionism then boy howdy hoo I-guess-it's-not-that-bad? Nothing but a meaningless smokescreen for those people to continue trying to force the game to stay mired in its fifty years of terrible baggage and tell all those new players freshly invited to the table that their invite's expired and they're no longer welcome. If you're not a white straight cisgender male ready to sit down and genocide some green people for the crime of not being sufficiently human, you can just go somewhere else and leave D&D for the real fans, right?
Why you think I should praise that sort of stance, and why you think people are going to be happy and supportive of it, I will never understand.
I will absolutely defend your right to have your own beliefs and opinions, but those opinions can be shared without derogatory insults meant to belittle your opponents in front of others. If your argument has merit, it can stand on its own without ad hominem attacks. That sort of language is meant to inflame others against us, and "other" us. I have never, in any of my disagreements with you or others, resorted to insults.
We have a fundamental disagreement about what constitutes "hateful" content, and that's the problem. Your position isn't necessarily the correct one, but you speak to the rest of us as if it is, and as if anyone who doesn't agree with everything you believe is by default a bad, evil, racist, sexist person. There is no nuance to that position.
I am not a racist, sexist, bigoted person. I think you would find we have much more in common than you think, but you are unwilling to allow for disagreement with your strict interpretation of the world.
I 100% support making the D&D community a safe and inclusive space. Period. However, I disagree with some people on exactly what that looks like, and some people are unwilling to allow for any grey area.
Yurei, I 100% support your ability to play D&D in a safe, inclusive space. I don't know you, and despite our differences, and the way you speak about me in these forums, I have no ill will against you I just don't like the way you treat people some times. You've said before that you wouldn't want to play in a D&D session with me, well... I would play in a D&D session with you.
I am NOT asking for your praise. I don't want a cookie. If we are going to find common ground to stop people like Ernest Gygax, then there also needs to be a willingness to treat each other in this community as equal people, capable of disagreeing, and not always taking strict black & white positions without compromise.
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing) You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
I will absolutely defend your right to have your own beliefs and opinions
HAH. You have told me to shut up and go away in every single thread we've ever been at odds in. I'm almost impressed you have the bald-faced gall to say this to me.
We have a fundamental disagreement about what constitutes "hateful" content, and that's the problem. Your position isn't necessarily the correct one, but you speak to the rest of us as if it is, and as if anyone who doesn't agree with everything you believe is by default a bad, evil, racist, sexist person. There is no nuance to that position.
Nuance? What nuance? The one single morally absolute thing in this entire world of grey is that hatred should be opposed. No, I'm not going to bend and say that some hatred is fine and perfectly okay. There's no room for nuance, for saying that it's okay if only a few people are barred and excluded from the game for not being the right kind of person.
I 100% support making the D&D community a safe and inclusive space. ... Yurei, I 100% support your ability to play D&D in a safe, inclusive space.
How dare you say these words to me. You have been an outspoken opponent and critic of every single step that ANYONE - not just Wizards, but anyone - has taken to try and excise exclusionism in all its insidious forms from the game. You are one of the leaders of the charge against modernization and inclusiveness. Every single thread that even obliquely touches on these issues, I see your name fighting and clawing to exclude, deny, and denigrate anyone who isn't the right kind of player for you. You deny their pain, dismiss their concerns, and tell them they have no right to play the game if they don't shape up and toe the line. Don't ever pretend you're somehow on my side again.
You've said before that you wouldn't want to play in a D&D session with me, well... I would play in a D&D session with you.
I don't want to play the kind of D&D you want to create. No D&D is better than bad D&D.
I am NOT asking for your praise. I don't want a cookie. If we are going to find common ground to stop people like Ernest Gygax, then there also needs to be a willingness to treat each other in this community as equal people, capable of disagreeing, and not always taking strict black & white positions without compromise.
That's the thing. People in this thread are demanding that Ernest Gygax be perfectly allowed to publish his toxic garbage. That he should be allowed to sell it to whomever wants to buy it in any way he so pleases and no one should ever say him nay or stand in his way, because "The Market" will somehow magically regulate hatred. I cannot think of any possible reason they would want this save that they wish to purchase said book for themselves. Why should I "respect" such a stance and desire? What compromise is there for people who desire this thing?
I will absolutely defend your right to have your own beliefs and opinions
HAH. You have told me to shut up and go away in every single thread we've ever been at odds in. I'm almost impressed you have the bald-faced gall to say this to me.
We have a fundamental disagreement about what constitutes "hateful" content, and that's the problem. Your position isn't necessarily the correct one, but you speak to the rest of us as if it is, and as if anyone who doesn't agree with everything you believe is by default a bad, evil, racist, sexist person. There is no nuance to that position.
Nuance? What nuance? The one single morally absolute thing in this entire world of grey is that hatred should be opposed. No, I'm not going to bend and say that some hatred is fine and perfectly okay. There's no room for nuance, for saying that it's okay if only a few people are barred and excluded from the game for not being the right kind of person.
I 100% support making the D&D community a safe and inclusive space. ... Yurei, I 100% support your ability to play D&D in a safe, inclusive space.
How dare you say these words to me. You have been an outspoken opponent and critic of every single step that ANYONE - not just Wizards, but anyone - has taken to try and excise exclusionism in all its insidious forms from the game. You are one of the leaders of the charge against modernization and inclusiveness. Every single thread that even obliquely touches on these issues, I see your name fighting and clawing to exclude, deny, and denigrate anyone who isn't the right kind of player for you. You deny their pain, dismiss their concerns, and tell them they have no right to play the game if they don't shape up and toe the line. Don't ever pretend you're somehow on my side again.
You've said before that you wouldn't want to play in a D&D session with me, well... I would play in a D&D session with you.
I don't want to play the kind of D&D you want to create. No D&D is better than bad D&D.
I am NOT asking for your praise. I don't want a cookie. If we are going to find common ground to stop people like Ernest Gygax, then there also needs to be a willingness to treat each other in this community as equal people, capable of disagreeing, and not always taking strict black & white positions without compromise.
That's the thing. People in this thread are demanding that Ernest Gygax be perfectly allowed to publish his toxic garbage. That he should be allowed to sell it to whomever wants to buy it in any way he so pleases and no one should ever say him nay or stand in his way, because "The Market" will somehow magically regulate hatred. I cannot think of any possible reason they would want this save that they wish to purchase said book for themselves. Why should I "respect" such a stance and desire? What compromise is there for people who desire this thing?
Well, I tried.
Anyone who wants to can click on my profile and see all of my posts. I've not deleted anything. Judge for yourselves.
I oppose the works of people like Ernest Gygax jr. I support an inclusive community.
I disagree with some people about what constitutes "hatred". There are some things that are simply not clearly black & white.
I'm moving on from this interaction now, but I will continue to defend myself and others from inaccurate accusations of racism, sexism, or bigotry.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing) You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
DEAR MODS, why do some users on this forum continue to be allowed to use hateful and insulting language like this to smear other forum users the poster disagrees with? if we're supposed to be having a measured debate or conversation, why are these verbal attacks allowed?
Y'know, it's not 'hateful and insulting language'. It's me having an opinion and being willing to use colorful language to express it. A whole lot of people like to get on my case because I'm better with words than they are, but it's never going to stop me from having opinions. If I have to listen to yours, why do you get to take down mine?
But here. Since it was giving you the vapors, I took it down myself. Doesn't change anything I wrote, though. People who've been long-standing and outspoken opponents of every last one of Wizards' efforts to expel exclusionism from D&D, known to take dramatic action to try and rouse public ire against any attempt Wizards embarks on to try and make their game even just a little more inclusive, are not going to earn my glowing praise and admiration. I wrote what I wrote because those people on this board have shown where they stand, and it's not with players who've been historically barred from the game and just want their own fair seat at the table. And all this yabber about "The Market" and how anyone should be able to sell anything they like and if "The Market" supports rampant xenophobic exclusionism then boy howdy hoo I-guess-it's-not-that-bad? Nothing but a meaningless smokescreen for those people to continue trying to force the game to stay mired in its fifty years of terrible baggage and tell all those new players freshly invited to the table that their invite's expired and they're no longer welcome. If you're not a white straight cisgender male ready to sit down and genocide some green people for the crime of not being sufficiently human, you can just go somewhere else and leave D&D for the real fans, right?
Why you think I should praise that sort of stance, and why you think people are going to be happy and supportive of it, I will never understand.
"If you're not a white straight cisgender male ready to sit down and genocide some green people for the crime of not being sufficiently human, you can just go somewhere else and leave D&D for the real fans, right?"
So then... what should the new gender and appearance be to qualify as a DnD player? Certainly NOT Cisgender white male.... we got that! Clearly you're a younger player who never really felt the sting of DnD discrimination and bigotry like those of us who brought the game up to where it is now. YOUR toxic attitude and ignorance only contributes to the divisive climate we all are dealing with.
"Why you think I should praise that sort of stance, and why you think people are going to be happy and supportive of it, I will never understand." You don't seem to understand the origins of the 'green people' before DnD was even a game. Maybe do a little background research and you'll understand instead of spewing more toxic attitude... mkay?
Fox, you might want to get your Internet sarcasm meter recalibrated. Regardless of sarcasm misfires, I think you may want to pull back from this one. I know you're new here and have never engaged with the community before, but I'm one of the few people who've been on the forefront of dealing with the ocean of grognards trying to cling to Gygaxian "traditions" that do nothing but cause pain and strife. I know full well what the origins of 'green people' in D&D are, and this is not the first time I've fought with October over the issue of entire species of sapient people being reduced to nameless, faceless, guilt-free murder puppets for a party of Rugged Aryan Heroes. I'm on the side trying to tell people to stop pulling this shit and baking above-the-table racism into the bones of D&D.
But to clarify the sarcasm: obviously white straight cisgender males are allowed to play D&D. No one's ever suggested they shouldn't. I'd simply appreciate it if other people were also allowed to sit at the table and play, which doesn't seem to be a priority for most folks in this thread.
DEAR MODS, why do some users on this forum continue to be allowed to use hateful and insulting language like this to smear other forum users the poster disagrees with? if we're supposed to be having a measured debate or conversation, why are these verbal attacks allowed?
Y'know, it's not 'hateful and insulting language'. It's me having an opinion and being willing to use colorful language to express it. A whole lot of people like to get on my case because I'm better with words than they are, but it's never going to stop me from having opinions. If I have to listen to yours, why do you get to take down mine?
But here. Since it was giving you the vapors, I took it down myself. Doesn't change anything I wrote, though. People who've been long-standing and outspoken opponents of every last one of Wizards' efforts to expel exclusionism from D&D, known to take dramatic action to try and rouse public ire against any attempt Wizards embarks on to try and make their game even just a little more inclusive, are not going to earn my glowing praise and admiration. I wrote what I wrote because those people on this board have shown where they stand, and it's not with players who've been historically barred from the game and just want their own fair seat at the table. And all this yabber about "The Market" and how anyone should be able to sell anything they like and if "The Market" supports rampant xenophobic exclusionism then boy howdy hoo I-guess-it's-not-that-bad? Nothing but a meaningless smokescreen for those people to continue trying to force the game to stay mired in its fifty years of terrible baggage and tell all those new players freshly invited to the table that their invite's expired and they're no longer welcome. If you're not a white straight cisgender male ready to sit down and genocide some green people for the crime of not being sufficiently human, you can just go somewhere else and leave D&D for the real fans, right?
Why you think I should praise that sort of stance, and why you think people are going to be happy and supportive of it, I will never understand.
"If you're not a white straight cisgender male ready to sit down and genocide some green people for the crime of not being sufficiently human, you can just go somewhere else and leave D&D for the real fans, right?"
So then... what should the new gender and appearance be to qualify as a DnD player? Certainly NOT Cisgender white male.... we got that! Clearly you're a younger player who never really felt the sting of DnD discrimination and bigotry like those of us who brought the game up to where it is now. YOUR toxic attitude and ignorance only contributes to the divisive climate we all are dealing with.
"Why you think I should praise that sort of stance, and why you think people are going to be happy and supportive of it, I will never understand." You don't seem to understand the origins of the 'green people' before DnD was even a game. Maybe do a little background research and you'll understand instead of spewing more toxic attitude... mkay?
I think you misinterpreted Yurei’s sarcasm as they are non-cisgender themselves.
But now, it seems, the mob, as all mobs do, is taking a while to disperse and there are some who want to artificially see issues that are not yet even a thing.
Your use of the term "mob" is disrespectful for a group of people who exercised a boycott to protect an OGL they valued. Look up the definition of mob. That's not a mob.
Stopping everything shady is the wrong goal. Read some history books. It goes badly when people do that. Bottom line, there are going to be people with different value systems than yours express themselves in the marketplace and that is normal and acceptable.
Goal, yes. Expectation, no. And that is the biggest issue with any enforcement of anything vs expectations.
Perfection is not possible but that does not mean doing nothing is better than at least trying.
Crusaders often overshoot. I think you are overshooting. The methods you advocate produce too many negative outcomes. That's what experience tells us.
You are speaking out against censorship, but are censoring anyone who would say anything that sounds 'crusade-like' to you.
Moderation is a thing. Yes, it can go too far. If it really does go to far then I can still cut my subscription then. It isn't like the ability to speak with the pocketbook is somehow being taken away. The only way they could do that would be to shut down and force us not to spend here. Meanwhile, what, exactly, are you expecting from them? From anyone?
You need to revisit your critical thinking skills. I didn't "censor" you or anyone else. I told you what I thought was wrong with your proposed solution. Don't make baseless accusations or play loose with your language to try to build a false tu quoque argument.
I will absolutely defend your right to have your own beliefs and opinions
HAH. You have told me to shut up and go away in every single thread we've ever been at odds in. I'm almost impressed you have the bald-faced gall to say this to me.
We have a fundamental disagreement about what constitutes "hateful" content, and that's the problem. Your position isn't necessarily the correct one, but you speak to the rest of us as if it is, and as if anyone who doesn't agree with everything you believe is by default a bad, evil, racist, sexist person. There is no nuance to that position.
Nuance? What nuance? The one single morally absolute thing in this entire world of grey is that hatred should be opposed. No, I'm not going to bend and say that some hatred is fine and perfectly okay. There's no room for nuance, for saying that it's okay if only a few people are barred and excluded from the game for not being the right kind of person.
I 100% support making the D&D community a safe and inclusive space. ... Yurei, I 100% support your ability to play D&D in a safe, inclusive space.
How dare you say these words to me. You have been an outspoken opponent and critic of every single step that ANYONE - not just Wizards, but anyone - has taken to try and excise exclusionism in all its insidious forms from the game. You are one of the leaders of the charge against modernization and inclusiveness. Every single thread that even obliquely touches on these issues, I see your name fighting and clawing to exclude, deny, and denigrate anyone who isn't the right kind of player for you. You deny their pain, dismiss their concerns, and tell them they have no right to play the game if they don't shape up and toe the line. Don't ever pretend you're somehow on my side again.
You've said before that you wouldn't want to play in a D&D session with me, well... I would play in a D&D session with you.
I don't want to play the kind of D&D you want to create. No D&D is better than bad D&D.
I am NOT asking for your praise. I don't want a cookie. If we are going to find common ground to stop people like Ernest Gygax, then there also needs to be a willingness to treat each other in this community as equal people, capable of disagreeing, and not always taking strict black & white positions without compromise.
That's the thing. People in this thread are demanding that Ernest Gygax be perfectly allowed to publish his toxic garbage. That he should be allowed to sell it to whomever wants to buy it in any way he so pleases and no one should ever say him nay or stand in his way, because "The Market" will somehow magically regulate hatred. I cannot think of any possible reason they would want this save that they wish to purchase said book for themselves. Why should I "respect" such a stance and desire? What compromise is there for people who desire this thing?
Well, I tried.
Anyone who wants to can click on my profile and see all of my posts. I've not deleted anything. Judge for yourselves.
I oppose the works of people like Ernest Gygax jr. I support an inclusive community.
I disagree with some people about what constitutes "hatred". There are some things that are simply not clearly black & white.
I'm moving on from this interaction now, but I will continue to defend myself and others from inaccurate accusations of racism, sexism, or bigotry.
Some people will not accept that, if you don't agree with their proposed methods to deal with a problem, that you may still agree with them that it is a problem.
Fox, you might want to get your Internet sarcasm meter recalibrated. Regardless of sarcasm misfires, I think you may want to pull back from this one. I know you're new here and have never engaged with the community before, but I'm one of the few people who've been on the forefront of dealing with the ocean of grognards trying to cling to Gygaxian "traditions" that do nothing but cause pain and strife. I know full well what the origins of 'green people' in D&D are, and this is not the first time I've fought with October over the issue of entire species of sapient people being reduced to nameless, faceless, guilt-free murder puppets for a party of Rugged Aryan Heroes. I'm on the side trying to tell people to stop pulling this shit and baking above-the-table racism into the bones of D&D.
But to clarify the sarcasm: obviously white straight cisgender males are allowed to play D&D. No one's ever suggested they shouldn't. I'd simply appreciate it if other people were also allowed to sit at the table and play, which doesn't seem to be a priority for most folks in this thread.
Fox, you might want to get your Internet sarcasm meter recalibrated. Regardless of sarcasm misfires, I think you may want to pull back from this one. I know you're new here and have never engaged with the community before, but I'm one of the few people who've been on the forefront of dealing with the ocean of grognards trying to cling to Gygaxian "traditions" that do nothing but cause pain and strife. I know full well what the origins of 'green people' in D&D are, and this is not the first time I've fought with October over the issue of entire species of sapient people being reduced to nameless, faceless, guilt-free murder puppets for a party of Rugged Aryan Heroes. I'm on the side trying to tell people to stop pulling this shit and baking above-the-table racism into the bones of D&D.
But to clarify the sarcasm: obviously white straight cisgender males are allowed to play D&D. No one's ever suggested they shouldn't. I'd simply appreciate it if other people were also allowed to sit at the table and play, which doesn't seem to be a priority for most folks in this thread.
There is nothing like reading younger generations reinterpret the past absent context and without bothering to respect their distorted inferences do not obligate others to their leaps of logic. Fundamentally, Orcs are NOT REAL. They have been described as MONSTERS. Monsters are NOT REAL. No real orc was harmed by any games I have played. Orcs are only an analog for human beings if you want them to be. I don't. Leave me alone. You don't get to dictate the meaning of my game. "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."
Fox, you might want to get your Internet sarcasm meter recalibrated. Regardless of sarcasm misfires, I think you may want to pull back from this one. I know you're new here and have never engaged with the community before, but I'm one of the few people who've been on the forefront of dealing with the ocean of grognards trying to cling to Gygaxian "traditions" that do nothing but cause pain and strife. I know full well what the origins of 'green people' in D&D are, and this is not the first time I've fought with October over the issue of entire species of sapient people being reduced to nameless, faceless, guilt-free murder puppets for a party of Rugged Aryan Heroes. I'm on the side trying to tell people to stop pulling this shit and baking above-the-table racism into the bones of D&D.
But to clarify the sarcasm: obviously white straight cisgender males are allowed to play D&D. No one's ever suggested they shouldn't. I'd simply appreciate it if other people were also allowed to sit at the table and play, which doesn't seem to be a priority for most folks in this thread.
LOL....Guess the three women at my table yesterday didn't really exist then. I know that you don't believe it, but back in the early days of D&D (yes, some of us are still around), we were THRILLED when a girl played with us. Your view of the D&D gaming community is very narrow, but no one is going to sway you.
I get it... I was also bein sarcastic. Your meter may be off as well. I'm just wondering what it is you are looking for in a table-top game based around combat with other creatures? Where did genocide ever figure into it? I've never heard that in all my days of playing. What is it you want to see? I'm seriously confused as to what it is you are defending. No combat in DnD??
This conversation is going in circles and has run its course. It is leading to very unhealthy and disrespectful language, and as such I will be locking this thread. It is time to move on.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
How I'm posting based on text formatting: Mod Hat On - Mod Hat Off
For the record, I believe all the users of this website, including myself, are bigots and have at one time or another supported harmful ideologies or have harmed people themselves. Bigotry is a human failing that all of us are obligated to root out in both ourselves and others. If being bigoted makes someone a bad person, there isn't a good person in existence. Thus I choose to believe that it does not make someone a bad person, but that it is a ubiquitous weakness in the human brain that we are trying to overcome, some of us less so than others.
I think that formalized policies are tools by which we can help ourselves. They are not the only tools, but they are one and they help us attempt to be accountable to our lofty goals. Just like we use mnemonics to help us overcome weaknesses of memory, we can use other types of tools to help us overcome other weaknesses of the human brain. Like bigotry.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
And again I would like to speak from experience of literally having had my rights subject to the marketplace of local community opinion. "The Market" doesn't care about human rights. It is fundamentally a system that cares about profits and losses over what is right or wrong. We cannot rely on "the market" to take care of people or make them safe. Unregulated market forces would let people starve and die of disease and injury if governing bodies didn't step in to prevent that. So the idea that the marketplace would care to protect people from something like trauma and microaggressions is not only wrong, it is historically exactly the opposite of what happens.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Crusaders often overshoot. I think you are overshooting. The methods you advocate produce too many negative outcomes. That's what experience tells us.
DEAR MODS, why do some users on this forum continue to be allowed to use hateful and insulting language like this to smear other forum users the poster disagrees with? if we're supposed to be having a measured debate or conversation, why are these verbal attacks allowed?
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing)
You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
Ok we have not seen the plans for making it fully backwards compatible, but in terms of rules it is not a drastic change, the action bonus action process stays the same, magic mechanics are broadly the same with just some tweaks to spell lists. You still have classes and sub classes. I imagine they will, on release, produce a crib sheet of how to bring a 5E character up to one dnd, or how to use a 5E subclass in a one dnd, game. We have not seen those changes yet, but the fact is that this is cosmetic tweaks rather then a wholesale change to the system.
As someone who has lived through complete system overhauls of games I loved this is not that.
Now I do believe that the 5E players handbook, dms guide and monster manual will be replaced, because wizards have told us they will. But this is not a whole new system. The fact is we don’t know what the plan for integrating the 2 systems is and making what of assumptions without information is at best speculative and at worst creates needles anger. The community was right to voice it’s opinion on the OGL (although I know 3rd party creators who feel changes where needed and are not 100% happy that those views have been drowned out by a vocal mob that where, simply as a side effect of being a mob, unable to sit down and discuss the nuances with wizards. Yes Wizards handled this badly. The community rallied round but I actually feel the best option would have been for everyone to take a breath, including wizards, and spend some time really working out the best way forward.
But now, it seems, the mob, as all mobs do, is taking a while to disperse and there are some who want to artificially see issues that are not yet even a thing.
I don't trust anything WotC is doing now. Sure, they backpedaled, but they had to other option. They've already lost millions of dollars and with people still angry, there will millions more lost. They hurt the brand.
This heart-felt lip-service we're getting from them has nothing to do with the company "hearing us". It's straight damage control at this point. Right now they're trying to figure out how to win those of us back that have dropped them as a game system.
WotC WILL FIND A WAY to monetize its new system that will set into place everything outlined in their OGL they structured and abandoned. It's just being delayed ... you'll see it again in the future the same way Magic the Gathering forces you to use ONLY WotC brand Magic cards at sanctioned tournaments.
While I’m glad for the victory. I’m still weary of any future attempts to press on with their original plans. With Hasbro wanting to monetize D&D so much more they’re bound to work any legal loophole they can.
However they’d end up right back in the same spot as now.
May the Dice be ever in your favor!!
Y'know, it's not 'hateful and insulting language'. It's me having an opinion and being willing to use colorful language to express it. A whole lot of people like to get on my case because I'm better with words than they are, but it's never going to stop me from having opinions. If I have to listen to yours, why do you get to take down mine?
But here. Since it was giving you the vapors, I took it down myself. Doesn't change anything I wrote, though. People who've been long-standing and outspoken opponents of every last one of Wizards' efforts to expel exclusionism from D&D, known to take dramatic action to try and rouse public ire against any attempt Wizards embarks on to try and make their game even just a little more inclusive, are not going to earn my glowing praise and admiration. I wrote what I wrote because those people on this board have shown where they stand, and it's not with players who've been historically barred from the game and just want their own fair seat at the table. And all this yabber about "The Market" and how anyone should be able to sell anything they like and if "The Market" supports rampant xenophobic exclusionism then boy howdy hoo I-guess-it's-not-that-bad? Nothing but a meaningless smokescreen for those people to continue trying to force the game to stay mired in its fifty years of terrible baggage and tell all those new players freshly invited to the table that their invite's expired and they're no longer welcome. If you're not a white straight cisgender male ready to sit down and genocide some green people for the crime of not being sufficiently human, you can just go somewhere else and leave D&D for the real fans, right?
Why you think I should praise that sort of stance, and why you think people are going to be happy and supportive of it, I will never understand.
Please do not contact or message me.
I will absolutely defend your right to have your own beliefs and opinions, but those opinions can be shared without derogatory insults meant to belittle your opponents in front of others. If your argument has merit, it can stand on its own without ad hominem attacks. That sort of language is meant to inflame others against us, and "other" us. I have never, in any of my disagreements with you or others, resorted to insults.
We have a fundamental disagreement about what constitutes "hateful" content, and that's the problem. Your position isn't necessarily the correct one, but you speak to the rest of us as if it is, and as if anyone who doesn't agree with everything you believe is by default a bad, evil, racist, sexist person. There is no nuance to that position.
I am not a racist, sexist, bigoted person. I think you would find we have much more in common than you think, but you are unwilling to allow for disagreement with your strict interpretation of the world.
I 100% support making the D&D community a safe and inclusive space. Period. However, I disagree with some people on exactly what that looks like, and some people are unwilling to allow for any grey area.
Yurei, I 100% support your ability to play D&D in a safe, inclusive space. I don't know you, and despite our differences, and the way you speak about me in these forums, I have no ill will against you I just don't like the way you treat people some times. You've said before that you wouldn't want to play in a D&D session with me, well... I would play in a D&D session with you.
I am NOT asking for your praise. I don't want a cookie. If we are going to find common ground to stop people like Ernest Gygax, then there also needs to be a willingness to treat each other in this community as equal people, capable of disagreeing, and not always taking strict black & white positions without compromise.
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing)
You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
All right. Picture the sound of cracking knuckles in your mind, if you would, because apparently we're doing this.
HAH. You have told me to shut up and go away in every single thread we've ever been at odds in. I'm almost impressed you have the bald-faced gall to say this to me.
Nuance? What nuance? The one single morally absolute thing in this entire world of grey is that hatred should be opposed. No, I'm not going to bend and say that some hatred is fine and perfectly okay. There's no room for nuance, for saying that it's okay if only a few people are barred and excluded from the game for not being the right kind of person.
How dare you say these words to me. You have been an outspoken opponent and critic of every single step that ANYONE - not just Wizards, but anyone - has taken to try and excise exclusionism in all its insidious forms from the game. You are one of the leaders of the charge against modernization and inclusiveness. Every single thread that even obliquely touches on these issues, I see your name fighting and clawing to exclude, deny, and denigrate anyone who isn't the right kind of player for you. You deny their pain, dismiss their concerns, and tell them they have no right to play the game if they don't shape up and toe the line. Don't ever pretend you're somehow on my side again.
I don't want to play the kind of D&D you want to create. No D&D is better than bad D&D.
That's the thing. People in this thread are demanding that Ernest Gygax be perfectly allowed to publish his toxic garbage. That he should be allowed to sell it to whomever wants to buy it in any way he so pleases and no one should ever say him nay or stand in his way, because "The Market" will somehow magically regulate hatred. I cannot think of any possible reason they would want this save that they wish to purchase said book for themselves. Why should I "respect" such a stance and desire? What compromise is there for people who desire this thing?
Please do not contact or message me.
Well, I tried.
Anyone who wants to can click on my profile and see all of my posts. I've not deleted anything. Judge for yourselves.
I oppose the works of people like Ernest Gygax jr. I support an inclusive community.
I disagree with some people about what constitutes "hatred". There are some things that are simply not clearly black & white.
I'm moving on from this interaction now, but I will continue to defend myself and others from inaccurate accusations of racism, sexism, or bigotry.
"Orcs are savage raiders and pillagers with stooped postures, low foreheads, and piggish faces with prominent lower canines that resemble tusks." MM p245 (original printing)
You don't OWN your books on DDB: WotC can change them any time. What do you think will happen when OneD&D comes out?
"If you're not a white straight cisgender male ready to sit down and genocide some green people for the crime of not being sufficiently human, you can just go somewhere else and leave D&D for the real fans, right?"
So then... what should the new gender and appearance be to qualify as a DnD player? Certainly NOT Cisgender white male.... we got that! Clearly you're a younger player who never really felt the sting of DnD discrimination and bigotry like those of us who brought the game up to where it is now. YOUR toxic attitude and ignorance only contributes to the divisive climate we all are dealing with.
"Why you think I should praise that sort of stance, and why you think people are going to be happy and supportive of it, I will never understand." You don't seem to understand the origins of the 'green people' before DnD was even a game. Maybe do a little background research and you'll understand instead of spewing more toxic attitude... mkay?
Fox, you might want to get your Internet sarcasm meter recalibrated. Regardless of sarcasm misfires, I think you may want to pull back from this one. I know you're new here and have never engaged with the community before, but I'm one of the few people who've been on the forefront of dealing with the ocean of grognards trying to cling to Gygaxian "traditions" that do nothing but cause pain and strife. I know full well what the origins of 'green people' in D&D are, and this is not the first time I've fought with October over the issue of entire species of sapient people being reduced to nameless, faceless, guilt-free murder puppets for a party of Rugged Aryan Heroes. I'm on the side trying to tell people to stop pulling this shit and baking above-the-table racism into the bones of D&D.
But to clarify the sarcasm: obviously white straight cisgender males are allowed to play D&D. No one's ever suggested they shouldn't. I'd simply appreciate it if other people were also allowed to sit at the table and play, which doesn't seem to be a priority for most folks in this thread.
Please do not contact or message me.
I think you misinterpreted Yurei’s sarcasm as they are non-cisgender themselves.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
Your use of the term "mob" is disrespectful for a group of people who exercised a boycott to protect an OGL they valued. Look up the definition of mob. That's not a mob.
You need to revisit your critical thinking skills. I didn't "censor" you or anyone else. I told you what I thought was wrong with your proposed solution. Don't make baseless accusations or play loose with your language to try to build a false tu quoque argument.
Some people will not accept that, if you don't agree with their proposed methods to deal with a problem, that you may still agree with them that it is a problem.
There is nothing like reading younger generations reinterpret the past absent context and without bothering to respect their distorted inferences do not obligate others to their leaps of logic. Fundamentally, Orcs are NOT REAL. They have been described as MONSTERS. Monsters are NOT REAL. No real orc was harmed by any games I have played. Orcs are only an analog for human beings if you want them to be. I don't. Leave me alone. You don't get to dictate the meaning of my game. "Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar."
I get it... I was also bein sarcastic. Your meter may be off as well. I'm just wondering what it is you are looking for in a table-top game based around combat with other creatures? Where did genocide ever figure into it? I've never heard that in all my days of playing. What is it you want to see? I'm seriously confused as to what it is you are defending. No combat in DnD??
-
View User Profile
-
View Posts
-
Send Message
ModeratorThis conversation is going in circles and has run its course. It is leading to very unhealthy and disrespectful language, and as such I will be locking this thread. It is time to move on.
Homebrew Rules || Homebrew FAQ || Snippet Codes || Tooltips
DDB Guides & FAQs, Class Guides, Character Builds, Game Guides, Useful Websites, and WOTC Resources