I stumbled on a thread the other day trying to claim that the Character Thaco the Clown from was WOTC taking aim at old school DnD players (grogs), flaming them for existing, apparantly being a grouchy old man who hates children is obviously these players.
Personally I think it is just a funny reference to an archaic combat system that I think goes down historically as one of the worst in TTRPG history. But there are many online who are taking it as a personal attack on themselves for being long term players and some of the threads and efforts to make the most obtuse connections are just amusing.
So thoughts, is Chris Perkins (who would have signed off on this) trolling DnD players, or is this just, as he says, a nostalgic easter egg in an age where easter eggs have become a massive thing in everything from Movies, to TV shows, to Books and now it seems TTRPG's?
I admit I don’t get the whole be offended thing. I’m 56. I played old school 1st and 2nd editions, still play some today. I loved war games back then and would probably still play them if I had someone to play them with. Is THACO obsolete? Was it weird? Sure. But why can’t you make fun of it? It was what we had so it was what we used. Why waste time being offended when you can just be playing and hanging with your group? The whole clown thing is pretty funny anyway.
I stumbled on a thread the other day trying to claim that the Character Thaco the Clown from was WOTC taking aim at old school DnD players (grogs), flaming them for existing, apparantly being a grouchy old man who hates children is obviously these players.
Personally I think it is just a funny reference to an archaic combat system that I think goes down historically as one of the worst in TTRPG history. But there are many online who are taking it as a personal attack on themselves for being long term players and some of the threads and efforts to make the most obtuse connections are just amusing.
So thoughts, is Chris Perkins (who would have signed off on this) trolling DnD players, or is this just, as he says, a nostalgic easter egg in an age where easter eggs have become a massive thing in everything from Movies, to TV shows, to Books and now it seems TTRPG's?
I think if you choose to identify with a character named after a system basically everyone hates and mocks, that says more about you than it does the people who created the character
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I stumbled on a thread the other day trying to claim that the Character Thaco the Clown from was WOTC taking aim at old school DnD players (grogs), flaming them for existing, apparantly being a grouchy old man who hates children is obviously these players.
Personally I think it is just a funny reference to an archaic combat system that I think goes down historically as one of the worst in TTRPG history. But there are many online who are taking it as a personal attack on themselves for being long term players and some of the threads and efforts to make the most obtuse connections are just amusing.
So thoughts, is Chris Perkins (who would have signed off on this) trolling DnD players, or is this just, as he says, a nostalgic easter egg in an age where easter eggs have become a massive thing in everything from Movies, to TV shows, to Books and now it seems TTRPG's?
I been told the offended party is always right. Even when no insult was meant. Thaco the clown gave me a small giggle.
I don't remember the interview, but Perkins specifically mentioned the Thaco reference in one of the previews for WBtW. It's clearly meant as an easter egg to amuse veteran players, not to insult them.
Basically no matter what someone says or does in this day and age, there is someone else somewhere that will be offended by it. No matter how trivial. I am almost 51. I spent a lot of time using THACO while playing 2nd edition D&D and spent a lot of time hating it. I find the joke amusing and right on point.
I'm fine with the ThAC0 mechanic and the character of the same name's persona. The reasons why I'm not offended by it are twofold: one, thAC0 is still a better way of calculating and presenting hit chance and damage dealt than most video games which are my usual entertainment medium (Baldur's Gate being how I was first introduced to it, and have you seen the Fallout CRPGs' damage resistance calculation?!), and two, I'm a grown-up, or rather, I earned the right to call myself one after I stopped with all my piss and vinegar. This definitely falls into the 'widdle and condiments' pile that I might well have stared at begrudgingly if I'd spent as much time in the tabletop as I have vidya.
As others have said, if Thaco causes offence then there's two possibilities: either your life is so great that you should be grateful a fictional clown is the cause of your latest grumpiness, or you need a serious sit-down to wonder what is going on with yourself. Maybe both. And it's OK to admit to either of those things. I did, and I'm a better person and player for it.
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
These days no one uses "offended" to refer to themselves, only others. It's a buzzword. They might say the thing in question is targeting them for mockery, or that they're being insulted, but never that they themselves are offended. As such, using it to describe someone is, in effect, framing them as emotional weaklings and crybabies, and probably isn't conducive to a healthy sense of community.
Anyway, I think from my limited exposure to this thing that it does sound like it's poking fun at grognards.
As one of those that THACO seems aimed at (65+, playing since 1980) I find the whole thing highly amusing thaco as a tool was fairly realistic but a freaking pain in the butt. If WOtC wants to do a clown Easter egg of it I love it. For anyone that is truly offended my comment is “ put your little boy pants on and enjoy the clowns- we are all bozo’s on this bus”.
Are there really substantial numbers of folks taking true offense at a NPC's name being an "in joke" that requires knowing one point from old rule systems to be in on? People can call them Easter eggs, but Easter eggs used to be things one would have to look hard for (you'd have to hunt for Easter eggs, that's why they're called Easter eggs, not see it in double pointed font right there on a name), now the term's just used to describe any allusive self or meta reference. That some individual on the internet is writing for upvotes to claim grievous injury by said reference is both incredible and unsurprising.
This Thac0 reference lands squarely here on the self-deprecating self-referencing sense of humor spectrum:
Were folks who read the Uncanny X-Men wronged by that joke? The ability to see the humor in one's past and in one's self is generally if not universally regarded as a healthy trait, and anecdotally I'd say that goes especially for gamers.
Myself an older gamer I thought it was funny that they did that, but after I had learned of ascending AC and how it worked to me it made so much more sense then descending. Even back when I was a 2nd edition player I disliked descending AC and THAC0, so ascending AC was like a lightbulb going on in my head, I swapped my 2nd edition games to ascending AC and made tables for each classes basic attack bonus so players could just roll the d20 and add attack bonus for AC hit it sped my games up so much that every old school player changed their minds and used it from then on, due to that I just played 2nd edition until 5th came out then moved over never really played 3rd, 3.5 or any of 4th.
I think if you choose to identify with a character named after a system basically everyone hates and mocks, that says more about you than it does the people who created the character
It's a ridiculously looking grumpy old and chubby clown named THAC0 that guards a gate. I don't think I'm being paranoid or overly sensitive at all, it's a mean-spirited attack on old-school gamers.
Or it was a minor joke about an old ruleset and old-school gamers wanted to shake their fist and yell at a cloud. Since, you know, people do that in these forums all the time over rules changes and new content anyway.
For the record, Thac0 the clown is more than just a crack at the concept of Thac0. This is a ridiculous-looking grumpy old clown who guards a gate. It's a direct insult to old-school gamers, it's very much meant to deliberately insult a very specific group of people. It basically says that old school gamers are clowns who guard gates and it's now the official wizards of the coast policy that it is ok to make fun of them. It's hardly innocent an innocent joke, its an attack on a minority group in the D&D community.
I don't get how this is "official Wizards of the Coast policy," because then I'd say that to make it so would be bullying. Either that or we have to apply every single thing possible in the D&D books to real-life, and we don't do that because that would be silly. To quote D&D Beyond's "Did you see that" page,
THAC0 is an abbreviation for To Hit Armor Class Zero and is used as the basis for determining if an attack roll succeeds in Advanced D&D. In The Wild Beyond the Witchlight, players meet Thaco the clown in the Witchlight Carnival. He can typically be found puffing on his bubble pipe, with a painted grin, serving as a Witchlight hand.
There's nothing particularly malicious about what's said there. There's no mention of it being "official policy" to abuse players because of their age or experience.
“D&D is over 45 years old and it’s become a multi-generational game. We’ve included tons of D&D Easter eggs that nod to the theme of time echoing throughout the story’s past and Thaco the clown is one of them," and "“The jabberwock appeared in a second edition Monster Compendium, and that’s what we went back to when revising it for fifth edition. The only official D&D adventure the creature ever appeared in was called The Manxome Foe, when I was asked to create an adventure tied to Planescape. It’s another instance of us reaching into the past and pulling something forward to reinforce that theme of time.”
Again, no official policy, otherwise it would have to include himself because he's worked at Wizards since '88. I would say that it's a jab at himself before anyone else, shortsighted or not, and I'm not entirely sure how accurate it is because I don't know the guy well enough, personally or professionally.
I get you greatly enjoy the older editions of D&D, I'm quite the fan of your retelling of how things were in the day, but I think you're taking this too personally because I've been there before with video games, time and time again. I cringed a wee bit at just now seeing some of the 4th Edition adverts targeting my (then) demographic, and at the time I may have had the same response as yourself. But then I remembered it's only an advert in poor taste, there's others that I enjoy, and that goes for everything else. Hell, just this morning I'd received a notification that Activision-Blizzard's marketing of the upcoming Call of Duty was tasteless, but was quick to remember that it's Activision-Blizzard, and that they have a history of poor taste. That doesn't make it OK, that just means it's expected and I can release my pearls sooner. I've not been playing the tabletop long but even I'm long over Wizards' silly marketing. I reckon it's time for you to shrug it off too. Or maybe you have, and this is all healthy conversation (and I apologise for the assumptions you haven't). Text makes it harder to guess one's tone. ^^
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
This reminds me of a story told by the creator of The Far Side, Gary Larson.
In his telling of it, he drew a cover for In Search of the Far Side (and he requests that people don't go looking for it). During a book signing, a kid came up and made note how phallic the stone idol looked, and he, for the first time, realized what he had unwittingly drawn. He called up his publisher in a panic. The way he tells it, she goes silent, assuming she was looking over the image. The next word she spoke defused the entire thing: "So?"
She further explained that people are going to see what they want to see. Larson resolved to use that very same response if someone came to him to point out something he didn't intentionally draw. "So?"
To the point of this thread (aka tl;dr), people are going to see what they want to see.
So?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider. My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong. I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲 “It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
This reminds me of a story told by the creator of The Far Side, Gary Larson.
In his telling of it, he drew a cover for In Search of the Far Side (and he requests that people don't go looking for it). During a book signing, a kid came up and made note how phallic the stone idol looked, and he, for the first time, realized what he had unwittingly drawn. He called up his publisher in a panic. The way he tells it, she goes silent, assuming she was looking over the image. The next word she spoke defused the entire thing: "So?"
She further explained that people are going to see what they want to see. Larson resolved to use that very same response if someone came to him to point out something he didn't intentionally draw. "So?"
To the point of this thread (aka tl;dr), people are going to see what they want to see.
So?
Wow, that fits perfectly here. It’s a damn clown. Get over it.
I was in a group of way, way, overleveled characters, and I think the DM and I were the only two who got it (and I'm neither that old nor particularly familiar with THAC0), at least until we explained the joke.
Our barbarian disintegrated him by dropping on him with a hammer. Did something like 66 points of damage due to the DM stacking falling damage on both characters, turning him to a chunky red mist. We were trying to do it non-lethal- the barbarian just assumed that the DM had scaled up his stat block, because, again, very overleveled. He had not done so.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I stumbled on a thread the other day trying to claim that the Character Thaco the Clown from was WOTC taking aim at old school DnD players (grogs), flaming them for existing, apparantly being a grouchy old man who hates children is obviously these players.
Personally I think it is just a funny reference to an archaic combat system that I think goes down historically as one of the worst in TTRPG history. But there are many online who are taking it as a personal attack on themselves for being long term players and some of the threads and efforts to make the most obtuse connections are just amusing.
So thoughts, is Chris Perkins (who would have signed off on this) trolling DnD players, or is this just, as he says, a nostalgic easter egg in an age where easter eggs have become a massive thing in everything from Movies, to TV shows, to Books and now it seems TTRPG's?
I admit I don’t get the whole be offended thing. I’m 56. I played old school 1st and 2nd editions, still play some today. I loved war games back then and would probably still play them if I had someone to play them with. Is THACO obsolete? Was it weird? Sure. But why can’t you make fun of it? It was what we had so it was what we used. Why waste time being offended when you can just be playing and hanging with your group? The whole clown thing is pretty funny anyway.
I think if you choose to identify with a character named after a system basically everyone hates and mocks, that says more about you than it does the people who created the character
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
I been told the offended party is always right. Even when no insult was meant. Thaco the clown gave me a small giggle.
No Gaming is Better than Bad Gaming.
I don't remember the interview, but Perkins specifically mentioned the Thaco reference in one of the previews for WBtW. It's clearly meant as an easter egg to amuse veteran players, not to insult them.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
Basically no matter what someone says or does in this day and age, there is someone else somewhere that will be offended by it. No matter how trivial. I am almost 51. I spent a lot of time using THACO while playing 2nd edition D&D and spent a lot of time hating it. I find the joke amusing and right on point.
I'm fine with the ThAC0 mechanic and the character of the same name's persona. The reasons why I'm not offended by it are twofold: one, thAC0 is still a better way of calculating and presenting hit chance and damage dealt than most video games which are my usual entertainment medium (Baldur's Gate being how I was first introduced to it, and have you seen the Fallout CRPGs' damage resistance calculation?!), and two, I'm a grown-up, or rather, I earned the right to call myself one after I stopped with all my piss and vinegar. This definitely falls into the 'widdle and condiments' pile that I might well have stared at begrudgingly if I'd spent as much time in the tabletop as I have vidya.
As others have said, if Thaco causes offence then there's two possibilities: either your life is so great that you should be grateful a fictional clown is the cause of your latest grumpiness, or you need a serious sit-down to wonder what is going on with yourself. Maybe both. And it's OK to admit to either of those things. I did, and I'm a better person and player for it.
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
- The Assemblage of Houses, World of Warcraft
If they are making fun of anyone, they are making fun of themselves.
Its not like the players came up with the THAC0 mechanic…
These days no one uses "offended" to refer to themselves, only others. It's a buzzword. They might say the thing in question is targeting them for mockery, or that they're being insulted, but never that they themselves are offended. As such, using it to describe someone is, in effect, framing them as emotional weaklings and crybabies, and probably isn't conducive to a healthy sense of community.
Anyway, I think from my limited exposure to this thing that it does sound like it's poking fun at grognards.
As one of those that THACO seems aimed at (65+, playing since 1980) I find the whole thing highly amusing thaco as a tool was fairly realistic but a freaking pain in the butt. If WOtC wants to do a clown Easter egg of it I love it. For anyone that is truly offended my comment is “ put your little boy pants on and enjoy the clowns- we are all bozo’s on this bus”.
Wisea$$ DM and Player since 1979.
Are there really substantial numbers of folks taking true offense at a NPC's name being an "in joke" that requires knowing one point from old rule systems to be in on? People can call them Easter eggs, but Easter eggs used to be things one would have to look hard for (you'd have to hunt for Easter eggs, that's why they're called Easter eggs, not see it in double pointed font right there on a name), now the term's just used to describe any allusive self or meta reference. That some individual on the internet is writing for upvotes to claim grievous injury by said reference is both incredible and unsurprising.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
This Thac0 reference lands squarely here on the self-deprecating self-referencing sense of humor spectrum:
Were folks who read the Uncanny X-Men wronged by that joke? The ability to see the humor in one's past and in one's self is generally if not universally regarded as a healthy trait, and anecdotally I'd say that goes especially for gamers.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Myself an older gamer I thought it was funny that they did that, but after I had learned of ascending AC and how it worked to me it made so much more sense then descending. Even back when I was a 2nd edition player I disliked descending AC and THAC0, so ascending AC was like a lightbulb going on in my head, I swapped my 2nd edition games to ascending AC and made tables for each classes basic attack bonus so players could just roll the d20 and add attack bonus for AC hit it sped my games up so much that every old school player changed their minds and used it from then on, due to that I just played 2nd edition until 5th came out then moved over never really played 3rd, 3.5 or any of 4th.
Uh, many of us old timers recall THAC0 fondly...
Or it was a minor joke about an old ruleset and old-school gamers wanted to shake their fist and yell at a cloud. Since, you know, people do that in these forums all the time over rules changes and new content anyway.
I don't get how this is "official Wizards of the Coast policy," because then I'd say that to make it so would be bullying. Either that or we have to apply every single thing possible in the D&D books to real-life, and we don't do that because that would be silly. To quote D&D Beyond's "Did you see that" page,
There's nothing particularly malicious about what's said there. There's no mention of it being "official policy" to abuse players because of their age or experience.
Chris Perkins, in an interview with Dragon+, has this to say, quote,
Again, no official policy, otherwise it would have to include himself because he's worked at Wizards since '88. I would say that it's a jab at himself before anyone else, shortsighted or not, and I'm not entirely sure how accurate it is because I don't know the guy well enough, personally or professionally.
I get you greatly enjoy the older editions of D&D, I'm quite the fan of your retelling of how things were in the day, but I think you're taking this too personally because I've been there before with video games, time and time again. I cringed a wee bit at just now seeing some of the 4th Edition adverts targeting my (then) demographic, and at the time I may have had the same response as yourself. But then I remembered it's only an advert in poor taste, there's others that I enjoy, and that goes for everything else. Hell, just this morning I'd received a notification that Activision-Blizzard's marketing of the upcoming Call of Duty was tasteless, but was quick to remember that it's Activision-Blizzard, and that they have a history of poor taste. That doesn't make it OK, that just means it's expected and I can release my pearls sooner. I've not been playing the tabletop long but even I'm long over Wizards' silly marketing. I reckon it's time for you to shrug it off too. Or maybe you have, and this is all healthy conversation (and I apologise for the assumptions you haven't). Text makes it harder to guess one's tone. ^^
Zero is the most important number in D&D: Session Zero sets the boundaries and the tone; Rule Zero dictates the Dungeon Master (DM) is the final arbiter; and Zero D&D is better than Bad D&D.
"Let us speak plainly now, and in earnest, for words mean little without the weight of conviction."
- The Assemblage of Houses, World of Warcraft
Mod reminder; discussions equating a light hearted in-game joke to actual discrimination against real people is not appropriate.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
This reminds me of a story told by the creator of The Far Side, Gary Larson.
In his telling of it, he drew a cover for In Search of the Far Side (and he requests that people don't go looking for it). During a book signing, a kid came up and made note how phallic the stone idol looked, and he, for the first time, realized what he had unwittingly drawn. He called up his publisher in a panic. The way he tells it, she goes silent, assuming she was looking over the image. The next word she spoke defused the entire thing: "So?"
She further explained that people are going to see what they want to see. Larson resolved to use that very same response if someone came to him to point out something he didn't intentionally draw. "So?"
To the point of this thread (aka tl;dr), people are going to see what they want to see.
So?
Human. Male. Possibly. Don't be a divider.
My characters' backgrounds are written like instruction manuals rather than stories. My opinion and preferences don't mean you're wrong.
I am 99.7603% convinced that the digital dice are messing with me. I roll high when nobody's looking and low when anyone else can see.🎲
“It's a bit early to be thinking about an epitaph. No?” will be my epitaph.
Wow, that fits perfectly here. It’s a damn clown. Get over it.
I was in a group of way, way, overleveled characters, and I think the DM and I were the only two who got it (and I'm neither that old nor particularly familiar with THAC0), at least until we explained the joke.
Our barbarian disintegrated him by dropping on him with a hammer. Did something like 66 points of damage due to the DM stacking falling damage on both characters, turning him to a chunky red mist. We were trying to do it non-lethal- the barbarian just assumed that the DM had scaled up his stat block, because, again, very overleveled. He had not done so.