David Wesley deserves historical credit for creating the Braunstein game that was the foundation upon which Arneson created Blackmoor. After that, imitation is the highest form of flattery. Will Wesley publish the rules and advice for Braunstein games before he dies?
Good points. I’m unfortunately negative on this topic, I think it’s going to get worse before it gets better. And I think the algorithms that drive social media play a big part. Because not only do they feed people more articles, videos, and clips of their own views, creating an echo chamber, but apparently even the comments shown under a video are “curated” to literally give the impression that everyone thinks like the person targeted by the algorithm. As someone outside the US I’m constantly baffled by Trump Derangement Syndrome, and brainwashing through online echo chambers is the only explanation I can think of. I can 100% see why someone would dislike him, but to liken him to Hitler and call him a threat to democracy… I don’t know how that makes sense, then again the flat earth movement is a real thing, so I guess anything goes 😂
I do think it's good to leave politics out of our gaming, it just creates friction where none is needed. Mainly though I was aiming at the tenor of people's language when discussing gaming with each other. There seems to be a growing lack of civility, and that just should have no place in a hobby. I'm not a work guy who believes in safe spaces, but I do believe in civility and relatively polite discourse. I'm likely out of luck on both of those counts these days. 😅
The thing with the OSR is that it comes in two flavours: First you have the Old School Revival crew, for which your arguments stand strong. Then you have the so-called Old School Renaissance, where they pick up some of the design aspects of old games (simplicity/incompletitude of rules, high risk - high reward situations, DM as an arbiter, etc) and reframe them as a way to facilitate relevant in-character decission making. Games like into the odd, cairn, maze rats and so on would fall in this category. For me there is a really interesting area to explore there, and potential for attracting lots of new players.
I think you have an interesting point about the old school Renaissance. I wonder how effective it is in facilitating player decision making. I know in my own design efforts that I'm trying to find The Sweet spot between player agency and enough mechanics so that the game can be functional. I think you need enough mechanic so players understand how the world "works". Is required to make a good decision in character. The hard part is not having mechanics detract from the role play by interfering too much with the flow of things. You're definitely right that it's an interesting area for exploration of game design and play.
Thank you for a very reasonable take on this. It is getting very tiring seeing people rail against these tools. They can only help. If you don't want to use them, you don't have to. I cannot express how refreshing it is to hear a good, reasonable consideration of this, rather than the knee-jerk hostility that is so unfortunately common.
Hey, again! Long post, it seems I had a lot to say. Hopefully you find it interesting. I watched Chris Gonnerman’s video, and I agree that it was good, and he does seem like a good guy. There is, however, some things that he’s missing in my opinion. One thing is that he is giving a commonsense answer. I would bet $100, you, and I, and Chris would all agree on basically everything he said, and the minor differences we’d work out in about a minute, and then we could have a great time playing games together. Because of commonsense and a willingness to cooperate. Some people aren’t like that, though. Their priority isn’t to have a good time playing an RPG. They are first and foremost activists, and their priority is fighting for their cause, and the RPG scene is one of the places they are doing that. So, if Chris is running a game at the FLGS and one of these people show up, and he kindly and in a commonsense way tells them that they can’t game together because in his world orcs enslave humans, the activist player (who can’t tolerate slavery) isn’t going to say okay and find another game (the commonsense thing to do). Instead that person is going to go to the FLGS management and complain (and perhaps use threats about blacklisting and spreading information online etc. something that is morally justified by the importance of the cause, and the view of all opposition as evil) until the FLGS management gives in and bans Chris’ games from their establishment. If all they did was create new gaming things for a new generation of gamers, there would be neither problem nor conflict. But that’s not it, activists don’t want to add things, they want to replace them. And that means they want to destroy the old things. It is part of such people’s mission to prevent Chris from playing his game the way he wants to and they would say he is evil for doing so, and a bad person for wanting to do so. Again, I really did think the video was good. It came from a good place, and I fully agreed. But unfortunately, that’s another mistake that many people make. They assume good intentions. “This form is to protect my mental health:” This triggers kindness and empathy in most normal human beings. The problem is, people who are activists, and fanatical about their cause, are going to use a thing like that to gain power to push their cause. And they are not “agree to disagree” people. They are the “do as I say or get destroyed” type of people, hiding behind things like mental health to gain power. Because it is very difficult arguing against something that is presented as a plea for help. So, the people giving these forms and things a hard no, in fact have a point, even if that may seem unnecessarily harsh. And it can be hard to understand for people who haven’t run afoul activists in gaming, or other situations. The strong, seemingly harsh, reaction is based on having dealt with activist type people, not the smokescreen reasons they claim to be about. And the hard no is given because once people agree to the form, they have agreed that some things are a problem to the extent that a form is necessary. And once they are that big a problem, why wouldn’t they want to stop them? And if they belong on the form, as a problem, why should they be allowed in a FLGS that is supposed to be for everyone? And if the TTRPG itself is also for everyone, why should those things be allowed there? And this is why assuming agreeance on commonsense answers is a mistake, as is the assumption of good intentions. Unfortunately. And it might seem extreme, or like a conspiracy theory. But it is exactly what is happening to D&D. With sensitivity readers and the censoring of certain words, the change that you cannot use the word “race” in any context, and that no race (now actually “species”) can be inherently evil, putting warning labels on old modules, etc. So, it’s quite a big can of worms…
You make a really good point about consent forms just being the camel's nose in your tent that leads to them regulating your speech and behavior. I hadn't thought about that but I think you have a great point about that and it isn't just about being upset, they do want to control you. So now I'm even more against having social contracts for this stuff and consent forms. I was also thinking about what you said about them complaining at a convention or something. If they banned Chris Connor man or someone like him from a convention they would very rapidly find out how fast you go woke and go broke. I think there's enough of us out there who'd organize another convention where that wouldn't happen.
Makes me sad reading this.... Never liked playing at conventions much. To noisy, to superficial. But in the day you walked up to a table with a free chair. Hey what are you playing? Vampire? Cool can I join? Sure... Etc What happened to common sense since? Maybe the older kids on the playground should distance themselves. Go back underground where rpg once thrived. Smaller, private non profit gatherings?
@@crapphone7744 Haha, great analogy. Yeah, I do think the old school ways will always remain to some extent. Many new gamers didn't pick up the hobby on their own, they learned from someone older. And in the long run, I think the hobby overcomes the activism, because the silent majority are actual hobby enthusiasts who just want to play.
@@Scibelius I know what you mean. But I think its just a sad phase for the hobby right now, in the long run I think it's going to go back to being about the games again.
Hey! About the pronunciation of grognard, I did some research in the past, deciding how to pronounce my channel name. And my conclusion was that the consensus in gaming circles nowadays is that the French pronunciation is used for the historical soldiers, while the anglicized pronunciation is used for old school gamers. It is with all certainty based on the fact that most people don’t know the original word, but it seems today even the gamers who do know, say “grog-nard” to denote people in the hobby. And I actually wouldn’t be surprised if the semantic changes eventually reach a point where the French pronunciation is in fact labeled as incorrect in this context. I do find it a bit funny, though, that we can now have grumbling among the grumblers. The French grognards versus the anglicized grognards, or perhaps we are neo-grognards, haha.
Neo-grognards is both awesome and hilarious. And if you want to go with the gaming pronunciation, that's fine. English is a language that evolves and borrows words constantly, and you're probably right in a couple of years people will be correcting me when I pronounce it the French way. What they won't expect is the lecture they get where I get all up in their grill about them correcting me because I am, in fact, un vrai grognard! (A true grumbler)😅.
@@crapphone7744 I feel like this exchange is a perfect microcosm example of the positive side of what we discussed in the other thread, and I really appreciate it! En avant grognard! :D
I apologize for that. I waited for a couple of days until I saw stuff plastered all over RU-vid about this. I will have to be more careful in the future. Live and learn. Again, my apologies.
I hadn't posted this until I had seen this plastered everywhere on RU-vid and so didn't think anyone wasn't aware. I'll be more circumspect in the future.
Matt has pointed out on twitter that, had the hp been calculated exactly, Otohan would have been left on hp low enough that the next player would have taken the kill. And, whilst that definitely could have been played out and been emotional too, Matt felt it was better to give FCG the kill. Especially considering how the “how do you want to do this?” Doubled as a “last words” opportunity for the character. Personally I think it was handled very well and made for a very good moment.
Ok I've been playing for over 45 years, and man this video comes off as either gatekeeping or plain stupid. Most people quit? I dont love 5e, but its impossible to deny that more people played 5e than at any time in the hobby. Likely massively so.
You've been playing for over 45 years. You love 5e. I would imagine you're playing with the same kind of people that you played with 45 years ago and probably the same kind of games. Oh sure the mechanics of evolved but the mechanics are still the game. I'd be curious to hear if I am right about that, it would also be interesting to know what your most memorable moment was in all those years of gaming. And I think those two answers would mirror the problems with our stagnating hobby. I may be plain stupid, but I do know that we need new people with new ideas playing and if we keep playing the way we've always played we're not going to get them and that's what I'm seeing and that's what I'm trying to help change.
I'm not a "critter" or anything, but if you're oging to comment on something, have some understanding of something more than just the hit points would help. To say they dont play their characters in the world is massively disrespectful. You also claim that Critical role is scripted. Also BS.
When I watch critical role which I have a bit to see what it's like, I don't see any immersive role playing, I don't see them experiencing the world through their characters eyes and ears. That's what I was trying to communicate. If you're not role playing your character, in character, then you're losing out on the essence of role-playing and you're just engaging in a tabletop game that uses character sheets. And that's fine I just wish that they wouldn't call it role-playing because that confuses new people, who then quit the hobby because role-playing is not role-playing it's this game they play instead.
@@crapphone7744 then I don't believe you're actually watching. You claim its scripted, where its not. You claim they arent doing any immersrive roleplaying, which is what they mostly do. Also this whole 80hp/40 damage thing, nobody knows how many hit points were remaining. Maybe matt fudged, a little. maybe he didnt. But if you think they arent immersive roleplaying you havent been watching. And for what its worth, I've been playing since the 70s.
Is there anybody in our entire solar system who doesn't already know this has happened? I have to be honest though, it did not occur to me that this might be a spoiler. I'll give that more thought in the future, thanks for pointing that out.👍
Been ten days. If you pay to watch you had ample time. If you are a free loader like most you also had plenty of time too. Title is just fine at this point.
Respectfully I disagree. Someone martyred themselves in hopes to save the party, you shouldn't cheapen that sacrifice by having a TPK. They fought Otohan Thull before and she had fully killed 3 members way before this and the last death stopped the fight. That moment was memorable because Matt Mercer let the party grieve and avoided a TPK. It's wild hearing someone talk about something with almost no context and then sharing their opinion of what they thought would make it better. You don't have enough information on the campaign, the characters, the DM or the villain. Also there are people that are months behind that you could be spoiling with your title, maybe you should consider changing it.
It certainly legitimate to feel differently about how that played out as you do. I would disagree that I don't have enough context, Mercer did "fudge the dice" by letting 40 points of damage kill a monster with 80 hit points. As to changing the title, I have seen so many RU-vid videos about this and so many shorts but I think at this point the damage has been done by others. As you point out I'm not a critical role watcher, but boy it sure came up in my feet all over the place even though I just watched videos about ttrpgs mostly solo gaming. I did say in another comments someone else raising this point that in the future I'll think more about that. I can always learn and be better.
@@alphaz27 If the rules do not matter then the story carries no weight. When the hard calls should be made and you waffle that cheapens the story being crafted not strengthens it.
Been ten days. If you pay to watch you had ample time. If you are a free loader like most you also had plenty of time too. Title is just fine at this point.
I wanna start with saying that I don’t mean any disrespect. But you said that didn’t know who the “bad guy” was and or what the plot was. So, just to make it clear, Critical Role is a show where Matt Mercer DMs for his friends and we just get to see it. The show while is broadcasted and is public, it is first and foremost for the people on that table. They tell the story together for their own enjoyment. Now, if you had watched the entirety of Campaign 3 until now, you would’ve known that FCG has always the martyr complex, from the very beginning. And FCG going out while saving their friends and realizing that they’ve been alive was a moment of grown and purpose for that character, which is why Matt asked him How Do You Want To Do This. And this isn’t the first time it’s happened. Matt always gives his players their very last moment. He did the same with Vax in campaign 1 and with Molly In Campaign 2. Moreover you say that you don’t want anything to do with the discourse online yet, you fuel it.
Lastly, they taught Otahon before and lost 3 of their party members in the fight. This combat was their second chance which is why Orym only went for the bag on her back since that’s how she defeated them last time. This was combat, a moment and an encounter in the making for the last 3 years.
Thank you for commenting and that was in no way disrespectful on any level. My main issue is when the GM says things like how do you want to handle that and takes you completely out of immersion and out of the moment. The other issue I have is fudging the rules for the rule of cool. I understand the impetus for that but it turns out you get more rule of cool type outcomes by not doing rule of cool very often. I totally understand critical role is entertainment, and I have no problem with that per se. The problem that causes is anybody thinking to try role-playing as a hobby is going to see something like critical role because of its highly visible profile and think that's role-playing. It's the type of role playing we've been doing for the past 40 years and it limits our hobby to a very small demographic. If we're going to grow role playing as a hobby we need to attract new people by having a game that's not joking around and laughing, but something that provides an ongoing challenge and entertainment by having character development and immersion. The analogy I use is model railroading in the 80s and model railroading today. The hobby has evolved to realistic operations and much better scenery. Metaphorically speaking we're still back using sawdust and glued down trees made of lichen. Thank you very much for your thoughtful by the way and I hope of addressed the points that you've made. Reasonable discourse with reasonable people is kind of hard to come by on social media these days and I appreciate your thoughtful remarks.
One other thought I wanted to add to my probably overly long response to your comments, which I appreciate, btw. If I said I don't want to trigger discourse, then I misspoke. I am happy to discuss things with people online. What I don't want to add to is the drama and sturm und drag which goes with this discussion online these days. I'm hoping to be able to discuss and ultimately persuade reasonable people that there is a better way to play and then we have for 40 years.
@@crapphone7744 alright, now that’s understandable. It’s hard for new players to manage expectations especially when all they’ve watched is Critical Role. There are definitely different styles of Roleplaying that are much more suited to your taste and would help the new comers to actually understand the game more. I completely agree. But the thing is, when it comes to CR, everything changes because it’s not really a pure D&D campaign, it’s D&D+ a lot of home brew stuff. Which is why Matt gives certain moments to players as a reward. And lastly, the main difference between any other table and CR is that at CR, they’re all actors and have a certain style of Roleplaying that works for everyone on that table. That’s how they’ve done it since campaign one. A new comer should never compare themselves to CR.
@@Film_Addict I certainly wish Matt Mercer and the entire cast of critical role well, they have been impressively successful and I salute them for that. The only problem I have is, our hobby is kind of stagnated demographically for about 40 years, and unfortunately what you see on critical role kind of contributes to that. A lot of out of character comments and interactions that detract from the immersion but add to the entertainment value. Unfortunately being locked into that style of play which is very common, dearth of has led to a dearth of new types of people coming into the hobby. 4D role-playing were more common, you get a new and thoughtful group of people who would come in and more importantly stay, because in the 4D style the new challenges and character development are more compelling than what happens in the Critical Role style of play which is so popular. We need new blood with new ideas and we're simply not getting it, or at least not much of it.
@@crapphone7744 my guy I was definitely talking about you. Just a simple change that keeps people from getting spoiled is just changing the title to something like "this critical role/campaign3 moment could have been so much better"
@@sagniksarkar2471 Been ten days. If you pay to watch you had ample time. If you are a free loader like most you also had plenty of time too. Title is just fine at this point. And I am not interested in your excuses either. We all got busy lives. If you are on youtube then you clearly had the free time to watch the episode.
@@crapphone7744 I think there's two reasons people might be mad: 1. You have a major spoiler in your title, which is just rude. 2. You are opining about an episode you didn't watch based on what you heard, which isn't even accurate.
I would say in my own defense I didn't do it as clickbait I did it because that was the subject matter. I do think that could have been done better. Since critical role with such a high-profile part of our hobby right now that seems reasonable to comment about because it affects how people perceive our games.
@@gametracker308The word "click bait" needs a lid put over it. Its way too used to describe said induviduals incapability to not click on shit. Just cause you had the urge to click doesnt mean it was clickbait. The title and the topic was on point. Yes its spoilers, a shame some will be spoiled by this but its social media. There are spoilers everywhere, hell i havnt gotten to the episode yet but was spoiled by other clips. But i can only blame myself for that.
Oh get a life. The only ones that might have a case to complain are the ones who pay for the content. They already watched the episode and know. If it bothers you so damn much then stay off the internet and go touch grass.
@@samlemahoney5601 bruh what about for people who are just starting the campaign now? Or are watching campaigns 1 or 2? You want them to catch up 9 years worth of content in 10 days? Have a little perspective.
Now that would have been a cool ending. All the characters dead and the BBEG loose in the world. They could have buried the characters and the system, and restarted with a new rules set starring the friends and families of the deceased. 4D indeed.
I watched, and enjoyed the whole first season of CR. But I have since lost all interest, and now I avoid it like the plague. It just annoys me how celebrities and “celebrities” have been made the face of the TTRPG hobby. And I hadn’t heard it was the “rule of cool” that killed the villain, that just sucks. Or rather, he could have done that, but then he should have taken that secret to the grave. Luckily I don’t have to care, though 😂
That's a great point, had he just said that killed the monster and not revealed how, I think I would have had the effect I mentioned. Thank you for pointing that out!
@@roleingsolo Seeing as the stat block for Otohan is not released to the public there is literally no way for "someone did the math" and know for a fact enough damage was done.
I know of it but I've ignored it. I think this was likely more of a publicity stunt?? or it turned into a publicity stunt. It was needed to boost channel interaction? After all leaving the D&D mechanics had flatlined their subs. At least it was more of a meaningful death. Some good takes on the topic though.
LOL, maybe they're publicity stunt will work for my channel. 🤣. I really don't want to do clickbait kind of stuff but this really struck me as a glaring example of how something could have been great and instead ended up mediocre.
Take one look at the viewership metrics the following episode and you'll see they fumbled the bag. Started extremely well compared to recent CR episodes this year and ended at one of the worst CR episodes this year. You have to take out the other shows they do when crunching the numbers as the viewership tend to be fairly low on non-CR content.
@@lordhawkeye I am purely guessing. That candela obscura guy made off like a flash in the pan. I wonder if people are stilm playing it. I dont keep tabs on CR stuff, only seeing what other people post about it. Was this series doing better than Candela?
4D gaming is one of the most pretentious thing I have ever heard of. The reason people need everything to be "just so" inn order to achieve this state is because they are doing it wrong. It is incredibly easy to achieve this 4d level.
In role playing for many years I have found that real immersion is a difficult thing to figure out how to create. Once you do though I would agree that it's pretty easy to do, especially with a little bit of practice. Having experienced it a few times I have found I don't want to role play any other way, that may be why you find it pretentious. I don't think of it as pretentious, it's just that it's so much better that I don't want to go back to the old way of playing. Time to put away the beer and pretzels and get into character.
@@crapphone7744 Wanting immersion isn't pretentious. Thinking there's only one way to get immersed and that all other wy son playing are inferior is 100% pretentious.
@@ishmiel21 you make a fair point. I should keep an open mind about other ways of achieving the same goal. It's just I have only seen it really work well when everyone is in character and stays in character, so my experience has been that this works better. But that is just my experience and you are right there might be other ways of achieving the same goal. I appreciate your comments and thoughtfulness.
I watched over 5 minutes of this before I decided it wasnt satire. I think you have all the right ideas about adapting and improving hobbies to keep them fresh. I also think that a lot of the old-school mentality re: safety tools, etc, can be alienating to new players. As a counterpoint, though, I started roleplaying in 2023. In juat a year I have deeply dug in to the hobby. It has been extremely fun and rewarding. It allows me an escape from day to day stresses and some of the pain of life. And I was truly drawn in to the hobby with OSR games like Knave, Cairn, and OSE. So I do think the older-style games do have the ability to draw in new players. At least anecdotally, it did for me. I think a lot of people are discovering this hobby and loving it. Maybe I'm in a bubble, but I meet or see a lot of new folks in the hobby. But you are 100% spot-on when you point out that clinging to the old way of thinking about it can alienate and deter new people. And as a final point, I think fun should be the aim. I love the idea that a game is only as good as the amount of fun it creates for you personally. And everyone will judge different games differently on that front. But we are all here for the joy of it. Thank you for your thoughts. Cheers.
Us solo roleplaying enthusiasts love the stories and the comraderie, we dont need fancy editing and music. Im always glad to discover a new solo roleplaying channel. Subbed. 😊
Thank you for subscribing. I think it's important that we all make contributions that we can. I think enthusiasm and quality of content will overcome bad editing and the lack of related skills.
I'll have to get back into considering my Zozer solo game. Your video's are giving me a few ideas on the approach to presentation. Strangely my solo-rpg idea video is one of my most seen video's, so these videos on solo gaming appeal to a large audience.
Yeah, solo play is exploding. I think a lot of people are tired of the drama with safety tools, social contracts and all that stuff. Just to play a game. Many of us are like, to heck with it, I 'll play by myself.
Yes, these videos are fun to listen to instead of music. You can follow the story while doing other stuff and it is really entertaining. For me, it is a motivator as well. I hear a good game and get fired up to play myself.
Wow that was awesome such good story and description. I really like you bringing up that point from geek gamers about "All is play". Such a good point to remember
Well done Brother, that Baker / Farmer bit was the perfect duration for a joke to last, made the whole show for me without ruining the immersion at all.
My great technique for showing things is I pull whatever it is closer to the camera, which is my phone on a selfie-stick. So you already have an amazing set up with two camera angles.👍
I don't do any editing as well. Also no soundtrack no nothing. Only the ugly truth of gaming. Unedited footage directly from the gaming table.😄😱. So don't sweat it. The only thing I sometimes do because I have to is put two clips together.😂
Glad to hear I am not alone in this. I hope to get better, but there are only so many hours for a hobby, and I would rather play and share that than edit a lot.
This was great! 👍👏😁 Don’t worry about editing stuff, that’s not something anyone needs to play solo RPGs. I did back the latest S&W KS, but I have yet to play it 😅
Well get to it! So much fun just waiting to happen. S&W is closed to OD&D which was what I was wanting. I wish they would just reprint the OD&D rules and supplements.
Why in the world would you think that someone is scripting Critical Role? Seriously. They spend like 40% of their time just floundering, with no idea where to go or what to do. Matt probably has some content (descriptions, NPC names, etc.) pre-written like any good DM would, but there is just no evidence of any kind that the show is "scripted" in the sense that the character's lines or in-game decisions are written ahead of time. As far as any actual evidence or even observation would suggest, they are just playing DnD.
@@crapphone7744 CR is not scripted. That's a fact backed up by evidence (e.g. they continued to film through the writer's strike and they're all still union members) and not an impression.
1st: This video title is clickbait, and you know it. If your hobby isn't any fun, then what's the point? IT still has to be fun to be worth bothering with. If it's fun, for you and your friends, that's fine and all, but yeah, it's a garbage game. We all like McDonald's or Little Ceasar's from time to time, but no one claims they're good. They don't need to be good. It's okay to play trash once in a while. I also take issue with the idea that only 4d can be good. if the GM has a good story to tell, that's worth sacrificing some player agency for (obviously, with their agreement). My players give me a bit of leeway to push them around, if only because there are times when I -can't- predict their actions, and they do something that is either equally or less sensical that the direction I had expected. I'm the GM, i get to push them back onto the path, not because I want to, but because I -need- to. Otherwise, we get a crappy game where we're all sitting around making inside jokes and not exploring anything resembling a plot.
I just have to sincerely disagree with you on the player agency thing. If you want to tell a good story, tell a story. If you want to do role-playing, do role playing. I think what we need here is we need a better taxonomy. I would suggest that there are table top adventure games that as you suggest can tell stories and can include the beer and pretzels games where you're playing a play sheet and spending half your time. Making jokes and being out of character. That's fine until you start calling the role-playing which it isn't. It would be like lumping chess or Squad Leader in with board games. Yeah there's a superficial similarity but it's not the same thing.
I'd argue the biggest problem in the current RPG hobby is not really the roleplay aspect, or the rules, or the attitude of players. I'd argue that it's the corporations monetizing it to hell and back. And I'm not even talking about stuff like mobile app subscriptions (D&D, a whole bunch of VTTs, Mapmaking software) or requiring special proprietary dice (DCC RPG, Mouse Guard, GENESYS). I mean the catering to the lowest common denominator in order to spread the market as wide as possible. I can ignore "representation". I can ignore works that actively vilify me and people like me. That's just fluff, something to be changed anyway. I can ignore sickening shows, movies and memes about "ha ha bard seduce dragon nat20 funni". But I can't ignore downright oversimplification of the writing and rules. And when they are not oversimplified, they are overburdened and inelegant. In their desire to have their cake and eat it too, corporations try to have both very simple rules for all, and more simulationist rules for the grognards. They fail at reaching either. I find many games today to be neither beautifully simple, nor satisfyingly complex, but rather somewhere in the disappointing middle. Corporations are what defines the hobby now, and they want only one thing. With that elephant in the room, I find it rather difficult to focus on the levels of true immersion of individual groups of players.
My first thought is to instantly disagree, but instead I'm going to have to think about what you said then reply. Thanks for responding with a good explanation.
That's only part of the problem. Remember, they couldn't dumb the hobby down unless PEOPLE ARE BUYING IT. And they are. In droves. The corporations are playing to the lowest common denominator, but that only matters because the bar has fallen so low. The TikTok generation is not going to like good roleplaying; it just doesn't appeal to their style of attention. Too slow, too little going on, too little stimulation. People sit around and crack inside jokes and whatnot because that's how communication has evolved - people are increasingly talking through memes. You could blame that on Meta, Twitter, etc., but they just found what the market wanted and provided it. If it wasn't them, it would have been someone else. This is the world we live in now. We have -far- deeper societal problems to solve, lack of good RPG groups is just a symptom of the sickness.
@@hexelix First of all: You are not wrong. In fact, I'd say that you are very much correct in your assessment. I do agree that corporations are just doing what they always do, no matter how much it damages the enjoyment of the hobby for the core players. And I do agree that this is emblematic of deeper problems in society, such as culture deterioration thanks to rapid technological advance. However, that is another discussion entirely. If we keep on going down that path, and talking deeper societal problems, we won't even be mentioning RPGs two posts down the line. And it certainly won't remain as civil. People today kill and are killed in hundreds of thousands, trying to answer the question of "How we all should be doing things". It's a question with no clear answer. And I am not sure it ever will have one. We all have our beliefs and biases, present company not excluded. And the deeper into that rabbit hole you go, the harder they are to keep in check. So, while agreeing with you, I'd say let's stick under the umbrella of a modern capitalist society, and try to problem solve under that restriction. It's a video about RPGs and not deeper underlying problems of modern living, after all.
@DifferentRussian Then all you can do is carefully vet your players, because far too many people who are interested in roleplaying these days are degenerates that you don't want to share a room with. The style of roleplay isn't going to fix that problem.
I'm not sure about the "average", but I think we should all be trying to push the envelope. Now I agree most will not succeed at that but they will get better through the effort and that helps everybody. Likely it will be a few gifted individuals that will be the ones who are on the cutting edge who will make real advances, but we should all try.
