|
Post by Kainguru on May 19, 2014 13:45:27 GMT -8
I mean why are we explaining games like AW, which play nothing like D&D, with "it's like D&D?" Isn't that just plain lazy and adds to the perception of the hobby being one thing which it most defitintely isn't anymore? That reminds me of when I was doing some IT at my mother's office and she says things like "I'll make a xerox of it" when in actuality she will put it on the ultra amazing high speed (cannon) scanner that will spit out a duplicate over the network to the (brother) color laser printer. It's about as different as you can get from the grainy black and white facsimile "xeroxing" connotes. But all the other people in her office say the same thing and understand what they mean. Why stop at Xerox? There's durex, panadol, liquid paper, brufen, perspex . . . just to name a very few. To scoff at the term 'D&D' becoming a universal descriptor is to scoff at the evolving nature of English and pretend that we speak the same 'English' now as we did a 100 years ago. We don't, words and meanings change over time - more often than not losing there original providence. Point of fact most common terms and turns of phrase in English have naval origins . . . courtesy of Britain being a naval power for so long . . . yet the original intent of these phrases has been lost as they were slowly assimilated into the general (non naval) parlance. It's not 'lazy' it's linguists and social evolution at work . . . maintaining a position that refuses to acknowledge this facet of societal progress? I call luddite (a word in modern use which only vaguely relates to it's origins) Aaron
|
|
tomes
Supporter
Hello madness
Posts: 1,438
Currently Running: Dungeon World, hippie games, Fallout Shelter RPG hack
|
Post by tomes on May 19, 2014 13:58:37 GMT -8
In agreement with the evolution of the language... I use "D&D" to be synonymous with "RPG" all the time, for the first sentence. Then once the person is more interested than a one sentence conversation, it becomes "I don't *really* play Dungeons and Dragons, I other play role playing games like that" and then it goes forward. It's useful for the first few seconds because yes, that's what people know in order of terminology.
If D&D died... the term RPG would probably start working its way up, as the hobby seems fairly sturdy right now.
|
|
|
Post by HourEleven on May 19, 2014 14:15:55 GMT -8
The problem with the term rpg, at the moment, is that it means "Skyrim" to a lot of people and "final fantasy" to the rest.
|
|
|
Post by kaitoujuliet on May 19, 2014 14:31:05 GMT -8
If WOTC died tomorrow, the hosts would probably be dancing on its grave.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on May 19, 2014 15:10:52 GMT -8
The problem with 'RPG', at the moment, is that the moment you use it as an opener most peoples minds usually fixate on those other games that involve latex uniforms, gimp masks and a feather tickler . . . Aaron
|
|
|
Post by Forresst on May 19, 2014 17:36:49 GMT -8
You know, maybe that would be good. I mean why are we explaining games like AW, which play nothing like D&D, with "it's like D&D?" Isn't that just plain lazy and adds to the perception of the hobby being one thing which it most definitely isn't anymore? Sure, it's more accurate, and it's more representative of the state of the hobby today, sure. But we're talking about this from the perspective of a bunch of gamers who know what's what. If you're trying to explain to someone who is not at all gamer-savvy in any way? You probably have somewhere between 15 seconds and a minute to get at least a hook and the gist of what you're trying to explain across before someone decides if they're interested or not. It's lazy, it's not properly representative, but it's effective to broach a first exposure scenario.
|
|
|
Post by Arcona on May 19, 2014 23:44:20 GMT -8
"Its like theater or improv but around a table. There is one person that has a story/plot to narrate while the rest of the players act out a character of their choosing within that story collaboratively. There are no fixed lines and the players respond with actions and words to what the narrator/game master describes for the world around them.
The setting can be anything from heroic Fantasy like you see in Lord of the Rings to a modern world or even a future one"
Thats how I explain RPGs. If the person seems interested then I give more details, if the idea of improve and collaborative storytelling is not their cup of it there is no point to go into how exactly it works, characters and all that.
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on May 20, 2014 0:57:03 GMT -8
to scoff at the evolving nature of English and pretend that we speak the same 'English' now as we did a 100 10 years ago. We don't, words and meanings change over time - more often than not losing there their original providence. plus The problem with the term rpg, at the moment, is that it means "Skyrim" to a lot of people and "final fantasy" to the rest. equals another topic. As an aside, this is why business fiercely protects its brand names and should give careful consideration before extending the brand as anyone with a lick of sense, or business history, will understand. Business in one industry will apply lessons from other industries when it suits it. In the pharmaceutical industry: Bayer and the brand Aspirin. In sports: Rollerblade. Line extension can hurt the brand by diluting its recognition equity, when it becomes the category label (like D&D). What is D&D? This is an aside topic because it won’t apply to new-to-the-hobby people who, in the autumn, will believe 5e is D&D. But for those of us within the hobby, the question is relevant. Notice how the logo has changed in a re-branding effort with every edition? That’s on purpose, though equally detrimental & deleterious to a D&D brand. But that’s all an aside to this conversation. It is “geek speak” to new people. === IMHO, terms like “game system” and “RPGs” are essentially meaningless when it comes to describing the activity of tabletop role-playing games. A game system is a Nintendo. Pardon me for my age. I mean X-Box. When someone asks you for an Aspirin, because that’s what they know, you earn the “I am a twat” T-shirt for refusing to offer them an Apap (Tylenol in Poland) because they’re not the same thing despite relieving the same pain. If you know your players would like a D&D game that is more mechanically related to GURPS, bring out your GURPS books. Or homebrew your D&D to suit the activity your table of players want. You’ve nothing to prove, Old Sport.
|
|
|
Post by guitarspider on May 20, 2014 1:28:22 GMT -8
If it works for you, fine, but I don't tink it's impossible without D&D. I've done it. "We sit around a table and tell a story together, there's certain rules to it as well, kind of like a boardgame. Each player takes on the role of one character, say if we're playing Game of Thrones you're Ned and I'm Jon Snow." Of course that's awfully generic, and needs to be tailored to whoever you're talking to and to what they're interested in. But it's really not that complicated. Some people make the connection that it's kind of like D&D, and then you can just tell them it's kind of like it, but not quite the same. Why stop at Xerox? There's durex, panadol, liquid paper, brufen, perspex . . . just to name a very few. To scoff at the term 'D&D' becoming a universal descriptor is to scoff at the evolving nature of English and pretend that we speak the same 'English' now as we did a 100 years ago. We don't, words and meanings change over time - more often than not losing there original providence. Point of fact most common terms and turns of phrase in English have naval origins . . . courtesy of Britain being a naval power for so long . . . yet the original intent of these phrases has been lost as they were slowly assimilated into the general (non naval) parlance. It's not 'lazy' it's linguists and social evolution at work . . . maintaining a position that refuses to acknowledge this facet of societal progress? I call luddite (a word in modern use which only vaguely relates to it's origins) Seriously? Scoffing at the evolving nature of English? Pretending we speak static English? D&D becoming a general term being a facet of social progress? Are you trolling? Tell me you're trolling. First of all, the term D&D is linguistically not comparable to xerox or durex or any of your other examples. I won't bother you with terminology, but we don't D&D and we don't say we buy or play D&D when we go to buy or play any other RPG. I won't even bother to point out the rest of the ridiculous pseudo-linguistics in your post. Calling on linguistics when linguistics doesn't support your point, maybe not such a great idea. Second, we choose how to use words. Not too many decades ago nigger, Neger and other variants of the same word in other languages was a completely acceptable term to describe a certain group of people. Today it is shunned and for good reasons. Same goes for fag or gay (of which both, incidentally, had nothing to do with sexual orientation orginally) and a host of other words describing groups of people, things, etc. Of course words evolve, but that doesn't mean we should just sit in our armchairs and go "well, that's progress, must be right." That's ridiculous. That means just accepting the status quo, because you're too lazy to think about it. That means accepting any ideologically charged use of a word as correct, just because a lot of people are using it. You may be unconcerned when departments are "downsized" and people "let go," but that kind of language enables a certain kind of ideology to do what it does more easily. Other examples are available. As someone who doesn't vote Tory, I'm sure you can appreciate this particular one though. Yes, I refuse to accept that D&D stands as a symbol for the hobby I love, because I don't believe it is representative anymore. It certainly does not represent what I am doing when I sit down to play. I do not want to accept that label. Any number of forum members may be perfectly happy to, but I am not. I'm not even saying that using D&D in that way is categorically wrong. That is why I questioned the way it was used instead of making points about how wrong it is to use it this way. I believe we should at least think about it and this thread happens to be a thread about the role of D&D in our hobby.
|
|
|
Post by CreativeCowboy on May 20, 2014 1:35:36 GMT -8
IMHO, terms like “game system” and “RPGs” are essentially meaningless harmful when it comes to describing the activity fixed.
|
|
|
Post by Kainguru on May 20, 2014 3:02:06 GMT -8
If it works for you, fine, but I don't tink it's impossible without D&D. I've done it. "We sit around a table and tell a story together, there's certain rules to it as well, kind of like a boardgame. Each player takes on the role of one character, say if we're playing Game of Thrones you're Ned and I'm Jon Snow." Of course that's awfully generic, and needs to be tailored to whoever you're talking to and to what they're interested in. But it's really not that complicated. Some people make the connection that it's kind of like D&D, and then you can just tell them it's kind of like it, but not quite the same. Why stop at Xerox? There's durex, panadol, liquid paper, brufen, perspex . . . just to name a very few. To scoff at the term 'D&D' becoming a universal descriptor is to scoff at the evolving nature of English and pretend that we speak the same 'English' now as we did a 100 years ago. We don't, words and meanings change over time - more often than not losing there original providence. Point of fact most common terms and turns of phrase in English have naval origins . . . courtesy of Britain being a naval power for so long . . . yet the original intent of these phrases has been lost as they were slowly assimilated into the general (non naval) parlance. It's not 'lazy' it's linguists and social evolution at work . . . maintaining a position that refuses to acknowledge this facet of societal progress? I call luddite (a word in modern use which only vaguely relates to it's origins) Seriously? Scoffing at the evolving nature of English? Pretending we speak static English? D&D becoming a general term being a facet of social progress? Are you trolling? Tell me you're trolling. First of all, the term D&D is linguistically not comparable to xerox or durex or any of your other examples. I won't bother you with terminology, but we don't D&D and we don't say we buy or play D&D when we go to buy or play any other RPG. I won't even bother to point out the rest of the ridiculous pseudo-linguistics in your post. Calling on linguistics when linguistics doesn't support your point, maybe not such a great idea. Second, we choose how to use words. Not too many decades ago nigger, Neger and other variants of the same word in other languages was a completely acceptable term to describe a certain group of people. Today it is shunned and for good reasons. Same goes for fag or gay (of which both, incidentally, had nothing to do with sexual orientation orginally) and a host of other words describing groups of people, things, etc. Of course words evolve, but that doesn't mean we should just sit in our armchairs and go "well, that's progress, must be right." That's ridiculous. That means just accepting the status quo, because you're too lazy to think about it. That means accepting any ideologically charged use of a word as correct, just because a lot of people are using it. You may be unconcerned when departments are "downsized" and people "let go," but that kind of language enables a certain kind of ideology to do what it does more easily. Other examples are available. As someone who doesn't vote Tory, I'm sure you can appreciate this particular one though. Yes, I refuse to accept that D&D stands as a symbol for the hobby I love, because I don't believe it is representative anymore. It certainly does not represent what I am doing when I sit down to play. I do not want to accept that label. Any number of forum members may be perfectly happy to, but I am not. I'm not even saying that using D&D in that way is categorically wrong. That is why I questioned the way it was used instead of making points about how wrong it is to use it this way. I believe we should at least think about it and this thread happens to be a thread about the role of D&D in our hobby. Not trolling pointing out a fact. 'D&D' has 40 years of providence as being a term to generically describe TTRPGs: we're not talking about a small sample of the population who would understand a description of a TTRPG - we're talking about the people might read two books in their life and have no interest in the ideas of ' story' and 'storytelling'. But they do know, at a basic level, what 'D&D' is . . . For better or worse, depending on their frame of reference. It's like being 'two sheets to the wind' - to a non-sailor it means 'pretty pissed'. To a sailor it means that and the fact that two ropes (sheets) are flapping so the sail is loose and the ship will be unsteady as it progresses. To an informed audience the term has two meanings, to the uninformed it has the one. Language evolves, it doesn't matter if the great TTRPG public no longer think D&D is synonymous with TTRPGs the term will continue to generate an understanding of what you are talking about . . . As much because the likes of Dark Dungeons had introduced it into our common lexicon as a term in and of itself. We as individuals don't determine the common lexicon - it's a process of consensus and media influence and brand recognition - whether the brand is viable any longer or not. Paracetamol is the actual drug but people, non-medical, tend to default to the term Panadol - which is one brand amongst many. Don't discount branding like that - in OZ Panamax was withdrawn from the NHS subsidies formulary because it was too expensive. The company launched a campaign to 'bring back Max' and it worked - all through the mims they had announcements 'max is back'. The general public pushed for this despite the alternative formulation being exactly the same and cheaper because of brand identification and a cynical exercise in exploiting public ignorance. Like it or not there were a significant number of people for whom paracetamol was simply 'Panamax'. The marketing behind it was a gross display of using a brand to create a sense if group identification which mobilised its members to advocate for a change that wasn't to their benefit in any practical sense. The upshot is we, the informed on TTRPGs, can pontificate on whether D&D should or should not be a generic term but in practicality it's outside our control. Whether WoTC crashes like TSR did the term will continue . . . If only because it has a 40 year legacy. As to PC terms - how often have the PC terms of 20 years ago had to be replaced with new PC terms because that PC term ended up becoming just as judgmentally charged as the word it was supposed to replace? In medicine we attempted to replace the term patient with client to 'enable' those persons and remove the connotation of dependence - until some clever Medico pointed out that only lawyers and prostitutes have clients : the circle spins and we're back to patients . . . Though the new PC term of choice today? Service user. Which will come to acquire all the negative facets of the words it replaces until it too is replaced. A good example of language and change is in the UK and the word 'Paki'. Which to me is offensive, but a fellow worker who is of Pakistani decent was surprised by me being offended when she used the word. She explained that it was only offensive if the person was actually of Indian descent - she pointed out that I called myself an Aussie not an Australian. To her it was the same difference but I still maintain if I, as an obstentably white person, used it it would still be offensive because of the way it has been used by the likes of the BNP and the National Front. So in her Asian community it isn't an offensive word - they've reclaimed it except the rest of the country has yet to 'catch up' So it remains offensive except in and around areas of Bradford (being a community with strong Pakistan connections and therefore more informed of the issues concerned). But there is a substantial difference between emotionally charged words and brand identification. D&D is brand that represents an idea - this hobby, what it isn't is a term of segregation or abuse with a history of exploitation or denigration of people based solely on their appearance or nationality or infirmity. I'm bi polar - I've run the gamut from having a psychiatric illness, to a psychological maladaptive behaviour to a mental health problem to a mental health issue . . . Just words that describe a condition. How do I describe it people to whom all those descriptors mean nothing? 'I can be a bit crazy sometimes' - then I explain how and why and demystify it. Aaron
|
|