Quote from: jhkim on February 22, 2023, 12:05:44 AM

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on February 21, 2023, 03:37:12 PM

Quote from: jhkim on February 21, 2023, 11:57:38 AM

Quote from: S'mon on February 21, 2023, 05:23:15 AM
I'm not sure it was stupid - WoTC have been working hard on 'divide & conquer' tactics, stirring up race hate, and now Brink has a bunch of lefties defending his comments. Result. Plus it was a deflection tactic - the interviewers want blacks in well paid & powerful executive roles, so Brink starts talking about getting rid of basement dwelling white players, & hiring poorly paid PoC designers...

I agree. I suspect that this has done exactly what it has intended. WotC hasn't had to do any action that is actually leftist - not even hire more poorly-paid PoC designers.

Instead, simply by a few words, he's changed the conversation from being about their corporate overreach of IP (which had gamers united against them) to being about oppression of white people (which left-leaning gamers won't sign on about).

That interview got me to sail the high seas on all D&D content and share the method to do it with all my groups.  Hey its only 12 people, but if they share with 2 more a piece that's 24 and so on.  Kudo's Brink. 

Other people feel the same way.  I'm also OFF D&D Beyond as a platform and using Fantasy Grounds in lieu and training my players to use it as well.  Again, congrats Brink.

Interesting, honeydipperdavid. Many posters here left WotC several years ago, and if not, at least after their attempt to cancel the OGL back in January. Pundit has been very vocal in anti-WotC talk, and it seems like especially conservative posters have tended to agree with him.

Personally, I left WotC over their OGL debacle in January. I never had a D&D Beyond account, but I gave up WotC products after that.

I'd be curious about your staying loyal to them until now, and then leaving after the Brink interview. How would you sum up your view compared to Pundit's and other conservative posters?

I had already cancelled D&D Beyond over OGL, Brink's statement guaranteed I would never resubscribe.  I quit buying any original content once WotC decided to label 4E and earlier content racist on Drivethru.  I've been using existing older content updated to 5E to specifically not give WotC any revenue and using the books I already have owned.  I started working my groups to use other RPG's using the OGL as the excuse to move 12 people away from D&D and it worked.  Brink's behavior got me to show my players ways of getting 5E content without funding WotC.  I've made it a point to mention when visiting a hobby shop if they have the D&D Beyond code bundled in their books?  They say no, and I come back but WotC is planning on doing that, how come they aren't offering it to stores to piss the owners off against WotC.  It would be easier now to spread that little bit of disontent towards WotC at game stores now that the store for D&D with the D&D Beyond code is live.

And no, I'm not a conservative, I'm a moderate.  WotC is went social marxist like most of the dreg misanthropes who work in the far left coast.  A moderate doesn't judge someone based on their skin, a leftist social marxist does, they simply replaced class because the US gives you the opportunity to own private property, run a business and access to decide where you want to work so class based communism didn't work, its why they went to social marxism to use race as the primary attack on the United States.  Moderates and now Conservatives don't support needless wars due to cost and pointless deaths the left meanwhile absorbed the neocon/neolib.  Ask yourself, who will have a Ukrainian flag on, an Antifa member or a small business owner, its the Antifa member.

WotC bowed to the leftists because of twitter bots, well plenty of people can hit them in their bottom line from the people who did buy their content and WotC turned them into anti-consumers directing sales problems to WotC itself.

Quote from: S'mon on February 22, 2023, 01:05:08 AM

Quote from: jhkim on February 22, 2023, 12:05:44 AM
Interesting, honeydipperdavid. Many posters here left WotC several years ago, and if not, at least after their attempt to cancel the OGL back in January. Pundit has been very vocal in anti-WotC talk, and it seems like especially conservative posters have tended to agree with him.

Personally, I left WotC over their OGL debacle in January. I never had a D&D Beyond account, but I gave up WotC products after that.

Personally, I mostly stopped buying WoTC stuff because it tended to be bad, certainly compared to many other publishers. I think Fizban's Treasury of Dragons was a real turning point. It was just so lazy. January 2023 was the first time I really felt an active aversion to them. Then when they released the 5e SRD into CC I thought 'hm well maybe they can win me back, I might pick up Planescape, that was always kind of a Seattle-like setting anyway so they presumably won't ruin it like Dragonlance...' But really now I get a sick feeling in my stomach at the thought of sending them any money. I think now once Free League's Dragonbane is out - loved my first playtest session - I'll probably mostly run that for a while. And I just picked up Forbidden Caverns of Archaia in a Humble Bundle, along with a ton of Necromancer Games/Troll Lord Games/Kobold Press stuff. Definitely not short of material.

I think their 5e peaked around Mordekainen's Tome of Foes or Tomb of Annihilation. After that I just couldn't rouse myself to care. That said I peeked every now and again for the surveys or free pdf content. I was worried how they would fuck up the classing settings

Xanathar's seemed table useful (Random Chart list o' names is nice) -- except for all the new archetypes that I just would not have at my table -- so overall it was give and take neutral. Ravenloft... started strong with the teaser adventures then whimpered out. Yawning Portal seemed like a happy compromise reprint, still not something pushing me to pay for WotC products.

By Tasha's I wrote them off, widget factory galore, now with blessings from on high to pout-stomp out any last restrictions based on setting or table taste. There's no 'there' there anymore, just like RPGnet. And if we learn nothing in life at least learn never go full Something Awful (a fun site back in 2000 for a hot minute, and just that lone minute), a la RPGnet did.

I could care less about whatever meaning anyone wants to put behind his words. He explicitly states, "guys like me can't leave the hobby fast enough" and doesn't leave himself. He's a disingenuous twat and it's sad anyone would continue to take him seriously from this point on. 

Quote from: Ron Maiden on February 22, 2023, 10:54:32 AM
I could care less about whatever meaning anyone wants to put behind his words. He explicitly states, "guys like me can't leave the hobby fast enough" and doesn't leave himself. He's a disingenuous twat and it's sad anyone would continue to take him seriously from this point on.

Your logic marks you as problematic. Logic is the work of the white-devils running WotC that can't seem to leave fast enough.

Quote from: tenbones on February 23, 2023, 10:00:36 AM

Quote from: Ron Maiden on February 22, 2023, 10:54:32 AM
I could care less about whatever meaning anyone wants to put behind his words. He explicitly states, "guys like me can't leave the hobby fast enough" and doesn't leave himself. He's a disingenuous twat and it's sad anyone would continue to take him seriously from this point on.

Your logic marks you as problematic. Logic is the work of the white-devils running WotC that can't seem to leave fast enough.

If I see one more single mother medieval farmer with two kids in a D&D module I'm going to barf, that crap didn't take place till 5E.

Even giving this guy the full benefit of the doubt that he wasn't saying white players need to leave doesn't make him look good, because he's still stating that he wants people to be hired for their skin tone and genitals rather than talent for putting out good products.  Now if he came out and admitted, "Hey, our employees suck, we're racist and only hired them because they're white dudes so we need to get rid of the talentless racism hires," that would be a different matter.  Without some kind of admission that the current white employees are incapable of doing their jobs, saying you want them to be replaced by not-white people comes across as, well, very racist.

Quote from: Valatar on February 23, 2023, 02:26:14 PM
Without some kind of admission that the current white employees are incapable of doing their jobs, saying you want them to be replaced by not-white people comes across as, well, very racist.

Sure, but claiming they're incapable of doing their jobs because they're white is just as racist. If they were hired for racist reasons, the solution is to get rid of them and hire other people for non-racist reasons -- not to hire other people for different racist reasons.

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on February 23, 2023, 12:08:35 PM

Quote from: tenbones on February 23, 2023, 10:00:36 AM

Quote from: Ron Maiden on February 22, 2023, 10:54:32 AM
I could care less about whatever meaning anyone wants to put behind his words. He explicitly states, "guys like me can't leave the hobby fast enough" and doesn't leave himself. He's a disingenuous twat and it's sad anyone would continue to take him seriously from this point on.

Your logic marks you as problematic. Logic is the work of the white-devils running WotC that can't seem to leave fast enough.

If I see one more single mother medieval farmer with two kids in a D&D module I'm going to barf, that crap didn't take place till 5E.

Even if its a grimly determined widow whose yeoman husband was killed by goblin raiders and refuses to give up the land that is her young son's by right and that her husband died protecting? If she hears you're out hunting those goblin raiders she'll give you her husband's axe if you promise to bury it the skull of one of the goblins as a message from her.

Context is everything.

Quote from: Chris24601 on February 23, 2023, 04:21:55 PM

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on February 23, 2023, 12:08:35 PM

Quote from: tenbones on February 23, 2023, 10:00:36 AM

Quote from: Ron Maiden on February 22, 2023, 10:54:32 AM
I could care less about whatever meaning anyone wants to put behind his words. He explicitly states, "guys like me can't leave the hobby fast enough" and doesn't leave himself. He's a disingenuous twat and it's sad anyone would continue to take him seriously from this point on.

Your logic marks you as problematic. Logic is the work of the white-devils running WotC that can't seem to leave fast enough.

If I see one more single mother medieval farmer with two kids in a D&D module I'm going to barf, that crap didn't take place till 5E.

Even if its a grimly determined widow whose yeoman husband was killed by goblin raiders and refuses to give up the land that is her young son's by right and that her husband died protecting? If she hears you're out hunting those goblin raiders she'll give you her husband's axe if you promise to bury it the skull of one of the goblins as a message from her.

Context is everything.

A single mother in a medieval society raising children alone and farming is going to die of starvation or at the very least lose the children trying to stay alive.  Families would kill their children during famine and they had a husband and wife to farm and prepare food for winter, cut the labor in more than half and you have problems.  I don't care about "context", I care about verisimilitude.  The example I'm giving is from Phandalin.  Meanwhile, they then put in the same module a butterskull ranch with a guy and a bunch of farm hands getting raided and taken over by orcs (realistic).  There was a reason why in the past single mothers were ostracized, it was due to their inability to take care of the kids and being an undue burden on people barely eking out an existance to begin with medieval farming techniques.

Greetings!

Context. Hmmm...well, single mommies in the ancient and medieval worlds were generally shafted, and hard. Unless the mommy had close family to take care of her and her children, she and the kids were screwed. Kids were either abandoned by the mommy, given away to family--or whoever, and the mommy becomes a prostitute. That was the "good" outcome. For the mommies that were young, sexy, and beautiful. The ugly women, the fat women, they routinely became impoverished beggars, and starved in the streets and gutters.

This was the constant reality facing unmarried single mommies throughout history. These dynamics have only changed because of the current reign of cucked and feminized social welfare states.

Having single mommies can be realistically portrayed in the game campaign. Typically, such women fill in the ranks of the hordes of prostitutes that throng most cities and towns, or, as mentioned, lay about in the gutters begging. A few more fortunate single mommies can maybe get by in large cities by working long, hard days as a laundry woman, cook, or also being a bar girl, or maybe working at a bathhouse. If she is not willing to be  prostitute, such jobs don't pay much at all, so they must more than likely work two jobs, or three, six or seven days a week. That's just to get by, without being a prostitute or a starving beggar in the streets. Ancient Roman sources even describe how vast numbers of "ordinary" women, single women, that may have not been professional prostitutes, still practiced regular "part-time" prostitution, such as some laundry women or cooks working their normal, grinding jobs for much of the week, but for one or two nights per week, such women embraced opportunities serving as prostitutes. Such women were also opportunistic, in that they would indulge prostitution whenever very appealing opportunities presented themselves at any given time.

Throughout the world, such as in Egypt, Persia, Britain, India, or China, these dynamics expressed themselves as constant realities for lower class women, for poor women in general, and especially for single mommies.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on February 23, 2023, 04:58:32 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on February 23, 2023, 04:21:55 PM
Even if its a grimly determined widow whose yeoman husband was killed by goblin raiders and refuses to give up the land that is her young son's by right and that her husband died protecting? If she hears you're out hunting those goblin raiders she'll give you her husband's axe if you promise to bury it the skull of one of the goblins as a message from her.

A single mother in a medieval society raising children alone and farming is going to die of starvation or at the very least lose the children trying to stay alive.  Families would kill their children during famine and they had a husband and wife to farm and prepare food for winter, cut the labor in more than half and you have problems.  I don't care about "context", I care about verisimilitude.  The example I'm giving is from Phandalin.

D&D has never portrayed the harsh existence of medieval peasantry, with children being killed in winter to save on food. For example, The Village of Hommlet was just as anachronistic, and came across like a 1950s small town - with each house being owned by a nuclear family.

Historical medieval peasantry was far messier than this, with lots of mixed homes of 8 people all living in a hut together - some related, some not - all scraping by to pay rent to the lord. There were lots of single mothers -- not the strong independent "I want to raise a family on my own" type, but rather knocked up out of wedlock, abandoned by her husband, widowed, or raped. A significant fraction of medieval men and women were never married - I've seen estimates of 25%. Among upper classes, unmarried folk would usually become monks or nuns - but among lower classes they generally just got by however they could.

I hate Lost Mine of Phandelver, mostly because I found it dull as dishwater. I just think that aspect doesn't stand out to me, given that D&D has never conveyed medieval peasantry in its towns.

EDITED TO ADD: Cross-posted with SHARK. And yes, prostitution was common, though sexual service for favors was likely much more common than formal prostitution.

Quote from: jhkim on February 23, 2023, 05:50:10 PM

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on February 23, 2023, 04:58:32 PM

Quote from: Chris24601 on February 23, 2023, 04:21:55 PM
Even if its a grimly determined widow whose yeoman husband was killed by goblin raiders and refuses to give up the land that is her young son's by right and that her husband died protecting? If she hears you're out hunting those goblin raiders she'll give you her husband's axe if you promise to bury it the skull of one of the goblins as a message from her.

A single mother in a medieval society raising children alone and farming is going to die of starvation or at the very least lose the children trying to stay alive.  Families would kill their children during famine and they had a husband and wife to farm and prepare food for winter, cut the labor in more than half and you have problems.  I don't care about "context", I care about verisimilitude.  The example I'm giving is from Phandalin.

D&D has never portrayed the harsh existence of medieval peasantry, with children being killed in winter to save on food. For example, The Village of Hommlet was just as anachronistic, and came across like a 1950s small town - with each house being owned by a nuclear family.

Historical medieval peasantry was far messier than this, with lots of mixed homes of 8 people all living in a hut together - some related, some not - all scraping by to pay rent to the lord. There were lots of single mothers -- not the strong independent "I want to raise a family on my own" type, but rather knocked up out of wedlock, abandoned by her husband, widowed, or raped. A significant fraction of medieval men and women were never married - I've seen estimates of 25%. Among upper classes, unmarried folk would usually become monks or nuns - but among lower classes they generally just got by however they could.

I hate Lost Mine of Phandelver, mostly because I found it dull as dishwater. I just think that aspect doesn't stand out to me, given that D&D has never conveyed medieval peasantry in its towns.

EDITED TO ADD: Cross-posted with SHARK. And yes, prostitution was common, though sexual service for favors was likely much more common than formal prostitution.

Hommlette had a keep being built, a full mercenary troop, a wizard and a fighter leading the town with a milita as well.  It had a fair bit of huts and some shops but not over the top.  You are looking at a temple, druid grove, and a corrupt trader.  Not counting the smith, carpenter and some other craftsmen.  It was fairly decent for a small town.  If you set up with a trade resoure or on a main trade root it made more sense where its' located.

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on February 23, 2023, 12:08:35 PM

Quote from: tenbones on February 23, 2023, 10:00:36 AM

Quote from: Ron Maiden on February 22, 2023, 10:54:32 AM
I could care less about whatever meaning anyone wants to put behind his words. He explicitly states, "guys like me can't leave the hobby fast enough" and doesn't leave himself. He's a disingenuous twat and it's sad anyone would continue to take him seriously from this point on.

Your logic marks you as problematic. Logic is the work of the white-devils running WotC that can't seem to leave fast enough.

If I see one more single mother medieval farmer with two kids in a D&D module I'm going to barf, that crap didn't take place till 5E.

It's pandering to a target market, sure. Pandering is nothing new in these games. The rough adventurer type who sets out to earn his own fortune is also pandering. Real medieval history was way more complex than typically portrayed in these games. The single mom may be a widow who often could carry on her dead husband's trade. As for the adventurer, he was probably a nobleman or was protected by one and probably very much a "murder hobo". And druids were fucking long gone by this time.

Quote from: SHARK on February 23, 2023, 05:44:31 PM
Greetings!

Context. Hmmm...well, single mommies in the ancient and medieval worlds were generally shafted, and hard. Unless the mommy had close family to take care of her and her children, she and the kids were screwed. Kids were either abandoned by the mommy, given away to family--or whoever, and the mommy becomes a prostitute. That was the "good" outcome. For the mommies that were young, sexy, and beautiful. The ugly women, the fat women, they routinely became impoverished beggars, and starved in the streets and gutters.

This was the constant reality facing unmarried single mommies throughout history. These dynamics have only changed because of the current reign of cucked and feminized social welfare states.

Having single mommies can be realistically portrayed in the game campaign. Typically, such women fill in the ranks of the hordes of prostitutes that throng most cities and towns, or, as mentioned, lay about in the gutters begging. A few more fortunate single mommies can maybe get by in large cities by working long, hard days as a laundry woman, cook, or also being a bar girl, or maybe working at a bathhouse. If she is not willing to be  prostitute, such jobs don't pay much at all, so they must more than likely work two jobs, or three, six or seven days a week. That's just to get by, without being a prostitute or a starving beggar in the streets. Ancient Roman sources even describe how vast numbers of "ordinary" women, single women, that may have not been professional prostitutes, still practiced regular "part-time" prostitution, such as some laundry women or cooks working their normal, grinding jobs for much of the week, but for one or two nights per week, such women embraced opportunities serving as prostitutes. Such women were also opportunistic, in that they would indulge prostitution whenever very appealing opportunities presented themselves at any given time.

Throughout the world, such as in Egypt, Persia, Britain, India, or China, these dynamics expressed themselves as constant realities for lower class women, for poor women in general, and especially for single mommies.

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK

Oh yeah, that's why I game, to get away from the dull realities of life by getting slapped in the face with the ungodly ugly realities of the medieval period. Said no one ever.

I know how really ugly was for most of human history, if I wanted a refresher I would read a book, I play to have fun.

The above quote by Shark while historically accurate doesn't sound like something that would be fun to encounter in my saturday night game. YMMV, if anyone finds it fun then knock your self out, I'll pass.

Quote from: rytrasmi on February 23, 2023, 06:21:21 PM

Quote from: honeydipperdavid on February 23, 2023, 12:08:35 PM

Quote from: tenbones on February 23, 2023, 10:00:36 AM

Quote from: Ron Maiden on February 22, 2023, 10:54:32 AM
I could care less about whatever meaning anyone wants to put behind his words. He explicitly states, "guys like me can't leave the hobby fast enough" and doesn't leave himself. He's a disingenuous twat and it's sad anyone would continue to take him seriously from this point on.

Your logic marks you as problematic. Logic is the work of the white-devils running WotC that can't seem to leave fast enough.

If I see one more single mother medieval farmer with two kids in a D&D module I'm going to barf, that crap didn't take place till 5E.

It's pandering to a target market, sure. Pandering is nothing new in these games. The rough adventurer type who sets out to earn his own fortune is also pandering. Real medieval history was way more complex than typically portrayed in these games. The single mom may be a widow who often could carry on her dead husband's trade. As for the adventurer, he was probably a nobleman or was protected by one and probably very much a "murder hobo". And druids were fucking long gone by this time.

Greetings!

Good stuff, Rytrami! Your commentary is spot-on. It also reminded me of the rather frequent occasions I've read about Medieval Nobles and such, with their retainers and hangers-on. I can recall a mix of lesser nobles, middle-class Yeomen, veteran mercenaries, as well as barbarian raiders--or "former barbarian marauders" as well as the occasional "Former criminal" or scandalized ex-clergyman, serving as retainers or whatever nobleman. And these retainers were also often very much *Murder Hobos* *Laughing*

Semper Fidelis,

SHARK