If I call myself a Basketball player to people who ask what I do, and I've literally never played a game of basketball in my life for even a moment but I do watch NBA basketball on TV, then I am most definitely not a basketball player. I might be part of the "larger basketball community" as I am a "fan" of people who do play basketball, but I am not a basketball player myself and should not go around telling people I am a basketball player.

I'm not sure why this would be different for D&D. If you only watch D&D being played and never play it yourself, you're not a D&D player. I don't think there are any issues of gatekeeping involved with that question.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1072464The problem (as trivial as it is) with that is that "D&D Community" is a weasel term meant to imply more than that, but providing the cover of "not saying they are really gamers" when called on it.  They are supposed to be Schrodinger Gamers--gamers by default until you look at them, and then go back again as soon as you stop looking at them.

I have no problem to see both the baseball players and the fans watching as part of the "baseball community", a community which shares some common interests and goals. And in the same way I don't see any problems of identifying a "roleplaying community", which consists of players, GMs, youtube audience, writers, artists etc. Because nobody is calling for including the audience in the concept of "gamers" or "players".

Quote from: Mistwell;1072478I'm not sure why this would be different for D&D. If you only watch D&D being played and never play it yourself, you're not a D&D player.

And nobody is arguing for anything else. Nobody has said that they should be called players, you are fighting against windmills.

Quote from: kythri;1072228And, I'd point out, that this is nothing new.  I've been here 9-10 years, and from the get-go, people have been calling Pundy out because they disagree with him.  Ironically, more often than not, time proves him correct.

Yup. Which is one of various reasons why I have no problem with people disagreeing with me. It often gives me the opportunity to say "I told you so" down the line.

Quote from: RoyR;1072506I have no problem to see both the baseball players and the fans watching as part of the "baseball community", a community which shares some common interests and goals. And in the same way I don't see any problems of identifying a "roleplaying community", which consists of players, GMs, youtube audience, writers, artists etc. Because nobody is calling for including the audience in the concept of "gamers" or "players".

As a description of the actual reality, it sucks.  Other than that, nothing wrong with it.  Though I know I'm channeling William Safire here, and tilting at wordsmith windmills.  The debasing of the language to be imprecise, because a segment of people want it to be imprecise, is a historical trend with a pedigree as long as something you could remotely call "English" has been around (at least).  It's particularly jarring in this case, because if you go back to what a "community" is, the analogy falls apart rapidly.  (Picture a local community of a small town and the people immediately around it.  No one calls someone that drives through occasionally on their way to somewhere else part of that community.)

For the record, I'd say that there is a gaming community (People who game), a game watching community (observers), and a game discussing community (people on message boards).  There are, of course, enough people that participate in more than one of those communities to create a poor illusion that it is all one thing--if you don't make your roll to disbelieve. It was almost assured that eventually someone would use the shorthand of "gaming community" to mean all of those collectively.

We've had people pretending that people that talk on message boards about games incessantly, but never play them, are "gamers" for a long time.  So this latest push is merely the latest evolution of that.  Some of you are saying that no one is calling the "watchers" gamers, and this is a strange hill to die on.  Yeah, except, this is a losing rearguard action to delay as long as possible the real fight, which is coming, where people start insisting that they are gamers.  It's only a matter of time.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1072531As a description of the actual reality, it sucks.  Other than that, nothing wrong with it.  Though I know I'm channeling William Safire here, and tilting at wordsmith windmills.  The debasing of the language to be imprecise, because a segment of people want it to be imprecise, is a historical trend with a pedigree as long as something you could remotely call "English" has been around (at least).  It's particularly jarring in this case, because if you go back to what a "community" is, the analogy falls apart rapidly.  (Picture a local community of a small town and the people immediately around it.  No one calls someone that drives through occasionally on their way to somewhere else part of that community.)

I agree that the word "community" is a very vague term, so vague that is often essentially meaningless. And that is why I am so surprised in the hostile reactions to the use of it - that is a very strange hill to die on. As for the hypothetical battle you see in the future, I can't see that you are improving your position in it by using your strength attacking windmills today.

Quote from: RoyR;1072533I agree that the word "community" is a very vague term, so vague that is often essentially meaningless. And that is why I am so surprised in the hostile reactions to the use of it - that is a very strange hill to die on. As for the hypothetical battle you see in the future, I can't see that you are improving your position in it by using your strength attacking windmills today.

We are getting people on record that people who only watch games aren't gamers.  Will be interesting to see which ones stick to that.

Quote from: RoyR;1072533I agree that the word "community" is a very vague term, so vague that is often essentially meaningless. And that is why I am so surprised in the hostile reactions to the use of it - that is a very strange hill to die on.

In my experience, when people on social media these days use the term 'community' in reference to hobbies, there are usually two things going on:

1) They're preparing the ground to start enforcing social norms, where declarations of commitment to certain stances on social issues will become mandatory to be included in the community.
2) They really mean 'market', but using the word 'community' is a nicer way to get lonely people to feel they're part of something bigger than themselves so they don't mind being treated like customers.  

Turning an online group into a 'community' basically lubricates a push towards making it conformist, commercial, and performative.

Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1072535We are getting people on record that people who only watch games aren't gamers.  Will be interesting to see which ones stick to that.

How is that even controversial?  If I only watch football, and never play, I'm not a football player, period.  If I go on football forums, play fantasy football, know 20 years of stats, etc. I'm a FAN.

That's what people who never play games but only watch them are, Gaming Fans.

Gamer's a general term though.  I doubt anyone who actually watches RPGs or Video games as entertainment plays no games of that type at all.

I don’t know why because nerds are involved this whole Community bullshit becomes important.  

I watch movies, I'm not an actor.
I watch porn, I'm not a pornstar.
I watch sports, I'm not an athlete.
I play games, I'm a gamer.

Quote from: Rhedyn;1072275The worse thing you can say CR is doing as a bait-n-switch.

Oh no I have all these players with incorrect expectations but after a session or two some of them get-it and stay around!

Matt Mercer is a used-car salesman (The horror!)

I think this is where I am with it. People are going to respond to what they learn according to their personalities.

Which can range anywhere from this delightful little tale:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJOvSzCYTb4

To this grinding nightmare:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WMzXmjOcik

No level of overacted tripe is going to make the DM in the first video worse; she's got a good sense of humility, enthusiasm and creativity. She'll get on, her games will rule a little more every session.

Conversely, I don't think there's any saving the guy in the second. What does that to a human being?

Quote from: CRKrueger;1072564How is that even controversial?  If I only watch football, and never play, I'm not a football player, period.  If I go on football forums, play fantasy football, know 20 years of stats, etc. I'm a FAN.

That's what people who never play games but only watch them are, Gaming Fans.

Gamer's a general term though.  I doubt anyone who actually watches RPGs or Video games as entertainment plays no games of that type at all.

I don't know why because nerds are involved this whole Community bullshit becomes important.  

I say within 2 years from today, there will be someone that will post to this board that will say that they are gamers.  I'm throwing the marker down.  I'll probably forget that I've thrown it, but I'm sure someone will remember to link back to this topic eventually when it comes up again.

Quote from: Azraele;1072568I think this is where I am with it. People are going to respond to what they learn according to their personalities.

Which can range anywhere from this delightful little tale:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aJOvSzCYTb4

To this grinding nightmare:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WMzXmjOcik

No level of overacted tripe is going to make the DM in the first video worse; she's got a good sense of humility, enthusiasm and creativity. She'll get on, her games will rule a little more every session.

Conversely, I don't think there's any saving the guy in the second. What does that to a human being?

He's just here to bring light to some awesome aspects of this wonderful person that we can learn from!

Or, blue haired blobby guy fancies skinny actress. News at Ten.

Quote from: Azraele;1072568To this grinding nightmare:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WMzXmjOcik

I couldn't get past the first 30 seconds of that squeaky narration, so I'm really not sure what Joel's point is here, but you only need to get 5 seconds in to hear more proof of Pundit's point (emphasis mine):

"... one of the best players on Critical Role, her characters are ... written very well ..."

Quote from: Willie the Duck;1072219And if what Pundy were doing was merely talking about the issue, people probably would be universally supportive. However, he's done more, including suggesting that it is a big problem, that it is effecting lots of non-CR-crowd-people's tables (to a degree where a simple 'this isn't CR, adjust your expectations' does not solve the problem), and that Mercer's response is insufficient/disingenuous. I think that these additional positions, combined with a few beliefs that I think are creeping into this site--Pundy is bitter and vindictive of WotC/Modern gaming/anyone who is succeeding at making a living at RPGs more successfully, Pundy is trying to monetize outrage (and thus we are not the customers here, but the product), Pundy is trying to gatekeep the hobby (despite resistance to such things being a major reason a lot of people are here), etc. -- are, IMO, just highlighting some of the strains here within the site.

This.

Those worried about Critical Role steering the presumed mode of play for new players in a direction they don't like should take comfort in Matt Colville's new streaming game. Colville is a hugely influential guy in the hobby, and his mode of play is much more traditional.