How come, despite the claim that “RPGs are more popular than ever”, that there are way less supplements published for various gamelines than in the 90s and 2000s? Even big stuff like D&D barely get any supplements and it’s not like the quality of supplements have gone up with this slower pace, if anything there tends to be less useful mechanical content than before.
If you've checked in online marketplaces, you're actually going to see some pretty insane sales numbers from 3rd parties. Some publishers are managing to make literal millions of dollars, and the dearth of 1st party books is helping to create that environment.A good number of these "3rd party" publishers are not really that far removed, with many Wizards and ex-Wizards employees jumping in and making D&D products and publishing them essentially as side-gigs, and with the ridiculously draconian license on the WotC-run DM's Guild and the cut they take off of anything sold, it's essentially an ideal relationship for Hasbro. WotC makes lots of money, while not having to be directly responsible for any content in case someone decides to get offended, and there's countless groups willing to do all the work as freelancers because it's such a lucrative market.
the money's in funko pops and digital subscriptions
>>96840712Because people realized 3.x's class bloat was a bad thing and that less is more, or they realized that rather than piggyback off of D&D they could just create their own TTRPGs that do exactly what they want rather than having to deal with mechanics that don't do what they want and/or rewrite an entire ruleset to do what they want.There are now more TTRPGs than ever before, because now anyone can fire up a google doc or PDF maker and write their own game, communities like Discord servers allow for people to recruit playtesters with ease to refine their games, and with WOTC pushing out their shitty new license why would you give THEM money when you could make your own system?
>>96840712The development of supplementals has largely been democratized in the marketplace. Rather than spending the time with salaried authors and artists developing a supplement that basically serves as a residual income for a subset of already existing customers, can try to focus on other more valuable interests, such as marketing to expand their customer base with existing products (advertising) or diversification that also expands their customer base in other areas (vidya games, merchandising)>The Lottery3rd party supplements are really suck or save ventures with a huge number of them just languishing. But when they hit, they are explosive victories that make bank.
>>968411233.X's class bloat was a good thing that was bad for Wizards.
>>96840712pretty sure new RPG players will just use their own imagination than just buy books from Boomers.
>>96841123>>96841401some editions are there to try new shit and some editions are there to either lay groundwork or focus/hone the game down. This is the cycle. I don't see how class bloat was bad for wotc- it sold their books after all. I also don't think content got all that much playtesting.
>>96840712Back in the hayday of supplements they were made out of desperation and didn't sell well./thread
>>96840712>“RPGs are more popular than ever”That's a quote. Who says that? Was it the company that sells RPGs and needs to convince shareholders that it's a growing market/playoids that they'll find groups? Could this be self-serving?>there are way less supplements published>implying popularity of thing is equal to sales of thingDoubly and triply retarded because most people will buy just the PHB and never anything else AND a multitude of groups can play with a single book between them AND loaning/vintage markets/piracy exists.>it’s not like the quality of supplements have gone up with this slower pace, if anything there tends to be less useful mechanical content than before.Wrong. That's exactly what happened. Sure in the 3.x days you got a book every month or whatever with options. But a lot of them were baaad. Some of them would absolutely deserve to be banned. How much (and I can not stress this enough) USABLE content did you really get in the edition where both angel summoner and BMX bandit were in the PHB?
>>96840712Other than 5e, there is very little published material. Everyone prints out these buy and forget tabletops with 0 official support. What's the point of publishing if there are no supplements, world books, campaign modules or a the very least individual adventure modules? Unless you're really into homebrewing, 99% of the systems are empty husks.
>>96840712Well, 3.5 taught WOTC a lesson but not the right one. You can have more than one or two supplements a year. However they have to be GOOD. The reason 3rd party supplements blew up as much as it did was most of them were good compared to WOTC bland shit with most of 5e. Hell if some of your classes and subclasses are unplayable because you didn't fucking playtest them. Then it's a creator problem. Also, after WOTC try to change the OGL to take everyone stuff. People are now making their own shit over bothering with DND ONE and all. All we need is one of them like DC20, Broken Empire, ACKS, World Without Number, etc to become the next Pathfinder and take over the Fantasy TTRPG. Especially if it more than one of them and forces game companies to keep working on their system and refining it outside of just making slop like DND and PF.
>>96842783Meh, ACKS, C&C, WWN, and few other systems do have additional material. Though yeah I agree. You need more than just the classic PHB and GMM.
>>96842783>What's the point of publishing if there are no supplements, world books, campaign modules or a the very least individual adventure modules?you let your creativity fly and make adventures/campaigns/worlds? like are you for real anon?I don't have anything against published adventures, but not every group needs them
>>96842849ACKS at least has a generator for everything.>>96842888But almost no published system has them. That's what I'm saying. They should be optional, they should exist. I'd never bother with some barebones system with 0 adventures I could run when learning the system. DIY should be for when you're experienced with the system's flow.
>>96842888New players generally benefit from well written adventures and campaign setting books. An experienced DM can pilfer ideas from them and make it into something new. If there is something we need more of it's stand alone adventure modules that you can just slot into a pre-existing campaign instead of these big campaign books that WotC keeps shitting out.
>>96842944>I'd never bother with some barebones system with 0 adventures I could run when learning the systemHow are systems relevant here at all?it's not about systems it's about gameplay loopsif you played some D&D you can pick up any system about fantasy or even sci-fi adventuring and make [at least] a half decent adventure to playif you played Shadowrun you should have no issues making heist adventures for Cyberpunk etc. for horror etc. for mysteryit's not about learning resolution systems it's about learning the structures for a specific gameplay loop genre [for lack of a better word to distinguish from thematic genre]
>>96843272>New players generally benefitcorrectbut not every table is a new player table>An experienced DM can pilfer ideas correctwhat's stopping you from pillaging modules for ideas from other systems?just so we are clear I'm not advocating there is no need for splatbooks/campaigns/adventure modulesI'm explaining that not all table require those
>>96841424This is probably the one thing that new generations do right.
>>96840712But shit like drive thru RPG and the D&D marketplace whatever it's called are chock full of garbage supplements. What makes you say they aren't getting better?
>>968407125e was written by a skeleton crew left over from the collapse of 4e. When it somehow managed to become the single most popular edition the game has ever been despite this, WotC decided against dramatically expanding their team, instead coasting on the skeleton crew - hence the slow release pace of 5e. And now for 2024, some of the skeleton crew have left the company, meaning there's now even fewer people working on D&D.
>>96840712>“RPGs are more popular than ever”When people say shit like this is usually with a giant asterisk. Is like when they say modern movies of capeslop and marveltrash are making millions of dollars. What they don't tell you if their profit margin is a miserable 5-10% because the actual movie costed billions of dollars. More often than not these movies fails horrible because even if can be popular enough for people to ignore they're blatant dogshit, they still fail to turn a profit at the end of the day.Hasbro and WoTC are money burners. They're not really turning an actual profit of their propierties. Their mediocre employees don't have any imagination or desire to do any real work. Is all "vibes" and "brand" garbage. Gygax on the other hand made the first batch of DnD from his neckbeard basement alone, even 1 single copy sold was already a profit because the investment was sweet, piss and a couple of bucks loaned from another neckbeard. The investment now is millions of dollars for the next flop.
>>96841401>>96841522It was bad for the game and great for WOTC. It meant they sold more product, because they could lazily shit out a "new" class that's just an existing class with one new feature. Paizo did the same shit with PF1e.Classes are only useful if they are all extremely distinct and fill different niches. Once you start making them all the same shit with one new feature, you might as well go classless point buy.
>>96840712Because they're lying. It's a propaganda technique.> BAND WAGON: This common propaganda method is when the speaker tries to convince us to accept their point of view or else we will miss out on something really good. The Band-Wagon technique is often used in advertising. Examples: "This is the wave of the future", "Be the first on your block", "Act Now!". You might ask yourself "What if I was the only one on my block because no one else was interested (duped)?".Truth is D&D did have losses after DEI policies. turns out alienating your core fanbase, turning to crochet monsters and cutesy adventures for minorities who won't even play is harmful for business. Hasbro laid off 1,100 employees (20% workforce) across divisions in December 2023, including some at WotC.Not admitting it is their strategy. If they concede defeat, they enable their opponents. Just like politicians when they claim they're sure they'll win the elections and make up random polls saying they're the most likely candidate to win.TL;DR: Woke people ruined D&D and lied to cover it up.
>>96844424How much can it possibly cost to draw this Steven Universe kind of crap?
>>96845436Less than it would cost to hire Justin Sweet or any of the various other artists who've done actual D&D work.
>>96840712>there are way less supplements published for various gamelines than in the 90s and 2000sSource: trust me, bro.
>>96845436>MOM! I POSTED IT AGAIN!Imagine obsessing this hard about a SINGLE (1) image and then building your online personality around that obsession
>>96843314>How are systems relevant here at all?>it's not about systems it's about gameplay loopsBecause the gameplay loops' structure is heavily informed by the numeric functions of the system. This is why converting modules between D&D editions is rather troublesome. Loot schemes that work in AD&D have little if any bearing on 3.X because the items themselves have different comparative values, there's way more fungibility of the face value, and it got (mostly) divorced from XP. It's only strokes so broad as to not really matter about foundational thematic concerns, which will fill out a design document with concepts but end up offering almost nothing for actually running a session.>>96844555>It was bad for the game and great for WOTC. It meant they sold more product, because they could lazily shit out a "new" class that's just an existing class with one new feature. Paizo did the same shit with PF1e.Not quite, the redundancy is a matter of not pushing to novel design space. Much more an issue with PF1e because it abandoned PRCs allowing similar padding with way more design space and steadfastly refused anything other than Vancian.>Classes are only useful if they are all extremely distinct and fill different niches.Not necessarily, the lock-in is still useful for idiot-proofing and it's relatively well understood how to approach levels in a class framework whereas classless yet level-based is basically absent outside some niche homebrew attempts of mix-and-match "vertical slices".>Once you start making them all the same shit with one new feature, you might as well go classless point buy.Or get to folding them into explicitly-correlated variant classes, alternate class features, substitution levels, prestige classes, bonus feat options, and so on to bring the "base class" list back down with negligible loss of build options.
>>96845505> nooo you can't remind us of what we did!!!Sorry fag, accountability and self-reflection are like kryptonite to you guys but people remember what you did.See the consequences of your actions in this post >>96845427
>>96845521There is reminding and then is posting that shit over and over and over again.Consider this: if what you are claiming was a real, actual problem, you would have dozens upon dozens of those images.And you have one.All you are achieving is making people tired of your shit, rather than doing any sort of self-reflecting or eye-opening.
>>96845535Here's an entire article on woke D&D art: https://markoftheweathersun.substack.com/p/a-comprehensive-history-of-woke-d-b86See pic related as well.Either way, it's good to see you seethe in embarassment. It shows you know what you like and support is cringe and is destroying the hobby.
>>96845427Is this a fucking ChatGPT screenshot lmao?
>>96845493Compare the amount of supplements for D&D2 and 3, World of Darkness and Cyberpunk at their respective peak and then compare them to now.
>>96841424It's true, after all there are no boomer modules about running a queer-owned coffee shop inside a multicultural fantasy city so us based younger generation have to make it ourselves
>>96845664No, Grok. Name a single thing it got wrong though. You can't.
>>96845809>grokTop kek man. When did this site get filled with social media addicted twitter normies?
>>96845862Name a single thing it got wrong though. You can't
>>96845517>Because the gameplay loops' structure is heavily informed by the numeric functions of the systemyou sound like a no-games>This is why converting modules between D&D editions is rather troublesomealso it really isn't
>>96845809Regardless of the "information" presented, that is a ChatGPT chat being screenshotted
>>96845996>you sound like a no-games...Says the one who apparently thinks that loot distribution is remotely fungible between AD&D and 3.5. To say nothing of the shit spell preparation time disparity and relative access to extra cast sources does to the bounds of pacing.Again, strokes so broad as to not really matter about foundational thematic concerns. If the players are not in tune with the implementation of them you're relying on, then you need to have a good handle on the system-specific mechanical considerations to make thematically-appropriate choices vaguely reasonable gameplay decisions.You can't throw an AD&D dungeon crawl loop at a 3.5 party of Invocation, Soulmeld, and Maneuver users, they are simply missing anything like the spell slot pacing mechanism that relies on. The gameplay loop must be altered to accommodate this fact of the party not using the systems it was for.>also it really isn'tThe basic expectations of how much of a threat a given enemy is have changed in many cases, and anything involving NPCs runs into literally none of the editions having fully-fungible classes. And in the case of 4e and 5e, they don't do classed NPCs in the first place so you have to re-write them altogether, to say nothing of cases where item usage in a module's source edition is outright illegal in another.
>>96845929>my parrot just said something. name a single thing it got wrong.It's a fucking parrot, dude.
>>96845505He's almost as gay as the pic
>>96846192Would you be stubborn like this were it a "normal" search engine or a database query giving the same examples?
>>96845996Spoken like someone who's never tried to run the great pendragon campaign using ironsworn
>>96846160>well IN THEORY words-words-words so IN THEORY i'm correct words-words-wordsmore no-game speak>The gameplay loop must be alteredyou know all this contrarianism is a weird way of finally agreeing I was right the gameplay loops are what mattersbut I will gracefully accept your clumsy concessions
>>96846240take the time to understand the context of the discussion before you embarrass yourself next timehere I'll even throw you a bone >>96843314
>>96846283>well IN THEORY words-words-words so IN THEORY i'm correct words-words-wordsThe relative placement of monsters in the numeric scaling and basic assumptions of timing for resource recovery changing is not "in theory", it's a fundamental break in compatibility requiring manual adjustment that no amount of loose concepts will let you get away with. Unless you mean to be invoking Rule Zero on a regular basis to convey this general FEEL of a somehow system-agnostic gameplay loop no matter the dice results, in which case you're not really using the system in question.>you know all this contrarianism is a weird way of finally agreeing I was right the gameplay loops are what mattersYou specifically argued it was in a system-agnostic capacity:>>96843314>How are systems relevant here at all?>it's not about systems it's about gameplay loopsSo no, it's not a concession, because it's stating that the system is relevant because the gameplay loops are constrained by it instead of the priority being the other way around. Even in systems of the same genre, their mechanical functions handling elements differently necessitates conscious consideration of how those handlings alter the inputs and outputs and thus the viable in-session events.Just minor-seeming numeric differences can EASILY cascade into invalidating bulk structures if you do not pay attention to the system, let alone anything like Shadowrun having fucking magic as a routine assumption and Cyberpunk only having off-beat optional rules tucked away in magazines and spinoffs from thirty years ago or more. No amount of experience with Shadowrun heists lets you run a Cyberpunk one WELL without actually learning the Cyberpunk system to a meaningful depth.
>>96846450>You specifically argued it was in a system-agnostic capacity:in obviously implicit confines of systems capable of doing the same gameplay loop, yes>No amount of experience with Shadowrun heists lets you run a Cyberpunk one WELL without actually learning the Cyberpunk system to a meaningful depthObviously I'm not arguing you don't need ANY knowledge on the system you are running, childI see you are already loosing yourself in the WELL THEORETICALLY layersNo worries, I'll help you. Let's return to your initial no-games statement >>96842944>I'd never bother with some barebones system with 0 adventures I could run when learning the systemMy argument is that if you know the gameplay loops you don't need a starting pre-made adventure module to "learn the system"You just read the rulebook to learn the system, you slap together an adventure based on your existing experience with the gameplay loop, and you are setthis is obvious to anyone who has actually GMed at least a couple of games
>>96840712>How come, despite the claim that “RPGs are more popular than ever”, that there are way less supplements published for various gamelines than in the 90s and 2000s?Two reasons:1. The claim is a lie. The 1E-era Mentzer Basic box, the classic red starter box, sold more units than any other D&D product ever has or most likely will. The "5e wave" is a piss in the ocean in comparison. WotC are claiming D&D is bigger than ever because they have to if they don't want to admit that they can't measure up.2. Excessive release of supplements is what killed TSR. Too many settings fragment the market and effectively nobody buys modules. Producing the books costs money, printing the books costs money, keeping excess stock warehoused costs money. Eventually it adds up to more money than you have and your company tanks. The 5e release schedule was very consciously adopted by WotC to avoid this fate, at a time when they didn't expect even 3e-tier success and knew/assumed they were going to have to turn over every penny to keep afloat.
>>96840712The two factors are piracy and diversification. These days, it's easy to make, publish, and disseminate an RPG. That means that the market outside of D&D itself is more divided than ever, and each game gets less of the pie. On top of that, most people do not buy their own physical book of each splat any more, they just download a PDF, so there's less money to go around. Combine that with human factors – instead of a game made by a small company of people meeting in an office in the back of a game store, now it's often one dude working alone for years. When he does that, and then the financial return is negligible (and nothing compared to hours put in) the drive to keep going on the hope that his flop becomes a hidden gem just isn't there. And even pretty big games don't make what they would cost to produce if you actually budget out everything that went into it. Long support with lots of modules can turn things around, but it can also just waste time.
>>96846359Allow me to say the same thing in a different way: Imagine a DDrone trying to run Blades in the Dark, without any context of how the campaign-scale gameplay loop looks like. Could you do that for me?
>>96845505Imagine simping so hard for a PICTURE(!) that you stalk the board for any mention of it and vituperate anyone who criticizes it within fifteen minutes.
>>96846085>>96846192The only parrots here are you two who repeating "muh AI = bad muh slop" yet can't name a single thing it got wrong. If it works, Why complain? Do you also mind calculators for that matter?
>>96844555No, Wizards did not sell more product with that business model, they sold LESS because it killed their sales so bad that 3.5 came out 2 years early to revive sales, failed, and sales were barely more than dead 2 years later.But I don't give a fuck about Wizards of the Coast's sales and neither should you.
>>96846742the discussion is specifically about a games with the same gameplay loopsyou are a fucking moron
>>96841123>Because people realized 3.x's class bloat was a bad thing and that less is more[CITATION NEEDED]>>96844555>Classes are only useful if they are all extremely distinct and fill different niches.[CITATION NEEDED]
>>96846897You got any evidence of that or are you just claiming stuff in your head is accepted by everyone
>>96840712>Even big stuff like D&D barely get any supplementsThat is supposedly on purpose. They've made claims in the past that they don't want to repeat the 3.5 era where they flooded the market with books. And there is good reason for that, because that sort of thing has killed other games before and it's not really a financially smart way to run things.However, D&D has also suffered profound brain drain. The nerds and autists that built their company have all retired, formed their own companies, or just got fired in one of the many purges they've done over the years. They literally just don't have anyone with enough brains and balls left to come up with interesting original ideas, engaging mechanics, or clever game design. Even if they wanted to release more books, they can't. It took them 10 years with 5e to release a new edition that was just 5e, but with a handful of stuff from their previous splatbook, and a handful of tweaks and houserules tacked on. They're both paralyzed by lack of talent, but also lack of vision. They think they can get by selling nostalgia to people who never played the originals, and they fear scaring off those same poseurs by doing anything that might disrupt the brand identity. As for everyone else, those companies went tits up because they never came close to competing with D&D when they were publishing, printing, shipping, and selling a new book every month. It's not a model you can keep up with when the general market doesn't know you exist, and the niche fan market can only afford to buy maybe a few luxury hobby products per month. Trying to be like D&D 3.5 killed them, and unsurprisingly, they spent the last 2 decades trying to recover from it.
>>96847439>They think they can get by selling nostalgia to people who never played the originals, and they fear scaring off those same poseurs by doing anything that might disrupt the brand identity.They also can't bring themselves to actually sell the nostalgia, because it's Problematic.
>>96847548They'll just repackage it instead with the same exact reasons people used to say it wasn't problematic.Then>Dark Sun? That game is full of slaves and racism!>yes but you can kill the racist slavers, because they are bad guys. That's the point.Now>The new Dark Sun setting book is so exciting because it's a bleak and evil world where players can take up the role of proletariat heroes who fight back against injustice and bigotry by defeating racists and slavers!
>>96847593I don't think they'll even go that far, anon. Asking a GM to depict slavery is now infringing on their human rights or something
>>96847593What Anon said. Paizo removed the concept of slavery from Golarion because these people are so ludicrously oversensitive they can't even bear to imagine the villains doing it, apparently. That's what makes the nostalgia impossible to sell. I mean come on, they deleted the word "race" from the core books!
>>96847671>>96847671Already happened, actually. https://archive.fo/6YpRZ>That's not subtle politics. The Sorcerer Kings are simple metaphors for oligarchs, billionaires, industrialists, and the devastating impact on the environment that is necessary to support them. The desertification of Athas is literal climate change. The slave revolts are stories of collective solidarity between the oppressed. It's green, it's socialist, it's very left wing.
>>96847740Huh? Fuck is that?
>>96847834>Fuck is that?A lefty faggot performing olympian mental gymnastics to explain why the problematic D&D setting is actually good and aligns with lefty politics and should not be cancelled for having fictional slavery in it, in brazen defiance of all previous programming that says any fictional depiction of slavery is unacceptable.
>>96847843... Okay? Massive news for people who give a fuck, I suppose.>all previous programming That doesn't track, s¤yjacks pog over sanderson's shit and several of the main characters are slave owners
>>96840712Without even looking, I'd say there's a glut of content. People have been producing TTG content for decades now. Even if a specific module isn't used for YOUR game, it can probably be reconfigured to fit your game. With that level of interconnectivity, you have an almost infinite amount of stories and characters to explore. That's before you even touch on off-the-cuff DM storytelling, where they have a general idea of the world and allow the players to color it as they go. If you're going to produce a supplement/module, it needs to be pretty good; otherwise, it's not going to get much traction. This is a good thing; it ensures the content that floats to the top is usually pretty decent.
>>96841123>There are now more TTRPGs than ever before, because now anyone can fire up a google doc or PDF maker and write their own gamewhat this statement is really saying is "there are more BAD ttrpgs than ever before"; there literally isn't a single genuine competitor in terms of quality even to shit like late 90s world of darkness (not even modern paradox owned WoD) or late 90s and early 2000s D&D in terms of both content quality and breadth. Were there some retarded splatbooks for wod and 3.5? Yeah, obviously with that many releases some will be stinkers, but that's a preferable situation than everyone charging $80 for a 150 page PDF, half of which is garbage cal-arts digital art, and then absolutely no support whatsoever after release as the creators move on to their next pump and dump patreon scam
>>96840712D&D after 4th edition decided to pivot their business strategy, massively downsizing their development team to 1/10th its original size and trying to run a lean, fairly minimalist game model that leveraged the community that had grown around the game, and trying to legitimize the official organized play modes like adventure league and 3rd party supplements to work as community anchors to bring people in. it was actually wildly successful, even if it was quite disliked by a lot of older veterans who preferred the wealth of first party content 3.5 and 4th had provided. instead players now only ever needed the core players handbook and little else, but this focus on simplicity and community grew the player base and made it approachable, which through sheer coincidence also piggybacked off the success of critical role and stranger things bringing dungeons and dragons fully into the mainstream in a way they hadnt been able to over the last 30 years prior. in fact if it werent for the OGL debacle they might have been even bigger, but that episode lost them a tremendous amount of good will amongst the newly grown player driven 3rd party supplement economy they relied on and went scorched earth on it, even if they later walked it back, which pushed the creators into the arms of other developers ecosystems offering more stable licenses less managed by a single fickle corporations profit driven hidden agenda
>>96847874Follow the conversation better, next time.
>>96848023We're talking about wotsy, not some literal who.
>>96846624>in obviously implicit confines of systems capable of doing the same gameplay loop, yes"A heist" is not a "gameplay loop", it's an incredibly broad and loose subject. A "gameplay loop" involves shit like rest-times, resource expense rates, rewards for activities, and so on. Because it's the activity loop of the game.>Obviously I'm not arguing you don't need ANY knowledge on the system you are running, childI don't care, the way dungeon crawls work between just editions of D&D is outright incompatible. You cannot use prior experience with a vague premise in another system alone to inform how to structure a campaign in another. >I see you are already loosing yourself in the WELL THEORETICALLY layersNo, it's that you're lost in the fuzzy-logic overview outside any particular system. You cannot apply all that similar of a gameplay loop between XP for gold and XP for winning fights, because the risk-factor to avoid has been turned into a reward in itself.>No worries, I'll help you. Let's return to your initial no-games statement >>96842944Different anon, in case you couldn't tell by the spaghetti-quotes. >My argument is that if you know the gameplay loops you don't need a starting pre-made adventure module to "learn the system"Which is wrong, because the system's particularities making your expectations from other systems of "similar" purpose inapplicable is not theory, it's incredibly easily demonstrated fact if you mean "gameplay loop" in enough detail to actually be useful for structuring a campaign.Explain to me what the dungeon-crawling "gameplay loop" in common between AD&D 2e and 3.5 is, in as much detail as you can manage, to demonstrate your counter-argument's accuracy in my example.
Popularity is a false god.All you need is enough willing mortal flesh to form a cult. . . I mean a group.Then you can bootstrap their creative juices to manifest your egregore.. . . I mean, you can have a jolly time playing make-believe with your friends.
>>96845600I want to talk to your human operator.
>>96840712Because in the 90's and 2000's you had companies with open gaming licenses. Anyone could publish supplements for those games, and did. Then WotC got greedy, and Paizo had to change their games to avoid lawsuits by WotCost. But Paizo still has open gaming licenses and thus gets more 3rd party stuff published for them.
>>96848134The point is that WotC is teasing Dark Sun with a recent batch of "apocalyptic" subclasses that all seem vaguely Dark Sun adjacent. Anons said they can't do it because problematic themes. I pointed out that retards can and will bend themselves into ideological pretzels to arrive at the conclusion that it's actually cool and awesome and that they love Dark Sun now because it is actually totally in-line with the things they believe.
>>96851283Isn't it a little unreasonable that if lefties don't like something they're brainwashed snowflake NPCs who can't handle it, but if they do like something they're just doing mental gymnastics to justify it? Can't the libtard simply enjoy the setting?
>>96840712Supplements are "additional shit to enhance your campaing"You are, in notorious bad faith, overlooking the miniature market that was also non- existant in the previous century and today is massive
>>96851599"A little unreasonable" is 4chan's modus operandi
>>96845505You will never look like the girl in that gif lol.
>>96846192>>96846085Notice how they dance around the question and try to ad hom their way out of having to engage with the argument/information at hand. Textbook leftist rhetoric. Pretend not to understand and make actual discussion impossible, so you don't appear like you just lost the fight. lmao. Can't wait for their next reply.
>>96851599Going by the article linked above: No. It's not about enjoying the setting for what it is. The only interest is in how it represents the messaging and values they prioritize above everything else.
>>96852520I'm not on either side of the debate (I don't even know what thread I'm in desu) but he specifically said>NoWhen asked if it was ChatGPT, and it is.
>>96850662Concession accepted. Funny how quickly the compassionate WOTC shill arrives at "declare my ideological opponents subhuman" as their defense... kind of reminds you of a certain german political party and their austrian leader...
>>96854906I mean don't most people value a setting for how it portrays its messages and themes? Aren't there righties constantly complaining on this board about how modern D&D is gay and obnoxious because of how its messages and themes have shifted from "killing evil dragons is cool" to "the power of friendship is cool" (or whatever WotC does these days I don't really pay attention.) Warhammer fans are constantly arguing about it becoming less grimdark and more capeshit as well. Ultimately the writer of the article says he's excited for new Dark Sun content whether he considers it good or bad, because he finds the ways WotC might work around its contentious material to be interesting. He expresses a desire to see WotC revise content that is considered problematic, but would also rather they leave it in as is than just scrub the setting of it.It's also worth considering this guy is writing an opinion piece on some news website. It's his job to come up with an opinion to spin some yarn about, and he isn't indicative of the average person either which way. I left this point at the end because it doesn't really change the nature of the argument being made, but I just feel it should be added for posterity.
Halfling Marcille sexo.
>>96855051It's the difference between liking it for what it is, and valuing it as a culture war territory to plant a flag in. One is genuine, the other is is just more culture war bullshit.
>>96840936A lot of it is also people buying books without any intention of playing. But yes, it's all mindless consumerism.
>>96855051>le messagesYou dumb fucking faggot, I don't give a single shit about a setting's "messages" and its portrayals thereof, nor did the creator of any setting anyone that isn't a philosemitic gaywad cares about. Next you'll tell me Forgotten Realms "message" was free love and inclusivity rather than a simple expression of Greenwood's mastrubatory incestuous autism.You should reconsider suicide instead of looking for hobbies to use as a soapbox platform, or industries within which to place your AIDS-ridden flag of hypocrisy. Fuck off.
>>96856171Philosemitic gaywad here: I still agree with you. The fact that I want Israel to throw every last Palestinian cunt out of Gaza and the West Bank doesn't make me the slightest bit more inclined to like leftists colonizing settings with their ideological bullshit (in fact, they're typically the ones opposing the Islamist eviction thing, wouldn't surprise me if they added the Gaza Strip to Dark Sun as a desert city-state).
>>96856171Anon I don't think it's good for your blood pressure to get so upset at a rando on an anonymous imageboard. It's pretty weird to me that you're so hostile to the idea that writing can have messages within them. Forgotten Realms being about Greenwood's masturbatory incestuous autism is still giving the message of "I like all this weird shit." I'm not out here flashing my media literacy card or anything, people are fine to not care about looking at the media they consoom on a deeper level, but there's also nothing wrong with doing that either. Your attempt to preempt an argument that I don't think anyone on this site would ever make is somewhat telling. I worry that you've been so overtaken by terminally online political discourse and hatred of imagined enemies that it's impacting your ability to meaningfully engage with the world around you.
>>96840746But I FEEL different than this.
>>96841123Instead of class bloat we have subclass bloat
>>96840712They’re not more popular than ever. Matter of fact they’re in decline, mostly due to rampant shitlibbery, gayness and other faggotry driving off people that might otherwise play them. It’s just that the shitlibs, homos and faggots don’t have a life outside social media and conspicuous consumption of ‘nerd hobbies’ as a banner of identity.In reality, less people are playing, but they are gayer, lefter, more retarded and much, much louder. From politics to education to culture, we continually mistake the volume of noisy social media presence for numbers of people.
