• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    3 days ago

    If you lead with “Thing you like is actually bad”

    Why would you assume the critiques are of things they like? 5e has plenty of widely recognized flaws.

    To get through to people, find common ground and build off that.

    Often, simply catering to people’s priors means never leaving their comfort zone.

    • kattfisk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 days ago

      If they play a system, they probably like that system and find its shortcomings acceptable. You can’t convince someone that a system isn’t enjoyable when they have first-hand evidence to the contrary.

      Asking people to stop being comfortable doing something they like, so that they can be uncomfortable doing something you like, isn’t a good value proposition.

      • Kichae@wanderingadventure.party
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        Bingo. Especially when what they’ve done to trigger the comments telllimf them to “play something else” is ask how to extend the thing they already like, or to replace some subsystem that is so clealy not core to the game.

        But with 5e, there are also just so many third party releases that you can also replace core systems, like magic, with little difficulty, and people know it.

        They don’t want to play something else. They’re not ready to try something else. They want to keep their dragon ampersand and their dis/advantage rolls, and telling them they’re doing something wrong by holding on to that isn’t convincing. It just communicates that other games are played by fucking assholes with boundary issues.

    • Kichae@wanderingadventure.party
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      Sute, but the thing they like is “D&D”, and D&D isn’t just a game anymore, it’s an identity signifier. Pointing people to other games before establishing yourself as firmly not attacking their identity is going to trigger a fight.

      • kattfisk@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        It’s not about identity as much as it’s a very poor way to try to convince someone.

        Don’t base your line of argument on a statement you know the other person will likely disagree with.

        For example “You should play Pathfinder because DnD sucks”, holds no weight to people who don’t think that DnD sucks. In fact if they happen to like DnD, it undermines your argument, because if you disagree about DnD, aren’t you also likely to disagree about Pathfinder?

      • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 days ago

        D&D isn’t just a game anymore, it’s an identity signifier

        Which is part of the problem. Like talking to someone who only drinks Coca-Cola about trying a new bag of tea you brought over.

        attacking their identity

        If you’ve wedded yourself so deeply to the brand that you feel attacked whenever someone levels a critique, you’re probably not mature enough to be at my table.