Part the Second, In Which He Demonstrates Something Controversial
Controversy. Today's piece is intended to creat contreversy. I had expected my prior update to be simple enough to stand on its own. Apparently there are people who jump to suprisingly complex conclusions considering how little they have to work with in terms of data, and perhaps in terms of synaptical connections.

So basically the forums response was OMG OMG DERF DERF YOU SAID D&D WAS NO FUUN!!?!??!?!???!?!? I HBVAE SOOO MCUH FUN WITH MY FAT SMELLY VIRGINAL FRIENDS PLAYIN D&D!!!!!1

Okay turtle_07 is a good deal more literate than that, but I made the language match the ideas behind it. Tuesday's update said nothing as to the level of fun involed in Dungeons and Dragons and other Tabletop Role Playing Games. That's for today. That's right, I am going to tell you that you aren't actually enjoying D&D despite your apparent perception to the contrary.

This seems an impossible proposition, but you'll find it stops looking all that farfetched when I start redefining my intentions. I cannot hold that people cannot be happy while playing Tabletop RPGs. It should be pretty clear that someone enjoys it or Wizards of the Coast wouldn't be selling it. However, there is something else to consider. What if everyone playing D&D wasn't enjoying D&D itself but instead something that just happens to be happening simultaneously? Again, this sounds like an unlikely coincidence, but hopefully you will accept it as a postulate.

Now we begin the examination of that postulate. D&D is typically played by a group of friends or at least individuals who have developed a certain of camaraderie. Just being RPG dorks should be enough to bring some sort mutual understanding, no? Typically it is more than that; typically TRPGs are played by by folks who would consider each other friends.

Furthermore, D&D usually does not exist in a vacuum. It's not always the stereotypical cheetos, but if a group of friends are spending a sizable period of time together in the privacy of one's home, you can probably bet there's a-gonna be noshies, and, judging by the physical appearance of said friends, said noshies are rather high in fat and carbohydrates. One I'm implying, incidentally, is that D&D players are porkers. Of course nto all are, but that doesn't change the fact that D&D is intimately associated with junk food for a very good reason. It gets eaten while D&D is played.

Now it is time to present the third and final piece of evidence. Like the previous two entries (friendship and snack food if you forgot) it does seem in any sense an idictment of D&D, but I'm afraid you must wait for the pieces to come together if you haven't figured out where things are heading. This piece of evidence also an expansion on the assumption that D&D is generally played by a group of friends in the privacy of one's home. Chew on this: a home you know well is typically a very comfortable environment. Typically being in the presence of only your friends will be physically and psychologically relaxing. This relaxation is often associated with a relaxation of social mores. Playing Dungeons and Dragons involves giving up (to a certain degree) your own identity and replacing it (temporarily) with that of a character of your design.

So D&D consists of a group of friends eating, relaxing, and a third action. That third action could be called D&D, but let's use a more general term instead. Let's call it make-believe. "Make-believe" is usually associated with far those far younger than the typical D&D players, but think about the concepts for a moment. Make-believe
is pretending you're something you're not for the purpose of play. Dungeons and Dragons is pretending that you're something you're not for the purpose of play. Now D&D is more complicated. If you're a D&D fan you would probably use the term sophisticated instead. Now you'd be right, but only in certain senses of the word.

According to Merriam Webster sophistication's primary definition is "the use of sophistry : sophistic reasoning." Sophistry is defined as "subtly deceptive reasoning." How appropriate. We'll get back to this though. The meaning D&D's supporters are hoping for is found in definition three (the process or result of becoming cultured, knowledgeable, or disillusioned; especially : CULTIVATION, URBANITY) and four (the process or result of becoming more complex, developed, or subtle ). Notice the positive sense of sophistication these definitions grant. Now we unveil definition number two, the definition that best fits D&D: "the process of making impure or weak : ADULTERATION."

D&D takes the pure form of make-believe and adds dice and structure. Now why is this adulteration rather than improvement? Well let's examine what makes make-believe fun. Make-believe let's set this world aside in favor of a fantasy world of your own creation. Now Dungeons and Dragons makes it much harder for you to set aside this world because constantly tell those around what you want your charcter to do. You have to roll dice and listen to descriptions. That makes it much more difficult to actually get into it. Furthermore D&D is not a world of your creation. It is emphatically a world someone else's creation. Even if your make-believe is pretending to be Ninja Turtles or Power Rangers or something like that you still get to form your own interpretation. D&D is emphatically someone else's creation. It's the creation, primarily, of the game's designers and also of the gamemaster. You are essentially a spectator. And you're a spectator in a much worse story than what you'll find at the average movie theatre or quite possibly on TV.

That's where the primary definition of sophistication fits back in. Not only is D&D deceptively referred to as a "game" but it also does not have anywhere near the connection to make-believe I implied and you probably took for granted. Indeed it bears more similarity to going to the movies than to make-believe.

Think back to whenever you last played D&D. Think of the storyline objectively. Now do you really wonder why the Dungeons and Dragons movie was so bad? It was bad because a D&D game makes for a bad movie. You can still have fun at bad movies though. Much of that fun comes from being with friends. You're with friends when you play D&D. See the similarity?

Everythnig I've said today should build to a rather strong case. However it has been lengthy and convoluted so I shall distill the salient points.

1) D&D is not actually fun.

2) It is perceived as fun because it is typically played in situations which are already fun. It involves friends, food, and privacy. Those three things are typically enough to create an enjoyable experience.

3) D&D adds less to that situation than any other activity that could be considered fun. It is similar to a game in that it has a firm set of rules and regulations, but it lacks any incentive to work within those rules because there is no competition. It is similar to "make-believe" but replaces the carefree self-determination and replaces it with someone else's bad story and rules. It is similar to a movie in that you are a spectator to someone else's story, but there are none of the benefits of a movie or television show.* There are no special effects, there are no attractive actors, and there are no witty writers. It is strictly inferior to all three of these broad styles of entertainment.

4) Considering the friends, food, and privacy D&D is worse than nothing. With just those three things you can have a fine time. You can certainly amuse yourselves with scrumtulescent delicacies and the company of good friends. I'm sure you've gone out to dinner with friends. You enjoyed it, right? I'm sure you've ordered pizza or something along those lines with friends, right? I feel safe in assuming that you enjoyed it.

Now let's add D&D to that mix. Suddenly you have to use pencil and paper and dice. I find it unlikely that you enjoy writing down numbers and rolling dice. You no longer have freedom of subject. You are brought to bear on this mediocre tale of sword and sorcery. You are forced to do work without getting any control of the story. That's the negative element of a game combined with the negative element of a movie. Without the positives of either.


There you have it: a thorough explanation of just why Dungeons and Dragons is not fun. Suck on that dorks.




And remember the guiding light, lest we forget the glory that be Lemon Party.
Because your blog sucks.


*We went over this before. Because the gamemaster has godlike powers over the game you have no free will. The game will proceed as the gamemaster wishes. You can only delay the inevitable and make superficial changes.
- posted by Odovaucer @ 9:06 PM