• 322 Posts
  • 263 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: June 11th, 2023

help-circle































  • He has been “playing one campaign or another since mid-2014”. Also, “Of the last three years, one was spent entirely on a level 1-10 campaign of Pathfinder 2E, with the other two years jumping between Shadowdark, Mork Borg, Blades in the Dark, Monster of the Week, and finally a Heart: the City Beneath campaign that’s ending next week.”

    Also, he writes “with the exception of PF2E, all the other systems I’ve tried are less mechanically demanding.” So he seems to have at least a vague understanding of multiple systems. Enough to voice an opinion at least.


  • There seems to be a lot of attention on WotC actions, so I guess people are concerned that it might work to turn D&D in this dreaded “lifestyle brand?” Statements like the “it won’t work” in the title serve to convince yourself then.

    I don’t care about WotC. There is no threat to anything I’m playing. If they destroy the D&D brand, so be it.

    Could it still affect me negatively? Maybe indirectly. If D&D blows up, then RPG community probably shrinks and fewer people join. The most popular game is the entry game for many after all. So it will hurt the many small indie creatives too. Maybe there will be a painful correction. On the other hand, it probably results in a more healthy and resilient community afterwards. Still, I would feel sorry for the people who live on a small RPG business now which might not survive a D&D implosion.


  • Nothing is wrong with just saying it. In practice, it sometimes doesn’t work out though.

    For a very public drastic example, look at the Far Verona rape:

    The reaction of the other players at the table while the scene plays out is telling. It appears that no one expected this storyline to go where it went.

    Yet, nobody said “I don’t like where this is going.”

    To be clear: I don’t blame them for not saying it. Probably, I probably would have been quiet in that situation too. I believe that safety/communication tools are usually not necessary but in rare cases they are. Thus, it is a good practice in general and worth some overhead.




  • The actual paper is directly linked in this press release. It contains three threats to validity:

    First, due to the small sample size, demographic factors (such as prior experience with D&D and COVID-19 experiences) could not be entered into the statistical models as control variables. […]

    Second, the single-arm design is vulnerable to participant-related effects (participants responding to the demand characteristics of the research situation and placebo effects) and experimenter expectancy effects. […]

    Third, due to the age of participants (mean age was around 28), we should be cautious when generalizing these findings to other groups, such as geriatric or paediatric populations.

    Overall, this is not very strong evidence. The primary conclusion from the researchers seems to be “promising for further research”.

    One curious note:

    Interestingly, only two of the five outcome variables were found to change from T1 to T2. This could indicate that the positive effects of D&D take time to manifest or that a threshold of exposure is needed before positive effects begin to manifest.

    They had 8 weekly 1h sessions. T1 is “before the first session” and T2 is the middle “after 4 of 8 sessions”. (They also measured T3 “after eight sessions” and T4 “one month after the last session”).

    Seems like one shots won’t do it.