RPG Trash - 2022-08-23

user554842

01:29

I was wondering, did yall ever consider splintering a D&D stack off?

BESW

D&D is the only thing making this stack viable.

user554842

That's a shame, it seems like there's a lot of hate towards it because of that reason.

BESW

Nah, the "hate" toward D&D is because of its toxic business practices that negatively influence the entire industry, and how being established as the reference all other games are compared to warps the impression of the hobby and the kinds of games which can succeed.

That's related to, but distinct from, frustration with how D&D's dominance in the bigger space interacts with the Stack Exchange's policies and epistemologies to make rpg.se even more hostile for non-D&D-like TRPGs than it would otherwise be.

user554842

I'm not sure it's accurate to say it's because of toxic business practices. D&D has been the dominate TTRPG for generations now. Naturally if you want to play something else that means you have to share space with them. A lot of people hate that from the start, but when you factor in policymaking and the choice is between a policy that will be good for D&D (and 90-whatever-% of users) vs one that will be good for some other TTRPG, I can definitely understand why people feel resentment.

BESW

D&D makes rpg.se viable because without it, there just wouldn't be enough posts per week for non-D&D-like systems, and the Stack would shut it down. D&D makes rpg.se hostile to other systems for other reasons.

user554842

01:40

Yep, but making the stack hostile to D&D is in turn not a great solution for anyone, right? It just makes everyone lose equally. Ultimately I suspect you're right, non-D&D TTRPGs simply couldn't survive without D&D. But that just increases the resentment.

BESW

D&D has been the dominant TRPG because of hostile business practices from the start, including claiming and copyright the publicly shared material of others in the very early days and going on up to Wizards' current practices from sheltering abusers to justifying below-livable wages with "but you get to work on a thing you love."

This isn't about resentment, it's not just a "D&D makes me feel bad."

user554842

I would guess that although you may be passionate about those particular issues, the average SE user making a negative comment on a D&D question is probably not motivated by those issues.

BESW

I didn't say it was.

user554842

Sorry, could I clarify?

user554842

I am talking about the general userbase, so when you replied that "it's not about resentment it's about X" that seemed to me to imply you were also talking about the general userbase.

BESW

01:43

It sounds like you've got specific "negative comments on D&D questions" in mind.

user554842

I can appreciate that's your opinion, it just didn't happen to be what I was talking about.

Xirema

Are there a substantial number of users who post negative comments on D&D questions? Like, sometimes you see user toxicity, but I don't think I've seen people being toxic towards D&D itself.

user554842

Uh, I've never seen you comment, from your posts in chat I don't think you are particularly the type to make vague negative comments BESW. Rest assured I'm not talking about you.

Xirema

The most I've ever seen are people leveling (substantiated and level-headed) criticisms at the company in this chatroom.

BESW

I'm not aware of those comments. I am aware that every time I asked a question about a non-D&D-like system I had to brace for comments demanding that I explain the system because they want to answer but aren't going to bother to read it, and/or answers which assume the system is D&D or D&D-like because they know nothing about it.

@user77842 I didn't say I thought you were talking about me. I'm saying that your stance rests on experiences I'm not aware of.

user554842

01:46

I guess we are going to get stuck on what "substantial" means here. There are quite a few negative comments, jump over to the meta and you will see (in my opinion) a lot of comments that are negative towards D&D. Often suggesting policies motivated by anti-D&D sentiment. If you guys haven't seen it that's cool, I can only speak for myself.

GcL

@BESW I haven't see a lot of those comments on non-D&D questions. Might be I just see the questions too early as they're most of my questions page now and I'm not around that often.

user554842

@BESW That is very frustrating, I have definitely seen a lot of comments along that vein. I personally find it this situation very annoying too.

BESW

All I've ever seen on meta is an attempt to make space for not-D&D. That mean pushing against D&D as the default normal, not being anti-D&D.

We've got lots of metas about wrangling how to support D&D and non-D&D preferences.

user554842

It may be just perception then. For example if someone suggests a policy with the motivation of giving less to the D&D community to make space for others, I would probably perceive that as anti-D&D.

BESW

Because D&D is so massively dominant, maybe making space for other stuff looks like "anti-D&D."

user554842

01:49

Ultimately D&D is the majority as far as I can tell, so it would make sense for most policies to cater to D&D first.

user554842

@BESW Agreed

user554842

There are TTRPGs that I doubt have even a single question here, while it may be good to "make space" for them by carving out space occupied by D&D, to the userbase which is majority D&D players this is a negative.

BESW

D&D is the majority so policies must accommodate it or the site doesn't function. But if policies cater to D&D then this becomes a D&D-only site because nobody else wants to stick around in a place that doesn't welcome them.

There's a difference between policies that work for D&D, and policies that work for D&D at the expense of other systems.

user554842

Yep, that's the kind of sentiment I referenced to originally. Other TTRPGs are forced to share space with D&D for survival, and this leads to resentment IMO.

BESW

And again, "resentment" feels like you're dismissing real practical concerns as mere feelings.

user554842

01:52

I can definitely appreciate that it's a necessity for other TTRPGs, but for D&D it's a net negative.

user554842

@BESW Hm, you're saying negative feelings are not real issues?

BESW

No.

user554842

I think this is an emotional issue, how people feel is definitely salient.

BESW

I agree with that.

user554842

If part of the overall stack community is upset by something, is that not important?

BESW

01:53

Yes, it is. That's what I've been saying.

user554842

Ok, it feels like we are on the same page, so I don't quite understand your disagreement.

GcL

@user77842 Are these comments being actively deleted?

user554842

Let me put it this way;
If we had a 5e only stack then all policies could cater to 5e and all users would be interested in 5e.
For the 5e community that would be purely an improvement. Does that make sense?

BESW

Sure. And the rest of the RPG world would have no stack at all.

GcL

Where would the other TTRPG questions go?

user554842

01:56

@GcL I would say some yes, some no. Honestly not to be an ass but it's kind of a complex question. I was clicking through meta before and some definitely are aged and have upvotes. Where as I'm sure if you go to a 5e question and say "5e sucks" it will be deleted. Some kinds of "stack appropriate negative comments" are left, but yeah like I said I think it's complex.

BESW

But here's a counterframe: it's Bad, Actually, for people to be immersed in a world where the thing they already know is the only thing that influences what's happening around them.

user554842

@BESW Well in this hypothetical situation you would have both. But yes as we discussed the reality is that other TTRPGs need 5e.

GcL

@user77842 Gotcha. On meta. I don't go there anymore. I was thinking of the non-D&D questions on the main site.

user554842

@BESW Sure but we aren't talking about a conservative community being politically isolated in an echochamber (no offense if anyone here is conservative). We are talking about a TTRPG system here. We already accept that TTRPGs are separate to board games or computer games, etc. At some point we drew a line in the sand, but it is still a line in the sand.

BESW

I came here playing only D&D and I was burning out on it. If I hadn't come here for 4e knowledge and discovered games like DFRPG, Lady Blackbird, Atomic Robo, etc., I probably would've burned out of D&D and quit TRPGs entirely.

user554842

01:58

@GcL The main D&D hostility on the main site would be things like sealioning or excessive moderation, but I think we are getting a bit down in the mud here.

BESW

Nah, when it comes to D&D we really are talking about an echochamber--and that's part of my original point: Wizards and Paizo sell their games as sufficient for all gaming needs and silo players out of alternatives to the point that when I tell a friend "Fate isn't anything like D&D" they say "Oh, so it's like Pathfinder!"

user554842

@BESW I'm not totally sure that stacks are a good fit for exploring new games. I feel like the priority should stay firmly on Q&A. If I'm not mistaken it's not even possible to ask "if I like X kind of games what are some systems I should try". While it's great that happened for you, I don't think we should be engineering the stack to do that. Does that make sense to you?

user554842

I guess we are back at the highest level "what is this site supposed to do" haha

BESW

Aye, now you're getting into my issues with the stack and why it's built on terrible premises about the nature of information and the human condition.

@user77842 I don't know what you mean by things like "excessive moderation" of D&D, but almost all rpg.se's policies about how D&D questions get handled aren't about making space for other systems: they're in response to problems that came up within the D&D tags.

GcL

@user77842 I rather like the "have you tried this other thing" answers along with the answer to initial questions. Comes up more often for me in the software side of SE, but it is nice to see an answer that points out the weakness of a framework and an alternative where the problem is handled better.

user554842

02:02

I can understand you want to expose people to the myriad of games out there. That's a noble cause for sure. There's a hundred new TTRPGs a day and a lot of them are really good. I'm just somewhat sceptical of detracting from what I see as the primary goals of the stack as a Q&A archive and answering questions. I feel it's a bit dark to see this as an opportunity to "educate" users who did not come here for that.

BESW

They came out of things like the RAW/RAI debates which don't even matter to most non-D&D games.

It's not just about educating. It's about making policies that are informed by broader view which make the D&D part of the stack more robust as well.

GcL

Like "how do you handle gold economy?" comes up with D&D. Isn't a problem for Quest.

user554842

@GcL For sure, but when APIs or algorithms are plug and play I'm not totally sure how well that analogy carries over to TTRPGs. I guess there's more to it for me. When I'm writing software I'm focused on the end result, when I sit down to play D&D I'm not going to just change to pbta or wod or bob or whatever because someone suggests it. Using your "gold" example, is someone going to switch system just to have better economy? I don't know. I don't think it's a bad comment to make though!

BESW

Diversity and differing opinions would be good for D&D. In the stack's policies, in the industry. Siloing D&D more is going to be overall poor for everybody involved.

user554842

@BESW I think reading a lot of policies I have seen a lot of comments about D&D and often when making a suggestion counter to the popular D&D-catering suggestion the main argument is "this site isn't just about D&D". I think you broadly imply that everyone has good intentions and is just making space, I'm not totally convinced of that.

GcL

02:07

@user77842 I used to be focused on the end result, but equally as important for my work is how easy the solution is to maintain, comprehend, and interoperate with the systems using it. Similarly for TTRPG systems, if handing maintaining balancing magic is an issue, a system like ArsMagica throws balance out the window and thus there is not assumption that it will be handled. Troupe plan ensues and fun stories are told.

BESW

Well, yes. But that's not anti-D&D. That's pro-finding-a-common-solution-that-includes-D&D.

I'm not convinced that every time somebody says "let's not do the thing which further ossifies D&D as the only game the site cares about," that means they "hate D&D" or "resent" its presence here. Most of those people play D&D!

user554842

@GcL That's true. Like I said I don't have anything against people suggesting other system. If I am looking for a solution for a 5e problem I am probably not going to change systems to solve it. That is just me though, if it's appropriate for the question I think it's good to give the suggestion even if that particular asker might not use it. After all Q&A is the priority, helping the asker is secondary.

user554842

@BESW Right, which is why I've been careful not to say that.

user554842

@BESW Again I'm not convinced by the broad strokes you paint. Maybe let's agree to disagree on that point as it seems like we're going over the same thing.

BESW

Except it's exactly what you've been saying: that people who want policies which don't prioritize D&D are advocating that because they hate D&D.

GcL

02:10

@user77842 I wouldn't expect anyone to drop a system because it doesn't handle one thing well. I do expect players of a game to find value in reading and trying other systems that don't have the same pain points. Or by reading Q&A about other systems that have similar terms and patterns.

user554842

@BESW I think I have clarified several times that is not what I'm saying.

GcL

If the site were limited to or optimized for D&D, it would lose a lot of that utility.

user554842

@GcL I don't disagree that is utility, but I find it hard to believe the average user is doing those things. I guess I would need to better understand how the average user is using the site. From my understanding they are probably googling a question and then clicking the first stack result. I would guess that most users who sign up use the site a minimal amount too.

BESW

You just said that when people object to D&D-focused policies by saying "this site isn't just about D&D," you don't think they have good intentions.

GcL

@BESW I love D&D. Still for policies where it's not the priority. E.g. I come in here and there's a tag discussion about some aspect of D&D that is either D&D specific or has overlap with game terms from other systems. I think, "screw that tag" and "I'll come back later when this has gone to meta"

BESW

02:12

I'm gonna go have lunch. ttfn

user554842

@BESW Please do not take this the wrong way, but I have clarified several times that is not what I said. I told you explicitly that is not what I said. If there was any mistake or misunderstanding I should think it would be cleared up by my clarifying. I'm not understanding why you continue to insist I am saying something else. If there's a particular comment you are concerned about please quote it to me. Otherwise please understand that is not what I meant and not what I have said.

BESW

Right here, you said the thing. If you want this discussion to be productive I suggest you point out some of the behaviors you're referencing so we don't keep having to guess and then be told we're wrong.

GcL

Seems like this channel should have a standing link to how to make "I statements" and use neutral language.

user554842

@BESW I said "I have seen a lot of comments that say X", which you later mischaracterised as "people who want policies which don't prioritize D&D are advocating that because they hate D&D." or "people object to D&D-focused policies by saying "this site isn't just about D&D," you don't think they have good intentions"

user554842

Those are not equivalent statements.

user554842

02:16

I think you have sorely misunderstood what I have said.

user554842

To be crystal clear: no I do not believe everyone who doesn't agree with a policy that would be beneficial to D&D "hates D&D" nor do I think anyone who objects to D&D focused policies "doesn't have good intentions". I hope that clears up any confusion.

user554842

"so we don't keep having to guess and then be told we're wrong." this is also not what happened at all. I think you have misunderstood the basis of my disagreement.

user554842

I am not saying "you guessed wrong", I am saying that you have misunderstood or misrepresented what I said. And then after I clarified you continued to insist on the incorrect idea.

AncientSwordRage

> Other TTRPGs are forced to share space with D&D for survival, and this leads to resentment IMO.

I read this as too close to, "D&D occupies a lot of space, and that makes people resent it", that then colours your other statements and I then have to assume the resentment is brought up as the reason people want less of D&D on the site, not that the lack of variety is an issue or any of the other fundamental problems with how the game is marketed

GcL

When there's a back an forth between chatizens where there are assertions of what the other is thinking or feeling, I feel disappointed. I expect better discourse here.

user554842

02:20

@AncientSwordRage That is a correct interpretation. I think the dominance of D&D is definitely something that causes resentment.

user554842

@GcL I don't have a problem with initial misunderstandings, but when someone continues to insist despite clarification it becomes uncomfortable.

AncientSwordRage

@user77842 do you feel the resentment is the main or only reason people have anti-D&D sentiments?

GcL

@user77842 I can understand that discomfort. My advice is to cut to the clarification and eschew any assertions about anyone else's disposition.

user554842

@AncientSwordRage It's hard to say if it is the main. For some individuals it is definitely the main or only reason, but for people in general I'm not sure. I think we all know that "hating the popular thing" is a vibe for many people. I would guess that it is one of the primary reasons why people dislike D&D. Of course it's not the only reason, BESW above outlined some salient arguments against D&D that may be of interest.

AncientSwordRage

@user77842 I think from the outside, that resentment is the easiest to understand so it makes sense to assume it's the primary reason. But it really isn't that from my perspective — those salient arguments are often misinterpreted and dismissed as 'just resentment' or 'just jealousy' by others

user554842

02:25

@GcL For sure the former, as for the later - assertions aren't necessarily a problem. It's normal to ask someone "so are you saying X" or "you said X" or even restate their opinion as I did above. By you should be willing to listen to someone when they are talking about their own thoughts and meaning behind what they said. I can understand why you suggest that, but avoiding assertions entirely is not the best solution IMO. Sorry to always reply to you in long form 😅

user554842

@AncientSwordRage Personally I find it hard to believe that most people know or even care about those kinds of issues. "In the wild" the most stated reason, in my experience, seems to be just because D&D is popular. Whether that perception is correct is questionable, but that's my experience. Would love to see data but I doubt it exists.

AncientSwordRage

Assuming that's a primary reason is like assuming vegetarians want to see more vegetarian dishes on menus because they resent or are jealous of meat-eaters... But that's clearly not the case!

GcL

@user77842 I rather like the verbose explanatory responses. The aversion to the assertion of someone else's disposition is that one cannot know the internal state of another. I am certain of my own, and can only guess at someone else's. Genuinely inquiring about someone else's internal state is something I do like to see.

AncientSwordRage

@user77842 BESW has posted extensively in chat with links to examples of legitimate issues levied by both players and developers of TTRPGs

Do you have similar evidence of it just being jealousy/resentment?

GcL

@user77842 I usually replace the "you" part of "you said X" with "when X was stated, I felt Y". Or "I feel X doesn't accurately represent my position."

user554842

02:32

@AncientSwordRage If that was the most commonly stated reason and that seemed to be their temperament then it would be fair right? 😅

user554842

@AncientSwordRage As I said to BESW, I accept that their opinion and motivations, but I'm sceptical if that's everyone's motivations. For me this feels like a generalization: "I feel X so everyone must feel X". If I had seen everyone talking about the same issues as BESW, then I would accept that most people are concerned about that. Instead, I haven't, I have seen them talking about the popularity of 5e.

AncientSwordRage

@user77842 that doesn't address my point. The hypothetical vegetarians are vegetarians for a reason, and also want to eat at restaurants. Can you see why they might want more choice of that they can eat? It's nothing to do with jealousy. That makes it sound like they're saying "I wish I could eat meat"

user554842

@AncientSwordRage If we are talking about actual vegetarians then what you are saying makes sense. But if I stretch the metaphor to more closely match what I have seen then it falls apart in my opinion.

AncientSwordRage

@user77842 this isn't about their opinions or.motivations. They are "sharing links to examples" like I said

Mar 23, 2021 at 9:08, by BESW

PanzerLion wrote a twitter thread about how his contribution to WotC's "Candlekeep Mysteries" was edited without his input. Update and more details here. Matt Hayles wrote on twitter about how the official WotC D&D account responded.

Feb 15, 2021 at 23:44, by BESW

@Someone_Evil DDI ran on Silverlight, and when Silverlight support was discontinued WotC just stopped hosting DDI entirely rather than rebuild it for the handful of legacy subscribers still using it.

Jul 8, 2020 at 9:34, by BESW

The Asians Represent Podcast is unimpressed (twitter link) with WotC's quiet addition of a buried content disclaimer on its older store material.

user554842

Sorry, a but confused by this, it feels like you are saying I should read back to March or February /last year/ as part of this conversation? What are you saying here?

AncientSwordRage

02:38

in Not a bar, but plays one on TV, Jul 1, 2020 at 0:32, by BESW

ENnie award winner Jay Dragon wrote a twitter thread about the Paeliryon devil, transmisogyny, and double standards of queerness in WotC. CW: Transmisogyny, fatphobia, queerphobia.

user554842

I'm not sure if we are on the same page, none of those links are from this conversation or even this year or even this stack.

user554842

Would you mind clarifying your point?

AncientSwordRage

@user77842 I'm providing the data you doubt exists

user554842

Somewhere wires have gotten crossed.

AncientSwordRage

Care to explain where?

user554842

02:41

Did I say that I think no one could ever hate D&D besides it's popularity? That seems to be what you and BESW think I said.

user554842

I'm not sure what you are trying to prove to me with these links.

user554842

Are you trying to proven to me that BESW supported their argument (an argument which I don't believe they even made by the way)? Are you trying to prove that some people have problems with D&D besides popularity?

AncientSwordRage

@user77842 No, and I don't know why you're implying we think that

user554842

@AncientSwordRage Ok, well I'm not understanding what you mean by this

user554842

What is the data you think I doubt exists? Why do you think I doubt it exists?

user554842

02:44

My perception might be off on this one, but it feels like you jumped in to kind of "defend" BESW. Is that what's happening here? I'm not at all following this situation and would appreciate some clarity. GcL if you're still active and have some insight maybe you could clear up my confusion.

AncientSwordRage

I'm giving you a small slice of the problems I've seen levied against WotC and D&D. I'm doing this because you said "Would love to see data but I doubt it exists."

It's your turn to provide data to back up your claims

user554842

@AncientSwordRage Oh right, yes that's not the data I was referring to. I was talking about what "most people have problems with in D&D". I don't think I said "no one could ever have a problem with D&D besides its popularity".

AncientSwordRage

> in my experience, seems to be just because D&D is popular

Please share that experience with us

user554842

@AncientSwordRage Sorry, this is very confusing to me. You /are/ replying to me saying "I would love to see the data but I don't think it exists" right? What are you asking for?

user554842

@AncientSwordRage I think I already did share it with you and BESW and the entire chat? If you scroll up you can read it too.

AncientSwordRage

02:47

@user77842 you've not provided any support for that? You not explained what this experience is? Is it talking to people? Is it reading forums? Is it limited to this website? Is it extrapolating from your own feelings?

You're making sweeping generalisations, and I'm asking for just one bit of data on it?

One quote from someone saying something like "I dislike D&D because it's popular"

Because if you can't, but I have shown links to the alternative then those sweeping generalisations don't hold any weight

I need to head off now, but I'm genuinely curious as to what you provide to support the statements you've been making

user554842

Let's back up, you're being quite aggressive and it's somewhat uncomfortable.

user554842

If you scroll back to the top you will see I am talking about people on this stack making anti-D&D comments.

user554842

I think we can agree if someone on twitter said something 2 years ago it's not relevant to the conversation, right?

user554842

I can appreciate there are many reasons to dislike D&D and that is totally fine, I never thought otherwise or intended to say otherwise. If what I said was interpreted otherwise then on one side or the other we have miscommunicated.

user554842

I am not going to try to prove my experience to you, and I'm sure you can appreciate that's an inappropriate thing to ask. If we want to talk about abstract proof fine then, but saying the I need to do X and Y isn't on, ok?

user554842

02:54

If you feel you have genuinely seen more people in this stack making anti-D&D statements with the justifications you linked above, then I believe you. We can have differing experiences, that's fine.

user554842

I hope that is clear, sorry if I didn't sate your curiosity. Have a good one.

Akixkisu

06:38

@user77842 You stepped into a big and long-lasting conversation which doesn't invalidate your immediate feelings, but you seemingly lack the background understanding of the context, and you are not listening to other people providing you with that context.

user554842

06:57

@Akixkisu It doesn't seem like anyone was attempting to provide context. I see a user rapid fire asking questions about things totally outside the scope of the conversation and making a lot of incorrect assertions and assumptions. I can appreciate this is an emotionally charged conversation, but being dismissive and saying "oh but you didn't listen" is not helpful when others are being inappropriate.

user554842

Projection isn't providing context :/

linksassin

@user77842 Nobody else was being inappropriate. Implying they were in unkind at best. I can see you and other users are talking past each without a lot of understanding happening. I think it best to move on at this point.

Matthieu

Gonna be honest, I don't know much about either sides. From a somewhat neutral standpoint in this situation, the thing that seems to have started the wildfire was that some old twitter links were sent in order to give context on the situation, and they were misinterpreted as an aggression of sorts, something akin to "this was said and you didn't listen to it", which was not the original point of those links.

A simple misunderstanding, as often, I guess.

Sorry if I'm intruding here, I simply wish to point out that there was no actual original aggression on either sides, and the misunderstanding is what caused those seemingly aggressive exchanges. To put it shortly, neither sides meant to start a heated argument, so there's no need to fight.

user554842

@linksassin Excuse me? There were definitely some things such as strawmanning, aggressive attacks, etc which I personally think are inappropriate. I think I was very clear above when someone did something that made me uncomfortable. I don't see any value in revisiting it but implying that I did something wrong and no one else did is extremely dismissive.

user554842

@Matthieu I agree with your final sentiment, but I don't particularly agree with the rest. If someone fires a dozen rhetorical questions and demands me for proof and evidence it comes across as aggressive to me. In the moment having those rapid fire attacks definitely feels aggressive IMO.

user554842

07:05

I think it was pretty clear that the user was attempting to prove some point they thought I wasn't agreeing with. Not quite the "here is some context to help you understand the overall situation"...

Matthieu

@user77842 I did not take into account the conversation after that initial spark, since both sides were a bit rough at the time. What I meant is that there's no point arguing which one started it, because it started from misinterpretations from both sides. I believe no side is to blame more than the other.

Which is why there is no reason to fight over this, in my honest opinion.

Then again, english is not my native language so I might be missing implied aggressivity somewhere along the line. This is only what I gathered from reading the logs.

user554842

@Matthieu In the final analysis I agree that no one was "to blame", but people do need to take ownership of their actions. It's fine to say "I got heated and started attacking" but that doesn't mean the attack itself isn't still an issue :/ I know they haven't come back to chat since, but yeah, you get what I'm saying. Conversations shouldn't devolve to that level.

user554842

@Matthieu For "learning purposes" (ie not to lambast others) I would say that generally speaking repeated rhetorical questions and insisting on strawmen generally comes across ass aggressive to me. Whether or not that is true for everyone else in English speaking countries I don't know. There's more nuance than that, but it's probably not appropriate to deconstruct too much 😅

Matthieu

Agreed, it is important to take ownership of one's actions. That's valid for both sides though. While I do not mean to attack you personally, I'm seeing alot of "they were aggressive in X way" in your argument, and that's what's bothering me here, since it does not really reflect the ownership of your side's actions in this.

I think the best way to handle this is to agree that both sides were somewhat in the wrong in how things ended up, but neither sides meant to look down on the other side, and it ended up as a nothing more than two people with opposite views misunderstanding the other's…

linksassin

@Matthieu It's best to disengage now. There are a lot of unfounded accusations being made and I'm going to clean up the chat history.

← 164 messages moved from TRPG General Chat

room mode changed to Gallery: anyone may enter, but only approved users can talk

Transcript for

♦ RPG Trash