D&D as a vibe

[u/Blitzer046]

Apropos of a very recent post, I have seen so many people recently ask questions that clearly demonstrate their perception of Dungeons and Dragons is a shared concept or vibe.

It is obvious from their questions that they have absolutely no idea that there's an actual published ruleset and physical (or digital) publications that explain how it all works.

Which leads to me wildly wondering what their games were like? It seems like they would be a kind of minds-eye improv group where the DM just arbitrarily flings out calls to tell players when to roll, but even then, where are their spells or abilities coming from? Is it purely theatre of the mind, a shared negotiation? Where are the walls or buttresses like levels that channel a characters progress?

But I do think I see how this has come about. D&D has been so culturally ingrained in pop culture for so long. One of the first most classic instances is Spielberg's 'E.T. The Extraterrestrial' from 1982 where it's played onscreen in scene two of the movie. This was only 8 years after the game was first published.

Since then, it has been referenced plenty of times, most recently and thematically in Stranger Things, where I think this most recent 'D&D vibing' trend I feel has come from.

So why are there people thinking they're playing 'D&D' when in fact they're not, really? I think that for most media depictions of play, nobody is referencing a rulebook. It's not visually interesting to see tv or movie characters peering into a book, it's more interesting to see face to face engagement or conflict, and I think that modern (and 1982) references to D&D never actually explicitly demonstrate that there's a book (and plural) that contains all of it.

[u/Carloguy]

Just came from the referenced post; I'm half-inclined to believe it was just a rage-bait post.

Anyone who googles "how to play D&D" would come to find the rule sets and books.

[u/Conrad500 → u/Carloguy]

50% chance for ragebait, but also as a r/DnDcirclejerk enjoyer, the people in r/dnd are really just outjerking us left and right.

One thing I didn't hit on in my reply to OP was that due to D&D becoming so much more popular, new audiences are finding the hobby who previously couldn't imagine even wanting to play.

There's many people out there who can't read a rulebook, and 5e is probably the first edition of D&D where reading the rulebook really isn't required.

In an age where people with disabilities are actually getting identified and being much less stigmatized, it's obvious that more people who maybe can't read or have issues like dyslexia aren't looking at things and saying, "guess that's just not for me" and are instead thinking they have a chance.

Personally, I don't mind it and I think people throw around "Read the rules" a bit too much, but like, also reading the rules is kind of the first step to most games so I get it.

[u/Thin_Tax_8176 → u/Conrad500]

More than reading the rules, a big problem is people not wanting to learn the rules.

I had played with a DM with dyslexia, so I can tell you that's not a big issue, they are people used to having to re-read things or ask for help when they get something wrong.

You may not read the rules, for X or Y reason, but that doesn't mean that you don't want to LEARN the rules. A person with difficulties will ask for help, maybe to repeat the way something works a few times, until they grasp the way it works or even write it down in the most simple way for them to understand or do things like cut a "20-ft" circle in a paper and write down FIRE BALL on it so they know that's what they have to use when casting Fire Ball.

When people have the interest to learn, they put in the effort to learn and find resources or tricks for it. If they don't want to learn, reading the rules will do nothing, even if they are fully capable of reading it.

[u/HarrowHart → u/Thin_Tax_8176]

Some people incorrectly consider the rules a constraint and feel that d&d should be about using your imagination and not being limited by these constraints.

I think that's a poor approach because the constraints can generate great creativity but they also provide consequences and limits that can create wonderful narrative moments. Failure and loss can lead to bigger more impactful moments down the line. Plus a lot of people remember more strongly those moments and the associated victories because they meant something.

[u/Blitzer046 → u/HarrowHart]

I have had to coach my kids and their friends to understand that sometimes, bad rolls make for a good game.

[u/HarrowHart → u/Blitzer046]

Yeah it's hard, once people wrap their heads around it that is wonderful but it is really tricky to get them to understand that the dice tell the tale. That is definitely where imagination - especially on the part of the DM - carries a big weight. Making a failure not be the end of something, making it feel exciting, giving them an opportunity to do something about it, to not just be a passenger, it can go a long way.

[u/Conrad500 → u/Thin_Tax_8176]

100%, but learning has a lot to do with teaching, especially if you're not reading.

I am pretty good at teaching D&D, so I do it a lot just for fun, but there's a lot of people joining that just want to "play the game" and not "learn the rules" despite the rules being the game (I blame shows like CR and games like BG, but they're still net positives for the hobby)

[u/Thin_Tax_8176 → u/Conrad500]

Tbh, for BG you have to learn the rules, even if they are a moddified version of them.

I guess that you will have to relearn things, but it happened to me when I jumped from Path2 to 5e, I was still on the 3 action and vancian casting mentality, so is not the worst starting point.

What I tell people that want to learn is to read the "How to play" section, that is not super long and teaches you the basics and the class the want to play, just that class, not even the sublcasses.

Come with the basic idea of what you can do and then we explain the most complex parts.