Tech in The Bad Batch 1.01

Janaina Medeiros

JBB: An Artblog!
šŖ¼
No title available
Today's Document
almost home

ē„ę„ / Permanent Vacation
he wasn't even looking at me and he found me
Jules of Nature

Origami Around
DEAR READER
Aqua Utopiaļ½ęµ·ć®åŗć§čØę¶ćē“”ć
tumblr dot com

romaā

ellievsbear
Keni
No title available
Cosmic Funnies
PUT YOUR BEARD IN MY MOUTH

No title available

seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom

seen from United States
seen from Syria
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Ireland

seen from United States
seen from United States

seen from Australia
@chupacadupra
Tech in The Bad Batch 1.01
got scene 0 on the mind
This took EONS but it was too perfect not to do it
Well that was not on my bingo card. Here's hoping it's not overly kiddish, and gives us a good ol romp with kida and milo
Sometimes I'll be looking at bullshit online that I know will just rile me up and I have to think of this image to get myself to stop
Why do more people not fuck with Obi-Wan x Hondo. Itās so perfect. Obihondo youāre real to me
hold onto hope if youāve got it
Kanagi!
Ren!
Amaneās ššøš«
You can tell how much she doesn't want to kill him
From the first time we see them together, even before
She wanted to save everyone, wanted peace, sure
Shed rather keep the nowhere king trapped in limbo and the world's seperate than kill them
She can't bring herself to kill him when he willingly offers himself up to her weapon, the key
She can hardly kill him in the end, it's only when she truly forces herself to, knowing it's for the greater good, that its deserved and wanted, that she finally can strike
She loved the general, she cared for the elk, she could have easily loved elktaur
The true beauty of the nowhere king, the general, all of it, is it's truly all his own fault.
His own actions his own insecurities, his own ego, caused it all
She never wanted to kill her love, but after all his sins, after all he's done, she realizes it hasnt been love in a long time, maybe not ever, it was obsession
I'm sure the elktaur would have found another reason to split himself
But the fact it was love, devotion that did it is everything
Evergreen door forest
Every #miku is #canon
Dungeons and Daddies: Hey, we need a few theme songs for each season of our show. Itās just a ridiculous dnd podcast about dads and no actual dnd, so no need to go that hard.
Maxton Waller:
I've had a couple of people ask for a digestible version of the whole "the real problem with Dungeons & Dragons is false advertising, not anything that's present in its text" thing I keep alluding to, so here's the bullet point version of that argument:
Dungeons & Dragons is owned by Hasbro. Yes, the same Hasbro that owns Monopoly and My Little Pony.
Hasbro wants D&D to be the only tabletop RPG that anyone plays.
In order to accomplish this, Hasbro needs D&D to be a universal entry-level game.
D&D is not a universal entry-level game.
All game rules are opinionated about how the game ought to be played, and as tabletop RPGs go, D&D's rules are more opinionated than most. This is not a flaw, but it's not what Hasbro needs.
D&D is also on the high end of complexity as far as tabletop RPGs go, and it's complex in a way that strongly rewards system mastery, so it's pretty far from "entry level".
Hasbro could produce a version of D&D that's at the very least less opinionated and more entry-level than it presently is, but they don't want to, because they've determined that certain rules features which run counter to both of those goals are critical to D&D's brand identity.
They also don't want to produce multiple versions of D&D tailored for different audiences, because they want every single D&D group to be a potential purchaser of every single D&D product; they'd be effectively competing with themselves for their own customer base if the published game was actually modular in any meaningful way.
So how does Hasbro square that circle?
Simple: they lie. They insist that D&D is in fact a universal entry-level game in spite of all evidence to the contrary, and back their advertising up with sponsored thinkpieces and podcasts and such to "prove" it.
Further, they've spent decades fostering a culture of play which conceals the gap between the game they're advertising and the game they're selling by ascribing any appearance that D&D isn't a universal entry-level game to the incompetence or malice of individual GMs.
The game the rules want to produce disagrees with the game the group wants to play? Nonsense ā even the rankest beginner should be able to produce any experience of play using any set of rules, and if your GM can't, they're a Bad GM.
The game is hard to learn? No, it isn't ā your GM is merely gatekeeping you. This wouldn't be a problem with a Good GM.
The upshot is that the published rules are more or less irrelevant with respect to achieving the desired experience of play, because they're operating within a culture of play which dumps 100% of the work of making that desired experience of play happen on the GM.
Indeed, much of what modern D&D presents as GMing best practices are really methods of working around the fact that the rules you're using disagree with you about what kind of game you're playing.
(It's not a coincidence that D&D's entrenched culture of play also insists that it's normal for GMs to be miserably overworked and treats GM burnout as a big funny joke, then turns around and loudly wonders why there's a constant GM shortage.)
The trick is, because you're still at least notionally using the rules of D&D, the fruits of all that GM labour are perceived as the product of "playing D&D", not of the GM's hard work.
In essence, Hasbro's business model for Dungeons & Dragons is selling you your own GM's labour with a D&D sticker on it.
It's a very neat trick, if you can pull it off.
Now, at this point some readers may be asking: well, sure, but not all GMs are doormats. What about "killer" GMs who do gatekeep and railroad their players and otherwise act like complete tyrants? I hear horror stories about them all the time.
That's the second trick: these are not opposites. The GM as human Xbox and the GM as tyrant of the table both represent the GM doing all the actual work of making the game happen. The latter isn't the outcome that Hasbro wants, but it's a logical conclusion of the position they want the GM to be in.
I've seen a few folks in the notes respond "okay, but if that's true, why is D&D so much more flexible than most indie RPGs?", and the answer is that it's not. That's part of the sleight of hand I've talked about where the GM's labour is framed as part of the product. To break it down:
As noted above, all game rules are opinionated about what kind of game they wanted to produce. This isn't just a matter of setting (though setting-neutral games are often misleadingly called "universal" games), but also a matter of the basic structure of the narrative which emerges when you follow the rules.
The rules of Dungeons & Dragons are not less opinionated than those of your average indie RPG, and in fact are more opinionated than most. (Again, having strongly opinionated rules is not something that's wrong with D&D; it's merely something that's inconvenient for Hasbro's marketing goals in a way they're unwilling to address.)
In brief, D&D really, really wants your game to be a sword and sorcery dungeon crawl. If the GM is using the framework of play furnished by the rules at all, or if the players are responding to the rules' player-facing incentives even a little bit, it's going to squish your game into something dungeon-crawl-shaped.
(This should not be surprising; it's literally in the name!)
The rules of D&D being opinionated in this way tends to fly under the radar for a couple of reasons, one less problematic and one more so.
The relatively benign reason is that many popular RPG premises are not done any great violence by being squished into the shape of a sword and sorcery dungeon crawl.
A cyberpunk smash and grab caper? Basically a dungeon crawl already.
A special forces op in a modern military game? That doesn't need to be shaped like a sword and sorcery dungeon crawl, but it can be shaped like one and remain intelligible as what it's supposed to be.
Gritty logistics-driven survival horror? Not inherently dungeon crawl shaped, but the two genres are compatible ā a game can be both at the same time, as video games like Fear & Hunger and Look Outside demonstrate. (Indeed, Look Outside's apartment building follows the structure of an old school D&D megadungeon nearly beat for beat!)
Thanks to D&D's pervasive cultural influence informing what people expect a tabletop RPG to be, as long as this kind of compatibility is present, many folks won't even notice their intended premise is being squished into the shape of a sword and sorcery dungeon crawl.
If your chosen premise isn't compatible in this way, or if the group notices what's happening and decides to push back against it, though? That's where the sleight of hand I alluded to above starts to come into play.
Remember: a Good GMā¢, even a total novice, ought to be able to use any set of rules to produce any desired experience of play, right?
So get to work!
i.e., just as much of the game's putative approachability is the product of Hasbro selling the players their GM's labour in a D&D-shaped box, much of D&D's putative flexibility is the product of the GM being sold their own labour in a D&D-shaped box.
To be clear, this is not militating against homebrew content or rules. Homebrew is perfectly cromulent, and certainly, some games are more or less structurally amenable to it (though modern D&D tends to fall on the "less" side).
The problem is that what we've got on our hands is a culture of play that wants to have its cake and eat it too: when doing extensive homebrew is treated as part of the GM's basic, entry-level responsibilities, it's easy to fall into the trap of thinking of the product of that labour as merely being a feature of the game.
Which is, of course, exactly what Hasbro's marketing ghouls want.
Announcing United Wizards of the Coast - CWA
Hello World, weād like to introduce ourselves. We the workers of the Magic: The Gathering Arena team have come together to unionize as United Wizards of the Coast - CWA!
unitedwizardsofthecoast.com/news/announcing-united-wizards-coast-cwa
We are game makers, storytellers, artists, and creative technicians, and we are passionate about the work we do.
However, to continue creating games that you, the players, enjoy, the reality is that we must change how we are treated as employees by Hasbro & Wizards of the Coast.
Unionizing, in partnership with Communication Workers of American CWA, is how we ensure better protections, compensation, and a seat at the table for the future of the game we have made successful.
Hit the link for our full statement, other socials, ways to contact UWOTC reps, and more.
Together we will build the games industry we want to see. Support by sharing our posts, celebrating our work, & calling on Hasbro & WOTC to voluntarily recognize our union!
United Wizards of the Coast is the union of workers behind Magic: The Gathering Arena, organizing in partnership with the Communications Wor