D&D General D&D "influencers" need to actively acknowledge other games.

[Dire Bare]

My only point (poorly made, I admit) is that many games have solved almost all the "problems" the D&D influencers are trying to provide solutions for their audience. I'm not even saying that the influencers should say "play that game instead." I just think it would be cool, because of the outsized influence of D&D and its social media proponents, if those influencers would acknowledge that these other games exist and are good to mine ideas from.

Not all D&D influencer videos are about "fixing" some aspect of D&D.

For those types of videos . . . a solution created by the influencer themselves, or a solution created by someone else the influencer is promoting . . . is just fine. No, they shouldn't feel obligated to find some other game that has already "solved" the problem in order to be a "good" D&D influencer.

If an influencer happens to be familiar with another game that "solves" the problem at hand, and can be adapted to D&D . . . well, sure, why not? But this isn't superior to the above, just different.

Your original example of "Why didn't Ginni D mention that FATE has already solved this?!?!" is the disconnect that has got so many to push back against your initial post. Why didn't she? All sorts of possible reasons . . . she isn't familiar with FATE. She is familiar with FATE, but doesn't care for it. Familiar or not, she felt her audience would not appreciate mixing FATE with D&D. Or . . . she just didn't want to. It's all valid. Just as valid as if she had created a video adapting FATE mechanics to D&D.

 

[Oofta]

I gave an example not far upthread, and I'm not even a particular fan of storygames.

Fail forward is hardly revelatory. I don't need to play a game to understand the concept.

 

[Reynard]

Not all D&D influencer videos are about "fixing" some aspect of D&D.

For those types of videos . . . a solution created by the influencer themselves, or a solution created by someone else the influencer is promoting . . . is just fine. No, they shouldn't feel obligated to find some other game that has already "solved" the problem in order to be a "good" D&D influencer.

If an influencer happens to be familiar with another game that "solves" the problem at hand, and can be adapted to D&D . . . well, sure, why not? But this isn't superior to the above, just different.

Your original example of "Why didn't Ginni D mention that FATE has already solved this?!?!" is the disconnect that has got so many to push back against your initial post. Why didn't she? All sorts of possible reasons . . . she isn't familiar with FATE. She is familiar with FATE, but doesn't care for it. Familiar or not, she felt her audience would not appreciate mixing FATE with D&D. Or . . . she just didn't want to. It's all valid. Just as valid as if she had created a video adapting FATE mechanics to D&D.

Look, I full admitted I didn't think the initial post through and certainly didn't phrase it correctly, so I don't know why you are using hyperbole to "quote" me when an actual quote would be plenty.

And, no, I don't believe anyone making their living on YouTube talking about RPGs only knows D&D. That's obviously nonsense.

 

[Oofta]

Not all D&D influencer videos are about "fixing" some aspect of D&D.

For those types of videos . . . a solution created by the influencer themselves, or a solution created by someone else the influencer is promoting . . . is just fine. No, they shouldn't feel obligated to find some other game that has already "solved" the problem in order to be a "good" D&D influencer.

If an influencer happens to be familiar with another game that "solves" the problem at hand, and can be adapted to D&D . . . well, sure, why not? But this isn't superior to the above, just different.

Your original example of "Why didn't Ginni D mention that FATE has already solved this?!?!" is the disconnect that has got so many to push back against your initial post. Why didn't she? All sorts of possible reasons . . . she isn't familiar with FATE. She is familiar with FATE, but doesn't care for it. Familiar or not, she felt her audience would not appreciate mixing FATE with D&D. Or . . . she just didn't want to. It's all valid. Just as valid as if she had created a video adapting FATE mechanics to D&D.

Even if she is familiar with FATE, does she need to mention where she gets her inspiration for suggestions from? I mean, @Thomas Shey mentioned fail forward as an example that you could glean from playing other games (correct me if I'm wrong Sir Shey). But it's hardly a unique concept, it's discussed in the DMG where it's called success at a cost.

In any case, I take inspiration from any number of sources. Blogs, streamed shows, board games, you name it. If you're copying something verbatim from a different game it would be polite to mention the source, but I doubt that FATE is the only game to ever use the world building concept. There's nothing new under the sun.

 

[Reynard]

Even if she is familiar with FATE, does she need to mention where she gets her inspiration for suggestions from? I mean, @Thomas Shey mentioned fail forward as an example that you could glean from playing other games (correct me if I'm wrong Sir Shey). But it's hardly a unique concept, it's discussed in the DMG where it's called success at a cost.

In any case, I take inspiration from any number of sources. Blogs, streamed shows, board games, you name it. If you're copying something verbatim from a different game it would be polite to mention the source, but I doubt that FATE is the only game to ever use the world building concept. There's nothing new under the sun.

You are talking about plagiarism which is not at all what I was talking about.

 

[Oofta]

You are talking about plagiarism which is not at all what I was talking about.

If someone takes rules verbatim from a system they should name the source. If they're just inspired by one or more sources and modified then it's more debatable.

No game, no gaming advice, is generated completely in a vacuum.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Fail forward is hardly revelatory. I don't need to play a game to understand the concept.

You're not everyone. I can promise doing so, especially in an organized fashion, is indeed a brand new idea to a fair number of people.

 

[MichaelSomething]

Here a non D&D TTRPG video review you can watch.

 

[Aldarc]

I don't expect D&D influencers to cover non-D&D games. The reality is that there are D&D Content Creators and then there are TTRPG Content Creators. IME, they (largely) do not have the same audiences. Would it be nice if D&D Content Creators tried other tabletop roleplaying games that were D&D-adjacent or even non-D&D adjacent? Sure, but it's not something that I demand or expect from them. It's likely that many have. They may actually enjoy playing these other games. But when it comes to the content they create? They are D&D Content Creators and NOT TTRPG Content Creators.

 

[Zardnaar]

I don't expect D&D influencers to cover non-D&D games. The reality is that there are D&D Content Creators and then there are TTRPG Content Creators. IME, they (largely) do not have the same audiences. Would it be nice if D&D Content Creators tried other tabletop roleplaying games that were D&D-adjacent or even non-D&D adjacent? Sure, but it's not something that I demand or expect from them. It's likely that many have. They may actually enjoy playing these other games. But when it comes to the content they create? They are D&D Content Creators and NOT TTRPG Content Creators.

This.