Goodman Games Brouhaha

I am still a fan of Dungeon Crawl Classics.

Despite all the silliness that OSR YouTube drug up, assuming this and that, removing the names of the "legends" did not mean much to me then, nor does it now with them back in the 11th printing. Those people likely never wanted to be seen as gods; back then, we didn't see them as gods.

The game was king, not a person or a name.

And I get why they may want to remove them; with the estates of Gygax (and possibly others) licensing the names for competing products, why would they advertise for a competitor?

While we can use their names to illustrate "how old school should be played," - if you want to get into the actual way we played, you will need to watch many 1980s movies, listen to 80s music, and immerse yourself in the flash and cheese of the era.

To me, these names are names.

The more problematic aspect of preserving is how we played and accepting that things back then were not "the way we like things today." The shirtless barbarian, the chainmail bikini, the slaying of every monster that moved, the Manowar soundtrack, and an absence of today's "drama club gaming" pastiche.

Conan was a sex symbol, as was every other character - male or female. Hell, even the monsters were sex symbols. Get over yourself, current-day prudes; you are just as terrible as the Puritan religious types in the 1980s who got upset at skirts cut above the ankle.

Maybe even worse these days.

Violence was the same way and is just as problematic today. Watch those movies. You go back to the 1980s, buy into all the era's problematic aspects - and embrace them. DCC frequently ignores the sex appeal and dips into the weird as a non-triggering replacement. I get it; they have to sell games without pissing people off. It is a business.

But my game is my game.

I will play it how I want.

I have my safety tools, and they are filled out a certain way. Everyone has a fair warning. There are other games and tables, but this is mine. Again, I have a different view of these tools; they aren't player weapons to disrupt games like many present them to be where the GM is powerless. Stop being weak and playing the victim, YouTubers; these are communication tools for a group to communicate the content of games and go both ways.

I get it - drama and clickbait for views. YouTube, there are times you make the whole gaming community worse.

This is fantasy fulfillment, not today's drama in a faux-Renaissance setting. 5E has moved from a roleplaying game to a framework for drama club activities for streaming shows. Critical Role is taking their fans and heading for the door. Things are changing rapidly.

Much of the heat in this issue felt like lesser competitors trying to knock DCC down, along with many 5E fans punching down for sport (and to take out their rage on others now that 5E is going down in flames). A fair amount of click-baiting by YouTube commentators also made it worse. It is a crappy time to be a creative publisher of games since fandom has turned into gang warfare.

DCC has done much to legitimize and mainstream the old-school genre and explain it to a new audience. How incredible this genre is. What the genre is. Its ethos, lore, and principles. How does it differ from billion-dollar toy companies' cozy-gaming mainstream offerings? We don't worship names in the old school, and we don't erect golden idols. Those names were never even important back then. They only serve to highlight something larger.

This has not impacted my view of DCC.

Because my view of DCC is far different from even Goodman Games.

This is my game. While I believe in the spirit and ethos of the era - I was there. I know.

This is not Goodman's view of the genre, though they supply the rules; this is my view from having lived it.

And my game is most certainly not controlled by YouTube channels, so desperate for views they go around manufacturing controversy just to get another hit.