#RoleplayingGames

November, the Squinty Dorksquinty@tech.lgbt
2025-06-23

This is not a good look for #DriveThruRPG. It's ridiculous censorship that only benefits the worst people. Hateful my ass.
rascal.news/drivethrurpg-delis
#ttrpg #RebelScum #roleplayinggames

2025-06-23

384 pages of grim fantasy, dice and maps await as Cubicle 7 opens pre-orders for Warhammer: The Old World RPG. Choose your bundle wisely - the forces of chaos care not what you choose, just that you SPLURGE FOR THE SPLURGE GOD! Pre-orders close July 31st. l.d20.ninja/yckvrwy5 #Warhammer #Cubicle7 #TabletopRPG #RoleplayingGames #OldWorld #TabletopGaming

A collection of Warhammer: The Old World roleplaying game products is displayed, featuring several books and accessories. Prominently shown are the core rulebook, a player's guide, and a collector's edition, all adorned with intricate artwork. Additionally, there are packs of cards, a character sheet pad, and various dice, emphasizing the comprehensive nature of the available bundles.
2025-06-20

The idea that buying WotC and expecting it to help the FLGS is totally delusional.

Diversity is what will save FLGS and RPGs in general.

WotC has been reaching for the monopoly for a while.

#WotC #WizardsoftheCoast #DungeonsAndDragons #DnD #RPG #TTRPG #roleplayinggames #tabletoproleplaying

2025-06-20

How Do You Solve a Problem Like Reviewing

RPG reviewing is hard. It’s not simply a matter of reading, taking notes, forming opinions, and writing the review. It’s trying to say something meaningful about something when you can’t take the time to play the game and challenge your opinions. I have heard people say that this is why reviews are meaningless or that you should only review RPG products that you’ve been able to play. My issue with that is, almost no one that covers RPGs can review RPGs in the same way that, for example, video games get reviewed.

We’re Not Like Other Reviews

Some RPGs have beta versions that someone could play, giving them a head’s up on how the game is going to play, but not all. Very few people that cover RPGs make the money to do it on a full-time basis, and even if they did, actually playing an RPG to get meaningful table time doesn’t just require the reviewer’s time, but it requires several people able to take part in playing the game. If you wait until you have hours of play and feedback from players, it’s going to be months after the RPG before you can put out a review, and, and with the time that playtesting takes, you’re going to put out very few actual reviews.

I think there is a great value in someone providing an opinion of a product after reading through and evaluating the material, even if they haven’t played. People will get a general idea of what the game is, what the mechanics are, what the game looks like. Readers can find out the tone and readability of the text. I think there is some value to a reviewer looking at a game and pointing out similarities to other games with which they are familiar.

Artificially Constructed Hierarchies

That’s part of why I moved away from using star ratings almost immediately after I started reviewing. Seeing a star rating is providing an absolute. There is a danger that someone only looks at your star rating, or absorbs nothing in your review except the star rating. Unless you create multiple vectors to rate, you lose the nuance of a game that may be a joy to read, but feels unwieldy in play, or a game that looks gorgeous and may be a good sourcebook, but may not be the best at providing actual statistics for characters. But once you open the floodgates of multiple vectors of star ratings, where do you stop? Readability, presentation, physical product, electronic product, value for price, enjoyability of gameplay, ease of gameplay, ability to teach the game to someone not reading the book? Where do you draw the line? Because everything you want to talk about that feels meaningful could probably have a star rating, and there may not even be the same vectors that apply to every game.

That’s why I pivoted to Not Recommended, Tenuous Recommendation, Qualified Recommendation, Recommended, and Strongly Recommended. Even with a rating hierarchy, my scale prioritized broad appeal over the product’s inherent quality of writing and design. But even that scale made it hard to express when I loved a game and thought it did a great job exploring new avenues of roleplaying in engaging ways, but was definitely a niche product that would not be for a broad audience. 

I always said that I wanted people to know that I have preferences and biases so they could weigh those into what they were reading in the review to know if I was looking at the product from the same angle that they would. But that was hard to translate back into the new scale I created. No matter how amazing a D&D product is, can I really give it a Strongly Recommended? Because that means I’m telling people that dislike D&D at all that they would find some value in checking the product out. If I give a narrative roleplaying game whose mechanics are more about emulating and enforcing the tropes of genres of storytelling, filtered through a character archetype, and I think it’s great, can I give that a Recommended when that means it may be a good purchase for someone that really likes more granular or tactical games?

The problem with my scale was that I had to assume an “average” reader of my reviews, and given that I like a wide range of games, and talk to a wide range of gamers, that means my hypothetical reader vaguely likes everything but is always be excited about any specific genre, and only lightly engages with licensed material, they can’t be a ravenous fan. That’s making a lot of assumptions. 

Reexamination

The world hasn’t gotten any better since I felt too overwhelmed to continue doing regular reviews. In many ways, it has only gotten worse. That I feel inured to being a citizen of a country that is actively destroying the lives and erasing the rights of every marginalized community it can conceive. Every branch of government is complicit, makes me more functional, and also makes me worry about how much of my soul is dying. But on that happy note, I’ve had enough moments where my anxiety hasn’t been so high that I shut down. I want to write things again, just maybe not on anything that feels like a real schedule.

I don’t know that I want to go through the stress of trying to summarize things with a hierarchical list of ratings. It’s literally stressful to get to the end of the review and think where it should sit for that hypothetical reader. It gets even more confusing when you factor in whether my blog has a different hypothetical reader than Gnome Stew. I always said that I think the value of reviews isn’t the ratings they provide, but the insight into what is being reviewed, and the perspective of the reviewer measured against the reader’s own preferences.

In the future, I would like to do things that are more like my first impressions, across the board. I can talk about what works for me, what I think is new or innovative, what I think will be problematic or isn’t put in enough context, and how easy or enjoyable the thing is to read. I can talk about what it reminds me of regarding other games and how I think that will translate at the table. But it’s all me applying my knowledge, my experience, and my preferences to what I’m writing about. I hope that will be useful to people reading those articles.

Also, writing a review felt “final” to me. If I wrote a review and gave it a rating, and then later disagreed with myself, I didn’t want to edit the review. I wanted to record for posterity what I thought when I wrote that article. I want to feel more free to revise opinions, not only considering gameplay at the table, but considering how a line develops and what support materials it receives. If my initial article is effectively always my impression of reading and interacting with the product, it leaves room for me to come back and write about what the game feels like after playing a one short, or a short run of the game, or long-term campaign. If the initial look at the game or the game product isn’t a review, and doesn’t have any kind of rating, it only makes sense that follow-up articles will be an evolved view of what I’m talking about.

Does it Matter?

I still think RPG reviews, and any kind of meaningful analysis of RPG products, is useful. It can provide context to people that want to know what the product is. It can help people to know if there are any topics that it may or may not handle well. I may even tell people that a product exists when they previously didn’t know. But I also know from my perspective, I want to evolve how I look at and write about games. I don’t want to construct a hypothetical reader, I just want to talk to other gamers. Hopefully, this will still give people what they want from the articles I write.

It’s going to be weird describing myself as a “First Impressionist.” 

#NavelGazing #reviews #RoleplayingGames #RPGReviews #rpgs #TabletopGames #TabletopReviews #ttrpgs

Client Info

Server: https://mastodon.social
Version: 2025.04
Repository: https://github.com/cyevgeniy/lmst