Monday, November 22, 2021

Is This What It Feels Like To Be a Grognard? (Deja Vu and DND 5E)

Being an old hand at anything feels strange. Because on the one hand I always feel like I just became a member of a hobby (or even a profession) a few years ago. Then I take a step back, look at my timeline, and realize that no, I really have been here long enough for an entirely new generation or two to crop up and come into the hobby behind me.

Before we go much further, I'm going to try to follow my own advice in 5 Things You Can Do To Be a Better Ambassador For Your Hobby and not just grouse about things. However, I keep getting the strangest sense of deja vu, and I just felt compelled to talk about it this week.

Even in death, I still play.

As always, if you want to stay on top of all my content, make sure you sign up for my weekly newsletter. Also, if you'd like to help me keep the wheels turning, consider becoming a Patreon patron!

Lastly, if you want to check out all my info in one place, I've recently acquired a Linktree page... so drop in if you like getting everything from a single source!

Wait, We're Having THIS Debate Again?!


For those not familiar with the term, a grognard refers to an older member of most hobbies (and of RPGs in particular) who has chosen their particular style or edition and opts not to move on with the changing flow of the hobby. Whether it's folks who are perfectly happy with the first edition of DND and have been playing it for decades, those who grew up on 2nd edition in the 80s and don't like what came after, or folks like me who came in during the 3.0/3.5 transfer and found their happy place there or with Pathfinder's first edition, we can sometimes feel strange and dated when our tastes are compared with what's popular in current gaming circles.

The term itself traces back to the French military, and when capitalized it refers to the imperial guard formed by Napoleon. Something I went into more detail on back in What is a Grognard? for those who didn't see it.

THaCO? Only a few of us left know that name...

While I definitely have my preferred styles of gaming and play (I like crunchy games with a lot of customization, and where the GM is more of a referee and less of an author, for those who are wondering), I also make my living designing supplements and additional content for roleplaying games. As such, while I may choose not to play certain games or editions for my own entertainment, I still have to read, understand, and keep up on all these changes to make certain I can handle any contracts that might come my way.

And though the 5th Edition of Dungeons and Dragons isn't new by any stretch of the imagination (I've moved twice since the playtest, and there's rumbles about the 6th edition already), it is responsible for bringing in one of the largest generations of players into the hobby. That's a good thing, and I won't knock any edition for acting as a solid recruitment tool to expand what it both my favorite pastime, and the primary way I pay my rent.

But without getting too critical, the 5th Edition feels like a greatest hits list of all the things Dungeons and Dragons has already done before. They gave us Ravenloft and the Forgotten Realms, the Warlock and the Artificer, and every time Wizards announced they were going to be putting out some shiny new content it turned out to be something that was just a re-tooling of a class, adventure, setting, or archetype that was already old when I joined the hobby nearly two decades ago.

Perhaps as a natural result of that, it feels like players are even having the same arguments that tables were having back when I still didn't know the difference between my skill synergies and my saving throws.

Atheist Clerics, Celibate Bards, and Emotionless Barbarians


If you've been a part of any RPG boards, social media groups, etc., chances are good you've come across the debate over the atheist cleric. In short, it's a cleric who draws their power from commitment to an idea or philosophy, rather than one who forms a bond with a god in a traditional sense. The arguments over this have been raging for weeks in my feed... and I have this weird feeling that people aren't aware this was settled forever and a day ago?

Seriously, ask the old timers. We have citations for these arguments.

Way back when Pathfinder first came out, there was text in the rulebook specifically addressing this. It was also handled back in the 3.5 edition with various prestige classes and expansions. Hell, just before the latest round of debates hit, I addressed the way this is often done poorly in Addressing The Fantasy Atheist. So I felt understandably baffled that there were so many people shouting about this when as far as I could tell there should have been at least a few grognards raising their voice to let these newer players know this wasn't a new conversation, and there was already a lot of established reading on the subject.

But then I started noticing other echoes that gave me the same, weird feeling.

There were people arguing about how barbarian rage worked, and what forms it could take. An argument I first had about 17 years ago (and it was considered a dead horse then, too), and one which I expanded on two years back when I wrote 50 Shades of Rage: Reflavoring The Barbarian's Signature Ability. There's been arguments about bards that don't play music, and who use dance, poetry, or rhetoric are somehow invalid even though there have been archetypes and suggestions for doing these very things for several editions, and none of these extra limitations are backed up by text in the book.

Pick a class, a species, or nearly any concept, and people are still having the exact same debates they've been having for years now. But, more importantly, it feels from reading the comments and interacting with some of the more vocal individuals that a majority of folks are convinced they're the first individuals to have these ideas, or to raise these points.

Though I'm not old enough to be a grandpa grognard, I've been at this long enough that I think I could be considered a wise and world-weary uncle. So I'd like to offer some uncle-y advice to folks out there with regards to gaming; before you get really revved up about an idea, direction, or debate, ask someone who's been in the hobby for a while. I guarantee you that we've got stories to share, and we'll save you a lot of time, energy, and community outrage.

Like, Follow, and Stay in Touch!


That's all for this week's Moon Pope Monday. To stay on top of all my content and releases, make sure you subscribe to my newsletter at the bottom of the page!

Again, for more of my work, check out my Vocal archive, and stop by the YouTube channel Dungeon Keeper Radio. Or if you'd prefer to read some of my books, like my cat noir thriller Marked Territory, its sequel Painted Cats, my sword and sorcery novel Crier's Knife or my latest short story collection The Rejects, then head over to My Amazon Author Page!

To stay on top of all my latest releases, follow me on FacebookTumblrTwitter, and now Pinterest as well! To support my work, consider Buying Me a Ko-Fi, or heading to The Literary Mercenary's Patreon page to become a regular, monthly patron. That one helps ensure you get more Improved Initiative, and it means you'll get my regular, monthly giveaways as a bonus!

5 comments:

  1. Good post. I especially like the bit about people thinking they're the first to raise these points.
    Missed opportunity to use the word "avuncular" in place of uncle-y.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Embrace the Grognardism, I started with 2, moved thru 3, 3.5, 4 laughed at people who wanted to stay behind...

    found 5e dull, stuck with 4 and had to learn to accept, I'm just a Grognard too.

    ReplyDelete
  3. They may not be the first people to 'raise these points' but the people who had had this debate once before had already made their conclusions and moved off the stage a long time before and thus are not there to provide guidance... as eventually, everything defaults back to RAW since that is the point everyone starts at.

    Unless a debate leads to a change of the rules to remove the reason that leads to a particular 'raising of the points', the debate and conversation will always continue.

    Actually, you could look at the fact that if something continues to pop up independently and in isolation of an earlier conversation, this might point to an issue. It means that people are having a logical dissidence, that conclusions that were created by writers and developers who are either long dead or retired and who those who followed on after, treating the works of their predecessors as sacrosanct and untouchable, are no longer able to gel with the generations coming in...

    Which means we always come back to these old conversations... and the grognards will always stand their ground and throw wooden cogs in the gears of the system to prevent change, to maintain the stagnate state they have grown comfortable with. It is the right of the ancient greybeards who are slowly dying off due to old age to be crotchety and to be ultra conservative about any changes to the hobby.

    This is coming from a trying to reform Grognard.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I'm in that category myself. I'll argue all day that Paladins are Lawful Good, not any alignment like what 4e and 5e bastardized them to be. There are "paladins" of other alignments but they actually had different abilities and even different titles, depending on which edition you used (1e had the best ones). Therefore, they weren't Paladins.

    I did like PF2e's take on it, though. The "Champion" class followed by "Lawful Good Champions are called Paladins." Simple yet also keeps the legacy untouched.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I started with AD&D 1e, went through 2e and 3.x, skipped 4e, and landed on Pathfinder 1e. My group has decided to stay with PF1e, not out of a sense of grognardism but the fact we're in our 50s, with more responsibilities than ever before, and it just was never going to be financially feasible to replace every book and supplement AGAIN. We do love PF1e, however, and it will be the game we one day "retire" from.

    ReplyDelete