rpg

3210 readers

5 users here now

This community is for meaningful discussions of tabletop/pen & paper RPGs

Rules (wip):

Do not distribute pirate content
Do not incite arguments/flamewars/gatekeeping.
Do not submit video game content unless the game is based on a tabletop RPG property and is newsworthy.
Image and video links MUST be TTRPG related and should be shared as self posts/text with context or discussion unless they fall under our specific case rules.
Do not submit posts looking for players, groups or games.
Do not advertise for livestreams
Limit Self-promotions. Active members may promote their own content once per week. Crowdfunding posts are limited to one announcement and one reminder across all users.
Comment respectfully. Refrain from personal attacks and discriminatory (racist, homophobic, transphobic, etc.) comments. Comments deemed abusive may be removed by moderators.
No Zak S content.
Off-Topic: Book trade, Boardgames, wargames, video games are generally off-topic.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

Deborah Ann Woll teaches Jon Bernthal the basics of D&D (www.polygon.com)

submitted 4 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Deborah Ann Woll gave Jon Bernthal an engaging introduction to Dungeons & Dragons on his podcast, explaining character creation and gameplay in a fun and accessible way.
Woll’s approach focuses on storytelling and immersing players in the world rather than overwhelming them with character sheets and rules, making D&D more appealing to newcomers.
The video highlights the universal appeal of D&D, where both Hollywood stars and regular players can connect and enjoy the game together.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (2 children)

That's some idiot morphology right there. Fuckin' literacy rates giving out Participation trophies, FFS. What could go wrong?

FYI, kiddos†: Dictionaries are historical records, not current listings of usage standards (much less logic). If you are fine with sounding/presenting like an idiot, you're week within your rights to do so. That wholly personal choice will not have much effect on pluralization of an exceedingly simple word in English — unless modern civilization crumbles and you & your kin are left to repopulate it, of course. 😶

† you cited Wikipedia, ergo.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago

This is just so wrong. English dictionaries are descriptive: they describe how the language is being used.

In 1961 people like you threw a fit that "ain't" was added to Webster's, despite its first known use over 200 years earlier.

English has no ultimate arbiter of "proper" use; it changes as people use it and dictionaries are a reference for how it is being used, not how it ought to be used.

Language is a living, changing thing. It doesn't matter how many grammar nazis oppose the changes, if enough people start using a word or phrase in a different way, that becomes the "right" way to use the word/phrase. "Nice" used to mean foolish, "meat" once meant food in general, and in my lifetime "gay" went from "happy" to "homosexual".

If you can't accept that language changes, you're gonna have a bad time.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

/r/iamverysmart is back on reddit, feel free to head back any time.

edit: "you're week within your rights..."? when chastising someone on word choice, might be worth your time to check your comment before posting

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

Being able to use the correct it's/its cancels that out, as does they're/their/there, et al. Thanks, though. 😘