Hello!

Hello!

Hello! The newest episode of Fear of a Black Dragon is here! In this one, Tom McGrenery and I break a leg in Legerdemain!

Let me assure you: even though you have probably never heard of this module, you do not under any circumstances want to miss this episode.

Thanks to Paul Edson for the skillful and judicious edit.

Enjoy!

http://www.gauntlet-rpg.com/fear-of-a-black-dragon/legerdemain

36 thoughts on “Hello!”

  9. Thanks, Fraser. I also found it in the weekly roundup. In my podcast app I meant that there’s a URL but mine is not clickable and it was not letting me copy and paste it. It’s all good now though. Thanks again.

  10. Thanks, Fraser. I also found it in the weekly roundup. In my podcast app I meant that there’s a URL but mine is not clickable and it was not letting me copy and paste it. It’s all good now though. Thanks again.

  17. I actually felt a little uncomfortable listening to this episode. It’s the first time I’ve heard you review something that you are not generally positive about and so I wondered why you went ahead with it given how poor you thought the adventure was. But worse, for me, was the sneering tone throughout the episode. OK, so it must be nearly 30 years old, and might have been the only thing the author ever wrote, but to continually bring up how awful it was and by inference how bad a writer the guy was just felt unnecessary and, unlikely it might be that he’s listening, pretty hurtful. For folks like yourselves who seem to be big on inclusivity in the hobby, it would have bordered on bullying if it had been done face to face without any recourse or rebuttal so I’m particularly surprised that neither you saw anything amiss.

    Or am I getting overly sensitive in my old age? 🙂

  18. I actually felt a little uncomfortable listening to this episode. It’s the first time I’ve heard you review something that you are not generally positive about and so I wondered why you went ahead with it given how poor you thought the adventure was. But worse, for me, was the sneering tone throughout the episode. OK, so it must be nearly 30 years old, and might have been the only thing the author ever wrote, but to continually bring up how awful it was and by inference how bad a writer the guy was just felt unnecessary and, unlikely it might be that he’s listening, pretty hurtful. For folks like yourselves who seem to be big on inclusivity in the hobby, it would have bordered on bullying if it had been done face to face without any recourse or rebuttal so I’m particularly surprised that neither you saw anything amiss.

    Or am I getting overly sensitive in my old age? 🙂

  25. Am I the only person who doesn’t think the tone is that bad? In every episode, Tom and I are giving listeners our authentic selves. Isn’t that the point?

    It is total garbage to take a tutty, tone-policing attitude about ONE episode in the series having a slightly snarkier approach than the rest. Some people are reacting like Tom and I have become complete shit-talking edgelords after this episode. That is astoundingly unfair. For starters, it disregards the substance of the episode, which is on the same level as the rest of the series, and second, Tom and I are allowed to enjoy ourselves. If that means being a little catty on one particular episode, well, that’s just the way it is. Our enjoyment in making the show is our literal only compensation for doing so.

    I would like to point out here that every person who has tried to police the tone of this episode over the last week shares one characteristic: they are all old white dudes. I suspect the fact our criticism drifted into the module’s gross sexism, coded homophobia, and racism is part of the reason we have gotten some pushback.

    Also, Malcolm Coull, it is kind of unfair to suggest that this one episode of FoaBD negates the fantastic, tireless (and, btw, utterly thankless) work we do to promote inclusivity in the hobby, or to suggest we’re engaging in bullying. You are entitled to your opinions of the show, but that critique seems particularly unfair.

  26. Am I the only person who doesn’t think the tone is that bad? In every episode, Tom and I are giving listeners our authentic selves. Isn’t that the point?

    It is total garbage to take a tutty, tone-policing attitude about ONE episode in the series having a slightly snarkier approach than the rest. Some people are reacting like Tom and I have become complete shit-talking edgelords after this episode. That is astoundingly unfair. For starters, it disregards the substance of the episode, which is on the same level as the rest of the series, and second, Tom and I are allowed to enjoy ourselves. If that means being a little catty on one particular episode, well, that’s just the way it is. Our enjoyment in making the show is our literal only compensation for doing so.

    I would like to point out here that every person who has tried to police the tone of this episode over the last week shares one characteristic: they are all old white dudes. I suspect the fact our criticism drifted into the module’s gross sexism, coded homophobia, and racism is part of the reason we have gotten some pushback.

    Also, Malcolm Coull, it is kind of unfair to suggest that this one episode of FoaBD negates the fantastic, tireless (and, btw, utterly thankless) work we do to promote inclusivity in the hobby, or to suggest we’re engaging in bullying. You are entitled to your opinions of the show, but that critique seems particularly unfair.

  27. I don’t think there was any unnecessary jabs. Those things should be called out, otherwise you’re essentially giving the wrong impression to listeners who may otherwise want to pick it up and play it and then discover for themselves that there is some deeply problematic content in it. If you read it and played it you ought to be able to review it. Not just pick and choose the ones you did like to chat about. Face-to-face I imagine there would be no rebuttal for those things, other than it is a product of it’s time which is stated in the episode already. Let’s not look back at things with only rose-colored glasses. How you make the hobby more inclusive and better is by calling out these things.

  28. I don’t think there was any unnecessary jabs. Those things should be called out, otherwise you’re essentially giving the wrong impression to listeners who may otherwise want to pick it up and play it and then discover for themselves that there is some deeply problematic content in it. If you read it and played it you ought to be able to review it. Not just pick and choose the ones you did like to chat about. Face-to-face I imagine there would be no rebuttal for those things, other than it is a product of it’s time which is stated in the episode already. Let’s not look back at things with only rose-colored glasses. How you make the hobby more inclusive and better is by calling out these things.

  29. The tone didn’t bother me, but it might have been a little too belabored at the start, making it sort of confusing. I had distinct thoughts when listening like “wow, they’re cutting into this one. I wonder why they are making an episode about it. They must have some ulterior motive, like using it as an example of how to pull utility out of bad adventures or something”, but then the snarky bits continued long enough without getting to that point that I did think “uuuhhh… maybe they are just changing their format?” … but then you eventually got to the point.

    When Tom asked “Jason, why did you make me read this?”, I kind of had the same reaction because, at that point in the episode, it wasn’t really clear what you were up to. It became so, but maybe took too long to get to that point.

    In other words, sort of a problem with pacing, not tone, per se.

  30. The tone didn’t bother me, but it might have been a little too belabored at the start, making it sort of confusing. I had distinct thoughts when listening like “wow, they’re cutting into this one. I wonder why they are making an episode about it. They must have some ulterior motive, like using it as an example of how to pull utility out of bad adventures or something”, but then the snarky bits continued long enough without getting to that point that I did think “uuuhhh… maybe they are just changing their format?” … but then you eventually got to the point.

    When Tom asked “Jason, why did you make me read this?”, I kind of had the same reaction because, at that point in the episode, it wasn’t really clear what you were up to. It became so, but maybe took too long to get to that point.

    In other words, sort of a problem with pacing, not tone, per se.

  33. Well, we’re going to just keep making the show we want to make. Sometimes that show will contain negative criticism. Sometimes that show will be a little snarky. Folks are free to listen or not, folks are free to support us or not. Expressing an opinion about the show is totally one’s prerogative, just as it is my prerogative to call out tone policing bullshit.

  34. Well, we’re going to just keep making the show we want to make. Sometimes that show will contain negative criticism. Sometimes that show will be a little snarky. Folks are free to listen or not, folks are free to support us or not. Expressing an opinion about the show is totally one’s prerogative, just as it is my prerogative to call out tone policing bullshit.

Comments are closed.