World's Most Divorced Man Wants to Ruin More Things

You may have heard on the wind recently that the World's Most Divorced Man, Elon Musk, has expressed an interest in purchasing Hasbro as a way of gaining access to the Dungeons & Dragons IP. This follows Musk's public distaste at Wizards of the Coast's (WotC) work to make D&D a more inclusive space and their wishes to distance themselves from the more problematic elements of the game, created by E Gary Gygax.

Musk and his persistent trait of confusing bigotry with freedom of speech took exception to this and suggested WotC "burn in hell" for their perceived trashing of Gygax. After feeling like his criticisms of WotC weren't being taken seriously, Musk took to Twitter to publicly ask "How much is Hasbro?". According to Forbes, shares in Hasbro are currently worth $63.89.

Although it isn't clear whether Musk was serious, or if he was just having one of his trademark tantrums, this would also give him access to toy properties such as Star Wars, Ghostbusters, My Little Pony, Peppa Pig, and Pokemon, among others. Musk purchasing Hasbro just so he can wrestle D&D back into the dark ages might seem ridiculous, but he has already shown the world how petty he can be with his disastrous take over of Twitter.

There has understandably been an outcry from fans expressing dismay at the prospect of Musk getting his grubby little incel hands on D&D, not only because his track record for tanking Twitter as soon as he bought it could spell doom for the hobby, but also because the purchase would likely herald the game becoming a hostile place for minority groups.

While it is easy to jest at the bizarre and manic actions of one of the world's richest men, it must not be taken lightly. D&D has become more inclusive over the years and while WotC still occasionally slip up, there can be no doubt that there has been a generally progressive trend. This would undoubtedly come to an end if Musk successfully purchased the property. One only needs to attempt to write the word "cisgender" into Twitter, to come face to face with Musk's personal brand of free (read: hate) speech.

We are all hoping his tantrum was short lived and will not lead onto anything else, but this story is one worth keeping a close eye on.

An Alternative (but no less troublesome) Perspective

Another take on this is that Musk does not really care about D&D, nor the memory of Gygax, it is just a front that suits the current political narrative for him and his allies. This is just another company that he can strip for assets and profit from the demise.

The exact model is known as the Bust Out playbook and has received notoriety through Bain Capital. The exact plan can be summarised using the seven points below:

1. Identify a target (The Leader).
2. Install or axquire an insider on the board of the company, maybe the CEO/CFO.
3. Spread rumours about the target through the media (The Liars).
4. Create a class action lawsuit against the company.
5. Fire up the printers and flood the market with fake shares of the company, driving share prices through the floor (The Dealer).
6. The company either declares bankruptcy or is delisted from exchange.
7. Perform a leveraged buyout of the company, busts it out, acquires other competition to capture and kill, then when the company is so saddled with debt it can no longer stand, kill the company and let the wolves feed off the carcass (The Butcher).

This is perhaps a grim prediction of what Musk might have planned and very much depends on whether Musk is as intelligent as he wants everyone to think he is, but one that offers even less hope for the future of Dungeons & Dragons.

Personally, I think Musk is not smart, just rich, so I feel it is more likely that if he does get his hands on Hasbro it will be it's ruin through stupidity and political pandering, rather than a grander scheme of venture capitalism.

The Importance of Theme in Table Top Games

How important is theme in table top games? This is a question that arises a lot in board gaming communities and it always splits the party. There are those of us who feel that theme is only important in so far as they make the assets of the game look nice, and there are those who will excuse less exciting game mechanics in exchange for a captivating theme.

When we really get down to studying board games, we cannot escape the fact that they are largely just maths in motion. (I could excuse certain games from this sweeping generalisation, like dexterity based games for example, but then I get to thinking about trigonometry and how really everything can be reduced to mathematics and I start to spiral a bit.) Some games, namely the majority of Eurogames, are more obviously maths games with their theme-light, mechanics-heavy play style.

For those unaware of the different styles of board game, Eurogames are a very popular type of game that needn't be European or technically board games at all. However, they share a set of similar characteristics such as little to no combat, the earning of "victory points" to determine a winner, a theme that does not directly impact the gameplay, and very little chance or luck involved, to name a few. Some popular Eurogames that you might have heard of include Catan and Carcassone. 

Sat opposite from Eurogames is Ameritrash (which do not have to be American, or trash), which conversely favours highly developed themes, player conflict, and usually a high level of luck through dice rolls or drawn cards. Examples include Dune, Twilight Imperium, and Runewars. Interestingly, War Games tend to fill a classification of their own, despite the argument that many would fulfill the requirements of Ameritrash.

Across these different game styles we see a significant difference in terms of how important the theme is to the overall enjoyment of a game. Arguably, a fan of Eurogames would enjoy Puerto Rico just as much as Power Grid even if they have no particular interest in the organisation of national power supply networks, or the antics of colonial island governors. Whereas someone who has little interest in the socio-economic and military politics of Arrakis is probably not going to enjoy an hours-long game of Dune: Imperium.

So what really is the question when someone asks how important theme is to games or gamers? Realistically speaking, the answer lies in the games themselves. The key difference is how the theme impacts the game, and this will always become a matter of how well an Ameritrash game sticks the landing. Games like Horrified have become fan favourites because of how well Ravensburger have incorporated their various themes into the game experience. The theme compliments and builds on the mechanics. Whereas a game such as Firefly: Shiny Dice feels like the theme is battling against a game that wanted to be something else. 

Of course there will always be gamers who will see theme as something that threatens to get in the way of mechanics, and who are we to yuck their yums?

Personally, my real love is with games that allow for storytelling. This spans both Eurogames and Ameritrash, but more often than not is enabled by a strong theme and a significant role of chance in the game. I find that sitting around a game of Colt Express provides a rich storytelling experience that I crave and is responsible for some of the more memorable gaming moments. A game with a theme that feels merely cosmetic, such as Sushi Go, while entertaining, I find won't offer the same level of storytelling opportunity. 

There is obviously no answer to the question posed at the top of this post, but a key belief of Hand Limit is that there are table top games out there right now for everyone no matter what their tastes and interests are. Questions such as this are enjoyable because they help us appreciate what a diverse and expansive hobby table top gaming has become.

So, I ask you know, how important to you is theme in table top games?