The Cult of Lard

[jamescutts 6924xp 4]

I’ve put off writing this topic a few times and had many drafts but hopefully this is the one that sticks. I’ve been feeling increasingly uneasy and alienated with the “Lardie” community around games written by the Too Fat Lardies. This is by no means in any way any sort of attack on them but an expression of observations and feelings that have been generated.

So let’s start off with a disclaimer, I enjoy a whole bunch of Lardie games and I don’t enjoy others, I’ve played a fair bit and I’ve had good games, and some bad games, as you do with pretty much every game going, so this is in no way related to the games themselves. I’ve attended a few Lardie games days and have high praises for them, they were excellent experiences with great people and amazing games for the most part. I’d also like to state that this tends to be a minority and even then its not always individuals as much as passing comments.

That aside, the main reason I’ve put writing this off is actually my first feeling of unease, to say anything other than praise for the Lardie games appears to be taken with offence by some members of their community. Usually a tirade of how you’re wrong, the games are perfect and you couldn’t possibly express anything other than admiration follows, something I’m sure this topic will attract, though hopefully not from you awesome folk in the cult of games, see the pun I did with the title now?

There’s a few elements to this that seem to have been slowly building up and creating these feelings for me, so a few examples are probably in order to illustrate, though I also want to keep them somewhat generic so as to avoid any easy identification.

First off is the inability for some to take any hit of criticism or opinion that differs from their own views, this usually very quickly results in a flock of similar minded people joining in highlighting why you’re wrong. For example i pointed out every game I’ve had of ‘O’ Group has come down to fubars (breaking your enemy) and never once have i had a game won by a player meeting their objectives, and for me it was the biggest criticism of the rules (which i generally like btw) and that maybe this wasn’t necessary the best thing be it historically or as a game mechanic, enter several commenters telling me how i was all wrong, war was about attrition etc. suddenly a small comment had attracted more replies than the original post on which i had commented on, which asked about fubars specifically. That was in a game specific group but even on open forums such as twitter i’ve drawn eire on occasion for vague mentions of the lardies, on mention that WSS magazine was sometimes a bit lard heavy (in reality meant as a subtle compliment) I attracted responses such as WI is Warlord Games heavy, not really necessary, and ironic given it was part of a tread on why i haven’t renewed by WI subscription.

That’s just two small examples but I think it highlights a point that it’s very hard to say anything without attracting a wave of responses, interestingly I’ve never really come across this level of defencism in a community before, most other communities will happily have discussions. It leaves you feeling a bit unsure when you say anything mentioning their games, for fear of a wave of responses.

I’ve always been a big believer that wargaming is for everyone (i dislike the phrase broad church) and as part of that we all have varying interests, games and mechanics that some may like others dislike etc. and that is perfectly acceptable. We all like to take occasionally liberties in poking fun at various other game systems, usually in a jovial manner but I seem to observe an undertone of superiority in a lot of the Lardie community. The community view their games as the best in every way, and seem to subtly enjoy pointing out flaws of other games, despite the fact that we all are looking for or enjoy different things when we choose a game. In a similar wayWarlord Games seem to be a particular target and while everyone loves poking a bit of fun at G’Wulla it just doesnt seem necessary to constantly poke at Warlord just because they have a very different WWII game in Bolt Action.

A friend recently asked about trying out Chain of Command and had some enquiries about various forces, not in the core rule books having come from other WWII games with a collection. Responses varied from, do a search, check the forums, use one of the core armies, to this force couldn’t possibly be in the rules as nobody knows the exact on paper historical makeup. None of these were actually helpful nor welcoming to a potential new player, in the end I had to do some significant trawling to actually find some community made force lists that should have been included by those knowledgeable in their responses.

All of this is making me increasingly unhappy being part of their community and is making me consider my investments made into rule books and miniatures collected for the various games, thankfully the miniatures are generic so useful for other games but I still have projects and collections specifically made for Lardie games e.g. 15mm chain of command forces, when I’d probably use 20mm or 28mm for most WWII gaming.

My gut feeling is I should probably take a step back, leave or mute the groups, and stop following people on various social media channels and youtube that generate these feelings for me, and then when the time is right maybe revisit them. This would be a shame as some of these are great sources of content but a combination of the above attitudes and actions even small in these seems to be slowly eating away at me.

[rickabod41Participant 9259xp 5]

Although I am not totally aware of the output of “The Lardies” (which in itself would probably see me hung drawn and quartered!), sadly I think this is symptomatic of most communities / online forums.

We see it on here, any news room article related to a GW product always draws some snippy comment about their business model and practices.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion but blindly liking something out of brand loyalty or blindly hating it for some imagined slight seems very short sighted.

Nothing is perfect in life, no person, no gaming system, no company.

Judge things / people on their merits, not a preconceived notion of “this company released this thing in 1989 and it was life changing so they can do no WRONG!”

[dagsParticipant 3591xp 2]

I have sharp practice and seen chain of command played.  They have a focus on morale and friction, which offers an experience and I appreciate them for that, wouldn’t just play them though.

I think that any community can become overly tribal and dismissive of people looking for different experiences.  I have left plenty of community’s for games I really enjoy, if they become overly obsessive over an element or another.  If it’s not on balance adding to my hobby enjoyment it is a negative so why add that to something you do for fun.

[warzanKeymaster 31125xp 2]

Fandom is a minefield of emotion, where loyalty and betrayal go right to the heart of it. Its probably an evolutionary thing related to our tribalism. We join a tribe and it’s fed through deep seated instincts and emotions rather than any pure and cold logic.

It would be nice to have a human reset button to press before looking at something to be more objective and look at the ting in isolation of any past experiences, but it’s not an innate trait we humans seem to have in abundance.

If its becoming toxic, the lardies themselves may need to put their neck on the line a bit to try and reign it in without making things worse lol

But having been there a few times myself, by jove you need a thick skin! lol

[jamescutts 6924xp 2]

Thanks for the thoughts and comments, all really useful things to be considering, and being honest just expressing some thoughts in the first place has already help me feel a bit better. Its also been nice to revisit the forums, there’s something soothing about their slower pace.

You certainly do need thick skin @warzan and maybe that’s why its affected me more than say other groups or communities I’ve joined or followed and probably because I’ve felt more invested in it. Its not really constrained to one place or platform, but more of a subtle undertone I’ve sensed from across various places, the Lardies certainly encourage a “our rules are best” attitude but name a rules author who doesnt! Thankfully I’d certainly not class it as toxic, perhaps just overbearing?

On the whole the community is fantastic, there’s some amazing work that goes on, particularly the effort people put into preparing games and sharing that experience, but its those small comments and integrations exactly like you point out @rickabod41 that have been making me feel down. Maybe now I’m a bit more self aware of them I need to just filter out those sly comments about throwing other rules away or burning them and just see it as a somewhat childish element of the tribalistic fandom?

I think you’ve possibly hit the nail on the head @dags if its not adding to the hobby then I should probably take that step back, and that doesn’t need to mean I don’t play or enjoy the games.

[osbad 4279xp 3]

Yeah, someone should do a sociology PhD in the morphing of the tribal instinct into toxic brand loyalty.  Add in the charisma of the actual Lardies (who are really great, personable and knowledgable guys who do a great deal for the hobby) which has morphed a bit into a cult of personality, and then the general toxicity of the internet, internet forums and the whole “basement warrior” ethos of so many of us repressed, introverted geeky males, and we end up here.

I’ve seen it all over online wargaming culture as an innate trait.  Interesting to see that the Lardies have become so prominent that they have generated such widely spread “cult following”.  GW have had the phenomenon for years – with an apparent army of “GWombies” who are ready to instantly pounce on a perceived criticism with a barrage of apologesis (look at Discourse Miniatures experience – and read the comments in her youtube).  And of course the mirror image applies too where often pro-GW observations get pounced on by the “Everything GW Does Is Evil” brigade.

Of course there is a phenomenon too where popularity of an idea creates numbers, and swimming against the stream is just that – proposing  a minority view – such that the sheer number of people you are “arguing” with is tiring, even when they are being polite.  It feels often like wading in treacle.

Great to be a part of a community like OTT here, where discussion can be frank but generally there is a good quality of discussion and “pile-ons” are rare.  I remember the 70’s when in Australia there was open hostility and actual violence between Ford car-owners and General Motors car-owners.  At least we haven’t gone as far as the normies! :0D

[rickabod41Participant 9259xp 2]

@osbad I was in near total agreement with you until you brought up Discourse from youtube…..Nah I cannot get away with her, her whole shtick is just knocking everything GW does.

It’s like biting the hand that feeds you if GW didn’t exist she wouldn’t have a channel!

Clickbait at it’s worst in my opinion.

 

 

[osbad 4279xp 1]

I think we may have to disagree on Discourse.  I agree her titles are somewhat click-baity.  However, she isn’t unrelentingly negative – she often points out positive things when she finds them.  She does admit that negativity sells, and it seems many don’t get beyond the titles with her.  I guess one’s opinion about Discourse may be the mirror opposite of one’s opinion of GW.  Personally, I don’t have much time for GW these days, which maybe means her base opinions may resonate with mine, even though I don’t buy the hyperbole.

However, I think GW is big enough and bad enough to defend itself without the need for keyboard warriors calling her every nasty name under the sun! 😀  Of course if one is looking for validation of one’s opinions and one is generally a GW fan, then I can see how she may be irritating.  And whatever, if someone lives by click-baiting on the back of a large company, then they shouldn’t get too bent out of shape if there is something of an overreaction from the fanbase of GW.

And that last comment makes me wonder.  I guess the emotive content in debates often comes from those who consider themselves “fans” of a company rather than just “customers”.  i.e. they believe there is some closer “loyalty” relationship. This leads folks to defend what they are a fan of, whereas a customer may just shrug their shoulders and say “meh!”

[jamescutts 6924xp 5]

Bit of a small update, Lardy Rich actually reached out with a very polite, friendly and apologetic email something I really appreciated as I was obviously a bit worried I may have caused quite some offence. After naturally offering apologies in return Rich asked if it would be ok to repost on the Lardy Forum, something I was happy to agree too.

Curiosity got the better of me so I checked out the Lardy Forum and Twitter (which had a linked post) and was pleasantly surprised by the majority of responses that have already be posted. I think there’s a general acceptance that there is a minority as we’ve discussed in any community that can be a bit over zealous or not always the most welcoming and while not all agree with all my points, something perfectly acceptable as it is after all a discussion, it was interesting to see that some others have had similar feelings. The point on force/army lists might have been slightly misinterpreted by some as an expectation that they existed, rather than instead it was the response to that query that was my point in that case, however on the balance it seems there’s a bit more awareness particularly around making sure its welcoming, something that can only be good both for the existing community and anyone new.

The “Cult of Lard” title may have been taken a little literally by some but that’s almost certainly my fault for a very inside joke play of words on the Cult of Games, there have been some rather entertaining gifs posted on twitter though.

[dagsParticipant 3591xp 2]

@jamescutts that’s a real positive

I generally agree with pretty much all of the above and having let frustration etc get me into some negative spaces I understand the trap.  I try be more calm now and focus more on the actual hobby

On Discord she is largely appealing to a group that seem to revel in negativity and I dislike the format and style of most of her content.  When I have seen her talking about what she is enjoying though she is actually quite engaging and makes good observations.  The abuse she receives is completely unacceptable though.

[sotakorppiParticipant 2xp 2]

Interesting debate. First I’d like to express that I’m sorry you felt that way and hope that you’ll find a way to enjoy the TFL games and community if you wish to give them a second chance.

My experience has been a bit different. As I’m not from UK, I haven’t participated in Lardy games days, so I can only talk about the “online experience”. So far, in the about 4 years I have “mingled” with the Lard Community pretty much everyone I met has been extremely welcoming and helpful. Obviously there may always be the rude outlier or someone with a big ego, but I feel that happens pretty much in every social group. In general, most Lard fans I’ve seen tend to be really passionate about their projects, and open to share their fun with others.

On the Army lists subject, I’d say the general spirit is that the TFL rules are base guidelines one can build upon. A bit like LEGO bricks. For instance, as CoC models real full historical platoons, one can simply research on their own whatever platoon structure from whatever obscure real life force one wants to represent/simulate/game. Or even invent them if need. There are wild modifications for most TFL games that include stuff like Lord of the Rings, Cuthlu myths, Star Wars, etc. heck there’s even a FB group for CoC in the 40K universe. The authors even release a yearly magazine with all kinds of crazy stuff made mostly by fans (mostly historically themed, but there’s also fictional content).

As the main goal of their games is to have fun -and not be a tight competitive ruleset- one is allowed to tune their rules as one wishes (from adding to deleting rules, to theming them in any way one wishes, and all that is encouraged by the authors and the community). Basically the spirit is “the World is your oyster”, and you should not expect hand-holding. Although when asking for advice, I usually find many useful replies and suggestions.

I play many of the Lardy games as I like their focus on leadership and how much verisimilitude is found in many of the gaming situations they generate. But I also play other games from other companies / authors. And I have 0 issues of ignoring or modifying any rule I dislike, after all that’s the strong point of tabletop wargames for me -as I’m not a competitive player-. In fact, I’ve seen that many other Lardy fans like to play different game systems from multiple companies. Not only that, but thanks to the suggestions given by the Lard community I discovered many great wargames (historical and not historical) like Frostgrave, Rangers of Shadow Deep, Battlegroup and such.

A quick look at my Twitter feed shows that right now many of the Lard enthusiasts I follow are working on Saga, Space Hulk, Hero Quest and Battle Mech projects. So I wouldn’t call them “zealots” of a game system -I’m not saying that “only TFL hooligans” don’t exist, but they are certainly the exception not the rule-. In other words, variety is the spice of life. And while the TFL authors obviously promote their own stuff through social media, they also tend to encourage people to be nice and social and play whatever game system one is offered.

[rickabod41Participant 9259xp 4]

@dags & @osbad – oh don’t get me wrong I am not condoning anyone launching into hate campaign against the woman, she is doing her thing and making some healthy coin out of it I would wager.

Constructive criticism is valid when there is a point to it, and Discourse may well be constructive in a lot of her videos just the title and tone of what I have stumbled across is enough to cause me not wanting to ingest anymore of it.

And it’s not just her, I actively avoid watching or reading anything that comes across to me as being inherently just negative for negative’s sake – I personally don’t think that’s mentally healthy.

[sundancer 42976xp 3]

And it’s not just her, I actively avoid watching or reading anything that comes across to me as being inherently just negative for negative’s sake – I personally don’t think that’s mentally healthy.

Same here. It’s fun to poke at some things now and again but just being negative isn’t good for your mental health. Neither as consumer of that kind of content nor as producer. It just sucks the joy out of the hobby. Like scalpers sucking on our wallets.

[solarParticipant 2781xp 3]

Im 38 years old, Ive been collecting and painting models for about 29 years. Im involved in quite a few niche activities such as electronics, welding, woodworking, programming and gaming. I was also a police officer for a number of years. I PROMISE you that what tou are experiencing is just the usual human behaviour. We are all a little bit manic and autistic to some degree, perhaps more so in the nerdy pursuits. Just accept that there are some slightly odd people out there and either block or ignore the toxic ones. You do you.

[dagsParticipant 3591xp 2]

@rickabod41 didn’t come across as you were, and the vast majority of her stuff I won’t watch for same reasons.  It was seeing her on modelling for advantage that made me reassess a bit.

 

It clear holds an appeal for a sizable part of the community that thrives on the  negative, which I don’t think is great for mental health.  Far better to let that thing go and find the fun.

[Author]

Posts