4E being immune to criticism (forked from Sentimentality And D&D...)

[pawsplay]

The quote was asking why people get upset and feel they need to respond to "criticism" of 4E, and my response is that a lot of 4E "criticism" isn't criticism. If you don't like 4E as much as a previous edition, and you dislike it because 4E is different, its a dead end discussion. There's really nothing to say beyond "sucks to be you". The more it is repeatedly said, the more irritating it is to hear, because there isn't anything to discuss. Its not something that can be fixed or addressed, and nothing anybody can say can make it better.

I do not think even a substantial sliver of the criticism can be summed up as "4e is different." People criticize changes they don't like because the game has less value for them after the changes. Missing options, changes to milieu, different game mechanics with different weakness and strengths are all more than "differences," they are meaningful differences.

Suggesting that people who don't like 4e simply don't like change is ungracious, almost certainly inaccurate, and in any case likely to offend.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I don't understand this thread...

...it starts out with Ronseur's quote as something I think has a very true ring to it.

thecasualoblivion says "No. A lot of it is just stating a preference, and therefore is not criticism" Which I don't think makes a whole lot of sense, because stating a preference *is* criticism.

And then a lot of posters come on board to say "I have some 4e criticisms that somehow avoid the 'just stating a preference' criteria" which don't really avoid stating a preference.

I don't get it. Are we trying to say that some preferences are more valid than others? That some flaws of 4e are "valid" flaws and that other flaws are "invalid" flaws just because the criticizer is a sentimental fool?

4e isn't immune to criticism. All criticism is, by its very nature, fairly subjective. No critic is above their own emotional likes and dislikes, observering from some hypethetical neutral ground of pure objectivity. There is no such thing.

There can be learned criticism and ignorant criticism, and learned criticism tends to be a better argument for or against something, but that doesn't make ignorant criticism invalid, it just makes it unrefined -- a blunt instrument of gut feeling where a learned criticism is a pointed scalpel of at least rationalization.

But ultimately, it's all about whether or not you like something, which is NEVER a rational, objective choice, no matter what the sophists tell themselves.

4e can be disliked for specific, narrow reasons ("Ah. The Skill Challenges system is unbalanced!") or for general, broad reasons ("I HATE THE ART RARGLEFARGLE!"), or for a combination ("I prefer classless games, and I love gnomes!").

Valid criticisms are surprisingly easy to make about...well...anything. 4e is no exception. Just because a criticism comes from a position of "OD&D IS THE ONE TRUE GAME" doesn't make it any less valid. It's a fair cop -- 4e is not OD&D, and you won't be happy with 4e if you think OD&D is the one true game. Totally legit. You have every right to complain on ENWorld or the WotC boards or all across the Internet high and low about how 4e would be better if it took more ideas from OD&D. That's entirely fair.

People will disagree with you, and they will be justified, too, but you can scream it all you want without having that be an invalid criticism. It's valid. It's not entirely *relevant* in many respects, but it's still entirely fair to make.

 

[Raven Crowking]

4e isn't immune to criticism. All criticism is, by its very nature, fairly subjective. No critic is above their own emotional likes and dislikes, observering from some hypethetical neutral ground of pure objectivity. There is no such thing.

Sorry, KM, but JeffB already won the InterWeb. Care for a close second?

 

[PaulofCthulhu]

Yeah, apparently Cthulu isn't as popular as Dungeons and Dragons. And on a site which has the heading of ENWorld D&D/RPG News there are people arguing about D&D over other RPGs.

Oh, I dunno. It's quite popular on my site.

Regarding favourite editions of D&D, like most things, I simply vote with my time and my wallet. It's quite effective.

 

[mearls]

I think there's a subtext to the 4e discussions that effectively makes analyzing the game almost pointless.

Both pro- and anti-4e posters seem to have this belief that there's this war going on, and by arguing on the Internet they're fighting against the other side. It's like, if you're loud enough, and obnoxious enough, and constant enough, the vision you have for how D&D should be played will become a reality for everyone.

Frankly, I'm sick of fanaticism on all sides. It's undermining the entire online RPG community. It's a far angrier, far less welcoming place than it was not too long ago.

 

[monboesen]

Full rights to be aired? Yes, speak out, but for how long?

To me this is for the moment the key point. By now we have had about half a year of the same 4e discussions, praises, criticisms, fanboi positivisms and trollish haters.

Couldn't we just drop the issue. It is not like the discussion can be "won" or lead to anything usable. At least not the way the discussions have gone so far.

Personally I feel that the endless discussions drags me down and makes ENworld less appealing. Logging in to the Genereal forum and once again seeing half the threads being 4e discussions or spin-offs of 4e discussions is just depressing.

I would much rather see threads full of stories about great roleplaying exeperiences, advice for dm's and players, interesting house rule variants and easily stealable material for my game.

Maybe its nostalgia kicking in already, but isn't that how it used to be?

 

[wolfen fenrison]

I agree that nothing is beyond criticism, and that all criticism is valid but mabe not relevent.

My biggest kavetch about 4E is that it plays like a video game or MMORPG and books read less like the rule books of old and more game walkthroughs.

Now in general I love video game rpgs and mmorpgs, I play them all the time, hell I even have DDO but that is not the D&D expierience I want at my table. If a friend wants my to come over and play 4E, kewl I will gladly, I'm a gamer it's what I do. However I will not spend money on a game I do not believe in.

 

[JackSmithIV]

I would much rather see threads full of stories about great roleplaying exeperiences, advice for dm's and players, interesting house rule variants and easily stealable material for my game.

Amen.

 

[Vocenoctum]

My problem with the 4e "debates";
1) people saying "that's not a valid criticism" when it's a public message board and someone is just venting. If it's not important, then just skip the message and let it die. Attacking the arguement and going multiple pages to "win" the semantic debate doesn't prove anything, you don't get to set the rules for a discussion.
2) Like politics (which I'm not discussing!), you've made up your mind, you're not convincing the other guy. The other guy, he's made up his mind and you're not convincing him. Use the three response rule, if you're repeating yourself for the third time, it's just not worth repeating anymore.
3) "Imagination Rules!". You don't like how 4e uses minions or whatever, then you need to use your imagination to paint the picture... like somehow all other editions, you couldn't use your imagination. Like it's unique now that suddenly you can and should fill in gaps to fit the scene. Somehow, suddenly, 4e is liberated from rules by Scene, but all previous editions the DM and players were bound by granite rules of conduct.
4) Fanaticism, which couples into 3, really. This is where you use your imagination to fill in gaps and then present your solution as if the other person should have known. "There is no grapple" "well, if you use this roll here and that roll there, it's the same as grapple, so that's not a valid complaint!" (off the cuff example, not saying that happened.)
5) Of course, that leads to the "Prove Your Opinion" mentality. I can't prove that the grapple quote is 100% accurate with links, so it's not a valid quote... again, what debate folks are trying to win.. I don't know anymore.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Frankly, I'm sick of fanaticism on all sides. It's undermining the entire online RPG community. It's a far angrier, far less welcoming place than it was not too long ago.

WAY TO GO GUYS! WE'VE MADE MEARLS CRY! QUICK, WE NEED PICTURES OF ADORABLE KITTENS! HELP ME GOOGLE!

It's gonna be all right, Mike! I promise! In a world with kittens like that, how can it not be?!