Pathfinder 1E Lisa Stevens, CEO of Paizo, commenting about ENWorld

[The Little Raven]

How'd that work out?

It worked pretty well for 3rd Edition, and seems to be working just as well, if not better, for 4th Edition.

 

[jgbrowning]

The real problem in the discussion culture is

that it's happening online. People are more jerkish online than face to face.

IMO, ENworld is more pro 4e than pro 3e, but it's still pro 3e.

This would be a good front-page news poll, Morrus. "What's your favorite edition of D&D" with enough response options to make Diaglo happy.

joe b.

 

[Arnwyn]

but to stimulate a discussion on whether or not there is truth in her comment that enworld is firmly in the 4e world.

I was going to post a bunch of stuff, but Psion ended up saying what I was going to:

I think a look at any of the various "edition preference" polls will reveal to you the actual bias of the boards fairly accurately. Most current active ENWorld posters favor 4e. The boards aren't as blatantly pro-4e as the RPGnet d20 forums, but I think claims that the slant is "all in your head" doesn't match up with the self professed preferences of the members.

I am glad Morrus changed the page titles to omit an edition; that helped remove some appearance of bias or exclusivity on the part of the board.

Note especially the second paragraph, which IIRC was there for a while, and was yet another contributor among many.

AFAIC, it's patently obvious that ENWorld "is firmly in the 4e world" (not that that's necessarily a bad thing; along with many obvious reasons why it is so). It also doesn't help that there are 5 or 6 'usual suspects' (c.f. Herremann the Wise's post in this thread - I can't believe people are still trying to defend the behavior in that other thread) that are at such a level that whenever they see any even remote criticism of 4e they come in, virtual arms flailing, to defend 4e's honor at all costs. (That is a bad thing.)

I think Lisa is correct.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I was going to post a bunch of stuff, but Psion ended up saying what I was going to:

Note especially the second paragraph, which IIRC was there for a while, and was yet another contributor among many.

AFAIC, it's patently obvious that ENWorld "is firmly in the 4e world" (not that that's necessarily a bad thing; along with many obvious reasons why it is so). It also doesn't help that there are 5 or 6 'usual suspects' (c.f. Herremann the Wise's post in this thread - I can't believe people are still trying to defend the behavior in that other thread) that are at such a level that whenever they see any even remote criticism of 4e they come in, virtual arms flailing, to defend 4e's honor at all costs. (That is a bad thing.)

I think Lisa is correct.

Is she?

Yeah, I remember when Morrus posted that on ENWorld as a prelude to one of his support drives to keep the website open. I think a big part of the reason why the ENWorld PDFs lost their luster is the all-in mentality that ENWorld went into in regards to 4e. If Morrus could have kept things on a more neutral ground, providing an environment where pro-3e and pro-4e folks could have felt equally loved, his sales wouldn't have dropped off as much. But by pitching his tent so firmly in the 4e camp, he drove away the folks who would have bought his 3e PDFs in the last year. -Lisa

I think it was a decision of the EN World community to focus its discussions and news on 4E. I don't think Morrus have kept a more neutral ground, barring some very questionable method of manipulating the discussion culture - or maybe not reacting at all to the announcement.

And about "equally loved" - well, as it stands, it seems as if they achieved the "equally hated" state, and everyone forgets or ignores that there are people that feel just like you and post on these boards, too, and instead keep clashing heads with those that have a different opinion.

I just do not feel how Morrus has driven off anyone by his own choice or actions (or failures to act). It was the community that decided they wanted to talk about 4E, that they were no longer interested in 3E PDFs and want to get to know 4E.

 

[billd91]

I am glad Morrus changed the page titles to omit an edition; that helped remove some appearance of bias or exclusivity on the part of the board.

I think this, the initial renaming of the board as 4e, and the initial reorganization of threads when 4e launched could easily have given the general observer that ENWorld was solidly behind 4e. I remember being a bit perturbed at the time because I thought it was opportune moment to make the titles and organization edition independent.

I'm glad things have stepped away from that but I think it did make ENWorld look like it was shifting support to the new edition rather than merely adding a new edition.

For what it's worth, I think general moderation has not has such an appearance of bias, despite some claims to the contrary among the self-determined exiles from ENWorld on other boards.

 

[Grimstaff]

Such rude responses ar4e not justified because he said, "I have formed my opinion and I am not going to change it, so don't waste your time trying." Thats actually very courteous. He let everyone know up front he wasn't open to changing his mind. They insisted on trying anyways

You're saying the OP was entitled to his opinion, but no one else was.

 

[Morrus]

I think this, the initial renaming of the board as 4e, and the initial reorganization of threads when 4e launched could easily have given the general observer that ENWorld was solidly behind 4e. I remember being a bit perturbed at the time because I thought it was opportune moment to make the titles and organization edition independent.

I'm glad things have stepped away from that but I think it did make ENWorld look like it was shifting support to the new edition rather than merely adding a new edition.

From a basic web design viewpoint, there's search engine optimization to consider, too. What keywords do you put in your title? Obviously, the aim is to bring traffic here. For the record, the title wasn't replaced by 4E, it had 4E ADDED to it.

 

[Grimstaff]

They have. There are at least two occurrences of such mod posts in the Celtavian thread.

I meant something like a sticky at the top of the forum, like they did when we had a "break" from edition wars for a couple of months.

Maybe something like a "Rules of Engagement" for critical threads - ie, please do not start them if you don't want or can't handle rebuttals.

I think the mods do an excellent job here at ENWorld, btw.

 

[Rykion]

ENworld is a D&D news site, so it made perfect sense that it would have lots of info and discussion on 4E once its release was announced. ENworld wouldn't be serving its purpose if it didn't. The site also had and still has a lot of news from third party publishers. Any slant towards 4E has more to do with the community than Morrus or the mods.

I take it you did not read the thread in question? The OP was very nice and well reasoned. HE very obviously gave 4E a solid shake down run. He said, "this is my opinion based on my experiences giving 4E a fair shake, and my mind is made up." (My paraphrasing, not an actual quote)

Then a number of people came along and rudely attacked him. Rudely. Justifying it because he dared to say he had already made up his mind based on actual game play and well reasoned and well mannered explanations.

Celtavian started the thread by making the analogy of being married to D&D, and that it was a trollop trying to please the masses with 4E. I do not consider that a nice analogy. It is very likely to be taken as an insult by people that like 4E. Asking people who disagree not to respond to such a provocative statement is going to have the opposite result.

At the same time, I won't defend people being rude and making personal attacks. That has no place on ENworld. Many people that responded were not rude and made well reasoned and well mannered explanations that countered some of Celtavian's statements.

 

[Shemeska]

It worked pretty well for 3rd Edition, and seems to be working just as well, if not better, for 4th Edition.

I don't exactly recall any of the 3e designers calling something from 2e the "antithesis of fun" when they promoted 3e. Some of 4e's self-promotion by trashing 3e ventured into insulting territory, and the tone and application was distinctly different than the previous edition change.