D&D General ENWorld is better that the pundits…change my mind

Olgar Shiverstone said:
The internet has mostly lost the value of well-moderated forums and actually informed news.

EN World is an oasis of excellence in a desert of internet mediocrity.
Click to expand...

Depends. Its fairly bad at optimization and mechanics. A lot of theory crafting, lack of experience in real games, lack of active players and left over baggage from previous editions.

Theres maybe 6 people who are good at it.

Reddit and discord groups are better for that sort of thing.

If you want an example start a thread about Conjure Minor Elemental and seeing it used in a real game.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


I prefer pundits to social media, and yes, ENWorld is social media.

With pundits I can go to their site or blog or YouTube channel and get what they think about a topic without all the noise of social media. I can also simply not engage with the pundits I disagree with, unlike on social media.

The trouble with social media is that it's a firehose of nonsense. People you don't want to hear from opining endlessly about their pet topics. People you do want to hear from inevitably get sucked into long, exhausting exchanges with people you don't want to hear from, etc.

That is to say, the trolls drag everything down. Thread after thread of the same 6-7 posters screaming past each other isn't information. Reading a blog post or watching a video, even one you disagree with, is far more likely to actually contain information.

Also, consensus is overrated. Not that gamers can agree on things. Start a thread trying to define what RPGs even are and you'll see just how useless even the attempt at consensus is.

Basically, the signal to noise ratio of pundits is infinitely higher than that of social media.
 

overgeeked said:
Also, consensus is overrated. Not that gamers can agree on things. Start a thread trying to define what RPGs even are and you'll see just how useless even the attempt at consensus is.
Click to expand...
I love conversations here, but this is a good point: you will get a huge variety of opinions on what exactly a particular topic in RPGs is. I've been in the hobby long enough to know that the fundamentals of RPG topics have been widely debated for decades (I started seeing them in the 70s! when I was very young).

Many discussions are really just people talking past each other when they have fundamental definitional issues.

The question for me is: is one voice more useful than a group of voices? I think both can be but I hear different opinions on EnWorld every day and I find that I learn something in many cases.
 

overgeeked said:
I prefer pundits to social media, and yes, ENWorld is social media.

With pundits I can go to their site or blog or YouTube channel and get what they think about a topic without all the noise of social media. I can also simply not engage with the pundits I disagree with, unlike on social media.

The trouble with social media is that it's a firehose of nonsense. People you don't want to hear from opining endlessly about their pet topics. People you do want to hear from inevitably get sucked into long, exhausting exchanges with people you don't want to hear from, etc.

That is to say, the trolls drag everything down. Thread after thread of the same 6-7 posters screaming past each other isn't information. Reading a blog post or watching a video, even one you disagree with, is far more likely to actually contain information.

Also, consensus is overrated. Not that gamers can agree on things. Start a thread trying to define what RPGs even are and you'll see just how useless even the attempt at consensus is.

Basically, the signal to noise ratio of pundits is infinitely higher than that of social media.
Click to expand...

Indeed. I really need to do better at stating my case and leaving it at that instead of always delving into all the off topic minutia.
 



I don't really know what a pundit is, but one reason why I prefer ENworld is that all too often if I'm looking up something that it ends up being people talking about it, as in with a video. I much prefer to read, potentially skimming through an article than having to watch a 20 minute video which might end up being trash. I especially hate the Top X things you should have or do in your game. So much easier to read a list than watch a video of what they consider the top 5 feats or whatever, they really pad out those videos.
 

Zardnaar said:
Good if your an archer. Otherwise pass.
Click to expand...
Exactly what I am talking about.

“Don’t take this feat” often translates to a DPR discussion which is fine…if it’s a dpr question.

And it’s said with certainty and without nuance…and a newb may well
Just buy that and move on, limiting themselves needlessly.

Compare and contrast pundits is better…but for my money discussions and debates
Are most helpful.

Lots gets mentioned and I distrust and still verify…to botch a quote.
 

A lot of time, the advice I see is white room theory or pushing something really hard on a 1% or so difference or mostly a matter of preference. Sometimes though, it does feels spot on.

Overall though, I find my own experience with something is the best teacher - discovering what I like and don't like rather than just blindly following someone else's advice. While D&D is a game, sometimes the best move isn't the most optimal one or may be too circumstantial to work/not work depending on how the group works and what the DM is running.
 

Similar Threads

Snarf Zagyg
D&D General Optimistic Thoughts on Optimizing
2 3 4 5
Replies
44
Views
6K
Clint_L
Clint_L
lewpuls
Worlds of Design: All in Your Mind
Replies
6
Views
5K
mrm1138
mrm1138
Snarf Zagyg
D&D 5E (2024) There is sauerkraut in my lederhosen: Snarf's Guide to Using (and adjudicating) Skills in 5e
2 3
Replies
29
Views
2K
Minigiant
Minigiant
lewpuls
Worlds of Design: Mind Your Mercenaries
2
Replies
11
Views
7K
whizz
W
G
D&D 5E (2014) How Would You Run It? -- Dragon Dilemma continued
Replies
6
Views
976
aco175
aco175
Remove ads

Top