What makes setting lore "actually matter" to the players?

People who can't accept criticism of their likes are just as bad as people who continually bash things they hate. (It is fair to be irritated by criticism founded on purely emotional response that is couched as objective, though.)
But how do you tell the difference, and who is sufficiently privileged to sit in judgement on whether or not any given criticism is fair, so they can people who don't like it are just as bad as haters?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

It's basically the M&M problem, here is a bowl of M&M's, one is deadly poison, the rational person throws the whole bowl away. Privately, like with a writing group is one thing, publicly it is a different matter.
 

But how do you tell the difference, and who is sufficiently privileged to sit in judgement on whether or not any given criticism is fair, so they can people who don't like it are just as bad as haters?
I use my own judgment, of course. Deciding who is acting in good faith, who is acting poorly but with good intent, and who is just a bad actor is all part of the confusing guesswork we call life.
 

I use my own judgment, of course. Deciding who is acting in good faith, who is acting poorly but with good intent, and who is just a bad actor is all part of the confusing guesswork we call life.
Then it's perfectly fair for the rest of us to use our own judgements as well, even if we come to different conclusions than you.
 


But how do you tell the difference, and who is sufficiently privileged to sit in judgement on whether or not any given criticism is fair, so they can people who don't like it are just as bad as haters?
That is one of life’s great philosophical mysteries. All art is subjective. Therefore, isn’t criticism subjective also?

All I can say for sure is that my negative experiences have made me critical of the concept of intellectual property. If fans don’t like the way that companies alter or cancel their IPs, then the fans should be allowed to make and sell their own derivatives to compete. I think it would alleviate so much vitriol.
 

There is no good faith or trust, people's criticisms are just another form of attention getting, one upmanship.
Sometimes there is a net positive though with some of the criticism as one can test their own beliefs against critique or even by viewing the debate better understand their position on the issue. However continuous criticism can become less useful and slide into frustrating territory. I would not provide a blanket view on criticism.
 

Sometimes there is a net positive though with some of the criticism as one can test their own beliefs against critique or even by viewing the debate better understand their position on the issue. However continuous criticism can become less useful and slide into frustrating territory. I would not provide a blanket view on criticism.
Maybe, though such as with why DTRPG prohibited publishers from rating other publishers games on site, is because publishers were abusing it to down rate their competitors games, in order to boost their own.
 

Maybe, though such as with why DTRPG prohibited publishers from rating other publishers games on site, is because publishers were abusing it to down rate their competitors games, in order to boost their own.
If I look at my own criticisms
  • I criticised Supers vs Bats because I saw (along with a friend of mine) that the movie could have been great... if only for xyz...and because there were scenes/moments which I thought were brilliant hence I find it frustrating. :ROFLMAO:
  • I criticised 4e at the time because I was completely blind-sighted by the change in the game. I learnt to appreciate it more through conversations online with others who provided me insight into how to view the rules and play the game. Insight I did not have at the time due to my limited exposure to other RPGs and the terrible DMs who ran it for me.
  • I criticise 5.5e because I feel they never went far enough with changes the game could/should have adopted. I'll admit I do feel a one upmanship on this because some of the changes they made I was already including at my table. 5.5e is the first edition of the game that I have no interest in purchasing because I'm happy with our homebrewed 5e.
 

If I look at my own criticisms
  • I criticised Supers vs Bats because I saw (along with a friend of mine) that the movie could have been great... if only for xyz...and because there were scenes/moments which I thought were brilliant hence I find it frustrating. :ROFLMAO:
  • I criticised 4e at the time because I was completely blind-sighted by the change in the game. I learnt to appreciate it more through conversations online with others who provided me insight into how to view the rules and play the game. Insight I did not have at the time due to my limited exposure to other RPGs and the terrible DMs who ran it for me.
  • I criticise 5.5e because I feel they never went far enough with changes the game could/should have adopted. I'll admit I do feel a one upmanship on this because some of the changes they made I was already including at my table. 5.5e is the first edition of the game that I have no interest in purchasing because I'm happy with our homebrewed 5e.
These are just my personal feelings, I am not a cop, and don't wish to be. In Solis People of the Sun (pwyw on dtrpg) the military refused the job of law enforcement because their primary function is to destroy the enemy, as law enforcement, the danger is there that the people become the enemy. Scouts were handed the duty then, and created the Protector program, as police had garnered negative connotations.

As a publisher, being critical of other publishers has a tendency to make one unwelcome in publisher spaces, so the admonition is to not do it.
 

Enchanted Trinkets Complete

Remove ads

Top