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

TwoSix said:

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.)

Click to expand...

Micah Sweet said:

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?

Click to expand...

TwoSix said:

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.

Click to expand...

Micah Sweet said:

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.

Click to expand...

Micah Sweet said:

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?

Click to expand...

dragoner said:

There is no good faith or trust, people's criticisms are just another form of attention getting, one upmanship.

Click to expand...

AnotherGuy said:

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.

Click to expand...

dragoner said:

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.

Click to expand...

• 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.
• 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.

AnotherGuy said:

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.
• 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.

Click to expand...