D&D 5E 5E, The Edition Wars, and Shooting Ourselves in the Foot.

Will you be positive and refrain negativity about others' preferences?


Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
Supporter
The choices become "embrace surges" or "edition war".

Nope. There's a third option - walk away from the conversation. Do not admit defeat, but do not press either. Allow what you've said to stand on its own merits.

Remember that whether or not BryonD (or any other individual) "wins" an argument on the internet is not going to influence the designers over at WotC. The soul of D&D will not be won like leadership of the Drazi people on Babylon 5: Purple! Green! PURPLE! GREEEEEN!!!! thumpthumpthump... and the last one left standing gets what he or she wants.

The most efficient way to shoot yourself in the foot is to pretend that something that sucks doesn't suck.

With respect, that is incorrect. The fastest way to shoot yourself in the foot is to mistake, "I really don't like it," with, "it sucks."

There are posters here who will argue that, "in my opinion," should be taken as understood in all internet discussion. In doing so, they overlook some important bits.

In discussion, some folks will take the position that they know THE TRUTH, as if some aspect of the game were some objective reality, rather than an aesthetic preference. Given that such people do exist, a speaker cannot leave out the, "in my opinion", or "I feel that...," clause, and still expect readers to differentiate the speaker from a OneTrueWayist. The audience requires that we be explicit about it. Repeatedly.

This should not be surprising. If you want to communicate what you actually think, you must say what you really mean, in full, right? The more you leave as assumptions, the more chances you give the reader to guess the wrong way.

Moreover, the *speaker* needs the speaker to be explicit about it, repeatedly. When you speak, your words tends to shape not just your audience's thoughts, but your own - you influence yourself. Once you've committed to an objective wording, you're more likely to defend it as objective, rather than subjective, point.

Better to not go there at all, unless you really mean it.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


OnlineDM

Adventurer
I answered yes before reading the thread.

I think it's fine (and in many cases helpful) for people to say what they do like AND what they don't like.

I don't think it's fine for people to criticize ONE ANOTHER for having different preferences.

Fine: "I don't like healing surges."
Fine: "I don't like the way healing was handled before 4e."
Not Fine: "You're so stubborn for not liking healing surges."
Not Fine: "Anyone who doesn't like pre-4e healing is an idiot."
 

Oni

First Post
I answered yes before reading the thread.

I think it's fine (and in many cases helpful) for people to say what they do like AND what they don't like.

I don't think it's fine for people to criticize ONE ANOTHER for having different preferences.

Fine: "I don't like healing surges."
Fine: "I don't like the way healing was handled before 4e."
Not Fine: "You're so stubborn for not liking healing surges."
Not Fine: "Anyone who doesn't like pre-4e healing is an idiot."

Ideally people should be able to make criticisms without the wheels coming off, but it's no longer a neutral environment. I think if we are actually interested in repairing some of the damage that has been done then a higher standard may be in order. I'm worried the momentum of ill-will is going to carry on through to the new edition when it really doesn't have to. No matter how good a game WotC makes they still have to clear the hurtle of the fans and the toxicity of the environment will influence how high that hurtle is.
 


Oni

First Post
""Would the game even survive if every five or six years it just splinters into smaller and smaller groups?" -Mike Mearls

That's a good question, and I'm glad someone at WotC is asking it, they have their part to play, but so do we.
 

BryonD

Hero
With respect, that is incorrect. The fastest way to shoot yourself in the foot is to mistake, "I really don't like it," with, "it sucks."
I think you miss the point that some things DO still suck when it come to the big picture of creating success (or "unity") and any individual loving it or hating it is quite irrelevant to that.

You incorrectly presumed I was mixing the two things.
 

Remove ads

Top