D&D 5E Arguing, ideating and solution-seeking on the D&D Enworld forum

Overall, which of the following best describes Enworld's D&D forum discussions? (choose THREE)

  • A1. Too much arguing

  • A2. Just the right amount of arguing

  • A3. Not enough arguing

  • B1. Too much ideation/brainstorming

  • B2. Just the right amount of ideation/brainstorming

  • B3. Not enough ideation/brainstorming

  • C1: Too many creative solutions

  • C2: Just the right amount of creative solutions

  • C3: Not enough creative solutions


Results are only viewable after voting.

Aldarc

Legend
IME, there are a couple of pretty red flags that go up and generally mean that the productive portion of the thread is over:

1. Trotting out dictionary definitions. I'm sorry, but I totally agree with @Umbran here. Every single time someone trots out dueling dictionaries, that line of discussion is pretty much over.

2. Diving down into examples instead of engaging the idea. This is something I'm more than guilty of. Poster says X, poster gives an example of X, and then spends the next five pages trying to show why that example is a good example of X instead of actually discussing the idea.
3. Wall of Quotes: when the discussion devolves into a back and forth of line-by-line quotes that are clearly designed to try and score as many points against the other poster as possible.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


payn

Legend
My usual flag is the same two people posting for a dozen or more posts in a row.
Yeap, you know the thread is reaching its expiration date. I dont start many threads myself, but when I do I try and be a steward and keep it alive. I dont mind a little topic drift but sometimes a thread can be saved by redirecting the convo.
 

Hussar

Legend
Yeah, but sometimes folks use the to dump a hot take that cant be discussed because that wouldn't be +...

Agreed.

I really miss the old Paizo sub-forums for the adventure paths. Folks did exactly this. If one of the writers goofed up an encounter, people offered solutions instead of crying about it. The community really came together and had some great supplemental material and ideas to take the adventures to the next level.
To be fair there ARE lots of great material threads as well as discussion threads here. If you search for stuff for any of the WotC modules, for example, you will come across lots of threads on how to add new stuff. But, that being said, there are now so many other venues for that sort of thing that probably get a lot more attention. Reddit is a fantastic resource for modules. All of the WotC modules have their own Reddit community and, well, to be honest, so far I've used the Saltmarsh and Candlekeep Mysteries ones the most, there is a MOUNTAIN of resources there.

You want beautiful maps for your VTT to go with a WotC module? Reddit is probably the best go to. Second is probably Discord.

I think that those two - Reddit and Discord communities have taken up a lot of the mantle of offering focused solutions for adventures.

I know that I personally come here for the discussions. But, not really for resources.
 

3. Wall of Quotes: when the discussion devolves into a back and forth of line-by-line quotes that are clearly designed to try and score as many points against the other poster as possible.

I dunno, man. I understand what you're talking about, but I've also seen people who don't do the line by line thing and then end up introducing a massive amount of confusion into a discussion because its not clear what part of a prior poster's post they're actually addressing.

I kind of think its a no-win situation.
 


My old communication instructor would disagree. Argument == discussion/debate of differing opinions, but most people mistake fighting (a desireto be right and hurt/anger the other person) as argument.

Well, it doesn't help that in common usage the distinction is often subtle (and honestly, unless you parse things carefully, the distinction between a case of the first that's gone off the rails and the second can be pretty subtle).
 



payn

Legend
To be fair there ARE lots of great material threads as well as discussion threads here. If you search for stuff for any of the WotC modules, for example, you will come across lots of threads on how to add new stuff. But, that being said, there are now so many other venues for that sort of thing that probably get a lot more attention. Reddit is a fantastic resource for modules. All of the WotC modules have their own Reddit community and, well, to be honest, so far I've used the Saltmarsh and Candlekeep Mysteries ones the most, there is a MOUNTAIN of resources there.

You want beautiful maps for your VTT to go with a WotC module? Reddit is probably the best go to. Second is probably Discord.

I think that those two - Reddit and Discord communities have taken up a lot of the mantle of offering focused solutions for adventures.

I know that I personally come here for the discussions. But, not really for resources.
Thats great to hear! I dont run any WOTC stuff at the moment because I have found it to be a distant second to Paizo stuff so far.
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
2. Diving down into examples instead of engaging the idea. This is something I'm more than guilty of. Poster says X, poster gives an example of X, and then spends the next five pages trying to show why that example is a good example of X instead of actually discussing the idea.
Not sure on this - I think the use of an example as a talking point rather than just discussing theory is very useful.
 

BookTenTiger

He / Him
I sometimes wish ENWorld didn't have Likes. Because the likes are usually used to agree, it means that if I want to agree I can Like or Reply, and if I disagree I only have Reply.

I don't think Disagreeable Emojis are the way to go. But the Like button means there's an extra filter for positive replies, whereas negative replies only have one option!
 


Aldarc

Legend
I dunno, man. I understand what you're talking about, but I've also seen people who don't do the line by line thing and then end up introducing a massive amount of confusion into a discussion because its not clear what part of a prior poster's post they're actually addressing.

I kind of think its a no-win situation.
Responding to a particular piece of someone's argument doesn't somehow require the act of dissecting their entire post line-by-line into a wall of quotes that invariably devolves into a quoting battle. It only requires the person responds to that part of the prior poster's post that they are addressing. This can be done by highlighting the pertinent part in bold (or some other means), cutting out the rest of the post apart from the relevant portion, or clarifying what part they are responding to in their own reply.
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
Responding to a particular piece of someone's argument doesn't somehow require the act of dissecting their entire post line-by-line into a wall of quotes that invariably devolves into a quoting battle. It only requires the person responds to that part of the prior poster's post that they are addressing. This can be done by highlighting the pertinent part in bold (or some other means), cutting out the rest of the post apart from the relevant portion, or clarifying what part they are responding to in their own reply.
If someone puts up a ten-paragraph post and there's something different in each paragraph I want to respond to, I can either:

a) reply once, breaking up the original post so my responses go with the bit they're responding to
b) reply once, with my responses as a single block containing lots of attempts to indicate which bit of the post each part of my reply pertains to
c) reply with ten separate posts, each quoting just a bit of the post I'm replying to.

Of these, a) seems by far the simplest and easiest.
 

Aldarc

Legend
If someone puts up a ten-paragraph post and there's something different in each paragraph I want to respond to, I can either:

a) reply once, breaking up the original post so my responses go with the bit they're responding to
b) reply once, with my responses as a single block containing lots of attempts to indicate which bit of the post each part of my reply pertains to
c) reply with ten separate posts, each quoting just a bit of the post I'm replying to.

Of these, a) seems by far the simplest and easiest.
Then they do the same, and you do likewise in return. Then everyone else suffers from the inevitable breakdown in communication and the increasingly impenetrable wall of quote texts to read.

Maybe it wiser to pick one's battles carefully rather than create multiple fronts of conflict.
 

Lanefan

Victoria Rules
Then they do the same, and you do likewise in return. Then everyone else suffers from the inevitable breakdown in communication and the increasingly impenetrable wall of quote texts to read.

Maybe it wiser to pick one's battles carefully rather than create multiple fronts of conflict.
That sounds like something the party Thief would say; but as the Fighter my reply is bring 'em all on - it's why you hired me, isn't it?
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
I will try. But I do want to note that due to the subjective nature of the request (it's not specified what criteria or judge that determines what an excellent example of the problem is) my efforts may be 100% on point in my eyes while failing to be in yours.

Human communication is almost never about specific criteria, and is always subjective. This is why, "Talk less, listen more, ask questions," is often a useful set of guidelines.

How about this - when folks are specifically talking about how certain rhetorical techniques, methods, or patterns present a problem, don't start using same without a frame explicitly showing you are doing so as an example.
 

FrogReaver

As long as i get to be the frog
How about this - when folks are specifically talking about how certain rhetorical techniques, methods, or patterns present a problem, don't start using same without a frame explicitly showing you are doing so as an example.
IMO I wasn’t.
 

Umbran

Mod Squad
Staff member
IMO I wasn’t.

Ask yourself this question - is your opinion the one that actually matters here?

As in, you are in a discussion, and something is going awry - if you want to continue having a productive discussion, is your opinion of what you were doing really the thing for you to focus on?

As a purely practical matter, your opinion (I have now shifted to the generic you, not you, FrogReaver, specifically) of what's going on was part of what got you into the situation. There's evidence that it isn't working. Perhaps your opinion of the matter should be questioned.
 

Dungeon Delver's Guide

An Advertisement

Advertisement4

Top