D&D 5E Blog Post by Robert J. Schwalb

[evileeyore]

Clearly your mileage may vary from mine. While you see juvenile bickering and pixel-bitching, I see players actually interacting with the description the GM gives for the room and the environment. I've seen a number of cases, in a 3e+ world, of players saying they're taking 20 searching the room without any indication that they're really thinking about what the room is like. The searching rules (spot, search, perception, whatever) may make it easy to use a PC's own abilities (which will differ from the player's) and help a goal-oriented/kill and loot style of play flow efficiently, but it's very easy to fall back to a game that doesn't involve rich interaction with the environment.

1 - Some people simply don't think that way. And no matter how often you hit them over the head with "HAHA! You didn't say you were searching under the mattress so no pearls for you!" they won't start thinking that way.

2 - I personally am long passed done with scraping every nook, picking every cranny, and reducing the furniture to splinters in case the desk had a false leg with a few coins hidden away in it and basically spending thirty minutes per room crawling through a dungeon. Give a 30 second die roll , a loot list from the DM, and let's move to the next room.

 

[Jester David]

You realize the logical problem with this, right? If the public cannot speak in response to Schwalb, then the public is being censored. So, "limit your self-expression so you don't limit *his* self-expression" is a bit of a boondoggle.

True.
But he's not questioning our responses, making potentially exaggerated claims based on our responses, or accusations. He's not asking us to stop. Free speech starts to become less free when it starts affecting other people, and our responses are directed at him and not the subject. He insulted something we love and we responded by insulting him. That's the key difference.

I'm being general here. Most of the posters and posts have not been aimed directly at Mr. Schwab and arguably the majority have been respectful, even if they disagree with his opinions or conclusions. But as a community, we're judged by our worst members.

He posted an essay that he himself recognized was a bit rantish on the internet. Unless he's seriously unaware of how the world works, he *knows* there'll be a ton of negative feedback. He does not need you to defend him from it.

His reaction to the blog suggest some surprise.
I imagine he expected some blowback, but not an 11 page thread on ENWorld and an equally large thread on the WotC Community (pre-wipe) or 87 responses on his comments, five times more comments than normal.

I doubt he expected to be called an edition warrior, or propagating old arguments, or held up as an example of why 5e went in the wrong direction, or any of the other myriad claims posited on this thread or elsewhere.
It's one thing to know some fans will get upset at anything (and everything) you say, it's another to know the establish triggers for edition wars on the forums.

 

[theliel]

I doubt he expected to be called an edition warrior, or propagating old arguments, or held up as an example of why 5e went in the wrong direction, or any of the other myriad claims posited on this thread or elsewhere.
It's one thing to know some fans will get upset at anything (and everything) you say, it's another to know the establish triggers for edition wars on the forums.

Don't Dog Whistle and you won't get called on it.

Seems simple enough. I mean...he clearly lays the blame at when fighters wanted to do more than just swing a sword or loose an arrow. He talks about the math minded spellcasters but it's really the people who wanted to play Conan (the wizard killing badass) who are to blame for the mechanics getting all crunchy. At least in his view.

In the comments he says that since wizards manipulate cosmic forces they shouldn't be shown up in the damage department by rouges or fighters.

It's great if you want Magic-Users/Wizards/Clerics/Druids to be The Bestest. But I have (three) much better versions of that game that don't imply that 'fighter' is an equal choice. (Those games being Mage: The Ascension, Mage: The Awakening and Ares Magica)

If you keep the same advancement table (which 5E has done) where a level is a level is a level then each level should be comparable.

He laments the fact that someone expects to have fighter 8 be comparable to wizard 8 just in different ways (such as how the Edition Which Shall Not Be Named attempts).

That's pretty much the core of edition warring. "Edition X made Y changes and now everything sucks, unlike when I was a kid sipping mountain dew at my buddies house."

 

[Jester David]

Don't Dog Whistle and you won't get called on it.

Seems simple enough. I mean...he clearly lays the blame at when fighters wanted to do more than just swing a sword or loose an arrow. He talks about the math minded spellcasters but it's really the people who wanted to play Conan (the wizard killing badass) who are to blame for the mechanics getting all crunchy. At least in his view.

In the comments he says that since wizards manipulate cosmic forces they shouldn't be shown up in the damage department by rouges or fighters.

It's great if you want Magic-Users/Wizards/Clerics/Druids to be The Bestest. But I have (three) much better versions of that game that don't imply that 'fighter' is an equal choice. (Those games being Mage: The Ascension, Mage: The Awakening and Ares Magica)

If you keep the same advancement table (which 5E has done) where a level is a level is a level then each level should be comparable.

He laments the fact that someone expects to have fighter 8 be comparable to wizard 8 just in different ways (such as how the Edition Which Shall Not Be Named attempts).

That's pretty much the core of edition warring. "Edition X made Y changes and now everything sucks, unlike when I was a kid sipping mountain dew at my buddies house."

Most of which has nothing to do with his overall point.

He wrote a 1500 word essay on the barrier of entry that is complex character creation and system mastery and everyone is fixated on the 300-odd words where he compares the most recent two editions with their predecessors and the forthcoming edition.
Everyone is looking at what is very literally 20% of his post where he says that the additive complexity that began with 3e might not have universally been a good idea.

 

[Umbran]

True.
Free speech starts to become less free when it starts affecting other people, and our responses are directed at him and not the subject.

With respect - this is the most common abuse of the notion of free speech. Freedom of speech is the guarantee that the government won't shut you up. It is not a guarantee that your fellow people won't dogpile you with rhetoric for cheesing them off. Sorry.

His reaction to the blog suggest some surprise.

Well, his naivete is unfortunate. Welcome to the internet, Mr. Schwalb.

 

[Agamon]

Yup. Gotta love the internet.

"Ah, it's just like the good ol' days. Why I remember when..."

"HOW DARE YOU! I'm only 12 years old, why would you possibly imply that the time before I was born is so much better than now! You are truly evil and I hope you die in your sleep!"

 

[Jester David]

With respect - this is the most common abuse of the notion of free speech. Freedom of speech is the guarantee that the government won't shut you up. It is not a guarantee that your fellow people won't dogpile you with rhetoric for cheesing them off. Sorry.

True.
But one would hope us geeks could show a little more restraint and class than, oh, say something that is politically partisan, so shouldn't get brought up here...




Mod Edit: Sorry, but we shouldn't go there. ~Umbran

 

[NewJeffCT]

With respect - this is the most common abuse of the notion of free speech. Freedom of speech is the guarantee that the government won't shut you up. It is not a guarantee that your fellow people won't dogpile you with rhetoric for cheesing them off. Sorry.



Well, his naivete is unfortunate. Welcome to the internet, Mr. Schwalb.

Great point on free speech - it's so the government doesn't stop you from speaking. (Though, there are multiple exceptions to free speech in every country that has a free speech law on the books.)

But, if his blog is on his own personal website paid for with his own money, he also has a right to control the comments on his blog how he sees fit. If he wants to cut off debate there, then he can. Of course, that doesn't mean he can stop debate here, or elsewhere.

 

[Umbran]

Great point on free speech - it's so the government doesn't stop you from speaking. (Though, there are multiple exceptions to free speech in every country that has a free speech law on the books.)

Yes, but that's beyond the scope of our boards.

 

[Klaus]

Well, his naivete is unfortunate. Welcome to the internet, Mr. Schwalb.

And is that what we do at EN World? Reinforce the bad stereotype?

The blog post went out of this way to accomodate everyone, stating upfront that there was no right or worng way to play, and gave us a glimpse on the thought process of one of the early developers of 5e (who worked for the two previous editions). But all the careful wording to avoid ruffling feathers wrongly gets ignored, and a few posters latch onto a soundbite here and there to fuel a mini edition warring, as if the editions themselves (and their fans) were under attack.

They weren't.

It's great that people are passionate about this hobby enough to read a blog post and discuss it. But this is not a competition to see who's right, and it's certainly not an edition war.