Discussions re: RPG Theory

[Morrus]

I have never heard that phrase in my 46 years but I have now added it to my arsenal for the future.

Did you have a time in your life you were a "formal debater" where you picked it up?

Sadly after perusing the Wikipedia entry on it I WAS familiar with *The Chewbacca Defense" which is related.

I don’t recall where I picked it up. It doesn’t really apply here, other than that the initial topic has been a bit buried by multiple other topics, and I’m a poor multitasker.

 

[Umbran]

As "gish-gallup" is added to the list of topics of the thread...

How about we focus, folks? For poor Morrus' sake?

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Morrus]

Right, so as Umbran alluded to above, we are going to be making [+] threads a thing on a trial basis. We’re hammering out the wording, but for those rules lawyers out there, we’ll be looking out for folks who abuse it as much as for those who ignore it. We’ll see how it goes and likely amend our approach organically.

 

[Lanefan]

Okay, that's what I've got so far. I might add that one more thing to put in is that if it's a plus thread, you shouldn't question the premise of the thread (for example, if you have a thread:

(+) Help Build a Magic Item Shop and Price System for 5e

... then comments about, "We don't need those in 5e" would be considered threadcrapping and subject to moderation.

Colour me thoroughly opposed to any such idea.

Why?

Two reasons.

One: echo chambers are generally a bad thing.

Two: threads like these might (as in, will) give the impression to a casual reader or visitor that there's a more or less greater desire for that thing than there really is. Using the 5e price guide example*, someone reading the thread and seeing no opposition would gain a false impression that a 5e price guide is universally in demand, when the reality is that there is in fact in some (and in some cases, a lot of) dispute as to its usefulness, desirability, or whether it should exist at all in any form beyond by-table houserule.

* - an idea which I support and would houserule in were I running 5e.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Eltab]

One: echo chambers are generally a bad thing.

OTOH, a dedicated workshop where everybody is working to accomplish a goal, without noisy distractions, is generally a good thing. "We want to design the mechanics / rules to run an X" does not mean there is Only One Way to achieve that goal.

 

[Umbran]

Colour me thoroughly opposed to any such idea.

Then we'd strongly suggest you stay away from the threads.

One: echo chambers are generally a bad thing.

So, this is a vast overstatement of the concept. One thread does not an "echo chamber" make. That concept is relevant when considering one's overall exposure to topics, not individual discussions. Folks will still have exposure to differing ideas in the myriad of other threads they have access to on the site.

If folks are trying to actually accomplish or talk about a thing - like, say, trying to build a new subclass for D&D - having the constant static of naysayers trying to tell them they shouldn't do it, or insisting they justify their personal reasons for wanting the thing is generally, and specifically, a bad thing.

But, apparently, you're okay with that bad thing. The dichotomy is not persuasive.

Two: threads like these might (as in, will) give the impression to a casual reader or visitor that there's a more or less greater desire for that thing than there really is.

Oh, for pity's sake! The discussions on EN World are not, and were never intended or claimed to be, an accurate representation of gaming as a whole. We are a self-selected population, not a representative sample. Being so is not part of our mission. Reading EN World at all gives an inaccurate impression of what gamers desire. So, this argument is moot.


Edit: I did not like how the prior end of this post came out. I have retracted it.

 

[Lanefan]

OTOH, a dedicated workshop where everybody is working to accomplish a goal, without noisy distractions, is generally a good thing. "We want to design the mechanics / rules to run an X" does not mean there is Only One Way to achieve that goal.

No, but it does presume a desire - that not everyone might share - to end up with mechanics / rules to run an X, in whatever form said mechanics / rules might end up taking.

I mean, if I started a thread based on "Hey, let's riff off Expedition to the Barrier Peaks and design rules for spaceships and space travel in 1e D&D" I'd fully expect assorted people to chime in with variants on "What a dumb / useless / genre-inappropriate idea"; and if enough of 'em did I'd maybe have to concede they have a point and abandon the attempt.

But if they weren't allowed to, thus all I ever saw was versions of "Great idea, here's x-y-z thoughts on how to make it happen", my perception of the demand for such a thing would get distorted all to hell.

 

[Lanefan]

So, this is a vast overstatement of the concept. One thread does not an "echo chamber" make. That concept is relevant when considering one's overall exposure to topics, not individual discussions. Folks will still have exposure to differing ideas in the myriad of other threads they have access to on the site.

If folks are trying to actually accomplish or talk about a thing - like, say, trying to build a new subclass for D&D - having the constant static of naysayers trying to tell them they shouldn't do it, or insisting they justify their personal reasons for wanting the thing is generally, and specifically, a bad thing.

But, apparently, you're okay with that bad thing.

I guess I don't see it as such a bad thing, and I'm by and large OK with it.

Put another way [and keeping in mind that in the end it's just a game we're talking about here], if your intent is to publicly discuss something that might be controversial or generate mixed opinions then asking (or expecting, or mandating) people not to express views that disagree with yours and-or your premise is a bit much.

Edit: I did not like how the prior end of this post came out. I have retracted it.

FWIW I never saw the unedited version - maybe I should be thankful?