Not a Conspiracy Theory: Moving Toward Better Criticism in RPGs

[hawkeyefan]

It's less a question of neutral criticism - it's more a question of not using terms so heavily laden with connotations that they cast unnecessary aspersions at other games simply by use of the term. Or even, I suppose, throwing out barbs about brain damage while you're laying out your conceptual framework, thus poisoning your own well.

Jargon of all kinds exists. Acting as if there's one small group of people who use it and they need to stop seems to ignore whole swaths of the hobby and the folks who discuss it.

 

[Emoshin]

My goal here on ENW has been to talk about games and to improve my GMing and playing, and to maybe share my thoughts so others can do so, too. And I would say it's absolutely had a positive impact on my gaming. Much of the discussions that most influenced me involved topics that this thread seems to view as negative.

I may be misunderstanding, but is this like a competition for limited resources then?

i.e., Group A wants to do X-talking. Group B wants to do Y-talking.
Enworld is the best place to do both X-talking and Y-talking.
The X-talking has a positive impact for the A people, and the Y-talking has a positive impact for the B people?
The X-talking bothers the B people, and the Y-talking bothers the A people?

Which is why I question its merits.

Sorry, by that, do you mean there's no merit to the idea that certain conversations help you but bother others, and other conversations bother you but help someone else?

 

[Umbran]

Which is why I question its merits.

By all means, question the merits of the discussion. The discussion itself is open to criticism.

But, be ready for folks to question the merit of your questioning when you bring, "Well, I've personally had good results," as a foundation. At best, this sets up anecdote vs anecdote, which goes nowhere fast.

 

[billd91]

Jargon of all kinds exists. Acting as if there's one small group of people who use it and they need to stop seems to ignore whole swaths of the hobby and the folks who discuss it.

And some of that jargon is prejudicial. You want an honest, open, and respectful discussion, avoid prejudicial jargon. That's all that's meant by looking for neutral terminology, or more neutral jargon if you will.

 

[pemerton]

That page Snarf linked has a huge variety of links. Quality and topics are mixed, but there's some stuff worth getting into. I do feel compelled to point out that the page belongs to an ex-luminary of the Forge -- not because I wish to uphold Forge Thought, but because lots of people involved there have continued to make games and refine their ideas since then, and it's nice to talk about e.g. what Emily, Vincent, Ron, etc. have done since then, instead of rehashing the same old stuff.

Are you referring to the Emily Care Boss page? (Black and Green Games)

To my mind, anyone who wants to suggest that she has useful things to say, and also suggest that The Forge is useless/elitist etc, is just confused. Apart from anything else, to the best of my knowledge she pioneered the notion of "fictional position" as a tool of analysis/explanation.

 

[Campbell]

And some of that jargon is prejudicial. You want an honest, open, and respectful discussion, avoid prejudicial jargon. That's all that's meant by looking for neutral terminology, or more neutral jargon if you will.

Can you accept that to many of us the normative jargon used in most tabletop RPG discussion feels just as prejudiced? That it seems like we're constantly asked to justify our existence. Not just here, but also within the larger hobby.

 

[Grendel_Khan]

I may be misunderstanding, but is this like a competition for limited resources then?

i.e., Group A wants to do X-talking. Group B wants to do Y-talking. Enworld is the best place to do both X-talking and Y-talking.
The X-talking has a positive impact for the A people, and the Y-talking has a positive impact for the B people?
The X-talking bothers the B people, and the Y-talking bothers the A people?


Sorry, by that, do you mean there's no merit to the idea that certain conversations help you but bother others, and other conversations bother you but help someone else?

You're new here—welcome!—so just realize that this thread is inherently about past, present, and future ENWorld skirmishes. Maybe you're just trying to wrap your head around it, but it's ultimately pretty simple. There's a longstanding tradition of discussions about game theory breaking down into people feeling insulted and talked down to by other people's use of "jargon" and such.

What I (and some others, I've gathered) think is really going on when these discussions break down is about something else. Let's just say there are some people who talk about and critique many kinds of games, and some that play the one game and are ready to feel very slighted about any criticism of it (real or imagined). Sometimes there's real value, imo, when these communities mix it up. But it rarely ends in a pretty place.

So ultimately this is about old wounds and battle lines, and certain kinds of seemingly inevitable poster interactions—and I'm including myself in there.

 

[Emoshin]

You're new here—welcome!—

Thank you!

so just realize that this thread is inherently about past, present, and future ENWorld skirmishes. Maybe you're just trying to wrap your head around it, but it's ultimately pretty simple. There's a longstanding tradition of discussions about game theory breaking down into people feeling insulted and talked down to by other people's use of "jargon" and such.

What I (and some others, I've gathered) think is really going on when these discussions break down is about something else. Let's just say there are some people who talk about and critique many kinds of games, and some that play the one game and are ready to feel very slighted about any criticism of it (real or imagined). Sometimes there's real value, imo, when these communities mix it up. But it rarely ends in a pretty place.

So ultimately this is about old wounds and battle lines, and certain kinds of seemingly inevitable poster interactions—and I'm including myself in there.

I was trying to wrap my head around it, and it almost sounds simple and impossible at the same time.

Simple: It's like you've got a number of people that need to be in one place, and some behaviours are interfering with each other's enjoyment of this one place.

Impossible: The rules of the place do not forbid the unliked behaviors, so this is just another walk in the park (or not) of human conflict resolution.

 

[Lanefan]

It is what is being called for in this thread. That criticism not be so harsh.

But to be critical, we have to be able to examine something and acknowledge its flaws and shortcomings.

Of course.

Neutral criticism would also, however, point out the good aspects and benefits of [whatever is being critiqued] rather than focusing only on the perceived flaws and shortcomings. Harsh criticism, OTOH, rarely has much positive to say.

And in here, we often discuss - or appear to discuss - exclusively flaws and shortcomings mostly because if something's working well for us there's really not much to say other than "it works for us", and that little statement quickly gets buried in the noise.

 

[pemerton]

Well, that brings up a good question - a lot of effort has been put forward, but is it the right kind of effort?

Is this medium even appropriate for the task? Is the available audience a good one for this effort? Are the rhetorical tools and approaches effective ones?

Having read a whole lot of these discussions, my answers to those are, Maybe Not, Not really, and No, respectively.

So your goal: is... what? I still don't understand the goal.

Your method: to criticize the rules or techniques of the game (with no intention of criticizing the person directly)

Your audience: is it someone with a scientific or neutral position on the topic, or someone who is emotionally invested in the rpg? You didn't answer that, so I assume the latter.

So for the sake of [your goal?], you are criticizing the rules or techniques of the game with people emotionally invested in the rpg being criticized.

Outcome? Well, it sounds like it's not working? How are you achieving your goal then? What's next?

I've not yet been banned, I've never been suspended, and I've very rarely been moderated. So to the best of my understanding of how this board works, my posts do not typically violate any rules.

I've established connections with fellow RPGers, I've made friends, and I've improved my own playing. I've likewise had posters tell me that conversations we've had have been useful to them.

Some particular shout-outs from my side: @LostSoul and a bit later @Manbearcat helped me improve my thinking about 4e skill challenges. @Campbell taught me how to see the difference between Burning Wheel (and other scene-framed games like 4e, MHRP etc) and Apocalypse World, and this helped me work out how to GM Classic Traveller - something I had wanted to do on-and-off for over 30 years but had never really mastered before. @chaochou constantly pushes me (and other posters) to reflect on the respective contributions to the fiction of players and GM, and the interplay between these.

And some things I remember fondly (I'm a human being with as much pride in my craft as the next person):

D&D 4E - Pemertonian Scene-Framing; A Good Approach to D&D 4e

From http://www.enworld.org/forum/showthread.php?333362-Fixing-the-Fighter/page45&p=6073774#post6073774 This is an approach to GMing which I got from Pemerton's discussion of how he runs his games. I've used it in my last two 4e campaigns (one ongoing), albeit initially without full awareness...

www.enworld.org

Cam Banks's responses to some of my MHRP/Cortex+ Heroic actual plays - eg Into the North - Cortex Plus Heroic Fantasy actual play

Thor's response to some of my Torchbearer actual plays (which also got a shout-out from Luke on his own forums): Torchbearer 2e - actual play of this AWESOME system! (+)​

I don't know what exactly the threshold is for justifying one's participation on an open message board, but I feel like I've managed to step over it.