Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 8939333" data-attributes="member: 6795602">I think so.  Though I'm not about to scour 1000 posts in this thread to find anything more specific.You mean your approach to criticism in that interaction?  If so then No.  I think the particular approach you choose to try and criticize there ultimately diminished any potential criticism you were trying to make.  When [USER=29398]@Lanefan[/USER] immediately pushed back against your framing the scene in a way he viewed as failing at his goal, that was time to have a conversation like you would in the actual game to clarify IMO.  Instead, you doubled down on what to me seems like an unimportant detail for the criticism you were trying to deliver.  Others that tend to agree with your positions even followed up with a hypothetical example that [USER=29398]@Lanefan[/USER] seemed to have no problem with.  This is a great example where this discussion got derailed not because of content, ideas, or criticisms, but solely based on the delivery of that content, ideas and criticisms.For me there's a baggage that comes from our previous discussions.  I think that gets in the way at times.I don't know how to say this, but I have no problem with the general concept of talking technical elements of D&D.  I have no problem in general with criticism of D&D.  I do have problems with certain deliveries.  I also think there's certain criticisms that aren't productive, a hypothetical example might be: D&D is a bad game for X, Y and Z reasons.  If that was presented as a personal value judgement, ex: for me d&d is a bad game because X, Y and Z, then no issue there.I'll even add that while I tend to direct my comments toward your 'side', my side is often just as guilty of these same things.  We all need to do better.</blockquote>

Verification