Oofta
Legend
I think anyone who claims to be perfect is being sarcastic, is potentially delusional or simply does not accept that we are all human.
D&D General Rant: Sometimes I Hate the D&D Community
GMforPowergamers
Legend
I don't know cars but that works with computer stuff all the time
Oofta
Legend
So in a discussion about D&D we're going to have an argument about primate family trees?
Technically the way we happen to categorize things means that monkeys and apes are both anthropoids, but the tree split long ago.
This Effin’ GM
Hero
Great and now we have a chart that implies the Existance of Tarsiers, which we all know to be a myth propagated by Big Primate (a collection of unusually sized gorillas)So in a discussion about D&D we're going to have an argument about primate family trees?
Technically the way we happen to categorize things means that monkeys and apes are both anthropoids, but the tree split long ago.
View attachment 252841
Scribe
Legend
Celebrim
Legend
Eh. I agree with you.
Whatever game you run as a GM, make it your own. If I'm sitting at your table as a player, I'm not interested in playing the exact same game in the exact same setting I'd run as a DM. I want to experience your originality, your lore, your distinctive take on the game.
I'm just not sure that means much to say "To each their own." We'll all agree with that, and yet still want to explain why we didn't like 4e and that will still offend at some level the people that liked 4e, even if they agree I have a right to dislike 4e. They'll still want to explain why my dislike is not justified. Because no one has a preference that they don't feel is defensible.
Also, while it's true I don't like gnomes, if I'm in a thread about not liking gnomes, mostly I'm there to blow razzberries with the expectation that someone will blow razzberries back and I'll either laugh or learn something.
My biggest problem with D&D as it exists in any edition is the same as my problem with every RPG - I hate how much work is required to refine the rules to something I feel I want to play. I hate how much of the RAW feels poorly thought out, how much house rules I have to create, how much extra writing I often have to do to run a published module. It wouldn't matter what edition of D&D I wanted to play, I'd have to write hundreds of pages of house rules. The main reason I like 3.X, is I've already done that. If you love some other edition, either you already know it's problems or we are very different sorts of GMs.
Whatever game you run as a GM, make it your own. If I'm sitting at your table as a player, I'm not interested in playing the exact same game in the exact same setting I'd run as a DM. I want to experience your originality, your lore, your distinctive take on the game.
I'm just not sure that means much to say "To each their own." We'll all agree with that, and yet still want to explain why we didn't like 4e and that will still offend at some level the people that liked 4e, even if they agree I have a right to dislike 4e. They'll still want to explain why my dislike is not justified. Because no one has a preference that they don't feel is defensible.
Also, while it's true I don't like gnomes, if I'm in a thread about not liking gnomes, mostly I'm there to blow razzberries with the expectation that someone will blow razzberries back and I'll either laugh or learn something.
My biggest problem with D&D as it exists in any edition is the same as my problem with every RPG - I hate how much work is required to refine the rules to something I feel I want to play. I hate how much of the RAW feels poorly thought out, how much house rules I have to create, how much extra writing I often have to do to run a published module. It wouldn't matter what edition of D&D I wanted to play, I'd have to write hundreds of pages of house rules. The main reason I like 3.X, is I've already done that. If you love some other edition, either you already know it's problems or we are very different sorts of GMs.
beancounter
(I/Me/Mine)
Sure. If it's what you like. Why not?Indeed.
Long live Alignment and racial ASI?
Mercurius
Legend
I understand how this can be frustrating - I have also found it frustrating at times, when someone criticizes or doesn't see something I love in the same way that I do. It is easy to take that personally, regardless of whether it is their intention or not.
As others have said, what you're talking about is an element of every community, especially online. But a couple things to consider.
One, no matter what we do, we're not going to change everyone else's behavior. Venting may be cathartic, but what you're talking about is almost certainly never going to change - at least in our lifetimes. Who knows, maybe in a 1,000 years we'll have collectively transcended such silliness, but for the foreseeable future...people are going to "opinionate," and in a way that at least seemingly conflates their own subjective tastes with objective reality.
Sure, you can try to change what others say and do, but not only does that generally not work, but it often leads to more problems. Plus, it can have a kind of "moral crusade" connotation that, one could argue, is equally problematic and all-too common ("Thou shalt think and behave as I think you should think and behave, otherwise you are a bad person!"). Meaning, the cousin of BadWrongFun is BadWrongThinking.
Where we have actual power is over our own response to things - how they affect us. No, this isn't victim blaming, nor is it excusing bad behavior; it is empowerment, at least potentially so. We have some say in how we respond to things - certainly more than in how others behave. We can't just ignore or magically change our feelings of hurt or frustration, but we can work with them so that we are less reactive, so that what other people say has less power over how we feel. Unfortunately there is a common trend these days that taking offense at any and everything is good and justified and leads to change (that is, changing the behavior of others). What is often lost is how we can change our own reactions, and thereby lessen our own suffering.
And just to be clear, I'm not saying that one shouldn't express to another how their words were hurtful or annoying, just that it should be balanced with working on oneself. Which leads me to...
Two, everything people say and do and think is ultimately about themselves - their own version of things - and not necessarily about the Thing Itself, and certainly not about how the Thing exists within your world. We see the world not as it is, but as we are. That is, we all live in our own microcosm. Clearly we share the same world and our microcosms interact, but ultimately no one truly knows the world as it is - just as they (we) experience it.
So if I say, "gnomes suck," all I'm really saying is that I don't like gnomes - they suck within my own microcosm, but not in yours (Btw, I like gnomes). It is erroneous for me to think otherwise, just as it is erroneous for you to think that them sucking in my tiny universe has any bearing on their status in yours. Nothing objectively sucks, as "suckitude" is a subjective value judgement. But it is also erroneous for you to argue with me that gnomes don't suck in my own world.
This also doesn't mean that value judgements are worthless. In any context, there are degrees of quality. I'm into fountain pens, and I can say with a good degree of confidence that certain pens "suck" more than others. But I don't really think of it that way; rather, I turn it around and say that A) there are degrees of quality in terms of craftsmanship, and B) I have personal preferences that adjust A accordingly.
The cheapest, throw-away fountain pen doesn't "suck," but it also doesn't mean that it is of equal quality to a $200 pen, or that everything is the same, and it is all a matter of opinion. A vintage Pelikan is a beautiful thing, and should be honored as such. It is absurd to say that preferring a vintage Pelikan over a $2 throwaway is just a subjective opinion, which essentially negates any kind of discernment or sense of quality. But if you love your $2 pen, it is also silly of me to say, "You're wrong in liking that pen because it sucks."
Or we could look at ice cream. All ice cream, even the cheapest of grocery store brands, is pretty good. I mean, I'd eat it and probably enjoy it. But that doesn't mean that premium brand ice creams like Ben & Jerry's or homemade gelato aren't "better."
But if you prefer Haagen-Dazs and I say, "Haagen-Dazs sucks," it shouldn't be taken too seriously, nor should it be taken as a threat to your enjoyment of Haagen-Daz. Clearly Haagen-Dazs doesn't "suck" - even if I prefer B&J - and to say it does is probably just hyperbole on my part. But even if I did think it actually sucks, that's OK - I'm allowed to (and maybe it does "suck" in my own world).
So I think it is worth remembering that not only is there "no accounting for taste," but people speak certain ways that aren't necessarily literal equations of how they feel. Some people are just really opinionated, or like to express themselves in an overly passionate manner; for example, "Gnomes suck" rather than "I'm not really into gnomes - they don't fit within my personal aesthetic for fantasy gaming".
As others have said, what you're talking about is an element of every community, especially online. But a couple things to consider.
One, no matter what we do, we're not going to change everyone else's behavior. Venting may be cathartic, but what you're talking about is almost certainly never going to change - at least in our lifetimes. Who knows, maybe in a 1,000 years we'll have collectively transcended such silliness, but for the foreseeable future...people are going to "opinionate," and in a way that at least seemingly conflates their own subjective tastes with objective reality.
Sure, you can try to change what others say and do, but not only does that generally not work, but it often leads to more problems. Plus, it can have a kind of "moral crusade" connotation that, one could argue, is equally problematic and all-too common ("Thou shalt think and behave as I think you should think and behave, otherwise you are a bad person!"). Meaning, the cousin of BadWrongFun is BadWrongThinking.
Where we have actual power is over our own response to things - how they affect us. No, this isn't victim blaming, nor is it excusing bad behavior; it is empowerment, at least potentially so. We have some say in how we respond to things - certainly more than in how others behave. We can't just ignore or magically change our feelings of hurt or frustration, but we can work with them so that we are less reactive, so that what other people say has less power over how we feel. Unfortunately there is a common trend these days that taking offense at any and everything is good and justified and leads to change (that is, changing the behavior of others). What is often lost is how we can change our own reactions, and thereby lessen our own suffering.
And just to be clear, I'm not saying that one shouldn't express to another how their words were hurtful or annoying, just that it should be balanced with working on oneself. Which leads me to...
Two, everything people say and do and think is ultimately about themselves - their own version of things - and not necessarily about the Thing Itself, and certainly not about how the Thing exists within your world. We see the world not as it is, but as we are. That is, we all live in our own microcosm. Clearly we share the same world and our microcosms interact, but ultimately no one truly knows the world as it is - just as they (we) experience it.
So if I say, "gnomes suck," all I'm really saying is that I don't like gnomes - they suck within my own microcosm, but not in yours (Btw, I like gnomes
). It is erroneous for me to think otherwise, just as it is erroneous for you to think that them sucking in my tiny universe has any bearing on their status in yours. Nothing objectively sucks, as "suckitude" is a subjective value judgement. But it is also erroneous for you to argue with me that gnomes don't suck in my own world.This also doesn't mean that value judgements are worthless. In any context, there are degrees of quality. I'm into fountain pens, and I can say with a good degree of confidence that certain pens "suck" more than others. But I don't really think of it that way; rather, I turn it around and say that A) there are degrees of quality in terms of craftsmanship, and B) I have personal preferences that adjust A accordingly.
The cheapest, throw-away fountain pen doesn't "suck," but it also doesn't mean that it is of equal quality to a $200 pen, or that everything is the same, and it is all a matter of opinion. A vintage Pelikan is a beautiful thing, and should be honored as such. It is absurd to say that preferring a vintage Pelikan over a $2 throwaway is just a subjective opinion, which essentially negates any kind of discernment or sense of quality. But if you love your $2 pen, it is also silly of me to say, "You're wrong in liking that pen because it sucks."
Or we could look at ice cream. All ice cream, even the cheapest of grocery store brands, is pretty good. I mean, I'd eat it and probably enjoy it. But that doesn't mean that premium brand ice creams like Ben & Jerry's or homemade gelato aren't "better."
But if you prefer Haagen-Dazs and I say, "Haagen-Dazs sucks," it shouldn't be taken too seriously, nor should it be taken as a threat to your enjoyment of Haagen-Daz. Clearly Haagen-Dazs doesn't "suck" - even if I prefer B&J - and to say it does is probably just hyperbole on my part. But even if I did think it actually sucks, that's OK - I'm allowed to (and maybe it does "suck" in my own world).
So I think it is worth remembering that not only is there "no accounting for taste," but people speak certain ways that aren't necessarily literal equations of how they feel. Some people are just really opinionated, or like to express themselves in an overly passionate manner; for example, "Gnomes suck" rather than "I'm not really into gnomes - they don't fit within my personal aesthetic for fantasy gaming".
Scribe
Legend
To express as much has had many a debate kicked off. The irony is thick.
Ralif Redhammer
Legend
I would further add that there's a line between stating my own preference as a preference, and stating my own preference as a fact. It's one thing to say "I don't like artificers in my games" and another to say "artificers are a terrible class and don't belong in D&D."
People in any scene are too often inordinately obsessed with what is "true" and what is "not true." I'm reminded of some truly dumb arguments as a teenager over what was goth and what wasn't goth, argued with the blind certainty of youth.
People in any scene are too often inordinately obsessed with what is "true" and what is "not true." I'm reminded of some truly dumb arguments as a teenager over what was goth and what wasn't goth, argued with the blind certainty of youth.
Similar Threads
