Review of 4E on Aint It Cool News

[Psion]

Is that really bias, though?

It's sure an indication of probability of bias, yes.

Would it be less biased if his suggestions were not incorporated into the final rules?

Heh... well, I guess it might be negative bias if had some emotional commitment to his comments and they weren't taken seriously. But then, playtest comments get passed by all the time. I'd consider a sense of "ownership" over the ruleset that comes from being associated with its creation to be the more likely indication of bias.

Really, we need to know what people consider the line between biased and unbiased before we start tossing that word around here.

I'm using definition 2 here: a particular tendency or inclination, esp. one that prevents unprejudiced consideration of a question; prejudice, syn predisposition. It's not an indictment of his character, just a consideration of a pre-existing condition that could influence his thinking.

 

[Vigilance]

In most cases, I agree with Psion.

Playtesters of a book usually have a personal relationship with the folks doing said book.

My playtesters for example, are my home gaming group, friends of mine for years. It wouldn't be appropriate for them to review books I've done, imo.

This review is a little more fuzzy. Yes, the reviewer got to be on the "inside" but my guess is that he gets early previews a lot and won't as bowled over as someone else might be.

Also, he doesn't really have any kind of PERSONAL relationship with the folks who did the game.

To me, this is the biggie. If he was Mike Mearls' childhood friend, then his review really WOULD be biased, but this doesn't seem to be the case.

 

[Massawyrm]

Because they like something, no. Otherwise, no "unbiased" review would offer anything but a middle of the road score.

Now, the fact that the reviewer in question playtested the review and further later versions of playtest rules incorporate his playtest recommendations would be an indication of bias.

The problem here is that by rewording the original statement, you create the environment for bias where none exists. The phrase paraphrased here was: There were a number of comments made from our games that found themselves in later playtest copies and were eventually addressed.

The various playtest editions were riddled with inserted comments asking questions of the designers so they could find solutions. Our big coup, if you will, was getting stealth reworded as the way it read, it allowed PCs to use other PCs to stealth behind. This created a scenario we dubbed "The Halfling Rogue in a backpack" in which the fighter wore the rogue behind him, who would be stealthed, sneak attack then stealth again. Knowing this wasn't as intended we queried and saw the language changed next edition.

But what it all comes down to, after 6 pages of comments, is a string of ad hominem's. "How can we trust this reviewer?" Don't. I'm not a professional game reviewer. I'm just some dude who loves D&D. I played fourth, and I loved it. There's my bias - when I sat down to play, I tried to have fun. Not dissect the system so I could tell the world how I would have done it. Not to explain in scientific fashion on a scale of one to eleven how I felt about each individual mechanic. Every Saturday for four months straight me and six friends sat down to play Dungeons and Dragons and each time we did it made me look forward to the next Saturday.

That's my bias. I don't write game reviews for a living. Hell, that was part of my pitch to WotC. The first review out of the gate was going to be by a player, not an industry type. Not someone with an agenda. Just someone who really, truly, enjoyed the game and went 7000 words out of his way to share his enthusiasm with a bunch of fellow players. If that bothers you, please, by all means. Ignore me. Really, I won't be offended.

 

[Psion]

But what it all comes down to, after 6 pages of comments, is a string of ad hominem's. "How can we trust this reviewer?" Don't. I'm not a professional game reviewer. I'm just some dude who loves D&D.

There are precious few "professional" reviewers in RPGs. I personally can only claim to be paid for a handful of reviews, and certainly wouldn't suggest that is any sort of reason you should trust me. Most game reviewers are just folks who love to game.

In fact, I'm not suggesting people not trust you merely because you were a playtester. But I do think they should bear it in mind when reading your review.

 

[Wisdom Penalty]

FTW

Well said.

Wis