So what is edition bashing anyway?

[wrightdjohn]

My observation is that heavy moderation just leads to smacking with the velvet glove. I don't see the hand of moderation being that heavy here to be honest. I think WOTC boards though are a bit strict.

I think one thing that happens is someone unintentionally does the first slap. Then others who get triggered try to slap back. The first person due to their focus or viewpoint didn't even realize they were slapping. This is part of the perception bias. But once a thread gets rolling, it can become a slapfest. Usually the guy that gets caught is the guy that finally totally full of anger crosses the line and forgets to slap and punches instead. It's kind of like the nfl. The guy that punches first is rarely caught. It is the guy that punches back.

Anyway. Other than what you are doing I don't know what else is possible. Negativity wouldn't bother me other than having to skip over a lot of silly posts with no useful information. So in that regard it is good to limit it where possible.

 

[Libramarian]

I think my thread here serves as a good example of something that goes just over the line:
http://www.enworld.org/forum/new-ho...ovisational-combat-pg-42-not-good-enough.html

I thought it was basically a pretty reasonable, non-bashy analysis. But it was a bit too strongly worded.

(part of the issue is I didn't make the connection to 5e explicit enough, but if that were the only issue it presumably would have been moved to a different forum rather than locked).

 

[Tony Vargas]

I'm a little curious. Since it seems that anything critical of 4e is "edition bashing" and anything critical of previous editions is just fine no matter the tone.

That's "confirmation bias." If you dislike 4e, you'll tend to see criticism of it as valid, and refutations of those criticisms as merely labeling the criticism "edition bashing." Similarly, if you like previous editions, you'll see criticism of them as "bashing" that they 'get away with.'

The reverse, of course, applies.

That's on the emotional level. More objectively, there are criticisms that can be backed up with valid examples, lucid reasoning, fair arguments, qualitative and quantitative analysis, and even formal logical proof - and there are those that can't be backed up at all, or even are in obvious factual error.

So is there some clear rule or is just a knee jerk defense of the current edition because its the current one and we can expect the script to completely flip as soon as 5e comes out?

From my observation of the on-line communities at the release of 3.0, 3.5, 4e and Essentials, there is a very strong tendency for a new ed to get "bashed."

Let me say that I'm a "nerd," and I don't mind saying this is a very nerdy hobby, and we nerds put an inordinate investment in our hobbies. When you've spent years mastering a game, and it gets invalidated by a new edition, it's natural to be less than pleased about that. They've just taken something away from you in a sense. You were a master of the game, now you're a beginner again. That can be annoying for some personality types. It can be downright devastating.

I'm sure there's also an 'early adopter' set out there who just automatically wax enthusiastic about the latest thing every time, but I don't think our hobby attracts it so much. At least, not the sub-set that's attracted to D&D in the first place. D&D is the first RPG, and in the past, has changed slowly. It naturally attracts gamers who prefer a stable system with some history and sense of permanency, even if that means putting up with (and even growing attached to) obvious flaws.

So, yes, we tend to be hard on new editions until they prove themselves and become familiar. Generally they reach that point in 5 or 10 years - just in time for another new edition to come in and freak us out again.

 

[Salamandyr]

I think the term "edition bashing" is often used as a club to attempt to silence disagreeable opinions as often as its wielded as a valid criticism. This isn't intended as a comment on moderation, which in general seems to be light handed, which I appreciate. Rather, it's directed at the posts that go something like this.

Poster 1: I don't like 4e. It just feels too much like a video game.
Poster 2: You can't say that! That's edition bashing! 4e isn't like a video game at all.

Obviously, that's a rather tendentious description of how the conversations usually go, but it's within hand grenade range. This is a game, and with few exceptions, discussions surrounding them are going to involve subjective judgements. I think, since it's implicit in the discussion, a poster can be for not appending "in my opinion" to every post criticizing an edition he doesn't favor.

Just keep it civil, and recognize that your tastes are exactly that...yours.

 

[amerigoV]

This should answer your question

Dungeon Bastard - Edition Wars - YouTube


Oh, and your prom date was uuuuugly...