Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Art and the Artist: Discussing Problematic Issues in D&D
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 8526528" data-attributes="member: 18"><p>This seems like a pretty spurious point, because that's exactly what people typically do, in reality, u<em>nless the specific goal of an investigation differs from that</em>.</p><p></p><p>I mean, seem to be attempting to covertly criticise, for example, the breakdown of two specific kinds of racism in GAZ10 that we saw a few weeks back. But that was a specific investigation with a specific goal. As noted at length in the thread, the author didn't even hit all the racism in GAZ10, because that wasn't the specific goal.</p><p></p><p>And if you're criticizing people for investigating products with specific goals, I'd say that's pretty silly, because equally plenty of other investigations have specific goals, like working out how to convert an adventure to 5E or whatever. If someone wants to pull out all the issues a product has, rather than consider it in the round, that's absolutely valid. That's a specific investigation. Equally, If someone wants to, say, just consider a specific class from a specific book, that's absolutely valid. The rational implication of your complaint is that it is not, that we must always consider things "in the round", no matter how wasteful that is.</p><p></p><p>To put it bluntly, taking this away from racism or the like, you're saying "You're not allowed to just say things I think are bad things, you should be forced to say things I think are nice things too!", and your justification for this demand appears to be "WELL I ENJOYED IT!!", which, okay... maybe you did... but that's not rational. That's like telling me I can't just burn Eternals for being a truly terrible movie because you liked it (apologies for implying you liked Eternals, it's just an example!).</p><p></p><p>And you're wrong to say we always have to do that. It's perfectly valid for me to just go through a product and point out things that are wrong. It's also valid to go through a product and consider all elements of it. For example, with Taladas, which I often talk about, I think that if you consider it in the round, it's broadly progressive, but it's also totally valid for someone to pick out a part of it and say "This anything but progressive" or "this is attempting to be progressive but is very misguided" or whatever.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 8526528, member: 18"] This seems like a pretty spurious point, because that's exactly what people typically do, in reality, u[I]nless the specific goal of an investigation differs from that[/I]. I mean, seem to be attempting to covertly criticise, for example, the breakdown of two specific kinds of racism in GAZ10 that we saw a few weeks back. But that was a specific investigation with a specific goal. As noted at length in the thread, the author didn't even hit all the racism in GAZ10, because that wasn't the specific goal. And if you're criticizing people for investigating products with specific goals, I'd say that's pretty silly, because equally plenty of other investigations have specific goals, like working out how to convert an adventure to 5E or whatever. If someone wants to pull out all the issues a product has, rather than consider it in the round, that's absolutely valid. That's a specific investigation. Equally, If someone wants to, say, just consider a specific class from a specific book, that's absolutely valid. The rational implication of your complaint is that it is not, that we must always consider things "in the round", no matter how wasteful that is. To put it bluntly, taking this away from racism or the like, you're saying "You're not allowed to just say things I think are bad things, you should be forced to say things I think are nice things too!", and your justification for this demand appears to be "WELL I ENJOYED IT!!", which, okay... maybe you did... but that's not rational. That's like telling me I can't just burn Eternals for being a truly terrible movie because you liked it (apologies for implying you liked Eternals, it's just an example!). And you're wrong to say we always have to do that. It's perfectly valid for me to just go through a product and point out things that are wrong. It's also valid to go through a product and consider all elements of it. For example, with Taladas, which I often talk about, I think that if you consider it in the round, it's broadly progressive, but it's also totally valid for someone to pick out a part of it and say "This anything but progressive" or "this is attempting to be progressive but is very misguided" or whatever. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Art and the Artist: Discussing Problematic Issues in D&D
Top