
![]() |

How I stopped worrying and learned to love the monk thread failed, I thought I would take a more specific swing at the line between discussion and trolling in a "Rule" and "Comparison" conversation.
I think there are two kinds of people in these discussions. People who are trying to have a serious conversation, and people who want to "win" on the internet because they weren't hugged enough as a child and are trolling for attention.
Here are the top five things off the top of my head to show what side of the line people are on, as I see it. Feel free to add your own.
1. If you can't post a build, you aren't serious.
Often, particularly when discussing casters, examples of things you could do are given without the context. Yes, you may be fortunate to have all of the perfect feats and spells for that moment to make you ideal. But you can't always have ALL of the spells and feats at all times. If you won't post at least the outline of a build to back up your claim, showing what other spells and feats you didn't take and had to compromise, therefore opening yourself up to weaknesses in other areas, you aren't here to have a serious discussion.
2. If you change the subject to some other fight, or try to find a technicality that may make you right in some obscure context when someone clearly shows you were wrong, you aren't serious.
Everyone is wrong sometimes. There are tons and tons of rules that come into play, and we don't all know every one of them. Sometimes you miss a small line that means your super-overpowered thing is actually not that great when you play it right. Or sometimes you find out that what you thought was kind of a lame power is really useful in some situations. When you are wrong, acknowledge it and thank the person for showing you something you didn't know. It isn't a bad thing. I mean if you are serious, you are here to learn.
3. If you play "gotcha" with the rules, you aren't serious.
If someone is wrong about the rules, just post the rule. Don't tell them they are an idiot, or that they fell into your trap. Just post the rule. If you don't post the rule, or post it saying something insulting, you aren't serious.
4. If you won't acknowledge that sometimes you can buff and sometimes you can't, and that sometimes you don't have all the skill points you need to have all of the abilities or knowledges at all times, you aren't being serious.
Again, mainly with casters, people who want to win will tell you then have all of their spells memorized and all of their buffs on at all times, regardless of duration. They never get surprised, they never are asleep without armor on. They never fail a knowledge roll to find out the resistances and weaknesses, they never have to make saves when they aren't optimized...if you assume optimal outcomes at all times, you aren't being serious.
5. If you are looking for loopholes, you aren't serious.
When your intention is to "game" the game, you aren't serious. If you want to point out a flaw that may be exploited, as a way of encouraging the powers that be to correct the flaw, that is one thing. If you are arguing, say, that because it doesn't specifically say you can't take an epic level feat without a pre-requisite on that page, then clearly you can because of the typo, you aren't being serious.
And if you aren't being serious, you aren't here to add or contribute to the messageboard in my opinion. And while I feel sorry for you at that point, as it probably signifies some other personal social issues for you in the real world, on a more selfish level I wish you would stop posting on here like a four year old and go away so the adults can have a grown up conversation.
Thoughts?

Evil Lincoln |

I agree with these points. I feel the need to add that sometimes subjective experience is enough for certain topics (90% of GM advice threads), and in those topics I don't appreciate when people interject with this level of ruleswonking.
So one of the rules of "serious" rules discussion is make sure you're in a serious rules discussion first before you go caterwauling about how much superior your grasp of the game is.
That's not directed at you Ciretose. In the proper context, I think these guidelines are quite enlightened (and therefore destined to be ignored by the offending parties).

![]() |

I agree with these points. I feel the need to add that sometimes subjective experience is enough for certain topics, and in those topics I don't appreciate when people interject with this level of ruleswonking.
So one of the rules of "serious" rules discussion is make sure you're in a serious rules discussion first before you go caterwauling about how much superior your grasp of the game is.
That's not directed at you Ciretose. In the proper context, I think these guidelines are quite enlightened (and therefore destined to be ignored by the offending parties).
Oh I would call myself out for doing some of these things when I've been troll hunting. But it would also be fair to say when I was troll hunting I wasn't being serious.
I wish we could have an honest discussion of balance and rules on here at times, as I find the game is so complex that you don't really know the capabilities of any class unless you've played it for 10 or 15 levels (and even then, you can always learn)
There is a lot of collective knowledge to be shared, and I feel like it gets crushed under the weight of people who "want to be right".
And while the offending parties will ignore them, maybe having more agreed on guidelines can help us flag better when people go off course.

The Crimson Jester, Rogue Lord |

I honestly don't think that the problem with any discussion on the boards has anything to do with not being serious enough or not providing enough support for a given argument. It has to do with being respectful to other posters and trying to have a conversation rather than winning a fight.
I agree. I also think that there is in fact other types here as well. Those who are sick and tired of the attitudes that have been let loose. As such they post very infrequently because of these "I must win" thread duels.
As well as lurkers who just have hit the apathy level and no longer care.

JMD031 |

I honestly don't think that the problem with any discussion on the boards has anything to do with not being serious enough or not providing enough support for a given argument. It has to do with being respectful to other posters and trying to have a conversation rather than winning a fight.
Funny you mention this as I was going to start a thread called "How to politely argue on the internet".

![]() |

KnightErrantJR wrote:I honestly don't think that the problem with any discussion on the boards has anything to do with not being serious enough or not providing enough support for a given argument. It has to do with being respectful to other posters and trying to have a conversation rather than winning a fight.I agree. I also think that there is in fact other types here as well. Those who are sick and tired of the attitudes that have been let loose. As such they post very infrequently because of these "I must win" thread duels.
As well as lurkers who just have hit the apathy level and no longer care.
It is not the quantity but the quality of the support that is the issue for me. The "This is obvious, and you are stupid" seems to be the default, which becomes "I must defend my position, regardless of it's relationship to the real world!" and then we can't actually discuss the issue raised.
The monk wizard discussion was the example that was in my head as I discussed this. At no point did anyone create a wizard to use in the discussion. There are monk builds in the Game Mastery guide which could be used as default for comparison, and by posting a wizard or two and discussing, we could have compared and contrasted.
Instead it became "You are dumb, here is an isolated rule out of context to show I am right!"
I would actually like to see an honest discussion of that issue. Even more important to the game would be the playtest threads where so few people playtest, let alone actually build characters to see how it actually looks when rolled up.

Mistah Green |
Something about Aubrey again comes to mind. Also, if you go back and see what posts were removed you'll notice most of them were sock puppet trolls, and few if any of my posts were removed. So before you displace the actions of others onto me, look again.
Although the word Monk was in the topic title of that thread, it really had nothing to do with Wizards vs Monks at all. Both Wizards and Monks were discussed individually, but they were not the target subject matter. Why? Because it's impossible to have a serious discussion of that nature. It's like asking which is bigger - an elephant, or a mouse? The right answer is very obvious. Yet unlike the size relationship between an elephant and a mouse, the subject is still hashed out repeatedly anyways on all boards. On the competent boards, it quickly turns into a comparison between the Wizard and the Monk's cohort Wizard. Which isn't clear cut at level 19 or 20, as both will have 9th level spells. And even at lower levels, being one spell behind while significant is not completely insurmountable. You'll note though, that the actual Monk isn't even a consideration other than as a vehicle for Leadership.
The problem comes when the same line of discussion takes place on forums that are... how to say... unskilled. In such forums you'll see all kinds of ridiculous claims be made by the Monk side, which usually have no basis in the actual rules at all, or that would quickly be shut down by what the Wizard is doing as a matter of course. Examples include using abilities that put you several hundred feet in the air without flight and then stop you from taking further actions that turn and not say... grabbing the Wizard, who is FoMed anyways. They also include noticing the Wizard in such a scenario in the first place, despite the fact the DC is 92 due to distance, so what actually happens is the Wizard flies on by, not noticing the Monk who in turn doesn't notice him. The Wizard goes on to have his big boy adventures like the level 13 he is in that example, while the Monk... hides somewhere?
You will also find, if you read such threads a pattern quickly develops. The Monk's sole purpose in life is to kill this singular Wizard. Every aspect of his build is aimed towards doing so, at the expense of all else. The Wizard meanwhile is by no means specialized. He might not even be aware of the Monk, so when he goes on some spiel about how he trained his whole life just to defeat [Wizard name] the Wizard shrugs, says "O rly?" and then blows him away anyways before he can respond. Why? Because you only need to specialize to deal with threats when those threats are serious. Otherwise, the stuff you do anyways will work just fine. He could seriously go through that fight without even being aware he was fighting a Monk. Now if a Cleric, or Druid had a problem with him, and started training specifically to defeat him? Most optimal spell to use is (Greater) Teleport, because that's some scary stuff. But a Monk? Don't make me laugh.
And this is why the post a build stuff is a farce, as posting a Wizard build will inevitably result in someone making a build to specifically counter it and, once all the blatant rules errors are corrected and they stop pretending the hyper intelligent Wizard is a mouth breathing idiot they lose anyways by a landslide. It will also result in several people whining about how 'cheesy' the RAW Wizard is because he actually has a decent primary stat and how they wouldn't allow it in their games which are completely irrelevant to the discussion and it will also result in even more people talking about how they'd house rule on nerfs to win spells and other such smokescreens.
One need only Google the topic to find many such examples that proceed in exactly this predictable manner. It's old news to everyone but you.

wraithstrike |

How I stopped worrying and learned to love the monk thread failed, I thought I would take a more specific swing at the line between discussion and trolling in a "Rule" and "Comparison" conversation.
I think there are two kinds of people in these discussions. People who are trying to have a serious conversation, and people who want to "win" on the internet because they weren't hugged enough as a child and are trolling for attention.
Here are the top five things off the top of my head to show what side of the line people are on, as I see it. Feel free to add your own.
1. If you can't post a build, you aren't serious.
Often, particularly when discussing casters, examples of things you could do are given without the context. Yes, you may be fortunate to have all of the perfect feats and spells for that moment to make you ideal. But you can't always have ALL of the spells and feats at all times. If you won't post at least the outline of a build to back up your claim, showing what other spells and feats you didn't take and had to compromise, therefore opening yourself up to weaknesses in other areas, you aren't here to have a serious discussion.
2. If you change the subject to some other fight, or try to find a technicality that may make you right in some obscure context when someone clearly shows you were wrong, you aren't serious.
Everyone is wrong sometimes. There are tons and tons of rules that come into play, and we don't all know every one of them. Sometimes you miss a small line that means your super-overpowered thing is actually not that great when you play it right. Or sometimes you find out that what you thought was kind of a lame power is really useful in some situations. When you are wrong, acknowledge it and thank the person for showing you something you didn't know. It isn't a bad thing. I mean if you are serious, you are here to learn.
3. If you play "gotcha" with the rules, you aren't serious.
If someone is wrong about the rules, just post the rule. Don't tell them they are an...
I think keeping personal bias and opinions of how things should be(or how you want them to be) separate from what the rules really are is important. I understood everyone has a preferred way to play, but that has nothing to do with the rules. I was guilty of that for a long time, so I try to understand when people start mixing the two, but it still annoys me.

![]() |

Something about Aubrey again comes to mind. Also, if you go back and see what posts were removed you'll notice most of them were sock puppet trolls, and few if any of my posts were removed. So before you displace the actions of others onto me, look again.
Although the word Monk was in the topic title of that thread, it really had nothing to do with Wizards vs Monks at all. Both Wizards and Monks were discussed individually, but they were not the target subject matter. Why? Because it's impossible to have a serious discussion of that nature. It's like asking which is bigger - an elephant, or a mouse? The right answer is very obvious. Yet unlike the size relationship between an elephant and a mouse, the subject is still hashed out repeatedly anyways on all boards. On the competent boards, it quickly turns into a comparison between the Wizard and the Monk's cohort Wizard. Which isn't clear cut at level 19 or 20, as both will have 9th level spells. And even at lower levels, being one spell behind while significant is not completely insurmountable. You'll note though, that the actual Monk isn't even a consideration other than as a vehicle for Leadership.
The problem comes when the same line of discussion takes place on forums that are... how to say... unskilled. In such forums you'll see all kinds of ridiculous claims be made by the Monk side, which usually have no basis in the actual rules at all, or that would quickly be shut down by what the Wizard is doing as a matter of course. Examples include using abilities that put you several hundred feet in the air without flight and then stop you from taking further actions that turn and not say... grabbing the Wizard, who is FoMed anyways. They also include noticing the Wizard in such a scenario in the first place, despite the fact the DC is 92 due to distance, so what actually happens is the Wizard flies on by, not noticing the Monk who in turn doesn't notice him. The Wizard goes on to have his big boy adventures like the level 13 he is in that...
Thank you for reminding me of a 6th example.
6. If you post that the idea that you could be wrong is ludicrous and obvious to anyone right minded, you aren't being serious.
For example
"Because it's impossible to have a serious discussion of that nature. It's like asking which is bigger - an elephant, or a mouse? The right answer is very obvious."
I want to believe that one day you will actually post a build. I really do. But I don't think you want to actually find out answers to questions as much as try to "win" threads.
But, as Principal Skinner said, "prove me wrong kids, prove me wrong."

Evil Lincoln |

The problem comes when the same line of discussion takes place on forums that are... how to say... unskilled.
You're an arrogant prick.
Go ahead and flag me, I'm sick of it.
I could even deal with the random assertions that "competent" people would all come to an identical conclusion, if it weren't for the fact that since you started posting here, everyone has felt oppressed.
I hope you enjoy ruining an enjoyable pastime for other people by inflating your own ego. Then at least one person is getting something out of it.
This post will be deleted, but damn if it didn't feel good to say it. Out loud.
I'm taking a self-imposed 24 hour time out.

![]() |

Mistah Green wrote:
The problem comes when the same line of discussion takes place on forums that are... how to say... unskilled.You're an arrogant prick.
Go ahead and flag me, I'm sick of it.
I could even deal with the random assertions that "competent" people would all come to an identical conclusion, if it weren't for the fact that since you started posting here, everyone has felt oppressed.
I hope you enjoy ruining an enjoyable pastime for other people by inflating your own ego. Then at least one person is getting something out of it.
This post will be deleted, but damn if it didn't feel good to say it. Out loud.
I'm taking a self-imposed 24 hour time out.
I know this will be removed, and appropriately because it is outside of guidelines. But I think it illustrates the frustration of a lot of us, and was the reason why I made this post.
A few people, one in particular, have made the message boards hostile and oppositional, rather than welcoming and intellectual. Bad posters are chasing off good posters.
Hopefully this can be addressed.

wraithstrike |

I honestly don't think that the problem with any discussion on the boards has anything to do with not being serious enough or not providing enough support for a given argument. It has to do with being respectful to other posters and trying to have a conversation rather than winning a fight.
I agree with this, but there are a lot of issues here.
I also think that some of the people that are rude do have a lot of knowledge. The issue is the way they come across.I think they should take a break from the boards if someone says something that they find to be silly, but sometimes it is hard to walk away to cool down.
People also take offense to being told they are "doing it wrong" as the saying goes. Sometimes it is a matter of playstyle, but you can "do it wrong" depending on the situation.. I think you have to be tactful so the person you are correcting does not get defensive. People hate to admit they are wrong, and it does not get easier if they feel like they are being made to look silly.
Instead of saying your build is made of weak sauce, fail, or some other insulting term telling them what you believe is wrong and why it is more constructive. If they don't listen it is their loss. If they choose to spread their belief as the truth then it is debate time(just be nice).
If someone ask for a Sword and Board build as an example, politely pointing out another option is not rude IMHO, but if they insist on S&B then accept the fact that they want to use S&B and either help them or move on.

![]() |

If someone ask for a Sword and Board build as an example, politely pointing out another option is not rude IMHO, but if they insist on S&B then accept the fact that they want to use S&B and either help them or move on.
I agree, and I think that giving them options is helpful if you actually give rule based suggestions.
We all slip sometimes, but the intention of your post should be to discuss the topic, not prove you are right.
If there is a "Right" you can point to a specific rule or create a specific build and demonstrate it as a factual thing. Like if I said "Monks can't craft items" and someone pointed to the revised crafting rules which show they actually can, I would then be wrong.
If you can't create a build or show a black and white rule, then it is opinion, and you need to understand that opinions are like anuses. Everyone has one, and occasional they are full of...stuff.
You can give your opinion, but without facts in context your opinion is just that. So you have to agree to disagree.

Mistah Green |
KnightErrantJR wrote:I honestly don't think that the problem with any discussion on the boards has anything to do with not being serious enough or not providing enough support for a given argument. It has to do with being respectful to other posters and trying to have a conversation rather than winning a fight.I agree with this, but there are a lot of issues here.
I also think that some of the people that are rude do have a lot of knowledge. The issue is the way they come across.
I think they should take a break from the boards if someone says something that they find to be silly, but sometimes it is hard to walk away to cool down.
People also take offense to being told they are "doing it wrong" as the saying goes. Sometimes it is a matter of playstyle, but you can "do it wrong" depending on the situation.. I think you have to be tactful so the person you are correcting does not get defensive. People hate to admit they are wrong, and it does not get easier if they feel like they are being made to look silly.
You mean like using the word unskilled, which is relatively neutral? Oh wait, that didn't work at all.
Instead of saying your build is made of weak sauce, fail, or some other insulting term telling them what you believe is wrong and why it is more constructive. If they don't listen it is their loss. If they choose to spread their belief as the truth then it is debate time(just be nice).
Also tried, and didn't work.
If someone ask for a Sword and Board build as an example, politely pointing out another option is not rude IMHO, but if they insist on S&B then accept the fact that they want to use S&B and either help them or move on.
You know what I'm going to say here, right?

JMD031 |

I do not believe there truly is a "wrong" way to play this game. There is an optimal way, a fun way, a challenging way, a silly way and perhaps even a bad way to play, but not a "wrong" way. People may disagree with me because of number crunching and weighing this classes special abilities over this other class but I often say the this game is a team game not a one on one game. The only thing that I can agree with certain people who claim to know how to play this game better than everybody else is that some situations may call for a single person to take out everything because the party has found themselves in dire need. However, it is my belief that a good game will have those kinds of situations for all the characters and they will not happen very often.

![]() |

Hopefully this can be addressed.
Except it won't, because the guy who the community is tired of hearing from isn't taking the hint, and the rest of us can't say anything like, "You're an annoying asshat, go away" without violating messageboard etiquette and getting our posts removed.
The only people who could do anything about it - the mods - are apparently more in favor of passive aggressive condescension than they are in favor of fans of their game talking about their game.
After I make this post, I'm going to minimize everything but the pbp forums. I won't cause any more problems, honest.

![]() |

ciretose wrote:
Hopefully this can be addressed.
Except it won't, because the guy who the community is tired of hearing from isn't taking the hint, and the rest of us can't say anything like, "You're an annoying asshat, go away" without violating messageboard etiquette and getting our posts removed.
The only people who could do anything about it - the mods - are apparently more in favor of passive aggressive condescension than they are in favor of fans of their game talking about their game.
After I make this post, I'm going to minimize everything but the pbp forums. I won't cause any more problems, honest.
I for one am glad you and Evil Lincoln posted. It has gotten to a point where I think many of us feel it needs to be addressed.
To quote the movie.
"What we've got here is... failure to communicate. Some men you just can't reach. So you get what we had here last week, which is the way he wants it..."