Allegations of toxic community - A discussion


Pathfinder Second Edition General Discussion

51 to 100 of 124 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Betamax FTW.

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Article: The Dungeons & Dragons vs. Pathfinder Discourse Is Heating Up Again


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Leon Aquilla wrote:

If you don't want feedback, I wouldn't solicit advice or talk about how much your favorite system doesn't do (x) online.

I see the following scenario play out constantly on reddit:

Rando: Hey guys, my group plays 5e and I really want to do something sci-fi in space. How would you go about adapting the 5e ruleset to that kind of genre?

Me: Well, it wasn't really designed for that. Have you considered Starfinder? Or if that's too much of a jump for you, there's also Esper Genesis for 5e, but it has less material. All the rules for Starfinder are online to get started, and there's Foundry support.

Rando: My players don't really want to learn a new system but thanks, I'll just keep working on this homebrew solution

Me: Okay, well it sounds like you're not really open to suggestions but just trying to get validation for your choices. So good luck I guess.

There is a difference between "not open to suggestions" and "I don't want frame challenges". In the example you provided, they stated exactly what it was that they wanted advice on - how to homebrew 5e. Now, it's not unreasonable to respond to this with suggestions to try other rpgs that might work better, but it's also not like them saying "I asked for the thing that I wanted. This is not what I asked for." in response is evidence of bad faith on their part.

Like, yeah, a lot of people *don't* want frame challenges when they ask questions. They want suggestions and answers based on the questions they asked. That's not a dysfunction on their part.

Grand Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think the whole thing could be solved by individuals not commenting with something that was not asked for. And if that results in a lack of any comment, that is okay.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Sanityfaerie wrote:
Like, yeah, a lot of people *don't* want frame challenges when they ask questions. They want suggestions and answers based on the questions they asked. That's not a dysfunction on their part.

Yeah. The D&D Subreddit for instance is full of people telling other people that they shouldn't play D&D, which just isn't an interesting conversation to have if you're trying to talk about D&D.

Though at the same time, it doesn't really justify using a megaphone to punch down and belittle people either.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If the warning about unsollicited comments is clear beforehand, those who do willfully ignore it are not answering in good faith anymore.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:
If people publish something on internet, why should other people not react to it in good faith ?

I'm gathering that it's people reacting with unsolicited responses, at least initially.

"I like D&D 5e," or "I really wish 5e had X."
"Y'know, PF2e is actually better than 5e in most ways," or "PF2e addresses X and would solve the problem."

Then compound that with these responses being made in either good or bad faith, and one bad apple spoiling the bunch.
In one person's case, frequent people pitching PF at every opportunity.

I do feel that if you post/offer something in a public forum, then you open people to react however they want, which - even in good faith - might not be the response you were hoping for.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

If your on a mass media platform and choose you allow comments because you think it's good for your brand. Then if the comments aren't hate speech or insults I have limited sympathy.

A lot of female content providers have to deal with really nasty stuff being told that you might want to try pathfinder 2e which fixes the problem your talking about in your piece in my mind counts as fair comment.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:
I think the whole thing could be solved by individuals not commenting with something that was not asked for.

Regrettably, I submit This from 2004.

Grand Archive

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm saying that it is for the best in any interaction with another person, assume that comments are not welcome that are not specifically solicited.

I.e. (in context) Did someone specifically ask for a recommendation on an alternate trpg system? Then don't bring up a different one. Did someone ask for a recommendation on a trpg system? Then don't suggest one.

It is really that simple.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
siegfriedliner wrote:
... being told that you might want to try pathfinder 2e which fixes the problem your talking about in your piece in my mind counts as fair comment.

I agree... depending on how it's presented.

"Y'know, X Game handles Issue Y that you have a problem with."

is a lot more palatable than

"Get out of the dark ages already, put on your adult pants, and just start playing X Game. You can thank us later."

Try as you might, you can control how someone will respond.

Also in a celebrity's case (internet famous or otherwise), seeing "Try X Game" fifty to 500 times in a row would start to grate on anybody.

Liberty's Edge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:

I'm saying that it is for the best in any interaction with another person, assume that comments are not welcome that are not specifically solicited.

I.e. (in context) Did someone specifically ask for a recommendation on an alternate trpg system? Then don't bring up a different one. Did someone ask for a recommendation on a trpg system? Then don't suggest one.

It is really that simple.

Then we will only get comments the OP agrees with. Good for the ego I guess.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
SaveVersus wrote:
siegfriedliner wrote:
... being told that you might want to try pathfinder 2e which fixes the problem your talking about in your piece in my mind counts as fair comment.

I agree... depending on how it's presented.

"Y'know, X Game handles Issue Y that you have a problem with."

is a lot more palatable than

"Get out of the dark ages already, put on your adult pants, and just start playing X Game. You can thank us later."

Try as you might, you can control how someone will respond.

Also in a celebrity's case (internet famous or otherwise), seeing "Try X Game" fifty to 500 times in a row would start to grate on anybody.

There's definitely a difference between being asked, social media, and being a voice with a comment's section. I don't think I'd ever tell a content creator what to do unless they called out specifically for it and even then I'd have to feel real clever on a subject.

If I encounter a broad "I don't like X about 5E" social media post or it comes up in person, I might say "these systems do X that fixes/avoids that. You could try those or just steal them and add them to the game." The reaction ranges from "cool thanks" to "don't tell me what to do, you're not my real dad" depending on the person.

Grand Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:
Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:

I'm saying that it is for the best in any interaction with another person, assume that comments are not welcome that are not specifically solicited.

I.e. (in context) Did someone specifically ask for a recommendation on an alternate trpg system? Then don't bring up a different one. Did someone ask for a recommendation on a trpg system? Then don't suggest one.

It is really that simple.

Then we will only get comments the OP agrees with. Good for the ego I guess.

That is certainly a downside. However, it is not the responsibility of others to initiate a purging of ignorance of an individual.

Oragnejedi wrote:


If I encounter a broad "I don't like X about 5E" social media post or it comes up in person, I might say "these systems do X that fixes/avoids that. You could try those or just steal them and add them to the game." The reaction ranges from "cool thanks" to "don't tell me what to do, you're not my real dad" depending on the person.

I would posit that it is completely reasonable to just not comment. It is possible that the poster might follow up with a specific question "does any other system do X better?"

In addition "I don't like X about 5E" is not a question, it is a statement. As such it does not require or even solicit any response. Even more reason to not comment.


14 people marked this as a favorite.
Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:
In addition "I don't like X about 5E" is not a question, it is a statement. As such it does not require or even solicit any response. Even more reason to not comment.

If someone doesn't want replies or responses, maybe they shouldn't post on social media. Once you do, you invite people to comment/reply to you.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fumarole wrote:
Clearly we should all just play GURPS.

Funnily enough the very thing that's being discussed happened to me with GURPS. It was evangelized at me so hard and so often that it's completely killed any possible interest I have in picking up the system.

Well, that and the fact that one of the evangels kept bragging about how there were five books in GURPS dealing with grappling rules. I still have flashbacks of dealing with the flowchart; I don't need that madness in my life.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I don't comment on Dungeons & Dragons 5th Edition, because I have never played it. I assume it is a perfectly good game, because I liked earlier versions of D&D. As for Pathfinder 2nd Edition, I took part in the playtest where it felt like a work in progress, and I never shook off that impression. PF2 feels like it could use a little more polishing, and I am willing to houserule to add that polish.

I have a recruiting story about Pathfinder. I began my current campaign, the Ironfang Invasion adventure path converted to PF2 rules, in October 2019. The four players were my wife, our two housemates, and a teenage friend from church. The four in our household also play Elder Scrolls Online (Swamp Haven guild on the PC NA server). One housemate told stories about our Pathfinder game to her fellow ESO players in Discord. The ESO player called Story was especially interested. When we moved from meeting in person to playing via Roll20 due to the Covid-19 pandemic, we gained three more players: my two daughters who live in other states and Story. He plays a catfolk monk because he is a big fan of the catfolk Khajiit in the Elder Scrolls setting.

My younger daughter has another online game, run by her friends in Seattle, under Pathfinder 1st Edition rules. Story liked my Pathfinder 2nd Edition campaign so much that he also joined that other PF1 game. Now he can contrast the rules. He likes the power level of PF1, but also likes the teamwork in our PF2 game.

Thus, my player's PF2 storytelling led someone to PF1, too.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Perpdepog wrote:
Fumarole wrote:
Clearly we should all just play GURPS.
Funnily enough the very thing that's being discussed happened to me with GURPS.

I had a friend who couldn't stop gushing about GURPS, so I thought I'd give it a shot. We all made PCs for a game he was going to run and after I turned mine in, he looked it over and said, "I'm a little shocked. Out of everyone here, I thought YOU would understand the system better than anyone else and make a better character."

... I didn't bother showing up to the first game. :-D


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:

I'm saying that it is for the best in any interaction with another person, assume that comments are not welcome that are not specifically solicited.

I.e. (in context) Did someone specifically ask for a recommendation on an alternate trpg system? Then don't bring up a different one. Did someone ask for a recommendation on a trpg system? Then don't suggest one.

It is really that simple.

How is posting a YouTube video, or posting on a forum, not a request for comments?

Put the scope of the discussion in your forum rules, or in your blurb. Most people won't read it. However over time the community will get it and largely comply. Which should be enough. But the rando commenters that just drop in from time to time will never get it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:


Oragnejedi wrote:


If I encounter a broad "I don't like X about 5E" social media post or it comes up in person, I might say "these systems do X that fixes/avoids that. You could try those or just steal them and add them to the game." The reaction ranges from "cool thanks" to "don't tell me what to do, you're not my real dad" depending on the person.

I would posit that it is completely reasonable to just not comment. It is possible that the poster might follow up with a specific question "does any other system do X better?"

In addition "I don't like X about 5E" is not a question, it is a statement. As such it does not require or even solicit any response. Even more reason to not comment.

If someone at your table says "I don't have dice" is it unreasonable to offer them some?


8 people marked this as a favorite.
Leomund "Leo" Velinznrarikovich wrote:


In addition "I don't like X about 5E" is not a question, it is a statement. As such it does not require or even solicit any response. Even more reason to not comment.

I sort of disagree with this one. If you're broadcasting an opinion or statement or question over an open social media platform, you're almost by definition inviting responses.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

In my eyes there are three expectations for what makes a response ok.

- It needs to not be hate speech or in that vein.

- It needs to be phrased courteously, insofar as the thing its responding to was.

- It needs to be on-topic and in good faith.

Trying to control the discourse beyond that point is stepping into a kind of controlling territory, in my eyes, no one is really entitled to a platform in a public space where they aren't disagreed with. The speaker also shouldn't necessarily have control over the course of the discussion, all debate seeks the truth and it often moves beyond them or the answers they're emotionally invested in.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Oragnejedi42 wrote:
If someone at your table says "I don't have dice" is it unreasonable to offer them some?

I'd be more accurate to say something like, "I didn't bring any d12's for my great axe."

And then someone else say, "Here, roll these 2d6. It's better on average and 1d12 is too swingy anyway."


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

You never really *have to* be polite to people, just don't be shocked when they tell you to *expletive off* right back because they don't need your invitation or control to use their voice.


14 people marked this as a favorite.

If you're posting on a forum, social media, or anywhere with comments and open discussion, then you're inviting comments and discussion. If you don't want that, don't post in a place people can freely respond or turn off comments if you have control over the space. Otherwise, you're inviting discussion by anyone who frequents the location. As anyone who posts in a public space knows, that means the discussion can go anywhere and often does go off the rails as people respond to the original comment and the comments of others.

If you want to post to get agreeable feedback, well, the Internet is not the place for that. A private discussion with agreeable friends might be more what you're looking for.

That's how I've always seen it. Once you start commenting on the internet, you're in a free for all situation with only the moderation providing some parameters for the discussion.


10 people marked this as a favorite.

Maybe I'm weird but I don't make statements of opinion if I'm not willing to discuss them.

If I told.a friend I don't like mayo, I'm kinda expecting a conversation about condiments.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
SaveVersus wrote:
Oragnejedi42 wrote:
If someone at your table says "I don't have dice" is it unreasonable to offer them some?

I'd be more accurate to say something like, "I didn't bring any d12's for my great axe."

And then someone else say, "Here, roll these 2d6. It's better on average and 1d12 is too swingy anyway."

And in the event no one has a d12 that day, that's a serviceable workaround in a pinch. It's not about "my game is better" or fighting the edition wars. RPGs are collaborative in nature. It's a very cynical worldview that offering help when someone expresses a problem is bad.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

As long as it's relevant and without malice, responding to peoples thoughts and opinions in an open online forum is acceptable and expected. Some people might not like it and the courteous thing to do is keep answers to specific requested information but that's on a case by case basis. Most of the time, it's not a problem.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

I also don't put up statements online or in any public space if I'm not willing to have them discussed. That's not saying every statement I make is me looking for a conversation, but if one happens that isn't beyond my expectation.

Especially in a public forum or social media, I recognise that as soon as another person comes to the conversation I am no longer the focus of that conversation.

I also find it unhelpful to immediately jump to the worse possible interpretations. Someone asking about other condiments, or what I don't like about mayo isnt an interrogation. And if nobody asked those questions I'd have never discovered aioli and my life would be flatter for it.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

With the mayo thing, I think some context is important. Cause I'm seeing it as in a vacuum, someone simply posts "I don't like mayo". You're gonna get some responses about that. They wouldn't be unwarranted if that's the only thing you're saying. If on the other hand it was part of a sandwich recipe or something you were posting and you left out the mayo, the fact you don't like mayo is a lot less relevant to the original post and debate around that could get annoying.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Doesn't matter if its my friend group or a post on a food blog. I open my thoughts to anyone, those thoughts are now open to be talked about. If I don't want something talked about, I don't talk about it.

Also you are going to worst possible response again. There is a world of difference between being told I'm wrong for not liking mayo and someone suggesting I try Salad Cream.

Yup I can absolutely choose not to engage any further. Other people may continue the conversation in my absence. That's completely fine.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

Every post on a social media will generate answers. Among these answers, some will please you, some won't. There's no way you can limit the amount of unpleasant answers by not limiting the amount of pleasant one at the same time.
The question is how you deal with them.

And when an enthusiast encourages you to play something else... well, it's maybe not the best possible answer, it can be annoying and maybe the guy answers like a jerk, but is it really something you should call out?

There are some topics you just can't avoid. I mean, in these boards, you can start a conversation about whatever you want and end up with either "Wizard is bad", "Just play a Fighter" or "The game is too hard".

So, maybe Ginny Di had a rush of blood and answered emotionally. In that case, it's unprofessional. Chances are also high that her answer is perfectly calculated.

I also think she should try Pathfinder. I mean, she earns a living from playing D&D and she hasn't even tried the closest game to D&D. So, I actually think this is a good advice that has been given to her.

But first and foremost, I think she should learn to deal with "Play Pathfinder!". That's just part of her job.


6 people marked this as a favorite.

"I don't like what you said, thus you are harassing me."
Well, no. She is free to make a video to complain about the frequency of unsolicited advice, and everyone else is also free to criticize her for that. Continue ad libitum. She is the only one who can decide to break the circle, but since negative publicity is still publicity, I guess that it wouldn't be profitable.

51 to 100 of 124 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / General Discussion / Allegations of toxic community - A discussion All Messageboards