Criticism is a bad thing?

James Maliszewski's review of Monsters of Myth has brought up several points.

A- Of what quality is OSRIC's license?

B- Is criticism bad?

The first point is pretty much irrelevant to most people. Only the tiniest fraction of us care about publishing details. Luckily, the argument this time isn't "Is OSRIC legal?" (it is). The argument is "How well does it do what it sets out to do?" And the answer is... inconclusive.

The truth is that all of these licenses that people are publishing under are not reaching the people who would care. Yes, our little incestuous internet groups know what they are... but who cares? By the very essence of their existence (the OGL), these games are not allowed to actually say what they are, and with what games their materials are to be played with. It's a shitty position that has no solution. Can't say "Dungeons and Dragons," and promoting one's own simulacrum as a brand new thing defeats the entire purpose.

So then there's Monsters of Myth, a book I haven't seen (and considering my own release, would it make sense to buy it?), presented by the people that made OSRIC in the first place. OSRIC in action. And you should head over to the review and the comments thereafter to continue that train of thought.

Doing so brings us to this quote:

So, what do the OSRIC creators get? Criticism from the old-school community. I will never understand this.

Now we're not talking about the "Well, this might be illegal..." stance. That's not what anyone was talking about. The discussion was on the quality of what the OSRIC guys actually did, and how useful the tool is that they've created for the purpose they gave in creating it.

Why the hell shouldn't the "old-school community" be critical of OSRIC? Why shouldn't you be critical of OSRIC? Why isn't everyone critical of everything?

"If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all," is a horrible, horrible bit of advice. Without criticism, there is no engagement of ideas about quality. Without criticism, there is no valuable feedback for creators of imaginative works. (an aside: "Really cool! This rules! Awesome!" is completely useless. It doesn't inspire, it doesn't tell a creator what he did right, it's just empty cheerleading that at best allows a creator to further tap his creative well to do his next project, and at worst encourages him to keep pumping out the same old shit when the natural thing to do is stop.)

Criticism causes a person to ask, "Why do I feel this way? Why am I doing it this way?" Someone giving criticism has to figure this out to say anything of importance at all, someone receiving criticism needs to consider this in order to know whether to heed the criticism they have received. Bystanders who witness the criticism can also take this opportunity to use the arguments to solidify their own viewpoints and sharpen their own critiquing skills.

All of this is 100% pure goodness. Anything that makes a person more discerning and less of a follower, in any way, shape, or form, is positive. Creators and cheerleaders may not agree, but if a creator can't take a bruised ego, fuck him. He can quit and he shouldn't be missed. If a cheerleader can't...

Wait a second. Cheerleaders. Cheerleaders are useless clumps of flesh that don't do anything, but get in line behind someone who does just to leech off of their greatness. To be a part of something and pretend they're contributing to it just by telling people how awesome it is. (and people who do things are great... to variable magnitudes of course) You can tell cheerleaders from actual thinking, or productive, people because they'll complain about criticism, will not be able to discuss the pros and cons of the issue at hand, and will be offended if you don't simply have a binary "Yes, I like it," or "No, so I'm just going to completely ignore it and pretend it doesn't exist," response to things. Cheerleaders are different than supporters. Supporters will assist and aid, but they will also criticize as harshly as they feel is necessary. Usually in private. And usually accompanied by direct offers of assistance or a referral to someone who can.

If anyone's ever said to you: "Can't you just sit back and enjoy x?," you have encountered a cheerleader. Or an insecure creator. What they're telling you is, "Turn your brain off and accept what you're given!"

The opposite of the cheerleader is the detractor. You could cure his mother's cancer and heal his baby's cleft palate, and he'll still find every reason to shit on you whenever someone talks about you or anyone that looks like you. The problem is, many people confuse critics for detractors, and cheerleaders purposefully conflate the two. The difference between a critic and a detractor is often very simple: Is there a solution implied with the criticism? Or is the message simply, "Fuck you and go away!"?

Think. Think. THINK. Think and engage, with everything, always. Anything worth experiencing is worth analyzing. Is the experience worth trying again? Why? Can it be better? How? What exact parts of it did I like? What exact parts didn't I like? How does it compare to similar experiences? Is one clearly superior to another?

So... this "old-school" renaissance, or, to better put it (because I will not be passive and just accept that kind of wording :P), the "traditional revival," or "the return of actual quality gaming," is in dire need of criticism. And that criticism will flow freely in this scene, considering every single person in it is already exercising their critical qualities to reject (or un-prefer, if you're wanting to be nice about it) more current forms of THE BRAND NAME just to be in this scene. Which creates another cluster in the grand clusterfuck of simulacra issues. The projects are borne out of communities all loving something, and building something to express their love and to make it easier for other people to come join their love-ins. Or orgies, whatever verbiage you prefer.

So the people that are simply enjoying whatever is current and "mainstream" in our hobby, through passive enjoyment or active acceptance, hear this mating call. Maybe they just haven't experienced the traditional styles on their own. Maybe they're intelligent, fully functional human beings that just prefer other systems, other styles.

But that's not most people. No. I get the impression that many people these days (especially younger people) grew up hearing “discrimination is bad” for so long that they believe that critical thought is actually morally wrong. And they see this critical scene being critical of each other, nitpicking at each others' styles of play, not to attack, but to refine and improve.

But all that these humanoids see is unpleasantness. Effort. (same thing, right?)

Which is where we need to note that "criticism" is different than "abuse" or "attacks." "What you're doing there is ILLEGAL!" is not criticism. "I think you might have legal trouble here and here because of this," that's criticism. "This is useless because I can't do this, or this, because of that," that's criticism too, and it should be considered. An intelligent creator, and intelligent bystanders of discourse, know(s) the difference, and welcomes negative feedback as being of the utmost value.

So we need to make a decision. Do we put on a happy face, and walk hand in hand to bring a "new age" of "old style" to the role-playing "masses?" Or do we just be who we are, and be selective, and picky, and honest, and risk the apathy of the general "just enjoy yourself, it doesn't matter how" crowd?

I don't think one of those choices are even possible. TSR had the advantage of, well, being TSR and gathering around the vision of one man (while kind of discarding the vision of another man along the way...). When that singular vision was clouded, the monolith started its long and slow fall. Now we're in the post-apocalyptic age, amongst the ruins, trying to put the monolith back up.

Sound pessimistic? Maybe. But I don't think we have anything to gain by being evangelical or putting up a false front of unity. We are who we are, and if we compromise that in the name of growth or acceptance... we might as well just go buy 4E. We're selling our passions to the common crowd either way.

Meanwhile...

(like this is some big academic essay or something)

See the elitist attitude running all through this post? It's intentional. It's not simply a matter of empty "stick it to the man" posturing and feeling like I'm better than "the humanoids" and all those people who I perceive as not engaging in critical thought. There's a reason behind it.

Any movement, any organization, any anything becomes more repressive as it gets bigger. Individual ideas are more difficult to be heard in a scene owned and operated by large public corporations, and anything inconveniencing those corporations are more easily squashed. Mob mentality is a real thing, and it can influence gaming preferences as well as the decision to lynch some poor fucker that doesn't deserve it. One person is usually reasonable. A large mass of people, not so much. These ideas influence every thought that I have. I think that power itself is unethical, and giving up individuality, in any way shape or form, for a common cause or common good is a great way to be marginalized by your own cause when your goals are achieved.

The best way to prevent this from happening is to question everything. Everything. (and listen when answers are given, will you?) Be critical!

Right now, you have the opportunity to make a difference. You can recruit new players, not into the movement, or into the style, but into your game, where you show, and not tell, all about your preferred style. You can publish an adventure and make it different than anything that there's ever been, and it'll gain a bit of notice just because there's not all that much in the way of new adventures out there. Everyone is just one good idea away from being someone.

And we're all creators here. Not consumers. Role-playing is a creative exercise on both sides of the screen. Everyone is constantly creating, and modifying, material for their own games. Even people who never post or publish a thing. Even those who publish for free and not for profit. This is a community of creators.

So up with criticism! Let your voice be heard! Demand that it be heard! And make it happen in a valuable way - don't be a cheerleader or a detractor! Do something!