=][= On Do It Yourself (DIY) Discussions =][=

[Brother Tyler]

It is once again time to reiterate some very important points about DIYs. We occasionally reach these points where some course correction is needed, and recent events have pushed us to a culmination point. Most of what follows has been covered before, and in some respects is covered in other guides extant here at the B&C. Where those other guides tend to focus on how to develop DIYs, the focus here is on the participatory aspects of the process – more of how to interact with others and less of what to do with your DIY.

There are several principle areas to keep in mind:

• Author intent
• ”Canon” versus Creativity
• Criticism

AUTHOR INTENT

Author intent refers to two issues. First is the author’s intent with the DIY; second is the author’s intent with the topic. In the past, I’ve also used the word “context” to refer to both issues.

With regard to the author’s intent with the DIY, the author’s core concepts of the DIY come into play. This might be something as simple as creating a Cursed Founding Chapter with all blue eyes, or it might be something as complex as creating secret descendants of the Sisters of Silence. Alternately, the intent might revolve more around the method of presentation. The most common method of presentation is the Index Astartes article, but some authors choose other methods of presentation such as a series of vignettes, graphic novels, etc. Put simply, the author’s intent is what he/she desires to ultimately create in terms of content (not quality).

The basic problems here are two-fold, arising from either a lack of understanding of the intent (usually because the author fails to articulate the intent on the front end) or disagreement with the intent (often because group-think pushes towards “acceptable canon” which we will get into later, or because group-think pushes towards the use of the Index Astartes article, but also for other reasons). The simple solution to the former is for authors to clearly articulate their intent on the front end. The latter is more problematic as it requires participants to put aside their own preferences and consider those of the DIY author, and to then respect the author’s intents. Most of us find one or the other (or both) difficult – there is a reason that the Index Astartes article is the preferred format for DIY presentation (it’s recognized and it is thorough).

The author’s intent with the topic is another matter. Most often, authors post DIY topics here in order to present ideas, consider the feedback of others, and to then revise the ideas until there is some consensus regarding the quality and acceptability of the work. Much less common is the DIY topic that is intended solely to be an exhibition of a finished product with no desire whatsoever for feedback or revision. Even when this latter situation takes place, authors are often open to criticism and revision. Regardless, two issues arise. First is on the part of the author and has to do with how well the author accepts feedback/criticism. We often fall into the trap of falling in love with our ideas, so negative reactions to our hard work become difficult to accept. The converse of this is on the part of other participants and comes down to a combination of whether or not we react favorably to the author’s work and the manner in which we provide our feedback. Both of these issues will be touched on when I discuss the other principles.

Ultimately, the author’s intent overrides all other considerations and provides the construct within which everyone is working. This applies both in terms of what the author desires to create and what the topic is about.

”CANON” VERSUS CREATIVITY

A source of much angst within the WH40K hobby community is whether or not there is such a thing as official “canon” and, if such exists, of what it might consist.

It’s probably safe to say that there is some degree of canon, but none of us can agree on all points. Complicating this issue is the amount of conflicting material that is out there, whether due to revisions, perspective, etc.

Games Workshop has repeatedly demonstrated that, while there might be a “norm,” the realm of the possible is wide open. For example, up until 3rd edition it was pretty safe to say that there were no loyalist Chapters descended from the traitor legions. Yes, the events of the Eisenstein left some room to think that maybe, just maybe, loyalist members of the traitor legions had survived. Most, however, agreed that these were too few to create new Chapters. Then came Dawn of War, the Blood Ravens, and tantalizing clues that lead many to think that this new Chapter just might be loyalist remnants of the Thousand Sons Legion. This was followed later by the Forge World Badab War books and some clues that lead some players to think that the Carcharodons Astra just might be descended from the World Eaters Legion. Similarly, who would have considered a Chapter that subjected its aspirants to daemonic possession until the Third War for Armageddon website presented us with new information on the Exorcists?

So if official Chapters do things that might previously have been considered unthinkable, there is no reason that players can’t do the same with their DIYs.

This isn’t to say that this is a wise choice. Many players might demand explanations and rationale, and many authors might try their best to develop support for their maverick decisions. There is, however, no restriction on authors doing things that are outside the norm. Such decisions present challenges, of course, but some authors seek those types of challenges.

Even more problematic are decisions that go against commonly accepted “facts” or when authors decide to mix genres. Examples here include the creation of female Space Marines (a source of instant entertainment for me as I enjoy watching knees jerking) or things like the modeling of a Space Marine Chapter after the Legion of Super Heroes.

What we have to remember is that the game, the hobby, is about having fun. If someone wants to do something that might not fit in with what (others think) works within the accepted canon and they won’t budge on the idea, that’s their choice. Realistically, no one is hurt by such decisions. If you need to find some rationale for accepting it, use the “alternate reality” approach. This approach actually works for all DIYs, not just those that might be problematic. The alternate reality concept is basically that there is only one “official” game setting, and that is the one found in the official material (anything produced by Games Workshop and related companies such as Forge World, Black Library, etc.). Everything else is a unique alternate reality that uses the official reality as a starting point, with the DIY added in as a unique element. So my Nova Hawks DIY Chapter doesn’t exist in the official reality – they exist in a WH40K reality that is solely mine. Likewise, Kenton Kilgore’s Fighting Tigers of Veda (I hope I spelled that right) exist in his own version of WH40K reality. Neither of our DIYs has any impact whatsoever on the official reality, nor do we impact each others' versions of reality (unless we want them to – I might decide to incorporate my own version of the Tigers into my Nova Hawks reality while he might completely ignore the Vengeance Hawks).

Alternately, if you simply cannot accept someone else’s ideas and find them completely objectionable, while they refuse to make changes that will make their DIY into what you find acceptable, the best option is to ignore the DIY. Someone else’s work doesn’t adversely affect you, no matter how objectionable you may find it.

Remember, the cardinal rule is that the hobby is about having fun. For some, that fun includes ensuring that their DIY meshes with whatever might be considered as “canon.” For others, that fun might be in painting up their little toy soldiers to look like their favorite football team (frankly I’m surprised that we haven’t seen more DIYs painted up as professional football teams). Similarly, some players like to push boundaries, exploit gaps, or incorporate wholly unique aspects into their DIYs. We’ve seen radioactive Space Marines, female Space Marines, Mandalorians, Halo Spartans, and a host of other ideas that have sparked controversy, interest, and creativity even while they might not fit everyone’s concept of acceptability. As long as the authors are enjoying the hobby through their work, however, mission accomplished. It’s not up to anyone else to tell someone how to enjoy the hobby. The desired end-state of any DIY is wholly and completely up to the author, not the other members.

And this brings us to…

CRITICISM

Simple fact – the Bolter & Chainsword is a collaborative environment – feedback and criticism are part and parcel of what takes place here.

Authors have to understand that they will receive feedback and criticism, even if they intend solely to showcase their work without collaborative refinement. By its very nature, criticism may include both positive and negative comments. Just because criticism is negative, however, doesn’t mean that it is insulting, demeaning, or unwarranted. It’s very easy to fall in love with one’s own plan, only to have others readily identify areas where they think that the work can be improved, either in technical terms (how well the work is written and presented) or in terms of content (the ideas that comprise the DIY). It’s always an eye opener when someone else takes your lovingly crafted DIY and identifies a whole bunch of areas they think you can improve upon. Such feedback can easily be constructive in nature while still being negative, and this is perfectly acceptable. In fact, every author should particularly desire for others to openly and honestly identify what they perceive as weaknesses with the work. Such feedback is immensely helpful in improving the author’s work.

The converse of this is that other participants have to keep in mind that the work is ultimately that of the author, and that only the author will benefit or suffer from the finished product. The author gets to make all decisions. Let me say that again – the author gets to make all decisions. So if the author decides not to accept a recommendation, that’s okay. The tendency is for other participants to attempt to steer DIYs into what might be accepted within the “canon” by others, and this is all well and good if that is also what the author desires to achieve. If the author really wants to do something different, whether that is something like applying concepts from some other reality/genre or doing something like make female Space Marines (I just heard several knees jerk ), that’s the author’s choice. Refer to the “alternate reality” or “ignore” options I described above if you simply can’t accept such heresy.

What everyone has to remember is that the medium of text is extremely limited. It is often easy to misinterpret another member’s tone and intent, especially when their message is something with which you disagree. While a statement such as “your DIY is a steaming pile of dung” is clearly not constructive and is unacceptable, a statement such as “you have too much Mary Sue stuff going on” is open to interpretation. Authors might often interpret such statements is insulting and of no value, while the member that provided the feedback may have intended the statement to be a succinct description of problematic areas that need to be reassessed. Likewise, author responses to criticism are easily misinterpreted by critics, similarly applying a negative connotation to what might have been intended as a neutral acceptance of feedback with an attendant decision to ignore it. Whatever the case, everyone needs to remember that text is a poor medium for conveying tone and intent. When something looks disagreeable, put your emotion away and concentrate on the substantive content. If you have an inclination to fire back, especially if you want to escalate, wait. Go away, think about something else, and come back later. If you still want to fire back, either distance yourself from the discussion or report it to the moderators so that they can handle it.

Remember, we’re here to work with each other and to help each other enjoy the hobby. We all have different methods by which we enjoy the hobby, and we all have different views. This diversity is a strength and not something to be squashed. We’re not all going to agree on things, and that’s okay.