OK, we're gettng a little annoyed here!

Dinkeldog · Jan 21, 2008

Set said:
One thing I find helpful when I post a concern about some announced feature of 4E and am beset by people calling me names like 'hater' and 'grognard' and whatever other tedious things they can get away with without getting banned is to request that they point out a *specific* thing they like about 4E, rather than just mindlessly naysay anyone who points out a thing that they don't like.

(Set, this isn't directed at you by any means, I just wanted to respond to this topic.)

I think the key is always to try to self-moderate your tone. The people that tend to annoy me will put in a comment like, "Just another reason to not go with 4E." That will spring the "hater" reflex in me, then I tend to discount everything else. People that instead say things like, "Well, I'm not sure why they would do that, it doesn't make much sense right now," spring the "reasonable skeptic" reflex in me. I don't mind reasonable skeptics, but hating gets annoying, especially when I'm looking for some discussion on what a change is and what it might be hinting at.

I'll also admit that while I'm generally positive, there are some things that I wish made the 2008 cut--basically gnomes and druids with a side order of psionics. But if they're cut in 2008, then I'll find a way to make do on my own until they officially show up, or I'll do without. Some people seem to act like there will be 4E police coming to their tables to make sure that everyone follows the rules in the books exactly word-for-word. That hasn't happened in my 3E/3.5E games, and somehow I doubt Wizards will suddenly come up with the funding to do it in 4E.

Basically what I'm saying is, the tone matters almost more than the message. And repeated negativity everywhere just makes me wonder why someone is choosing to hang out on a messageboard that is about a subject they're really not interested in. If we were to split the forums eventually to 3.xE and 4E forums, then we'd be looking for the 4E interested people to not go into the 3.xE forums and start flinging the negativity around about what's new in 4E and how it's sooooooo much better than 3.x.

Civility remains the watchword.

Grimstaff · Jan 26, 2008

Dinkeldog said:
(Set, this isn't directed at you by any means, I just wanted to respond to this topic.)

I think the key is always to try to self-moderate your tone. The people that tend to annoy me will put in a comment like, "Just another reason to not go with 4E." That will spring the "hater" reflex in me, then I tend to discount everything else. People that instead say things like, "Well, I'm not sure why they would do that, it doesn't make much sense right now," spring the "reasonable skeptic" reflex in me. I don't mind reasonable skeptics, but hating gets annoying, especially when I'm looking for some discussion on what a change is and what it might be hinting at.

I'll also admit that while I'm generally positive, there are some things that I wish made the 2008 cut--basically gnomes and druids with a side order of psionics. But if they're cut in 2008, then I'll find a way to make do on my own until they officially show up, or I'll do without. Some people seem to act like there will be 4E police coming to their tables to make sure that everyone follows the rules in the books exactly word-for-word. That hasn't happened in my 3E/3.5E games, and somehow I doubt Wizards will suddenly come up with the funding to do it in 4E.

Basically what I'm saying is, the tone matters almost more than the message. And repeated negativity everywhere just makes me wonder why someone is choosing to hang out on a messageboard that is about a subject they're really not interested in. If we were to split the forums eventually to 3.xE and 4E forums, then we'd be looking for the 4E interested people to not go into the 3.xE forums and start flinging the negativity around about what's new in 4E and how it's sooooooo much better than 3.x.

Civility remains the watchword.

I'm in agreement here. So called "edition wars" have been on the implied "prohibited discussion" list forever, yet what should be a site for speculation and positivity has become a soapbox for a vocal minority determined to try and get as many people to avoid the new edition as possible. What the motive is behind this is a mystery, but whatever.

Maybe a seperate forum for "Anti-4E" discussion should be created, so the rest of us don't have to put up with it all the time?

malladin · Jan 28, 2008

Grimstaff said:
I'm in agreement here. So called "edition wars" have been on the implied "prohibited discussion" list forever, yet what should be a site for speculation and positivity has become a soapbox for a vocal minority determined to try and get as many people to avoid the new edition as possible. What the motive is behind this is a mystery, but whatever.

Maybe a seperate forum for "Anti-4E" discussion should be created, so the rest of us don't have to put up with it all the time?

Alternatively how about a seperate pro 4th ed board so people who want to discuss multiple views on 4th ed don't have to put up with being labelled haters and grognards! See it works both ways. So civility, not segregation, is probably a better way to go!

Piratecat · Jan 28, 2008

Yep. Neither of those is going to happen. Learn to get along.

AZRogue · Jan 28, 2008

Segregation would be a mistake, IMO. People get upset, especially when talking about things they care a lot about. It's natural that they want to agree because it validates them a little bit. It's just normal. What we have to remember is to not cross the line. My not agreeing with someone isn't reason enough to attack them.

Besides, if people want to be honest, no matter what happens with 4E we will all learn to deal with it. We'll take what we want and throw out the rest. Kind of like, you know, after every other edition.

Just post with a little perspective and realize that none of the changes are reason enough for animosity.

A'koss · Feb 6, 2008

Piratecat said:
Yep. Neither of those is going to happen. Learn to get along.

While that would be ideal, from what I've seen that's not going to happen. It hasn't happened yet, it's not happening now and certain segments are becoming increasingly intrenched in their opinions and polarized over 4e. The vibe here has become increasingly un-fun. So as much as I hate to say it, separating it into two boards may be the only answer. At least until a few months after the release.

Any time WotC reveals a new tidbit, you have a certain segment violently opposed it, confronted by those vehemently for it, and each side goes at one another trying their best to fly under the mod's radar (with mixed success).

Call me crazy, but I would have thought with a new edition coming out of the game we all love to play coming out, that this would (generally speaking) be a good time to be on the boards... Not a time to get wound up in indignant rage over some of the most absurdly trivial things I've seen on this board.

I mean if this is what it's come to here - make two separate boards. The attitudes here are not going to change and every new reveal WotC makes will inevitably fall into anti- and pro- arguments.

Kid Charlemagne · Feb 6, 2008

A'koss said:
While that would be ideal, from what I've seen that's not going to happen. It hasn't happened yet, it's not happening now and certain segments are becoming increasingly intrenched in their opinions and polarized over 4e. The vibe here has become increasingly un-fun. So as much as I hate to say it, separating it into two boards may be the only answer. At least until a few months after the release.

While I understand your POV, I have to wonder - how would you enforce this? How would you keep the pro-4E and anti-4E folks from going into each others forums? Right now, this is a 4E forum, and yet many people come in here who have no interest in 4E and no (stated) intention to play 4E.

I just don't see how it can happen. We are at a point in the D&D universe where there's going to be a lot of strongly held feelings in both directions, and I think we're just going to have to muddle through as best we can.

A'koss · Feb 6, 2008

Kid Charlemagne said:
While I understand your POV, I have to wonder - how would you enforce this? How would you keep the pro-4E and anti-4E folks from going into each others forums? Right now, this is a 4E forum, and yet many people come in here who have no interest in 4E and no (stated) intention to play 4E.

I just don't see how it can happen. We are at a point in the D&D universe where there's going to be a lot of strongly held feelings in both directions, and I think we're just going to have to muddle through as best we can.

Perhaps it’s enough to create a separate Criticisms & Critiques style board. I don’t how that would fly, and maybe you’re right and there is nothing that can be done. But let me throw the ball back into your court for a moment… ultimately, what do you want this board to accomplish? What do you hope people will get out of coming here during the lead-up to 4e, in a 4e forum? What do hope newcomers and older players who are returning to the game will get out of coming here?

There’s a lot of good discussion here, it’s still my favorite board. But I didn’t come here to fight an edition war (which is real easy to get caught up in here) or try to wade through one to find the interesting discussions.

Lanefan · Feb 6, 2008

A'koss said:
Call me crazy, but I would have thought with a new edition coming out of the game we all love to play coming out, that this would (generally speaking) be a good time to be on the boards....

It's an *excellent* time to be on the boards.

Just about every day we get something big and shiny and new to hash over...does it get any better than that?!

Lanefan

pemerton · Feb 6, 2008

A'koss said:
what do you want this board to accomplish?

<snip>

I didn’t come here to fight an edition war (which is real easy to get caught up in here) or try to wade through one to find the interesting discussions.

Obviously I can only speak for myself - but I come here to see what others are thinking about the implications of 4e for D&D, for RPGs in general, etc, and to participate in the discussion about design and mechanics that surrounds that. A lot of that involves engaging with those who feel more affinity for earlier editions, or have objections to the design direction of 4e. Splitting the boards would eliminate the possiblity of that discussion.

I don't think that the problem is one of pro- or anti-, but rather one of civility. I am broadly a pro- person, but there are plenty of those who are anti- with whom I've had worthwhile discussions. I don't care if someone doesn't like 4e, as long as they are prepared to express their opinion in a considered way that acknowledges that others might have different preferred playstyles. And likewise for those who are pro-.

OK, we're gettng a little annoyed here!

Dinkeldog

Sniper o' the Shrouds

Grimstaff

Explorer

malladin

Explorer

Piratecat

Sesquipedalian

AZRogue

Explorer

A'koss

Explorer

Kid Charlemagne

I am the Very Model of a Modern Moderator

A'koss

Explorer

Lanefan

Victoria Rules

pemerton

Legend

Similar Threads