4E being immune to criticism (forked from Sentimentality And D&D...)

[The Little Raven]

Then ask them what an elf is.

Jolly little men that live at the North Pole and build toys for Santa Claus.

It's a good thing we don't ask Joe SixPack what should be in D&D, eh?

 

[The Little Raven]

The bold highlighting is mine.

So... saying 3rd Edition was good, and we learned a lot from it... is an insult of some kind?

 

[mmadsen]

So... saying 3rd Edition was good, and we learned a lot from it... is an insult of some kind?

Apparently it's one step away from a window sticker of Calvin peeing on a 3E logo.

 

[Halivar]

So... saying 3rd Edition was good, and we learned a lot from it... is an insult of some kind?

Yeah... maybe me head full of stupid this morning, but that actually sounded like praise. Not only were they good books, they were instructional and informed the next version to be even better. That's what he said.

 

[WalterKovacs]

Regardless, of course, of whether or not they are still playing those older editions, and therefore seeing them more clearly, say, than someone who isn't, but is claiming that their current experiences are the product of nostalgia.


RC

Did I claim that? I did use the word perhaps ...

Not everyone talking about every previous edition is currently playing all of them.

There are people playing each of the previous editions, but at the same time, no ONE edition is the "true D&D", and that includes 4e.

There are different issues for games in progress. People currently playing the older editions do so with a lot of time having passed since their inception. Lots of corrections, lots of splat, lots of discussion, lots of thought. Those editions are heavily, if not fully, developed. They very likely had flaws that were fixed overtime in various ways. Unless someone is currently playing the older version the same way it was played unpon release, they may have a mix of nostalgia about how they used to play mixed with how they play now, which benefits from a lot of experience in playing and thus maximizing the parts they like and minimizing the problematic parts. If a game has been going for 30 some years ... people would likely have perfected the way to avoid running into problems. That doesn't get rid of the problems, but a problem you don't encounter is less likely to be a problem on your mind. It seems, however, that while they are willing to work around problems in older editions (to the extent they cease to be noticed as problems), they want to face the 4e problems head on, even if those problems exist in other editions as well, and can just as easily be worked around or hand waved away in some cases.

There are a number of people referring to all older editions, and yet only talking about the one edition they are currently playing, ignoring that, for example, it was something only introduced in 3e, but that taking it out after 1 edition is go against a time honored tradition that only really lasted 1 edition.

There are other situations where people talk about how they play the older edition, and thus ignore/gloss over problems in that edition simply because their party house ruled away the problem, or have a player-DM agreement (spoken or unspoken) to not do certain things that are problematic.

Personally, I've not had many problems with 3.5 ... but I've almost always played in the sweet spot to avoid the problems that occur outside of those levels.

If nothing else, people that are playing 4e must be seeing 4e more clearly than some who have played a only few low levels, or a few encounters, or just read the books and given up ...

 

[Irda Ranger]

A lot of "criticism" of 4E amounts to "it isn't OD&D/1E/2E/3E" and "I prefer edition X". People may go into detail about things, but the core meaning of what they say isn't any more than that. That doesn't really qualify as criticism. You are just stating a preference or lack therof and calling it criticism.

First, I think "Edition X did it better" is a fair criticism. It's basically the just a different was of saying "It wasn't broke, so why'd they 'fix' it?"

But on a more meta level, I have seen many fair criticisms of 4E (not just the one thecasualoblivion mentioned) unfairly shot down by 4E's supporters. I think too many people who like 4E see criticism of 4E as a criticism of them (some sort of reasoning that goes "They don't like 4E, and I do, so they think I'm a bad person."). Well that's just not the case. There's nothing wrong with liking 4E if it's your kind of game. That doesn't mean the rest of us should be mistreated for the crime of discussing 4E's shortcomings.

I think anyone who's actually upset by discussions needs to just breathe and contemplate how nice the weather is, and isn't it wonderful that we have things like computers and microfleece jumpers.

Probably what we need to do is just have a wiki of "Standard criticisms and responses" and link to it whenever someone comes along with a "new" post on how 4E is awful/pure genius. That'll save us all a lot of time. "Oh, another Argument 4a, is it? Well, READ THIS LINK." Plus, it may cure people of thinking they're clever and original.

 

[vagabundo]

You're quite welcome to explain your point of view. Are you saying that you think rounser's opinions are pure nostalgia? Or do you think all criticism of 4E must be pure nostalgia?

Part of the reason I read Enworld is for criticism of 4e, I need to know the pitfalls before my players fall into them.

And I didnt want to focus on one particular poster, as I feel that is against the rules of the forum, but a lot of the posts critical of 4e seem to repeat a dislike, or just vague prejudice, ad infinitum. It really distracts from the good posts and the discussed topic.

Of course everyone is entitled to an opinion and to express that opinion, but some posters here should really think about what they are trying to accomplish.

In the end I would prefer a more constructive atmosphere here to all versions of DND and respect for those who have made their decision to play whatever edition tickles their fancy. At the moment their seems to be a lot of thread pollution - not just 4e but I’ve seen this in pathfinder threads too.

At this particular point in time I could be tagged as a enthusiastic 4e supporter, but I love all editions of DND, in the end their differences are more minor than we think. There is a lot more that binds us than separates.

EDIT: Just realised I didnt answer the first question, but I think the OP topic is more on my mind..

 

[Irda Ranger]

The problem I see now is that, while in the past things would heat up and then cool down, we seem to have settled into a higher background temperature. Maybe it's just the economy, maybe there's an underlying sense of panic that one's D&D of choice is going to die, but things just seem more shrill than usual.

I think it's the OGL. In past wars the losing side reached the Acceptance Stage pretty quickly. Just consider you're average OD&D player - there's lots of acceptance that it's not coming back except as fanzine stuff. But with 3.x you have Pathfinder, True20, the SRD, etc. all keeping the flame alive. It's like WotC and the OGL sources are two engines of matter/anti-matter creation, feeding the fuel towards each other.

Which is why I think it's very important that people "disengage" criticism of the game from criticism of the person. Both games are going to be "alive and well" for at least another 8 years, so we all better learn how to live together or suffer a very sucky almost-decade.

 

[Irda Ranger]

Man, with all due respect, the more I look at those kittens the more they are seriously freaking me the hell out.

You can be freaked out, but please don't punch them! No matter was the PNW drivers do!

 

[Obryn]

I don't really know how to put this, but I'll give it a shot.

I run a regular 4e game, and I'm loving it. I ran 3e for a long time, and loved it. (I'm burnt out on it now, but I'm 95% sure I'll eventually pick it up again for a game or two.) I am currently running a once-per-month 1e game, and loving that, too.

Different editions do different things better than others, and all of them have been quite capable, broad, enjoyable, and adaptable games. I don't feel any need to squeeze my gaming love into a single edition at the expense of all others. I mean, I only have so much time, but I game because I love gaming. I DM because I love DMing. Different editions are fun in different ways, and I guess I don't see why I should restrict myself to just one kind of fun or waste time worrying about what the heart and soul of D&D is.

-O