Edition wars...a GOOD thing? or if not, an APPROPRIATE thing?

[Raven Crowking]

Firstly, what Mustrum said.

Sure. Firstly then, what I answered to Mustrum.

Secondly, where did I say 4e? There are people unable to let go on both sides of the fence. I'd suggest your reverse is not the opposite side of what I was talking about.

I'm not saying one "camp" is worse than the other. I'm saying that there are people who can't let go and there are people who can, have, or never had to because they never were upset in the first place. So I don't agree that this is a pot and kettle scenario, at least as far as I'm concerned.

The edition wars though? Pot and kettle. I'm not saying everyone on EN World (far from it), but the folks who come in to tell others to move on and get a life? The folks who care if you dislike, hate, or love edition X, Y, or Z?

Pot meet kettle; kettle meet pot.

That applies to me as much as to anyone else; I am not pointing fingers at others without pointing them back at myself.

You are still missing a big point - I (and others) don't talk about how I don't like D&D 3E and think it's a terrible game for XYZ reasons.

Cool.

But, again, so what? The playing field isn't equal. One may argue that, as the latest edition, 4e has an assumed prerogative that other editions don't currently enjoy.

3e had that. When I made some of the same criticisms of 3e that you did, upthread, I was considered an asshat for doing so. After all, 4e hadn't been announced yet.

One can easily imagine a D&D city where dragonborn are considered second-class citizens because tieflings are in charge. Dragonborn can "officially" get anything that tieflings can, but there is a "glass ceiling" on their advancement. They have to push harder to get what tieflings take for granted. The tieflings complain that the dragonborn are whiney gits who should just move on with their lives. After all, you don't see the tieflings complaining about what the dragonborn get, do you?

Problematic are threads that not just critisize a game, but try to establish which game is "the best". Or the "true" D&D or whatever. This is not something that we will get decided here.

Again, why do you care? Isn't there a function that allows you to Ignore a whole thread?

Pot, kettle; kettle, pot.


RC

 

[Umbran]

Ignoring the prejorative in "retread", are you actually suggesting that adapting old modules to the new edition is somehow "edition warring"?

No. What part of, "it isn't all about you, personally" failed to be clear?

I don't think remaking the modules is adding a whole lot of value for anyone. maybe I'm wrong. Knock yourself out. Have fun with it.

The module-remake thing enters into my position from the, "Maybe WotC could do it? Maybe they could post them on their site?" end.. That's returning yet again to "WotC doesn't support or court fans of older editions" thing. Nope. They don't court or support those folks any more. We've known this for over a year. They could, but they don't. In theory, there's some small chance they could return to doing so. But as a practical matter and a real possibility?

Remember the pizza analogy? There's a coffee shop next door to the pizza parlor. How long do you continue to try to engage the people drinking coffee about tomato sauce and pizza policy before you realize that you're not doing the coffee shop any favors? (this is to the "resistors", mostly)

And yes, there's clearly another side to that. Yeah, folks, there's this guy that keeps talking about tomato sauce. At what point do you stop engaging him in the Great Pizza Debate, ignore him, and go back to your coffee?

If the guy wants to go get a quiet table in the coffee shop to discuss tomato sauce recipes with like minded individuals, that's fine and dandy. If he's polite about it, and stops busting into other discussions to interject on the high value of tomato sauce, the baristas will probably do their best to keep those who've become annoyed by sauce-discussion out of his hair.

Again - this isn't you personally. I'm generalizing many people's behavior here. Yours was merely an example that came close enough to the pattern to use as a jumping off point.

One gets the impression that you would prefer folks to sit and mutter to themselves, so long as it is out of your hearing.

Honestly, I would prefer people vociferously chatter about going concerns - what's happening in their games, neat things they've seen in games, interesting rules structures and flavorful fluff.

 

[DanFor]

Now, let's assume you were smart and wouldn't try to refute anything. Can you say the same is true for every other 3E fan? Do you believe it to be true for every other 3E fan? Because once the edition wars really go the level of the above, I typically see 3E fans defending their game just as much as 4E fans defend their own.

I agree, but you should be careful about implying that someone is stupid because they refute something in your list--you could start an editions war. EEEK!

Both sides of the debate are at fault in perpuating the editions war; I don't believe there is any question about that. The question is whether or not the parties involved are accomplishing anything by re-hashing arguments that have been made over and over again. I honestly don't know. But from the point-of-view of someone who is dissatisfied with the current management of the D&D brand, I would like to think that it eventually will make a difference.

But the difference is - I don't go into the Pathfinder forum or the 3E forum and tell everyone how 3E is bad and has flaws I don't want to work with and that I'd rather play a different game. Why should I? I can just play that damn other game!

Good for you. And, good for me because I utilize the same option by playing my game of choice. People have negative opinions, and they express those opinions over and over again if they feel strongly about the subject of those opinions (i.e., the D&D brand). You may not be willing to post yet another list of 3E flaws on a Pathfinder/3E forum, yet you have done just that on the ENWorld General Discussion forum. So, I'm not sure you've made your point.

For the record, I happen to agree with all but two of the 3E flaws that you listed. As a matter of fact, I was actually looking forward to 4E because I expected it to be a revision to the 3E rules that would address those flaws. Needless to say, I was extremely disappointed when I discovered 4E was not a revision.

 

[mudbunny]

But, again, so what? The playing field isn't equal. One may argue that, as the latest edition, 4e has an assumed prerogative that other editions don't currently enjoy.

3e had that. When I made some of the same criticisms of 3e that you did, upthread, I was considered an asshat for doing so. After all, 4e hadn't been announced yet.

I don't know if it is a lack of sleep causing me to mis-interpret this, but you appear to be saying that because 4E is the current edition of D&D, Edition Warring* against it should be permitted.

If I am mis-interpreting it, I do apologize.

* - Note that I am not talking about criticism, but edition warring.

 

[ExploderWizard]

Sure there are people that edition war that like to call out others for edition warring, but (a) they are by no means the entire population of edition warriors. and (b) it appears to be a tactic rather than the heart of the matter.

Yes it is a tactic.

Usually, the first one to cry edition war in an ongoing debate is on the side getting clobbered. Rather than offer a counter opinion to something that they do not like, some people like to play the edition war card as some kind of Chewbacca defense.

 

[tyrlaan]

I generally hate picking apart quoted threads, so apologies in advance, but this one just seems to make more sense to respond this way.

Sure. Firstly then, what I answered to Mustrum.

If I'm referring to the right post, you're arguing that talking about what's good about an edition you enjoy playing is on par with edition warring??

The edition wars though? Pot and kettle. I'm not saying everyone on EN World (far from it), but the folks who come in to tell others to move on and get a life? The folks who care if you dislike, hate, or love edition X, Y, or Z?

Pot meet kettle; kettle meet pot.

That applies to me as much as to anyone else; I am not pointing fingers at others without pointing them back at myself.

Sorry, I just don't see this perspective. Here's why:

Edition warrior motives? While I'm sure I'm missing some in the following generalization, but it seems to be a need to make sure people feel the edition the warrior is fighting against is less legitimate/worse than the warriors edition OR the need to make sure people feel the edition the warrior is fighting for is the best edition and people who aren't playing it are doing the wrong thing.

Person who wants edition wars to stop - motives? Speaking for myself, I want to see them end so when I come to ENWorld I can see posts in general that are actually interesting and constructive. I suspect others that want them to stop feel similarly. It's about trying to make a community feel like one.

But if that makes me a pot to an edition warrior's kettle in your mind, I suppose I'll accept being branded as such.

Again, why do you care? Isn't there a function that allows you to Ignore a whole thread?

Ignore only gets you so far, as Umbran pointed out. Besides the fact that ignoring is really just doing the whole "close my eyes and it will all go away" trick (which rarely works), at what point do you look at how much you're ignoring and decide it might be better to cut your losses and find a different forum community or give up on forums all together?

 

[Raven Crowking]

No. What part of, "it isn't all about you, personally" failed to be clear?

The part where you keep quoting me?

The module-remake thing enters into my position from the, "Maybe WotC could do it? Maybe they could post them on their site?" end.. That's returning yet again to "WotC doesn't support or court fans of older editions" thing.

Nope. That's a "Maybe WotC doesn't want other people to do it for legal (GSL?) reasons, but would like the idea" thing.

You seem to be on a high horse about this for some reason, while saying you are not. Maybe it's just my "reader bias".

Why don't you and I simply agree to disagree about this?


RC

 

[Raven Crowking]

when I come to ENWorld I can see posts in general that are actually interesting and constructive.

I think that is the motive on both sides.

However, I also think that both sides paint other motives for their counterparts.

What is different (IMHO) is what one finds "interesting and constructive".

Someone who hasn't adopted RCFG isn't going to find a General Forum filled with RCFG posts and threads "interesting and constructive", and is likely to react to that. Their motives? To make EN World more "interesting and constructive".

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

How? By using your ignore list!

No, it isn't perfect - but if they are annoying enough that you cannot control yourself, consider using it more.

Yes, I am going to exercise it a little more. I dislike doing it, because I was happy to not have anyone on that list. Those days are over since a while now.

 

[MichaelSomething]

In terms of edition warring, it's simply more productive to walk into a random FLGS and offer to run an open game of whatever your favorite edition is, and make sure the players enjoy it a lot.