What's really at stake in the Edition Wars

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Frankly, 4e does have elements that I find videogamey but you wouldn't know what they were if you shut your communication off before I elaborated on them.

This whole time Hussar and I have been asking that people elaborate. How exactly is that "shutting communication off?"

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

If for no other reason, to avoid posting the same long-winded paragraphs of complaints in detail that so many will have read before, which will result in heated discussions.

Then as Umbran said, what are you adding to the discussion by posting even your short-hand rant?

 

[billd91]

This whole time Hussar and I have been asking that people elaborate. How exactly is that "shutting communication off?"

Hussar is bringing 10 year old baggage against the term to the discussion. He's already prejudiced against the very discussion because the term "videogamey" has come up. That's not being open to communication.

Take a look at the rest of this thread and the other one currently talking about what videogamey means. There's a lot of people (not just Hussar) who feel that saying "4e is videogamey" is trolling. If you are seriously and genuinely trying to find out what people mean by the term and open to take what they say at face value, it has become obvious that you are in the minority.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Take a look at the rest of this thread and the other one currently talking about what videogamey means. There's a lot of people (not just Hussar) who feel that saying "4e is videogamey" is trolling. If you are seriously and genuinely trying to find out what people mean by the term and open to take what they say at face value, it has become obvious that you are in the minority.

I think anyone who says "4E is videogamey" and refuses to elaborate is trolling. The person probably knows that the term carries negative baggage and is trying to incite others. If the person wasn't trolling they would be able to elaborate on their opinion. And if they really aren't trying to troll, but have nothing more to say than "too videogamey" why post anything at all? As Umbran pointed out, they wouldn't be adding anything new.

Personally, I would rather people assume that I've never heard their opinion before and use plain terms to discuss an issue. If you can't be bothered to restate your opinion then why spend time posting the buzzword?

 

[jfauch2]

I think the main feeling was of betrayal by WoTC in release a game that was not what they expected, that made all of their skill sets and ideas about the game ‘out of date’ sort of like people who hate Vista/7 and still use XP or 2000.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Don't misunderstand me. Before 4E there were plenty of people who only played earlier editions and other games. But they also didn't spend all their time obsessing on their resentment of the current edition of D&D. So that's the real issue.

That can be a serious issue, I agree. Of course, the reverse is also true -- were people playing the newest edition obseesing on their resentment of those who didn't like it?

The clock is never turning back. It will never be the 1970s or the 1980s again. Retro editions certainly have their appeal, but that is based on them being retro in the first place.

Have you tried the Cubical 7 Doctor Who RPG? It could be 1970 again.....

Seriously, though, the appeal of retro editions, at least as far as I am concerned, is based on their design parameters. Earlier design parameters play differently. This is not simply a fad.

In fact, the game I am working on is a fusion between those old systems and newer systems. Both have design parameters that I like for different reasons.

The fans have spoken. The fans are enjoying themselves.

I am not certain of that at all. There is an argument (Mistwell brought it up most recently in another thread, I think, and provided links to back the assertion) that 1e far outsold anything that has come along since. There is another argument that there are more 1e players right now than there are 4e players.

I am not certain if either of these arguments is correct, or if both are just so much rubbish.....what I do know is that I haven't enough information to say that the issue is closed.

Careful not to get sucked in to that wormhole you're creating, because according to you Objective is Subjective.

No. According to me, we very often fool ourselves into believing that subjective things are objective, because we find that comforting.

An object can be objective. A meaning cannot. The concept of meaning requires it to be subjective.

I get the point you're making and realize your putting some humor into it. But the point is that everyone (who understands English at least) can agree upon what a chair is and what a table is. Not everyone can agree on what "too videogamey" means.

Go back up to Umbran's post for a second.

The reason that few people argue (very much) about what is or is not a chair or table is because few people are that emotionally invested in the nomenclature of furniture. But it is precisely when one is strongly invested (emotionally, at least) that one's reasoning is most likely to be compromised.

You and I don't have to agree on what X means to have a conversation. I just have to be open to understanding what you are trying to say, and vice versa.

The problem is not the term. It is the emotional investment, and how that affects people's willingness to understand what others are saying. Any term, no matter how well defined, that means the same thing will have the same problem.


RC


(Oh, and thank you for realizing that I tried to be funny.)

 

[Raven Crowking]

I think anyone who says "4E is videogamey" and refuses to elaborate is trolling.

Not necessarily.

Some people haven't really thought deeply enough about why they think "X is Y" to elaborate effectively. Other times, the person might view the request for elaboration as baiting; itself being a kind of trolling.

For example, if asked to elaborate the definition of X, a person might include Y, Z, A, and B as terminlogy.

The person who asked for elaboration might then sequentially ask for elaboration on Y, Z, A, and B. This in turn requires more pharases to be defined.

Elaboration is again asked for.

Now, you and I know that, in some cases, this is legitimate enquiry. But we also know that there are some folks, on EnWorld and elsewhere, for whom this is a method to "prove" that the entire line of reasoning is meaningless, or to simply get the party to give up on the conversation.

Circumstantially, anyone who says "4E is videogamey" and refuses to elaborate may be trolling....or the person who asks for elaboration may be trolling. Or both parties may wrongly believe the other is trolling.

It is usually better to assume the "best reading". It is not easy, I know -- I frequently fail at doing so regardless of how hard I try. But that is my fault, not the fault of the poster whose writing is reasonable when granted the "best reading".


RC

 

[billd91]

Personally, I would rather people assume that I've never heard their opinion before and use plain terms to discuss an issue. If you can't be bothered to restate your opinion then why spend time posting the buzzword?

There are a lot of people who aren't very good at posting complete and detailed positions on message boards and there are also people who get distracted from the task at hand or who end up being rushed and never get around to it. I don't think they should really be lumped in with deliberate trolls simply because they are a bit vague in their criticism.

Honestly, we put up with a lot of vague and loose-definition-word criticism in 3e from previous edition adherents, disillusioned 3e players, and even 4e designers over the last 10 years. I think we aren't going to see a great improvement in communication skills on these boards any time in the near future without putting in the effort ourselves to make it better. And that includes the receiving end of the communication process.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Not necessarily.

There are a lot of people who aren't very good at posting complete and detailed positions on message boards and there are also people who get distracted from the task at hand or who end up being rushed and never get around to it. I don't think they should really be lumped in with deliberate trolls simply because they are a bit vague in their criticism.

Fair enough on both points. It was only my opinion and I could see cases where my inclination could be proven wrong.

It is usually better to assume the "best reading". It is not easy, I know -- I frequently fail at doing so regardless of how hard I try. But that is my fault, not the fault of the poster whose writing is reasonable when granted the "best reading".

I'm really just trying to say that I cannot give someone's post my "best reading" when all the poster spouts is a catchphrase with no substance behind it. They might as well post "3E, cowabunga dude!"

Honestly, we put up with a lot of vague and loose-definition-word criticism in 3e from previous edition adherents, disillusioned 3e players, and even 4e designers over the last 10 years. I think we aren't going to see a great improvement in communication skills on these boards any time in the near future without putting in the effort ourselves to make it better. And that includes the receiving end of the communication process.

I'm not asking for perfection. We all (yes, me too, RC) make errors in communication from time to time. I'm just positing a singular method that could help discussion. I agree with Mustrum Ridcully that there have been some very civil and enlightening discussions about how roles that are comparative to MMORPGs have effected the game, whereas threads that start as "4E is too videogamey" tend to need a lock.

 

[DanFor]

I don't play 4E or WOW. But, when someone states that "4E is too videogamey", I understand what they are trying to convey--that, in their opinion, 4E plays more like a videogame than a PNP roleplaying game. I don't require elaboration. Nor do I consider the statement to be trolling or deliberately provocative. It is merely a negative opinion.

I can understand why someone would disagree with the person's opinion, but I don't understand why anyone would be offended or make trolling accusations. I suppose a 4E fan could read between the lines and make the conclusion that the person who made the statement is insulting their intelligence, but that seems like an overreaction to me.