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

[PaulofCthulhu]

I think many of the answers to these issues have been said multiple times on EN World and elsewhere:

Play what you like and live & let live.

As simple as that, I think. The rules of RPGs are not sacred, just change them to your own personal needs.

More positive topics tend to create more positive atmospheres. I'm just grateful roleplayers (in whatever form) are still around!

 

[Mark]

In a world with kittens like that, how can it not be?!

That was also the theory behind Ewoks. Just sayin'.

 

[Remathilis]

That was also the theory behind Ewoks. Just sayin'.

There is much wisdom in these word. Reflect on them grasshopper.

 

[I'm A Banana]

That was also the theory behind Ewoks. Just sayin'.

Kittens can't talk, though, and they grow up to be evil full-grown cats, so they make up for it.

Also: Reality isn't written and directed by an increasingly insane George Lucas, as far as I know. Though I suppose that would explain the broad, cartoonish stereotypes inhabiting my immediate vicinity...

 

[Greg K]

All that matters to me is the following:

1. I had some issues with 3e that I wanted addresed.

2. The designers announced 4e and it appeared that they were going to address most of the issues that I had with 3e. It sounded promising until they began discussing their design philosophy for the new game and releasing previews.

3. I gave 4e a look and, despite finding a few things that I considered improvements, I have many more issues with 4e than I did with 3e. A few of the issues are carry overs or reintroductions from pre-3e editions (and the list has grown with the release of the Adventurer's Vault and the ranger animal companion material from Martial Power.

4. I chose to stay with 3e using UA, some third party material, and house rules. However, I adopted the 4e unified saving throw and would like to see someone redesign/balance the 3e races using the 4e approach of removing most of the non-biological aspects of race and making them into racial feats (the removal of the non-biological abilities from the racial description was one of my pre-3e questionaire requests 3e that did not make it into 3e).

5. If WOTC (via a 3e style Unearthed Arcana) and third parties address my issues with 4e, I may give 4e another look at some point in the future.

6. My gaming friends are of the same general opinion.

 

[WalterKovacs]

3) "Imagination Rules!". You don't like how 4e uses minions or whatever, then you need to use your imagination to paint the picture... like somehow all other editions, you couldn't use your imagination. Like it's unique now that suddenly you can and should fill in gaps to fit the scene. Somehow, suddenly, 4e is liberated from rules by Scene, but all previous editions the DM and players were bound by granite rules of conduct.
4) Fanaticism, which couples into 3, really. This is where you use your imagination to fill in gaps and then present your solution as if the other person should have known. "There is no grapple" "well, if you use this roll here and that roll there, it's the same as grapple, so that's not a valid complaint!" (off the cuff example, not saying that happened.)

One point about that.

This works both ways. A number of people will be perfectly happy to admit that you can use your imagination in previous editions (or that they house rule the problems and thus it wasn't a problem, etc, etc, etc) but then complain about a literal interpretation of the 4e rules. Or they deliberately use their imagination to make the 4e rules not make sense.

i.e. make wounds be gaping chest wounds so it doesn't make sense that the warlord can heal with a world ... ignoring that a gaping chest wound in any of the editions wouldn't make sense that the person isn't taking any damage on the following turns, not taking any serious side effects, etc, etc, etc ...

And of course not admitting that nothing out of 4e caused the problem, but they deliberately created a problem where 4e wouldn't make sense.

It's one thing for a game to not fit with how a group plays, what a player is looking for. However, it does seem a bit disingenuous to seemingly "go looking for" excuses to complain about the system. It's not "I can't narratively have HP be physical damage anymore" or "I like a gritty game where healing takes a long time" it is presented as "martial healing makes no sense at all".

 

[pawsplay]

It's undermining the entire online RPG community. It's a far angrier, far less welcoming place than it was not too long ago.

I think that before typing sentences such as this, one should pause for a moment and consider if that is, in fact, at all likely. In general, RPG message boards, like dutch ovens full of frying fat, run hot and occasionally catch on fire.

 

[Truth Seeker]

Here speaks the words, of unyeilding wisdom.

I think that before typing sentences such as this, one should pause for a moment and consider if that is, in fact, at all likely. In general, RPG message boards, like dutch ovens full of frying fat, run hot and occasionally catch on fire.

 

[Korgoth]

I think there's a subtext to the 4e discussions that effectively makes analyzing the game almost pointless.

Both pro- and anti-4e posters seem to have this belief that there's this war going on, and by arguing on the Internet they're fighting against the other side. It's like, if you're loud enough, and obnoxious enough, and constant enough, the vision you have for how D&D should be played will become a reality for everyone.

Frankly, I'm sick of fanaticism on all sides. It's undermining the entire online RPG community. It's a far angrier, far less welcoming place than it was not too long ago.

I've discovered your evil plan. The "4E Avenger Hateflamer Squadron" (you know, the guys who show up and try to shout you into submission for daring to criticize the tiniest aspect of 4E) is secretly in your pay... by effectively making irrelevant and irritating every discussion of 4E, your design decisions are made proof against rational criticism!

A plan worthy of your supervillain status.

 

[Darrin Drader]

I think that before typing sentences such as this, one should pause for a moment and consider if that is, in fact, at all likely. In general, RPG message boards, like dutch ovens full of frying fat, run hot and occasionally catch on fire.

Actually I agree with him. People on both sides of the argument pretty frequently delve into ad-hominem and hyperbole. I'll even admit that my own comments haven't always been fair to the other side.

The reason I think D&D is like that is because of the very nature of the thing. People don't simply consume it like most media, but they have to have a thorough understanding of it in order to play. People play any given edition for years at a time, and the way they interact with it leads to the way they define their experience with it. It isn't just something you do, it's something people are passionate about. For many in the over-30 crowd, it's something that we feel extremely connected with due to the persecution of the hobby back in the late '70s and '80s. A lot of us knew people who held uninformed negative opinions of it and either managed to straighten them out through reasoned debate, or at least had the courage to tell these people that we weren't going to change the things we enjoy and to keep their opinions to themselves.

For many of us, this isn't just a thing we do every week or so over pizza and Mountain Dew, it's one of the things we use to define ourselves by. It's a subculture. Of course people are going to get bent when something comes along that attempts to make drastic changes. It isn't a matter of just buying a new product, it's a matter of changing the way we interface with this culture we belong to. Some people like the change, other people don't and they feel like they've been abandoned by this thing they've invested so much of themselves into.

It's this feeling of personal investment that leads many, including me, to not like the more gamist nature of 4E while being more than willing to enjoy a strategy game along similar lines as Descent. One is something I've been invested with for over 20 years and the other is a game with some familiar elements that I've recently been introduced to. If 4th edition were released with a name other than D&D, would the reaction of some people be different? Would those who can't accept that this is the new form of D&D be able to enjoy it? Would those who love it and have defended it still pay any more attention to it than they do any other 3rd party release?

The pro-4E people need to realize that the anti-4E side is just as invested with D&D as they are, that they've been handed something that they can't get behind, and that their opinions are just as valid.

The anti-4E people need to realize that the existence of a new edition of the game doesn't suddenly make the previous editions suddenly cease to exist, nor does it change the fact that there's a lot of excellent companies made up entirely of gamers, just like them, who are still supporting the game they love.

In all honesty, my personal dislike for 4E has led to one very positive thing for me - the rediscovery of old school play. While I love the way 3rd edition was structured, I'm finding myself more free to follow where my imagination wants to lead because it's a less rigid system with fewer constraints. It's easier to design for, it's easier to wing-it, and the simple black and white line art actually stimulates the imagination just as well as full color masterfully crafted paintings.

I've been compiling notes and coming up with plots, sub-plots, challenges, maps, and all the other fun stuff for my Ancient World: Minoans campaign. Right now it looks like the system I'll be using will be Castles and Crusades, mainly because its so ridiculously easy to port material from any edition over to it without a lot of headache. In D&D, ideas are king. I also love what they did with OSRIC, Labyrinth Lord, and Mutant Future, but you can only play one game at a time, so makes sense to pick the one that matches what you want to accomplish for a given game, and so I did.

The bottom line is that looking at this as a war is the wrong approach. It's a choice that each group has to make. I've made my choice, other people have made theirs and no matter where you end up, we still belong to the same subculture. Want to play 4E? Go do it. Want to play 3E? Go do it. Want to play FATAL? Well, you may be one of the most interesting individuals ever, but by all means, go do it.