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

[thecasualoblivion]

Probably none, I doubt they're listening with any sympathy. No-one's going to slap their forehead after listening to someone written off as a "toxic customer" or someone "impossible to please" and recant most of "the design that will save D&D" that they've invested so much of themselves in. But I'm passionate about the game, and care what happens to it, and will argue my corner on things D&D...perhaps out of habit, grief, or a sense of outrage.

I know it would be convenient for you if I shut up and go away (and I have to an extent, I don't frequent ENWorld much anymore), but that just frustrates me with what WOTC have done all the more. Yes they own the trademark, but to me D&D is bigger than WOTC and what they've decided is 4E. I guess I'd be more willing to walk away if it were their baby that they were redefining, but it's not, they're no Gygax, Mentzer or Arneson. 30 years on, D&D belongs to all of us, and I don't care if you read that as unjustified entitlement.

To an extent I hope that D&D is deposed, now, and something I'd consider more D&Dish (like Pathfinder) would take it's place as top dog. That's probably my best hope for the game's future, albeit a quixotic one - I don't even play Pathfinder as my weekly game. I know 4E fans may consider that pernicious, but nowhere is it written that you should get your way either.

You have to accept that it isn't all about you.

 

[rounser]

It astounds me that this is something some people take so seriously they're not just willing to act like obnoxious jerks over Proper Elf-Pretend Procedures, but they feel it's their moral duty to do so.

Oh come on, enough facetiousness and calling other geeks geeks, you geek. It's like student politics - viciously fought because so little is at stake. I suppose you can belittle the fanaticism of fans, but they're the ones buying your books. Maybe if you trivialise what you do enough, it wouldn't matter if there were finger paintings in the rule books instead of rules, because clearly "elf pretend procedures" don't matter, so why would anyone bother to read your words?

People write books about elves too, but people would scream blue murder if Christopher Tolkien decided to revise his father's work since he decided that dragonborn warlords were a good idea in Middle Earth, and most D&D campaigns require significantly more effort than reading a book. Therein lies the personal investment. And it's human nature to try to even the score when someone feels they've been betrayed. The rest of coming across as a "jerk" is because an argument makes both sides seem jerks unless very civil, and when you're no longer on the inside you face a whole bandwagon of opposition.

But you've already decided such behaviour makes no sense, in fact it "astounds" you. I'm surprised you don't understand the psychology of it, but instead want to pretend those who don't just piss off are jerks.

 

[rounser]

You have to accept that it isn't all about you.

Didn't I tell you to lay off the psychobabble?

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Oh come on, enough facetiousness and calling other geeks geeks, you geek. It's like student politics - viciously fought because so little is at stake. I suppose you can belittle the fanaticism of fans, but they're the ones buying your books. Maybe if you trivialise what you do enough, it wouldn't matter if there were finger paintings in the rule books instead of rules, because clearly "elf pretend procedures" don't matter, so why would anyone bother to read your words?

People write books about elves too, but people would scream blue murder if Christopher Tolkien decided to revise his father's work since he decided that dragonborn warlords were a good idea in Middle Earth, and most D&D campaigns require significantly more effort than reading a book. Therein lies the personal investment. And it's human nature to try to even the score when someone feels they've been betrayed. The rest of coming across as a "jerk" is because an argument makes both sides seem jerks unless very civil, and when you're no longer on the inside you face a whole bandwagon of opposition.

But you've already decided such behaviour makes no sense, in fact it "astounds" you. I'm surprised you don't understand the psychology of it, but instead want to pretend those who don't just piss off are jerks.

It isn't good business sense to try to cater to silly people. Fanatics are the most unpredictable of people and trying to keep them happy is an uphill struggle at best. The fact is, its people who buy a product that determine its success, not the wackos yelling about how bad it is on the internet.

You speak of personal investment. That strikes me as sort of, well, personal. Something new comes out and you either like it or you don't. If you take it personally and get upset enough to have to rage about it, I don't see the need to trumpet it to all the strangers on the internet.

If you don't like something and choose not to buy it, that's between you and WotC. You rant and rave about how bad 4E is on ENWorld, and now you're telling me how to play my game.

 

[N0Man]

People write books about elves too, but people would scream blue murder if Christopher Tolkien decided to revise his father's work since he decided that dragonborn warlords were a good idea in Middle Earth...

Maybe I'm crazy, but I think that it's at least conceivably possible that a person could make quite a good story that involved dragonborn warlords. It's possible that maybe they could even pull off a version of such a character in Middle Earth. It's a slim chance that it will ever happen, but a good story teller can make the most mundane, silly, and unconventional story ideas into brilliant works.

and most D&D campaigns require significantly more effort than reading a book. Therein lies the personal investment.

See, you lost me here. Did you lose your past good gaming experiences? Did you lose the ability to continue playing a version you prefer? I think I'd rather play the Chaossium version of Call of Cthulhu than the D20 version, but it doesn't upset me that it went D20.

And it's human nature to try to even the score when someone feels they've been betrayed. The rest of coming across as a "jerk" is because an argument makes both sides seem jerks unless very civil, and when you're no longer on the inside you face a whole bandwagon of opposition.

Betrayed by who? It's justified for one person to be a jerk and want to "settle scores" with innocent parties that happen to disagree with them and are content to play a game that you don't like?

Also, what's the deal with the "bandwagon of opposition? It sounds like you are trying to suggest that people only disagree with your viewpoint because they are following the crowd. That's a bit patronizing sounding.

Can't people just prefer it because it fits their style better, without being suckered by marketing, conforming to the bandwagon, or deceiving themselves? Just because I don't have the same tastes as you doesn't mean I'm a brainless sheep.

But you've already decided such behaviour makes no sense, in fact it "astounds" you. I'm surprised you don't understand the psychology of it, but instead want to pretend those who don't just piss off are jerks.

You argue that such strong reactions are completely understandable, but do you honestly think they are rationale?

 

[Lanefan]

See, you lost me here. Did you lose your past good gaming experiences? Did you lose the ability to continue playing a version you prefer?

The issue is not the loss of past good experiences or the ability to continue playing my game. The issue is the potential loss of future good experiences and potential loss of ability to play my game due to being less and less able to find new people to play and experience it with as it continues to be slowly ground into oblivion by the marketing for this decade's Brave New Game.

The way I see it is this: A person who prefers 3E means nothing to me, because I have 4E.

If I took that attitude toward those who prefer other editions than I do, a whole lot of people would "mean nothing to me". I see little point in that.

Besides, good ideas can also come from those you disagree with.

Lan-"if my horse beats Raven Crowking's it'll only be by a nose"-efan

 

[Snoweel]

Come on everybody, do we really need to be arguing like this?

I think there's something we can all agree on, and that's the fact that 4E is the best edition of Dungeons and Dragons yet.

 

[Jack99]

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!

On a side note (unrelated to what I quoted), it's hard to use the ignore button. I myself have just decided to use it for the first time, in order to help myself avoid getting into these silly arguments with edition warriors from the other camp. And behold, this is what I get when I /ignore the first one..

Sorry XXX is a moderator/admin and you are not allowed to ignore him or her.

 

[Jack99]

Ah well, it's done. 13 people added to the ignore list. I sincerely hope it helps, because honestly, I think it is a pity that I feel forced to do so. Forced because lately, my interest in ENworld has slowly been wanning, mostly due to an increased amount of "let's crap all over 4e"-threads, dominated by the same people. It's a pity because most, if not all of these names, regularly contribute with something I can use in my own D&D when they talk about their own edition of choice. Because, despite all the differences some people feel there are between the editions, I still think a lot of good advice for D&D, whether it be world-building, NPC-generation or a ton of other things, translates between all editions.

We'll see if that helps. If not, you can always poke me in a month or so and let me know I failed to get out of the edition wars.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Come on everybody, do we really need to be arguing like this?

I think there's something we can all agree on, and that's the fact that every edition of Dungeons and Dragons brings its own value to the table.....Even if it isn't the value you particularly want, someone else will groove on it.

@ Mustrum: If a poster is posting in the 4e rules forum to say how 4e sucks, or in the Pathfinder/3e to say how Pathfinder/3e sucks, IMHO the moderators are fully within their rights to simply delete the posts. IMHO, of course. In fact, I encourage it. For the most part, EN World moderators are wise enough to sift between the posts that actually contribute to a discussion, and those that do not....I believe most of them would use the power judiciously.


RC