Do grognards have to be jerks?

[Dannager]

4e players do not defend what they enjoy exclusively.

Do you mean that 4e players do not just defend but also hate on things?

Or do you mean that 4e players defend things they enjoy as well as other things?

Either way, I agree.

older edition players do not hate other games exclusively amongst their group.

I also agree.

That is what is being discussed.

That's not what I'm discussing.

I was explaining that older-edition players are, in my experience and according to my understanding, more likely to be bitter, resentful, off-putting and hostile towards newer games and their players, and it was this observation that the OP was discussing.

I will absolutely throw out 'any researcher will tell you..." because i am a researcher, and I just completed research on evapotranspiration and rain shadow effect on biomes (i.e. how plants change moisture in deserts)
Since I am a professional researcher and educator, consider yourself schooled. Or not. We cannot help everyone.

This goes a long way towards explaining why you're unfamiliar with self-selection bias as a confound. It pretty much only crops up in social research. It also doesn't even apply here. If you want to accuse the OP of a bias, you're probably better off going with in-group/out-group or something.

But, again, we feel that this is not a case of bias severely distorting our perception. In fact, the very fact that we see threads like these more often than "Man, is it just me or are 4e players all total jerks about older games?" threads is evidence of this - if the behavior were uniform between the two groups, both groups would be complaining about the behavior.

 

[MrMyth]

Do you mean that 4e players do not just defend but also hate on things?

Or do you mean that 4e players defend things they enjoy as well as other things?

I'm guessing - and I could be wrong - that he meant, "It is not exclusively 4E players who defend things that they enjoy", which is to say, fans of other editions act the same way.

I admit that my experience has largely mirrored your own, but I don't think either of us can lay claim to that in any absolute sense. And I have, undeniably, seen 4E fans acting just as atrocious as any other 'haters' out there, sure.

I think there are bad eggs in every group. And they are usually the most outspoken and thus most noticeable, and even more than that, we tend to notice those who criticize our own favorite products more than we notice those who criticize other products.

(On the other hand, it should be noted that Dannager is often someone who defends both WotC and Paizo from unfounded and irrational criticisms, and so may indeed have a broader perspective than many on how often each company comes under such criticisms).

Anyway, not sure what is really to be concluded from this thread. As always, the best bet is to try and ignore the jerks, whoever they might be. If in a public environment where they are actively detracting from the experience, find someone running the event and bring it to their attention - such behavior is often not tolerated.

Similarly, if in an online environment, report the offending posts, rather than responding with one's own hostility. Most of the big gaming forums - especially ENWorld, and even WotC's - tend to be pretty good at trying to keep conversation civil. Even those with worse reputations, like Paizo's, still have rules of behavior, and if enough attention is drawn to trolling, the mods will usually take action eventually.

Trying to solve problems any other way, by shouting folks down or otherwise... rarely seems to have any good outcome at all.

 

[Vyvyan Basterd]

Though I am most definitely *not* calling the OP a jerk, I do believe the title to this thread is needlessly provocative, which increases the likelihood that posters in this thread will be...jerks.

I came into the thread thinking it was a question of definition. Like, "Is grognard a derogatory term meaning an old grumbling gamer?" My answer to my perceived question and the actual is no. But then I wonder if some do view it differently as I'm sure many wouldn't agree with mine. I consider myself a grognard because of my general outlook on the game, the feel I wish to accomplish. But I run 4E. 1E feel, 4E rules.

 

[Bullgrit]

Curious though, when the OP says 'grognard' that by itself could be considered a derogatory term. Does the OP mean to say, anyone not embracing new games - as in 4e is a grognard.

While its true, I've played all the editions since 1977, and currently play 3x/Pathfinder, I don't consider myself a grognard - I usually point that term to old pre-RPG miniatures gamers, or even the origin of the term retired veterans who served under Napoleon. I don't think any of those grognards are still alive.

http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/282687-define-grognard.html

Edit: I posted this link not to have more people vote in the poll, but rather to show how we've seen evidence that different people define the term very differently -- sometimes different people define it in mutually opposing ways.

Bullgrit

 

[Reynard]

Just got back from GenCon and had a pretty good time. One thing I noticed however was that at almost every event there was someone talking about how the latest version of game x was terrible and that the true version was an older edition and that I should try to find the OOP rules. (This happened with several game systems, so I'm not criticizing the fans of any one game here.)

One grognard went so far as to compare a game company to the Nazis and say that anyone who purchased their current products were mindless sheep - and of course I had a bag of their stuff by my chair.

My experience is the opposite with players who embrace change and new editions of games. They tend to be outgoing and not as insulting in one's choice of game.

Your experiences?

Since it is obvious we aren't going to avoid this whole thing by engaging in humor (alas) I will try and discuss it rationally.

First off, I don't think the basic premise of the OP is true. Fans of older editions are NOT mor elikely to be "jerks" than anyone else -- but if you are not a grognard, it's probably more likely that you'll note jerk-ish behavior from them (as opposed to whatever group you count yourself a part of).

That said, you ARE, I think, more likely to get an opinion from a "grognard" -- or any long time fan of anything really -- simply because anyone who has been a fan of a game or edition (or movie or book or whatever) for *decades* is likely to have formed some pretty solid and well supported (at least in their own minds) opinions about that thing. And, given that, chances are when they are presented with an opinion that runs counter to this long held opinion, they are likely to argue, perhaps vehemently, because they have invested something of themselves in their interest.

Do not, however, mistake vehemence for "being a jerk". To some minds, the one who presents the notion that, for example, old-school save categories are arbitrary and silly is the one being the jerk. Over the decades, the "grognard" has come to appreciate the value of the old school save categories (or THAC0 or Shadowrun 1E wound system or whatever) and integrated it fully into their experience of the game -- even going so far, perhaps, as to view it as an integral part of the game in question.

So, before you label a "grognard" a "jerk" because they argue with your point of view, consider this: they hold their views based on DECADES of experience and appreciation for something, and someone younger than their DMG suggesting their game is badwrongfun is an attack on a long established point of view.

To put it more simply and in a different context: go tell your dad you think [insert modern cover here] is a better version of his favorite Beatles song and see how that goes.

 

[gamerprinter]

http://www.enworld.org/forum/general-rpg-discussion/282687-define-grognard.html

Bullgrit

Eh, I already gave 'my' definition above, so I don't need to do it again in another thread. But its a word I never use, nor use it in any other context. I think its a derogatory term only.

 

[Votan]

Eh, I already gave 'my' definition above, so I don't need to do it again in another thread. But its a word I never use, nor use it in any other context. I think its a derogatory term only.

I see it as being halfway to a compliment. It does imply some resistance to the new but usually through a rich experience of the hobby (wargaming, RPGs, or others). There can be some grumbling involved but also some pretty nice history and experience too.

So I'd be happy with the label, myself.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

Either way, though, I frequent a number of online communities and my observations have held pretty steady across them - not a lot of current-edition players griping about other games, lots of older-edition players griping about newer games.

There's not much point in this as conversation if your anecdotal experiences are all that you're interested in.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I dislike explanations that go for the "All groups are equally obnoxious, you just don't recognize it in your own group," point.

I dislike positions that dislike reality.

 

[gamerprinter]

I just label myself as a 'long-time gamer', which I don't equate to grognard - to me the grumbly part is necessary for the label. I'm open to new ideas, that's why I tried 4e. It turned out I didn't care for it, though thought it was a perfectly viable game. Just not my flavor. I'm not grumbling...