Do grognards have to be jerks?

[SteveC]

To try and answer the OP's question: no, there's no reason that a grognard needs to be a jerk. Still, many can be, just as many gamers/sci fi fans/football fans and so forth can be. I'm a baseball fan, and I've seen some fan behavior that's simply inexcusable, so I know it's not just one group.

Still, the gaming community has a worse situation than many other groups, since we have quite a few members with some real issues with socializing.

I think the important thing to do is not tolerate it: I've been attacked for my choice of games many times (playing Champions in the 80's was not fun sometimes...), and as I play 4E at the moment, I get a fair bit of hassle over it from the Pathfinder fans (and others), or did, since the Edition Wars are largely over in my neck of the woods.

When someone I don't know wants to tell me the game I'm playing (or, worse yet, running) is badwrongfun, I simply don't let them. I pointedly and directly say that I don't care what their opinions are on the matter, and ask that they leave. I don't care to debate an issue that's about fun in an angry or aggressive manner. After some sputtering, it's always worked. If I don't know you, I have no interest in discussing how I'm playing an elf wrong.

I've seen a number of fans of the previous editions try to tell folks who express an interest in Encounters or LFR or other game that they shouldn't try them out, and, again, I approach the situation directly, asking if they have a game of edition X they can recommend, and then telling the new prospective player about how they can try Encounters as well, and judge for themselves. Again, there's usually some sputtering, but it typically ends with the person having two games to try, and that's a pretty cool thing . Fortunately my FLGS runs both Pathfinder and 4E on different nights, so it works out.

At times it's tough, because it requires me to keep my cool and be pleasant when I'd rather not be, but the results have been pretty positive.

It's just that simple: for a new person, keep it positive and help a new person to have fun, and at the same time require people to maintain some civility. For attacks on my gaming style, tell someone to go away.

It works for me at least.

 

[JamesonCourage]

This is so not a productive conversation. Then again, considering the original post and thread title, that's hardly surprising. I kind of wish we could stay away from edition wars, but they've once again broken out. Not as nasty as other times, but it certainly is edition versus edition right now.

 

[Aberzanzorax]

So was this your goal? To call me out for being vitriolic to Pathfinder or Paizo by pointing to a post of mine where I said that Pathfinder is a solid game but that its fans probably hyped it more than it deserved? Cuz, I mean, yeah man, I was flying off the handle there.

I thought it might (probably) have been you, but I wasn't 100% sure. I also didn't want to call you out specifically to this community. I figured if it was you, then you'd know and could choose to mention if it was you or not.

The way you're coloring the post now adds more data than was there. I believe you in what you say your intent was, but the brief post you made wasn't quite as positive as what you're saying here.

And, no, I'll admit that you weren't "flying off the handle" or "being vitriolic" but to post on a game site's own forums that it is specifically the most overrated rpg? Seems a bit harsher to me than some of the examples in this thread (where people aren't even allowed to talk about one edition/game to other people in line at gaming stores, even kindly/casually).


But, I'll stop this line of conversation now. I don't want to (and yeah, I'm the one who went there first) make this into a cross forum conversation.

It's clear that I think you're incorrect, and that you think I am...I think that's going to end up staying that way.

 

[DaveMage]

Exactly Dannager. It was more like...

Fans: "D&D is the classic game but this, this and that are bad for the game and it would be a much better game if something was done about it 'cause this stuff really sucks."

WotC: "We've heard you and changed many of the things you said were bad and have made a much better game."

Fans: "WHAT?!?!?!?!?!How dare you change and disrespect my game!!!!!!!!!!!!"

Ha!

You certainly remember it differently. And if you really think that's all WotC said and fans reacted the way they did, well, let's just say that you and I live in completely different universes.

But, to put it simply, WotC's actions affected enough people that Pathfinder is now thriving. WotC (IMO) became arrogant.

The good news (for WotC) is that the person in charge of the D&D rpg (mearls) gets it. If anyone can turn it around, it's him. Hopefully (again, for WotC), they won't lay him off before he can make some real positive change. (Although in the corporate environment of WotC, well, I have my doubts he'll have the latitude to do what's necessary.)

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I can guarantee you have never seen my name in a 4e forum. Except when I was learning it when it first was released.

I would imagine those individuals are the examples of 'jerks'. 'They' are not the PAthfinder or other edition crowds. They are individuals.

I have not been in a 4e forum for years.

Every jerk is a snowflake, no two exactly alike.

The Auld Grump, feeling pretty flaky about this thread myself....

 

[Pentius]

Bingo.

Of course, this is where the anti-4e crowd brings up the dragon poop cartoon and tries to convince us that it was WotC telling us that they want to crap all over the criticisms of 4e, rather than a comical satire of both sides of the edition wars.

I...shouldn't ask, but what is this "dragon poop cartoon"? A brief search on youtube was both fun, NSFW and incredibly unproductive.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

This example you provided, shows it pleased some fans and disappointed others. Perhaps the very vocal fans of what needed to be changed were the future fans of 4e. The fans in the latter part of your post could very well be the fans that saw the game they were happy with being changed, when they saw no reason for those changes.

It hardly shows this vaunted correlation between grognards and jerks.

That has been my view for a little while now - that WotC did listen to one group of fans, while the other group feels (and can produce evidence) that they were not listened to at all.

If you saw the 'problems' as problems then you were happy to see them fixed.

If you saw them as 'features' then you were annoyed and felt betrayed. I fall into this camp, and could see it coming even in the stupid little preview books. (If Pathfinder had such books I would have called them stupid too.)

If you didn't care, and were willing to play whatever somebody else was running? Then you are like most people....

The Auld Grump

 

[Vegepygmy]

This example you provided, shows it pleased some fans and disappointed others. Perhaps the very vocal fans of what needed to be changed were the future fans of 4e. The fans in the latter part of your post could very well be the fans that saw the game they were happy with being changed, when they saw no reason for those changes.

Indeed. The "fans" were not speaking in unanimity. Those of us who were generally satisfied with 3e, I suspect, simply remained silent (and thus unnoticed).

I remember being absolutely shocked upon the announcement of 4e at the number of people who suddenly came out of the woodwork to denounce 3e and praise 4e for "fixing" its many "problems." Or at least, it seemed that way to me. In reality, I'm sure they'd been there all along...I just didn't pay any attention to them or their complaints, because I was content with things as they were.

 

[Dannager]

This is so not a productive conversation. Then again, considering the original post and thread title, that's hardly surprising. I kind of wish we could stay away from edition wars, but they've once again broken out. Not as nasty as other times, but it certainly is edition versus edition right now.

I think it's important to note that this is more like the post-war phase. I mean, we're not really debating the merits of individual editions, but rather the behavior of certain sides over the course of the past few years. It's more like a History Channel retrospective.

 

[Dannager]

But, to put it simply, WotC's actions affected enough people that Pathfinder is now thriving. WotC (IMO) became arrogant.

Here, I think you're right. WotC had been riding high for years and (perhaps rightly) considered themselves above the rest of the industry. It led to them taking actions that could have been more carefully considered. They should have foreseen certain fan reactions, regardless of whether or not those reactions were warranted. Hopefully the experience of the last few years has left them a more cautious and thoughtful company.