Rampant Anti-Groggism

[Herschel]

Is it me, or have the anti-groggites been coming out of the woodwork lately? I mainly see this over at the WotC boards and rpg.net, which is probably why I can only bring myself to post about here.

Actually, it's the grognards coming out of the woodwork and attacking while 4E fans are defending, which is the usual case. Look at the join date and post counts of the generally incendiary thread starters and crap starters.
Whoops! Browser Settings Incompatible!

Whoops! Browser Settings Incompatible!

Just to show a couple and one person has started multiple threads like that. With teh announcement of D&DN many grognards took that a license to come out of the woodwork and start the edition wars all over again.

 

[rounser]

It's crap like "I won't buy 5E if the Warlord, Warlock, Tiefling, or Dragonborn are in the PHB" that is upsetting us 4E players. You "grognards" have no one to thank but yourselves for backlash received because of BS like that.

Why? If a bollocksed-up implied setting wrecked 4E for me and is returning for 5E, exactly how have things changed, and why do your preferences for reams of dragonborn to be retconned into the FR setting and D&D artwork, or shout-heal "warlords" to romp all over the homebrew landscape, trump my right to be disappointed, say "not this crap again, they've learnt nothing", and write off 5E?

The only reason you're getting what you want is because the designers have decided that it's going to be that way. Why are you getting your nose out of joint over someone making an argument that they're making the same mistake, twice? Oh right, because your preferences trump mine, and everyone else who abandoned 4E over those classes and races. They go a long way towards making 4E feel un-D&D when present in the core, and they're a pain to take out, and they wreck existing settings with the retcon they require, but how dare someone challenge the status quo and suggest that not all of 4E's failings lay in the mechanics.

 

[Incenjucar]

Why? If a bollocksed-up implied setting wrecked 4E for me

Some would argue that this a melodramatic behavior which is unreasonable. Surely plenty of people who can't stand Greyhawk were able to enjoy 3E.

and is returning for 5E, exactly how have things changed,

Rules. The only real issue unless nobody in your group can come up with their own fluff.

and why do your preferences for reams of dragonborn to be retconned into the FR setting and D&D artwork, or shout-heal "warlords" to romp all over the homebrew landscape, trump my right to be disappointed, say "not this crap again, they've learnt nothing", and write off 5E?

Inclusion>Exclusion. It's like limiting the internet to youtube because that's all you ever use it for.

The only reason you're getting what you want is because the designers have decided that it's going to be that way. Why are you getting your nose out of joint over someone making an argument that they're making the same mistake, twice? Oh right, because your preferences trump mine, and everyone else who abandoned 4E over those classes and races.

Your preferences exclude potential customers. You can always ignore material you don't like.

They go a long way towards making 4E feel un-D&D when present in the core, and they're a pain to take out, and they wreck existing settings with the retcon they require, but how dare someone challenge the status quo and suggest that not all of 4E's failings lay in the mechanics.

How are they a pain to take out? I can ignore Elminster in FR and he's half the bloody setting anymore.

 

[Kalontas]

This way 4e gets to recruit new players and, while 4e may not be the first book in the core, it stays supported and can be part of the spinal column.

The way I see it being developed so far, I can't see a single new player for 5E. With more and more quotes coming, it looks like it wholesale borrows from 3.5, while taking some minor words from 4E just to keep the facade of being friendly to all editions - while really kicking 4E swiftly in the groin, if you look deeper.

Let's look at the Vancian magic. IMO - and in opinion of many 4E players - lack of it in 4E was a vast improvement. Now they're stating it's back and in the core, so you can't avoid it. Power sources! One of the major changes in 4E, and ones iconic with the edition. Oh, they're dumping them.

If it keeps that way, i.e. being 3.5E with some names from 4E, it will fail spectactularly. The reactionists will remain with their 3.5 of Pathfinder (because why change their game at all?), while the 4E fans will remain with their - vastly different - game. Now WHO exactly will buy 5E books in that case? What new audiences can they interest in the game if all the old audiences will be gone elsewhere?

This is why developers must stop listening to those "grognards". Those people who were afraid of change and for whom the devs are now trying to regress the game are a malignant tumor upon D&D, one that will eventually drive it down, like every reactionist movement. Everything - tabletop games including - must PROGRESS to survive. That tumor needs to removed, or if it removed itself already, the healthy body must distance itself away from it, not try to re-attach it because "it was kinda cool on morphine with the tumor on".

 

[ShinHakkaider]

Gotta love how for four years, the "grognards" have been decrying 4E as "being WoW in paper form", "D&D for dumbies", or "Not REAL D&D", but now that WotC is shamelessly pandering toward them, the people who haven't bought WotC D&D in years, when 4E adherents, the people who HAVE been buying WotC D&D over the years, raise issue with the fact that their game is being treated like the red-headed stepchild of D&D in terms of how it fits into the planning of D&DNext, the "grognards" get their panties in a bunch because god-forbid the game give focus on something other than their preferred system.

It's crap like "I won't buy 5E if the Warlord, Warlock, Tiefling, or Dragonborn are in the PHB" that is upsetting us 4E players. You "grognards" have no one to thank but yourselves for backlash received because of BS like that.

Wow.

Pretty sure that when 4E came out and a whole bunch of us 3E players who had been spending crap loads of money on 3X material and 2E material before that and 1E and Basic material before that felt the same way that you do now. You want to know what the general consensus here at good ol EnWorld was by the 4E fans?

Who needs you.
either adapt to the new or be gone.
We'll make up your departed numbers with new and relapsed players.
Keep playing your old editions. No one is coming to take your rulebooks away.
When your player pool dries up you'll have no choice BUT to play the new edition.

So dont be upset because now the same thing is happening to you. Your edition got 4 years. The designers are going to build off of that to make something different that may appeal to both you and those grognards you all hate so much.

You know what though, I might agree with you about some of the way those grognards express their sour grapes towards new editions. but honestly if it weren't for the dedication of some of those grognards so many of you like to crap all over now? We wouldn't HAVE an RPG hobby.

 

[rounser]

Some would argue that this a melodramatic behavior which is unreasonable. Surely plenty of people who can't stand Greyhawk were able to enjoy 3E.

3E didn't screw up the implied setting with dragonborn warlords in Hommlett like your game did.

Rules. The only real issue unless nobody in your group can come up with their own fluff.

Yes, I understand that mechanics are more important than aesthetics for many 4E-ers. It can even be detected when the designers talk - the fluff is an afterthought. Well guess what - that shows.

Inclusion>Exclusion. It's like limiting the internet to youtube because that's all you ever use it for.

Tell that to FR fans who are upset with the retcons that the 4E implied setting required, or dragonboobs in core artwork, or explaining why elves blink at will. Your preferences are not core material because they are clearly too niche to belong in a thousand worlds. I don't deny you your reptile PCs, but think they belong in a supplement, that's all. It's also reasonable, given that you're the ones breaking with 30 years of what D&D is, a fracture that your game caused.

Your preferences exclude potential customers. You can always ignore material you don't like.

Yup, the whole edition.

 

[MortonStromgal]

Gotta love how for four years, the "grognards" have been decrying 4E as "being WoW in paper form",

Wait, stop... thats not grognards (for the most part) If you didn't play D&D that Gygax wrote (1e or before) your not a grognard. Some of them complain about 4e being WOW yes but thats not the majority, a good chunk of them feel 4e rules were a step back to what they loved about the origninal but were disapointed that dragonborn are now in phb1 and gnomes are not. (I was never fond of gnomes so that didnt bother me)

Let's look at the Vancian magic. IMO - and in opinion of many 4E players - lack of it in 4E was a vast improvement. Now they're stating it's back and in the core, so you can't avoid it. Power sources! One of the major changes in 4E, and ones iconic with the edition. Oh, they're dumping them.

Wait, what? Vancian magic is still in 4e (mechanicly)... they call them dailies! its just now the fighter gets his Vancian magic to. The memorization bits got removed and the fluff along with it so what makes you think the 5e Vancian isnt going to be very similar to 4e? After all the At-wills just got a rename to feats.

 

[CasvalRemDeikun]

Wait, stop... thats not grognards (for the most part) If you didn't play D&D that Gygax wrote (1e or before) your not a grognard. Some of them complain about 4e being WOW yes but thats not the majority, a good chunk of them feel 4e rules were a step back to what they loved about the origninal but were disapointed that dragonborn are now core and gnomes are not.

I put grognards in quotes for this reason. Countless true grognards have expressed that 4E felt more like 1E than 3E did. I wouldn't count the 4E gnome not being in the PHB to be a loss, BTW.

 

[rounser]

This is why developers must stop listening to those "grognards". Those people who were afraid of change and for whom the devs are now trying to regress the game are a malignant tumor upon D&D, one that will eventually drive it down, like every reactionist movement. Everything - tabletop games including - must PROGRESS to survive. That tumor needs to removed, or if it removed itself already, the healthy body must distance itself away from it, not try to re-attach it because "it was kinda cool on morphine with the tumor on".

This old canard. Art is cyclical, not evolutionary. D&D has more in common with the fashion industry than Darwinism, but certain styles are timeless and generally always look classy, whereas others are a flash in the pan and make people say "what were we thinking?" in hindsight. And to pursue your tasteless analogy, 4E is the tumor if anything is; after all it almost killed the host.

 

[frankthedm]

Is it me, or have the anti-groggites been coming out of the woodwork lately?

They fear in this time of turmoil the game will revert back to way things ought to be, leaving so called 'modern' game design to wither and decay. They see doom approaching their preferred style of game and don't want to accept the inevitable.