4E value < 3E value

[GnomeWorks]

I really don't see how that post can be interpreted as hostile. It expressed an opinion strongly, but did nothing to suggest hostility towards the opposite opinion.

It is hostile. Thinly-veiled with what some would call "civility," perhaps, but hostile nonetheless.

 

[GnomeWorks]

More civil than calling a bunch of posters "zealots", certainly. If you're really concerned about the thread going down in flames, don't bring matches and kerosene.

I never claimed civility.

Call a spade a spade, yo.

There are undoubtedly zealots on both sides. If you don't like the title, then don't act in accordance with it.

 

[Khairn]

For the OP, I would have to say that the "dumbed down" comment really killed any chance that your post was viewed as anything other than a jab. And even though I understand where you are coming from and what you are trying to say, I just don't see it as much of an issue.

Many players appear to like the large font and white space of this editions format. The lack of 3E formatted dense content is not viewed as a negative by those same gamers. And I can also see why they would appreciate separate books targeted for both GM's and players. This appears to be a case of providing the consumer something that they want. Of course from WotC's pov its also a solid win as selling 2 books instead of 1 means additional profit. Definitely not something to be avoided.

I find the most legitimate complaint about the value or content of the 4e books is that stuff is missing.

Firearm rules. Various iconic monsters. Familiars, illusions, summoning. Artifacts.

The fact that you have to wait for that stuff, that it's missing from the books? That's the real problem.

Also a very subjective topic, but one that I totally agree with. Based on my personal expectations of what the first 3 books should have included, I'll need to buy at least a few more books or pay a monthly subscription to get to where I was expecting to be.

 

[Scribble]

Call a spade a spade, yo.

There are undoubtedly zealots on both sides. If you don't like the title, then don't act in accordance with it.

Someone with a different opinion to yours does not constitute a "zealot."

 

[Fifth Element]

There are undoubtedly zealots on both sides. If you don't like the title, then don't act in accordance with it.

A: "I prefer 3.X's layout with little or no blank space."
B: "I think 4E's layout is better because it's easier to read."
C: "4E zealot!!!!"

 

[JeffB]

A very reasonable assessment.

Please. Less word count or less pages?= dumbed down? You really believe that?

Call a spade a spade, yo.

There are undoubtedly zealots on both sides. If you don't like the title, then don't act in accordance with it.

Spare me the gangsta-speak nonsense I don't believe stating our rebuttal/opinion to the OP was call for your using of a negative personal jab.

 

[Fifth Element]

I never claimed civility.

Intentional incivility is against forum rules. Basically, you're admitting you're not here to contribute anything? Is that right?

 

[GnomeWorks]

Someone with a different opinion to yours does not constitute a "zealot."

I have no stake in this edition war.

There are a number of folks - more on the 4e side, but they're on both - who will defend their chosen edition to the death, and engage in some pretty astounding feats of irrationality and passive-aggressiveness to do so.

Sounds like a zealot to me.

And again, if you don't like the title, then don't act that way. Simple as that. There are plenty more folk around here who like one edition over another that wouldn't be classified as zealots in my book.

 

[Fifth Element]

There are a number of folks - more on the 4e side, but they're on both - who will defend their chosen edition to the death, and engage in some pretty astounding feats of irrationality and passive-aggressiveness to do so.

Sounds like a zealot to me.

But no one has done that in this thread. On either side. You're assuming there will be a flame war, and then fanning what few sparks there may be by calling people zealots without provocation.

There have been a few mildly uncivil posts, from both "sides". But nothing remotely resembling a flame war. There is no edition war here. People explaining why they like a particular type of layout does not make an edition war.

 

[GnomeWorks]

Please. Less word count or less pages?= dumbed down? You really believe that?

Do I personally? Perhaps... I'm currently in the midst of mulling that idea over. I imagine that my verdict will be a definite "no," but I think that a lower word count will probably play a part in indicating if something is "dumbed down" - a contributing factor, but not the deciding one.

Regardless, it is still a reasonable position to hold. Disagree with it if you like; I probably will.

Spare me the gangsta-speak nonsense I don't believe stating our rebuttal/opinion to the OP was call for your using of a negative personal jab.

Ah, I see. This are serious thread.

Chillax. If you don't want to be considered a zealot, then don't engage in zealot-like activity. If you do, then expect to be called out on it; it's your problem if you're okay with that label or not.

Intentional incivility is against forum rules. Basically, you're admitting you're not here to contribute anything? Is that right?

Quite the quick one, ain't ya?

I never claimed civility with the intent to hide behind it.