Are people still mad about . . .

[Hunter In Darkness]

The little girl is creepier by far.

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

They didn't say your games sucks.

They said some things that people interpreted that way. Others did not interpret them that way. Everyone agrees they never used the words "your games suck".

Unfun and sucked were words I recall hearing. If I cared enough to look I would find a video am sure it still floats about somewhere. But the comment "was x rules sucked and if you use them your game is not as fun as it could be" Profession skills was one of em, listed IIRC

 

[Umbran]

D&D contains vast amounts of adult content. It just happens to be true that this content is perfectly suitable for children as well as adults. Thus no restriction is merited.

So, here we are, at a point where we note that the nomenclature is pretty poor. The content is "adult", but is suitable for children? Seems to me that the classification system leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[Celebrim]

I can't tell which is creepier... The Wizard or the little girl looking at him.

I don't know, but I'm getting a whole new insight into why the occult scare occured back then.

 

[Mistwell]

Unfun and sucked were words I recall hearing. If I cared enough to look I would find a video am sure it still floats about somewhere. But the comment "was x rules sucked and if you use them your game is not as fun as it could be" Profession skills was one of em, listed IIRC

Yeah, I don't think they used those words.

Does ANYONE have a link to the specific quote that HID is referring to?

 

[Votan]

I generally like the "play the edition you prefer" argument and I like how it supports the widest possible range of playstyles and lets people have the game that they enjoy. This is pure win. I know that much of my like of AD&D is pure nostalgia -- I'm no longer young but I like things that remind me of that youthful state of wonder.

Where I got annoyed (not mad, just annoyed) was by the decision not to let multiple approaches co-exist. For many years, BECMI and AD&D co-exisited peacefully on the market with some people prefering one over the other. But both could have fun.

Now I know that it is not practical to keep the whole D&D canon in print. However, in the era of print on demand and PDFs, I do find it confusing that there is no viable business model to keeping older editions available. Rolemaster managed to do it with RM Classic --> the printing looks like laser printing and the binding job is beaten by a grad student thesis but the books are avaialble. If PDFs == piracy then print on demand (while not cheap) seems like an option.

So I don't want to say 4E= bad. I was actually intrigued and interested by "Cloud-watching" rather than offended (I was excited by game improvements). I bought 4E books the first day they were available and own 15 or so of them.

But the actual game is doing things that I don't necessarily enjoy and modern games (with things like the character builder and the tight relationships between things) seem harder to me to houserule. This could be optics or I could be unusual -- I'm sure many people have different experiences. But it makes me want to try older games and see if my memories of them match realities.

It's true that careful lurking at Half Price Books does pay off, eventually, but I'd so much rather access to older material just to make things so much simpler.

 

[Hunter In Darkness]

Yeah, I don't think they used those words.

Eh I really don't care if you think they used such words or not. I recall being told my games must be unfun or not as fun as they could be..

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

You know, I'm not feeling particularly marginalized at the moment. Pathfinder is making me feel very, very included.

And it's not like Hasbro hasn't done many things that people have good reason to be upset about. Lists have been posted here over and over again; I see no reason to add yet another.

Ken

Not so.

If you don't like what the company is doing, go ahead and say so. But have good reasons for it. If you come off as reactionary, you will probably just end up marginalized for it.

 

[Fifth Element]

They didn't say your games sucks.

They said some things that people interpreted that way. Others did not interpret them that way. Everyone agrees they never used the words "your games suck".

Indeed. 3.5 was "my game" at the time as well, in that it was the game I was playing, and the only version of D&D I had played in several years. I listened to all the 4E marketing and was never once told my game sucks.

That tells me it's about interpretation. We all hear the same words and watch the same videos. Some people interpret it as "your game sucks." I didn't see it.

 

[BryonD]

So, here we are, at a point where we note that the nomenclature is pretty poor. The content is "adult", but is suitable for children? Seems to me that the classification system leaves a lot to be desired.

I'd say that this nomenclature issue has been forced by the premise.
Outside of this thread I would not use the term in this way.

The references have been given that "adult" must mean having PG-13+ ratings or adult video game ratings. The point is that "adult" appeal does not preclude child appropriate. Because "adult" has already been constrained to a definition not consistent with normal usage, the ability to clearly express ideas is hampered.