Are you tired of being told you hate 4E?

[Treebore]

I know I am.

I am really tired of being told because a certain game isn't a game I want to play or DM then I am a "hater". I don't "hate" 4E. I just don't like it enough to use.

I don't hate GURPS.

I don't hate HARP.

I don't hate any edition of D&D.

I just don't like any of them enough to be my preferred rules set.


I am getting really tired of being told being "anti-4E" means I am a hater.

I may dislike it, but I certainly do not hate it.

How about you?

 

[trancejeremy]

I dunno. I don't really hate 4e, but much like C&C and Savage Worlds, I'm rather put off by its rather fanatical and proselyting fans who constantly put down 3.x and its fans.

I do definitely hate GURPS. Gives me a headache. Like hitting myself with a hammer, only not as much fun.

 

[Derro]

Not to adversarial but I don't give a squat what anybody thinks of my gaming preferences. The exception to that being the 7-10 people that I game with regularly. And most of them dislike 4e or don't give a damn either way.

I've stated in plenty of other posts,"I like some elements of 4e's design elements but I think a lot of it is marketing and pandering to an portion of gamers that isn't me or the people I play with."

Do I hate 4e? No, that's just silly. What I hate is the attitude that if I'm not on the 4e bandwagon then I must be a) antiquated b) unaware of what good game design is supposed to look like or c) looking to pick a fight when I suggest possible design flaws or elements that are lacking.

I'm very curious to see what the 4e playing part of the community has to say in June 2009 after they've bought their third or fourth splat and the newness is no longer a blinding light. Revolution in game design or just another turn of the wheel? I guess we'll see.

 

[jdrakeh]

I dunno. I don't really hate 4e, but much like C&C and Savage Worlds Adventure!, I'm rather put off by its rather fanatical and proselyting fans who constantly put down 3.x and its fans.

With that one correction, I think you've pretty well nailed down my own position. The lot of SW fans you speak of seem to be largely confined to SW forums, which makes it bearable for me.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I know I am.

I am really tired of being told because a certain game isn't a game I want to play or DM then I am a "hater". I don't "hate" 4E. I just don't like it enough to use.

I don't hate GURPS.

I don't hate HARP.

I don't hate any edition of D&D.

I just don't like any of them enough to be my preferred rules set.


I am getting really tired of being told being "anti-4E" means I am a hater.

I may dislike it, but I certainly do not hate it.

How about you?

Wow.

You must really hate 4E.

Joking (of course). While I have no urge to run/play 4E I don't 'hate' it either - it seems to have some good ideas, so far, but not enough to balance other 'not so good' (in my opinion) other ideas.

Then again, I am not a huge fan of what I view as overly simplified systems - I like to tinker around in the gubbins, and simple systems don't leave enough room for my elbows....

The Auld Grump

 

[Dragon Snack]

I play both 3.x and Savage Worlds, I didn't realize that wasn't allowed...

 

[jeffh]

I have the opposite problem, especially on the WotC boards. My position on 4E is no more puzzling than liking a movie's script and special effects while admitting the acting was a bit wooden, yet people's brains seem to seize up when confronted with it. No matter how many misgivings I express about 4E, or how clearly I try to distinguish between being for it and disagreeing with specific stupid arguments against it, people accuse me of being enthusiastically pro-4E every time I show my face there. Many posters on various boards, but especially that one, don't seem to understand the concept of mixed feelings or to have the basic grasp of logic to see why "you're either with us or against us" is almost always an utterly stupid statement.

 

[Tewligan]

It doesn't look like a game I want to play at all, but I don't care enough about it to actually hate it.

Unlike Dane Cook, who I do, in fact, hate.

 

[Mark Hope]

I voted "can't we all just get along". I'm not aware of anyone ever having called me a hater, but I suppose it might irritate me a bit if it happened.

Truth is, I actually know relatively little about 4e and haven't done more than skim most of the preview information. I'm happy with 3.5 (er, Pathfinder RPG, I mean... ) and I haven't really been interested enough by anything I've heard about 4e to want to check it out thoroughly. Some things about it have sounded OK, other things not so much. It just hasn't caught my attention. As I've said elsewhere, my reasons for staying with 3e have lots to do with 3e and almost nothing at all to do with 4e. So it's pretty hard to hate something that is barely on my radar.

For my part, I say more power to those who want to play 4e. I'm hoping that the announcement of Pathfinder RPG will give us lost little 3e souls somewhere to go and may go some way towards healing this rather unfortunate divide that has appeared in the D&D community.

Hate's a silly thing to either have or attribute to others where games are concerned, after all .

 

[Michael Dean]

Until I get 4e in my hands, I can't say I hate it. Some of the design elements concern me in that they don't seem like they were designed for my tastes. But I have a shelf full of games, so who cares?

But I would also like to say that I hate Dane Cook, too. With a passion. I don't think 4e will take Dane Cook's place in that respect.