dising 3.5

[Emiricol]

Wow. I bow to your superior knowledge, wisdom, understanding, and judgement of character

 

[Shard O'Glase]

well at least you can learn.

 

[Hjorimir]

[sarcasm]Yeah, how dare you suggest to somebody they think for themselves with firsthand knowledge! I mean the things people hear or read regarding material that hasn't been released are never wrong![/sarcasm]

Some of you should read Thinking as a Hobby by William Golding. Really.

 

[Hejdun]

I thought he was rather clear that the guy's only foundation for his feelings was someone else's opinion.

Actually, if you reread the original poster's thread, he didn't make it clear at all.

It started off with him stating that he did not like the new rules. When I asked him if he had read the books. He said, a friend of mine. I cut him off and said have you read the books. He said no, but. I cut him off again and said they are laying right there. Pick them up and give them a look don't just go by what other people say.

What is clear, however, is that the poster cut him off before he said a word past "a friend of mine". The original poster didn't even hear what the player's friend had told him, so there is no telling whether he was told completely true information (possible), or whether his friend was exaggerating because he doesn't like 3.5 (equally possible). That is why it is brash of him to dismiss him before even bothering to find out if he had good information or not.

I can't blame the player, I wouldn't want to go buy a book if I'd heard it sucks and won't even get any information about it from my gaming group.

 

[Emiricol]

I thought it was clear. As to the rest, I wasn't there so my knowledge of how it all went down is less than yours. He seemed to be summarizing to me, though - I didn't sense that it was a blow-by-blow narrative.

 

[diaglo]

I thought it was clear. As to the rest, I wasn't there so my knowledge of how it all went down is less than yours. He seemed to be summarizing to me, though - I didn't sense that it was a blow-by-blow narrative.

i happen to know Drawmack from other message boards.

what he said sounds like an accurate account on his part of exactly how it went down.

thus my comment.

sorry you didn't know we were old buddies. but that's what i get for making short posts.

 

[diaglo]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: dising 3.5

Aren't you a happy camper..?

not to rub it in, but who's going to Gen Con? and who's not?

sorry for the low blow.

 

[Petrosian]

chalk me up into the sheep camp.

I too often use other sources than first hand trial before i try something. if a "freind" of mine seriously tells me that his food is spoiled, and i ordered the same thing i am unlikely to gulp mine down in the interest of first hand information.

i often get news from media, as opposed to rushing out to interview the people involved myself.

I sometimes listen to paid critics who, over time, I have found to have opinions that match mine.

I also listen to friends whose opinions, over time, i have come to regard well.

In short, when dealing with second hand information, i let my experiences with the source guide me as to whether or not i put stock in it.

If I suspected that the player in question was working off false information, or most of the time when i feel anyone is wrong, I would have let him finish his statement. Then, armed with KNOWLEDGE of what he was talking about, i could choose to point out the errors, the false info he was working on.

The player was assuming, based on a report he found credible, that 3.5 was as bad as he thought. OK, maybe that was a dubious decision. However, the responder who cut him off repeatedly was working off the presumption that the info the polayer had was inaccurate... not based on a trusted recommendation but rather on his own assumption.

i would much rather be the player who made judgement based on decisions from a source than the other who simply seemed to assume.

Thats probably just me.

BTW, with the SRD out now, and my various perusals, DND 3.5 is actually a little worse than i expected from the prerelease net stuff, dragon articles, online wotc spotlights and so forth. (The level of "annoyance changes" are much greater than i had feared.) So sometimes first hand may not automatically turn one into a wotc fan sheep.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

For what it's worth, I'd be disappointed if a player said they weren't interested in a new game because it was being played under 3.5 Rules based upon their hearsay of those rules. If they were converting an old game [3.0], I'd understand players being somewhat annoyed but since it appears to be a new game with 3.5 Rules, I'd most probably tell them to have a look through the books as well before they came to a definitive opinon.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[Malakye]

I think asking a player to read through the PHB before he makes a final decison on whether or not he likes the game is a valid one but cutting him off in midsentence several times may not have been the best way to do it. Of course, I don't personally know the people involved and maybe cutting this person off is the only way to get through to him.

I have a couple of players in my group who are apprehensive about the 3.5 rules so we decided to all chip in for the 3 books, read through them, and try it out. If we don't like it, we only wasted 10 bucks each and can go back to 3rd edition.