Do grognards have to be jerks?

[BryonD]

I'm not having another argument with you, BryonD. They aren't productive.

Not for supporting your wild claims, that is for certain.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

You have obviously never really posted at SySf forums. Or on Blaster. OMG the nerdrage over comics, Star Wars prequel series, BSG makes gamers look tame.

Or even deconstructed poetry in English Comp.. Keats it was, Ode to a Grecian Urn, when I saw a girl reduced to tears by the arguments about the Truth is Beauty line.... (My own take? Keats thought that the line sounded good, that it was, in essence, a throw away line.)

The Auld Grump

 

[Vegepygmy]

I...shouldn't ask, but what is this "dragon poop cartoon"? A brief search on youtube was both fun, NSFW and incredibly unproductive.

Dragon: The Red Dragon's Interview

 

[I'm A Banana]

Or even deconstructed poetry in English Comp.. Keats it was, Ode to a Grecian Urn, when I saw a girl reduced to tears by the arguments about the Truth is Beauty line.... (My own take? Keats thought that the line sounded good, that it was, in essence, a throw away line.)

Man, no kidding, people get persnicketty about anything they get invested in.

And, of course, the other guy is ALWAYS worse.

I think that's what gets under my skin, personally. I'm not too offended by people flying off the handle and getting rude about things. As a student of religion, living in one of the world's biggest metropolises, I've seen more than my share of people overreacting to petty little annoyances to know that the original getting peeved is mostly automatic. It's a basic emotional reaction.

The bigger problem is when people start to assume victimhood, to assume that they are somehow uniquely or especially put-upon by the other side, that the other team is actually the worse offender, put themselves up on their cross and say, "Look at me, look at me, I am suffering so mightily at the wickedness of those OTHER FOLKS!", to deny their preference is one of emotion, and to insist it is one of logical or emotional superiority. "Clearly, more civilized people will like Brand X! Look at all those barbarians raging at it!"

That gets under my skin because, I think, it is the beginning of a process of justifying their own perspective by trying to make it objective. They deny that they have subjectivity, that they insist those other guys are subjective, but that they, themselves, are objective, and are thus able to determine which side is actually the aggrieved party. It ties into my knee-jerk dislike of elitism and arrogance, since it's a very arrogant position, to be so unaware of yourself, and so condescending towards others, that you feel you know what's best for them. It's like a basic failing of human interaction, at a deep level, not just a flaw in the argument. To start the corrective process would be to start so deep and psychological that you'd need to be a trained therapist to get to the bottom of it. All anyone else can do is essentially give up on having a constructive conversation with those who hold that position.

 

[WheresMyD20]

Just got back from GenCon and had a pretty good time. One thing I noticed however was that at almost every event there was someone talking about how the latest version of game x was terrible and that the true version was an older edition and that I should try to find the OOP rules. (This happened with several game systems, so I'm not criticizing the fans of any one game here.)

One grognard went so far as to compare a game company to the Nazis and say that anyone who purchased their current products were mindless sheep - and of course I had a bag of their stuff by my chair.

My experience is the opposite with players who embrace change and new editions of games. They tend to be outgoing and not as insulting in one's choice of game.

Your experiences?

I think there are jerks in both camps. My own experience, however, has been that I've encountered more new-school jerks than old-school jerks. They'll usually pick some quirky old-school rule like THAC0 or demi-human level limits and pontificate about how it makes the old-school game insufferably bad and almost unplayable. Of course, most of them started playing D&D after 2000 and haven't even tried playing in an old-school game.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

I think there are jerks in both camps. My own experience, however, has been that I've encountered more new-school jerks than old-school jerks. They'll usually pick some quirky old-school rule like THAC0 or demi-human level limits and pontificate about how it makes the old-school game insufferably bad and almost unplayable. Of course, most of them started playing D&D after 2000 and haven't even tried playing in an old-school game.

Though many of us old timers were glad to see THAC0 die the death. *Cough! Wheeze!*

I think that it really comes down to what camp you are in - those who like one thing hear the insults against that thing much more profoundly. Me, I shrug off most insults to 4e - I don't notice them because, really, I don't care.

I hear someone spouting piffle about Pathfinder and I notice. If it is reasonable then it may be the start of a discussion, if not then... maybe I react, maybe I don't, and maybe I excise the person from my view of the world.

When I do notice someone besmirching 4e then it means that person was particularly rude, and it tends to mean that I am annoyed. (And, yes, there have been times that I have come to the defense of 4e, even though I really do not much like it, at all, at all. Rude is rude.)

The Auld Grump

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Here, I think you're right. WotC had been riding high for years and (perhaps rightly) considered themselves above the rest of the industry. It led to them taking actions that could have been more carefully considered. They should have foreseen certain fan reactions, regardless of whether or not those reactions were warranted. Hopefully the experience of the last few years has left them a more cautious and thoughtful company.

This much I will agree with, and I think that they felt that everybody would fall into line. Then were shocked when it didn't happen.

WotC may have meant the Dragon Poop ad to be funny, but it came across as anything but. The folks who think that it was insulting to the 4e naysayers? They have a right to feel insulted - it was very poorly thought out. And a lot of the lead up to 4e felt that way, whether it was intended as an insult or not.

We want you to play our new game, but first let us hit you in the face with a dead fish.

The Auld Grump

 

[Dannager]

WotC may have meant the Dragon Poop ad to be funny, but it came across as anything but.

Lots of people thought it did come across as funny.

The folks who think that it was insulting to the 4e naysayers? They have a right to feel insulted - it was very poorly thought out.

Anyone has the right to be insulted by anything. That is, unfortunately, part of our culture now - we suffer the chronically offended.

Whether they ought to be insulted by it is another matter entirely. It wasn't intended to be insulting, and as far as I'm concerned it's only possible to find it insulting if you self-identify as either an internet troll, a sycophantic kobold, or if you're looking to find new and exciting ways to be insulted by WotC.

So I don't think many people have cause to be insulted, and those who do...well, I don't really have a problem with calling a spade a spade.

And a lot of the lead up to 4e felt that way, whether it was intended as an insult or not.

Perhaps, but I'm a big fan of not being insulted by things that are not intended as insults.

 

[JamesonCourage]

...it's only possible to find it insulting if you self-identify as either an internet troll, a sycophantic kobold, or if you're looking to find new and exciting ways to be insulted by WotC.

Now that I find amusing.

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Lots of people thought it did come across as funny.

So, if I show a picture of a 4e Essentials book hanging from a nail in an outhouse with the caption of '4e: So Thick! So Absorbent!'* then I am allowed to laugh? Somehow, I don't think so.

How about a dragon flying over dung besmeared 4e players at a table with the caption: '4e Players: Better Targets Than Trolls!'?

Again, I have my doubts.

For you to find it funny does not make it funny - you were not the one that the dragon was pooping on in effigy. It is like a WASP saying that he doesn't know why some folks find ethnic jokes to be offensive.

It is only funny if you are not the one that the dragon is pooping on. The ad was an insult, intended or otherwise. And considering your own reaction to minor slights against 4e and 4e players I very much doubt that you would find such jokes, at your expense, amusing.

Someone at WotC should have thought things through. Instead they were surprised that the older players did not flock to their poop free banner.

The Auld Grump

* Real old timers will recognize the joke as stolen from one about the WWI British propaganda magazine 'Nelson's History of the War'. Both Black Adder Goes Forth and Terry Pratchett have referenced that old joke.