Edition wars...a GOOD thing? or if not, an APPROPRIATE thing?

[N0Man]

And in all honesty, if they moved enough 3.5 product, they may even be moved to have a couple of staffers or freelancers continue to extend the product line...

Again, only time will tell.

Actually that wouldn't be so bad, if they actually moved enough product to justify it. A Retro-gamer column could be kind of cool, even if it was a small amount of content relative to their current edition.

 

[N0Man]

What I've noticed is that one side in the Edition Wars is composed of sniveling whiners, while the other side is composed of stoic super-heroic poetic folks.

Assuming that you are not taking a shot at yourself, are you suggesting that people who disagree with you are sniveling whiners?

I'd just like to be clear.

I was also wondering if you happen to notice anything ironic in the length of your message in comparison to the length of your signature line.

 

[Raven Crowking]

Assuming that you are not taking a shot at yourself, are you suggesting that people who disagree with you are sniveling whiners?

I'd just like to be clear.

I believe that was another version of the previous observation:

"Pot, kettle; kettle, pot"


RC

 

[thecasualoblivion]

I think you're engaging in sophistry here. Without the D&D brand behind it, odds are excellent that WOTC's fantasy heartbreaker would have sunk with little trace, becoming another also-ran RPG. The railing against 4E is part due that some of us think they're being poor caretakers of D&D and what it's supposed to be. Currently, people with a history involving D&D care about what game has D&D on the cover, but IMO there's been such damage done to the D&D brand under 4E that that may be slowly changing.

And what does this railing against 4e really accomplish? 4E either fails or it doesn't, and I don't think people fighting on internet forums is really going to have any impact either way. This leaves the personal satisfaction of venting your frustrations and making life unpleasant for 4E fans and general forumgoers the only things accomplished by such behavior. You're either selfish or a jerk.

We all know the cards are stacked against fantasy heartbreakers that lack the advantage of having D&D on the cover, so your test would prove nothing. The fact that other games like Pathfinder are gaining ground as D&D replacements while 4E is in print speaks volumes, given the uphill battle they face against the brand.

What I'm saying that either 4E is a failure as D&D or it isn't, and no amount of internet whining is going to change that outcome whatever it is. If 4E succeeds at being D&D in the marketplace, where does that leave you? What is the end result of all the whining in that situation? Is it not better to embrace the game you prefer, in whatever form it settles into, and let the chips fall where they may?

How does making my own D&D solve the problems of diminished community and brand mismanagement?

Also, how do my viewpoints "rain on your parade"? You already have "your way", as you put it. How does my opinion affect your enjoyment of 4E? I'm not being facetious or argumentative; I truly would like to know why you would say that I am raining on your parade.

If you don't like it, you are free to take your business elsewhere. Its the right of every consumer. If taking your business elsewhere isn't enough for you, than thats a you problem.

"Rain on your parade" happens when you can't mention or read about 4E on general RPG forums without strife.

 

[N0Man]

In terms of edition warring, it's simply more productive to walk into a random FLGS and offer to run an open game of whatever your favorite edition is, and make sure the players enjoy it a lot.

Edition Warring actually hurts the chances of this happening. Those most vocal participating in the warring have a bit of a splash effect on others and create wariness in trying other games because they've heard so many bad things.

I know folks who have never played 4E, and refuse to even try it because they have heard from other gaming groups (3/3.5 Ed) that it killed roleplaying, is aimed towards kids, fighters cast healing spells, and it plays like World of Warcraft. The warring creates social pressures.

If I were to try to start a 4E game in a random FLGS, the only people I'd expect to give it a try are people who have not been part of 3E gaming circles over the last couple years. Otherwise, I suspect they'd been infected with too much bias to even give it a fair assessment. The rest may or may not like it, but I doubt they'd have as many preconceptions.

 

[Geoff Dale]

I am happy to embrace the game I prefer. I lament the various impediments that combine to prevent the audience for that game from growing, knowing that for the most part getting a new gamer for my (older) game means persuading one to leave some other version.

 

[rounser]

You're either selfish or a jerk.

Or you're selfish (wanting the current version of D&D from here on in your way or the highway), and the designers are jerks (for their hubris during the design of 4E). It's all based on your point of view, but I don't like using such labels.

But if you continue to call people selfish jerks, then gosh dang darn it you deserve a "war" and every uncomfortable observation about your game that the opposition can muster.

 

[N0Man]

I am happy to embrace the game I prefer. I lament the various impediments that combine to prevent the audience for that game from growing, knowing that for the most part getting a new gamer for my (older) game means persuading one to leave some other version.

What's their to lament? There's nothing any more wrong about inviting a 4E player to play in a 3E game than there is inviting them to a 2E game, or a completely different game.

Sometimes, I find myself looking back fondly at the old Chaossium system, and I'd kind of like to give the old Call of Cthulhu (d100, before the d20 one) another go, or maybe ElfQuest. I kind of want to try a game of Spirit of the Century. I have no problems with recruiting a player who is more used to another game to play either another modern game, or to retro game.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Or you're selfish (wanting the current version of D&D from here on in your way or the highway), and the designers are jerks (for their hubris during the design of 4E). It's all based on your point of view.

There's a sense of entitlement in this statement, that the designers are jerks for the audacity to design an edition of D&D that doesn't appeal to you personally. It also begs the question, is a public forum like ENWorld the place for this? You can certainly send your opinions directly to WotC, but then again they're unlikely to respond and you have no real idea if they're listening. So you call out the designers and 4E itself(you describe it as being created with hubris) on a public forum with no regard for the collateral damage. Some people actually like 4E. Some people just don't care to have people aggressively arguing about a game and would rather have a more positive atmosphere. My take on it is that people are angry to the point where they need to vent and have to see that people are hearing it, regardless of what that does to the community.

But if you continue to call people selfish jerks, gosh dang darn it you deserve a "war" and every uncomfortable observation about your game that the
opposition can muster.

I didn't call anyone in particular a selfish jerk. I described the behavior of whining about a game whose most recent edition has not turned out to your liking in a public forum selfish and jerkish.

 

[N0Man]

But if you continue to call people selfish jerks, then gosh dang darn it you deserve a "war" and every uncomfortable observation about your game that the opposition can muster.

And the rest of us have to suffer through such threads just because one person said something that was (or was interpreted as) insulting?

And what about "uncomfortable observations?" This seems to imply a weird notion that those who would disagree are practicing self-deceit. I think such an idea is more indicative of someone with such bias that they themselves are the ones practicing in self delusion. Or maybe I'm interpreting this statement different than it was intended.