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

[TheNovaLord]

Anger also is not to be reasoned with. .

Yep "Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering."

 

[Crothian]

I personally think that if EN World had created an Edition Wars forum, and left it completely unmoderated, people would have burned out on it quite a while ago.

There is Circus Maximus, but few people go there for Edition Wars. I imagine they find it niot as much fun when others get to respond however they want.

 

[Piratecat]

No. They're a giant pain in the ass, they accomplish nothing and they make the boards less fun for me to read. Thus, I have no interest whatsoever in putting up with them.

We're not there yet. But I think we've gotten much better, with occasional flare-ups here and there. This makes me happy!

 

[Raven Crowking]

For the record, anyone who wishes to may post that RCFG sucks, or isn't fantasy, or is too videogamey, or isn't really "roleplaying", or is dumbed down, or whatever.

If you post that RCFG accurately reflects reality, I'll worry about you. Otherwise, I'm willing to accept that you are entitled to your opinion.

It is an unwillingness to accept the opinions of others that causes edition wars -- nothing more, but certainly nothing less.

So, no, edition wars are not a good thing. Posting your opinions may be, but taking exception to other's opinions (on either side of the fence) is not a good thing.


RC

 

[Turtlejay]

Here I am breaking my vow to not post here again, but I had an *epiphany*. . .you can break vows for those, right?

For me it is the pervasive negativity itself that is distasteful (and this is hardly unique to enworld, or even gaming). Soooooo many of the theads I avoid are in no real danger of descending into edition warring, but the premise is just negative, so I have no desire to read them.

For example, on the front page right now there is a thread called something like "Things you have always hated about D&D". While this thread has the *potential* to turn into something amusing like the portmanteauxx thread, it could also turn into an edition war, or just be a collection of pet peeves. I'll poke in again later to see if against all odds it becomes worth reading, but in general. . .I'd rather avoid them.

Edition warring is *that* it is negative, it is not worth reading, and it is usually a waste of time and breath on both sides.

Jay

 

[Barastrondo]

Speaking as a publisher who's seen some flame wars over his products:

No. They really aren't a good thing. They involve too small a sample base to give you any sort of accurate read on the major part of your fanbase. They quickly abandon any pretense of discussion and become people shouting the one particular statement they want to make over and over again. They're full of ridiculously absolute statements (if you've ever seen the words "never" or "forever" in one, there you go). If you take the absolute statements seriously, there's nothing you can do to respond to said fans, and your own efforts are useless. If you don't take them seriously, then they're completely unhelpful.

What makes an edition war is that people don't want to discuss and resolve these issues — or if they do, they go about it in entirely the wrong way, because nothing that can be properly labeled an "edition war" involves discussion and resolution. It involves people Making Statements, and then going into ludicrous amounts of semantic nitpickery on the other guy's statement to try and "prove the other side wrong", which never works. Even if they are wrong. (And yes, people can be wrong in Edition Wars. Usually it happens when they wrongly extrapolate the makers' intent, like "The makers of Game X's Edition Z have always hated Game X!" It's happened to me; sorry, folks, but no, Werewolf: The Forsaken was not made to try to "capture a conservative audience," thanks.)

Having been there? Give me all the constructive criticism you like. I feed upon the stuff. But if you're there to fight an Edition War Battle, save your breath. If a toxic thread has ever produced anything useful for a publisher, it happens only if the wars are forcibly stopped and the venom lanced out of the discussion — but then it's not an edition war, of course.

 

[jdrakeh]

No. They really aren't a good thing. They involve too small a sample base to give you any sort of accurate read on the major part of your fanbase. They quickly abandon any pretense of discussion and become people shouting the one particular statement they want to make over and over again. They're full of ridiculously absolute statements (if you've ever seen the words "never" or "forever" in one, there you go). If you take the absolute statements seriously, there's nothing you can do to respond to said fans, and your own efforts are useless. If you don't take them seriously, then they're completely unhelpful.

All of that. You have perfectly described every edition war event ever. They (i.e., edition wars) are nothing more than the product of dueling asshats.

 

[innerdude]

I don't think I've seen a single post by a hater of one edition that stood up and went the opposite route. "Gee, I actually don't hate edition X! I was merely misinformed!"

Well, I suppose I may be a first, then......

Initially I was as violently opposed to 4th Edition as any "hater" could possibly be. Bought a 4e Player's Handbook the day of its release, and returned it 24 hours later after reading through the bulk of it. At the time, I thought it was simply something I would never want to play.

Later, I was convinced by a friend to play in a couple of one-shots. As a result, I starting looking at various forums trying to get a handle on what I should expect, whether maybe I had overreacted initially, etc.

After getting some more insight, and playing in a couple of one-shot games, I am actually pretty neutral on 4th Edition as a rules system. It's probably not what I would choose to play, given the choice, but I'm certainly not opposed to playing it. Having read many opinions/essays on the merits of 4th Edition, I have actually come to understand, at least in part, what WotC's goals were for the edition, and have a better grasp on the rationale of certain rules changes. In other words, in large part to engaging in the so called "Edition War," I actually came to understand 4th Edition a little bit better, and what WotC was trying to accomplish. Now, while I still disagree with some of the core design philosophies, I can certainly appreciate the system's merits (and flaws) as they are, and if my long-time core group of players decided tomorrow to switch to 4e, I'd shrug my shoulders and go with them.

However--The fact that I am now ambivalent to the 4th Edition rules, does not mean I am mollified towards Wizards of the Coast as a business entity.

If there's a company that's had a worse 18 months from a public relations standpoint than Wizards of the Coast, I certainly can't think of one. Even if 4th Edition ends up being the "Greatest RPG Rule System of All Time" (not likely, since I think 3.x / PF is a better system right now ), it doesn't change the fact that WotC has generally botched every opportunity they've had to generate a feeling of good will towards people like me--people who might have adopted 4th Edition wholeheartedly, but generally didn't like the entire calculated "vibe" of the company producing it. As a whole, very little of what WotC has done in the last 18 months has felt much like it was oriented to me, the consumer, but was rather done to maximize profits.

At this point, I will almost certainly never invest in more than the three core 4th Ed rulebooks, and possibly the PHB2. I certainly will not buy the "Power Source" books, I certainly will never be a DDI subscriber, and I certainly will not buy minis/maps/DM material from them. And given the chance, I will encourage any group I play with to instead play Pathfinder, because I feel that Paizo, as a company, is more deserving of gamers' hard earned money, and because their ruleset is the one I would, given the choice, prefer to play.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

As I've stated before, I think the WotC marketing/customer relations statements are overblown. I say this because the 4E rules themselves are generally hostile to a lot of existing paradigms that previously existed in D&D, and most of the marketing complaints were connected to systemic complaints. OGL, simulationism, infinitely customizable characters, powerful world changing magic, ect. 4E not only changed the game and plotted a different direction, it removed a lot of things people liked from the game entirely, with prejudice.

To me, the thing I hear in all the chatter about 4E's marketing is that 4E removed/changed something people liked, and they were told to not let the door hit you on the way out. People blame the marketing for this, but I don't know that you can hold the marketing responsible when the game system itself says this.

For example, some people loved the OGL. The 4E rules told the OGL to get lost. I don't think any amount of public relations was going to fix things for OGL fans.

 

[rounser]

I say this because the 4E rules themselves are generally hostile to a lot of existing paradigms that previously existed in D&D

Exactly.

Personally, I blame the 4E designers for the edition wars, not the fans. According to rumor they seem to have been expecting a schism due to the abandonment of key expectations people had for D&D, and they got one. I mean, changes from 2E to 3E were enough change IMO, but 3E to 4E goes far beyond that, and really lets it all hang out on what they really believe, game design-wise. I don't think the 900 lb grandaddy of RPGs was the right vehicle for that.

Look at the psychology behind why it is politically incorrect to blame them. They make bold pronouncements of debatable design philosophy in interviews and podcasts that would get anyone here slaughtered in the resulting debate were they to voice the opinions on a messageboard as fact. They seem prepared to "fire" their customers as part of a grand strategy that may have seemed a good idea in 2007 but by now the wheels may have fallen off of. They abandoned many expectations set up by 30 years worth of branding and expect longtime fans to go eat cake. There is no way there could not be some sort of fallout.