Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 7750462" data-attributes="member: 6696971">Saelorn,This is a little weird.&nbsp; I brought this up in significant detail.&nbsp; My post regarding 4e and MtG was actually the genesis to this conversation angle.&nbsp; You either responded to that post directly or responded/XPed posts that were in response to it.Its not that interesting......that you misconstrued or mischaracterized what I wrote.&nbsp; I didn't accuse Saelorn (or anyone else I've been conversing with) of being disingenuous.&nbsp;&nbsp; Yes, I did lay out the factually correct information that he was confused over (thereby revealing ignorance of continuity and paradigm), but I didn't remotely question his integrity.Now this is indeed interesting.Two of the major rubbish edition warrior attacks against the 4th edition of D&amp;D and the players who liked it were invoking things like:a)&nbsp; &quot;the new Video Gamer mentality&quot; as an epithet.b)&nbsp; &quot;tactical skirmish boardgame linked by freeform roleplay&quot; as an epithet(A) was the angle that certain folks used to decry other folks (and a perceived attendant gaming paradigm) that were/was said to standardize &quot;entitlement&quot;, &quot;munchkinism&quot;, and/or &quot;ezmode&quot; (B) was about shallowness in gameplay where there is no &quot;relevant fiction&quot;; eg components of a shared imaginary space become irrelevant to action resolution and therefore the trajectory of play.So...like I said earlier; &quot;weaponized&quot; for edition warring.&nbsp; Thanks for the apropos example.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Manbearcat, post: 7750462, member: 6696971"] Saelorn, This is a little weird. I brought this up in significant detail. My post regarding 4e and MtG was actually the genesis to this conversation angle. You either responded to that post directly or responded/XPed posts that were in response to it. Its not that interesting... ...that you misconstrued or mischaracterized what I wrote. I didn't accuse Saelorn (or anyone else I've been conversing with) of being disingenuous. Yes, I did lay out the factually correct information that he was confused over (thereby revealing ignorance of continuity and paradigm), but I didn't remotely question his integrity. Now this is indeed interesting. Two of the major rubbish edition warrior attacks against the 4th edition of D&D and the players who liked it were invoking things like: a) "the new Video Gamer mentality" as an epithet. b) "tactical skirmish boardgame linked by freeform roleplay" as an epithet (A) was the angle that certain folks used to decry other folks (and a perceived attendant gaming paradigm) that were/was said to standardize "entitlement", "munchkinism", and/or "ezmode" (B) was about shallowness in gameplay where there is no "relevant fiction"; eg components of a shared imaginary space become irrelevant to action resolution and therefore the trajectory of play. So...like I said earlier; "weaponized" for edition warring. Thanks for the apropos example. [/QUOTE]

Verification