Grognards?

[Imban]

Wait, what?

Where's the disrespect here? Most (traditional) Grognards wear the term like a badge of honor; I don't see much disdain intended when applying this term nor offense taken to those who it is applied to.

It's disrespectful when it's applied willy-nilly, especially when it's applied to people who have never been fans of D&D, as it's an attempt to disparage their complaint as merely a product of their stuck-in-the-mud nature.

Otherwise, no, it's really not.

 

[Lizard]

I think it is spelt fanboi

f4nboi.

 

[Cabled]

f4nboi.

4w g33z, n0w U dunn1t

 

[Carnivorous_Bean]

Probably the fact that many of the anti-4e posters --

-- use perjorative and condescending concepts such as "4e is dumbed down" and "4e is for little kids" (thus basically stating that anyone who likes it is a moron whose opinion can be discounted).

-- complain endlessly about EVERYTHING. NOTHING about the new edition can be done right. It's all wrong, wrong, wrong, the people who make it really hate D&D and are showing disrespect for Gary Gygax and Arneson and everybody else up to and including the Holy Roman Emperor.

-- declare the absolute perfection of everything except 4e. If it's so perfect, why does it bother you that 4e is coming out? Go play the edition of your choice. It's no skin off your nose if somebody else plays a different edition. Your favorite edition exists.

-- positive comments are invariably dismissed flippantly as "fanboyism," "ignorance," "condescension," and "extremist views," while everything that is negative about 4e is lauded reverently as "finally, something balanced," "impartial," "rational."

I've seen far, far more of these posts than anything resembling 'rational' and 'respectful' analysis.

That said, I don't think grognards are really the people who are described by what you're talking about as a grognard. What you're talking about is someone who's absolutely determined to hate 4e, of which there seem to be plenty.

 

[dmccoy1693]

I am a NeoNard. I prefer a game that has the option of continued support. I do not have to hunt down old copies of the rules since I always have the SRD, new and crisp as when I print them my own computer. Products I buy will not run dry as long as I and others like me keep buying them. And companies can always make games based on the rules set I know so well, launching them as a brand new product should.

I am not a grognard. I do work off of scanned in copies of 3rd or 4th generation photocopies. Books I read are not products of their time, but of my time. Just because the one company tosses asside an old rules set does not mean that someone won't see it, polish it up and do wonderous things with it. The term "grognard" does not apply to me.

 

[helium3]

Probably the fact that many of the anti-4e posters --

-- use perjorative and condescending concepts such as "4e is dumbed down" and "4e is for little kids" (thus basically stating that anyone who likes it is a moron whose opinion can be discounted).

-- complain endlessly about EVERYTHING. NOTHING about the new edition can be done right. It's all wrong, wrong, wrong, the people who make it really hate D&D and are showing disrespect for Gary Gygax and Arneson and everybody else up to and including the Holy Roman Emperor.

-- declare the absolute perfection of everything except 4e. If it's so perfect, why does it bother you that 4e is coming out? Go play the edition of your choice. It's no skin off your nose if somebody else plays a different edition. Your favorite edition exists.

-- positive comments are invariably dismissed flippantly as "fanboyism," "ignorance," "condescension," and "extremist views," while everything that is negative about 4e is lauded reverently as "finally, something balanced," "impartial," "rational."

I've seen far, far more of these posts than anything resembling 'rational' and 'respectful' analysis.

So the above is a checklist of what a Grognard's post will generally contain?

Hysterical in tone? Check. Chock full of overwrought descriptions? Check. Ascribes lesser mental capacity to a particular group the poster has decided is "wrong?" Check. States opinions as if they were undeniable truth? Check.

Thank you providing us with an example of what a Grognard's post should read like.

 

[WayneLigon]

Why are people so vehement?

The vehemence comes, at least on my own part (and I'm 45, though without a beard), because 'they' are a group of people that I perceive as having kept D&D 'down on the farm' when it needed to be changed many years ago. D&D should have had a real skill system at least a decade ago. It should have de-emphasized or eliminated Vancian magic long ago.

It was the pioneer all those years ago and should have continued to innovate and show the way instead of lagging behind other RPGs in design terms, options, etc.

Due in part to my job, I despise people who refuse to change simply because they've always done something a particular way and don't want to change to a better way of doing things. They're deadwood who need to be fired, so the rest of us can actually get something done and grow our agency. We have people who have been settled in the same position since the place was formed 32 years ago, and see no reason to hit a lick at a snake; they do just enough that they can't be fired for cause. They long since topped out in the salary for their position, so it doesn't matter how badly they do on their evaluation. I hate them. They sit there and suck up resources that could better be used on others; we could hire three guys in their 20's for what one of these parasites makes and actually be able to meet some deadlines.

Yeah, I know that most of D&D's problems with change were the result of an entrenched and treacherous management team who used the company as their own personal ATM. It inadvertantly trained people to expect things to remain the same in D&D-land but that's an abberation; that's not how things work normally. But to hear people my age - and especially younger! - defend this abberation just makes me shake my head sadly.

 

[AZRogue]

I think it's just a matter of perspective. I've noticed a lot of people attacking a particular rule or new addition that's been uncovered and usually doing so in a derogatory manner that implies a level of derision towards those who like the rule. This is, of course, discouraged here.

Are there really more people attacking 4E fans than the other way around? I doubt it. I just notice it more based on my opinion. I think more people here, in the 4E forum, lean towards liking 4E, minus obvious reservations usually stemming from taste. It probably feels like a person is being ganged up on when it's just a lot of people posting their own opinion.

Unless someone starts attacking YOU, or becomes outright rude, I wouldn't take the disagreement to mean anything disrespectful. It's just that there are a lot of people out there who are going to argue the other side.

And, since grognard is usually not taken in a negative way, it's probably a term used more than it should be. It's usually not a personal attack.

 

[The Grumpy Celt]

Grognards, to me, are those old, 40something guys with big beards..

I'm not 40. I don't have a beard. I like what I've seen of the mechanics. I just don't like what the did to "update" the Forgotten Realms. The rest seems to be peaches and cream, so far at any rate.

And I think the grognard's need a theme song.

 

[Sphyre]

Man, I'd love to be a grognard. But the new edition just looks too damn cool so I have to be a fanboy instead. Fanboy sucks.

Me too. I got called a fanboy on the WotC forums for disagreeing with someone about their non-logical conclusion of 4e.

I laughed. I cried. It was a moment. I wish you could have shared it with me.