I was "booed" for even showing the 4e Core books

[Cadfan]

Well, just because they aren't playing doesn't mean they are wrong and they might actually not like the game, but it would still be an interesting question how many "uneducated" opinions of 3E or 4E exist, and what did lead to their opinions. But EN World is not the best place for such a poll, because most of us are pretty well informed, and possibly even more aware about their preferences then most.

I didn't get into that in my last poll, I was more interested in seeing how people that played the game reacted, or what people that didn't play yet plan to do.

I don't know. I suspect a lot of them are at least reasonably informed.

I think the real issue is, very simply, that there's often a life cycle to a geek. The geek in question can be an RPG geek, a comic book geek, any kind of geek. They start out excited and interested in their geekdom. Eventually, they play out that initial excitement and interest. Then, just as their enjoyment is starting to flag, a new edition comes out, or a new comic book restart, or something that jolts their world a little. So they blame the newness on their lack of interest in their geekdom, when really the change is internal.

With RPGs, I think you get a four stage process of disillusionment.

1. Enthusiastic munchkin. The player is new, he kills monsters, takes their stuff, and thinks its grand. He has a sense of wonder when he casts Stinking Cloud, or finds a magical hat. Chances are his games have, at best, a superficial plotline, but he's having a good time.

2. Intermediate gamer. He understands the game pretty well. He can start to recognize when material is over or under powered. He doesn't just wants to kill monsters and take their stuff, he's already done that. He wants to play unique characters with actual personalities. Chances are his game's plotlines and his characters are still a little superficial, but he's having a good time. He kind of wants more though.

3. Ennui. Ok, he's killed monsters and taken stuff. He knows everything in the books. He's played all the personalities he wants, or, his group isn't interested in interacting with his character's personalities in the way that he wants. Each new campaign seems to be kind of like the last. He may reduce the amount of the game he plays.

4. Anger. He decides that he could play the sort of D&D he wanted if it weren't for some particular boogeyman. Maybe its the munchkin newbies wrecking his game. Maybe its the way his favorite RPG company has "lost its way." Maybe its a new edition that's wrecked what once made the game worth playing, and replaced it with dross. He either quits gaming, or switches to a new system where the cycle starts again.

The problem is that over time our tastes change, and the game honestly changes very little. You can never recapture that initial feeling of obsession and wonder. You have to change what makes you happy, and find a new way to enjoy the game, or move on.

For me, what makes me enjoy the game now is DMing. Its a rush for me to be on stage, responsible for everyone having a great evening, and knowing I've succeeded. Its not what initially drew me to the game, but its what keeps me here now.

I think everyone has to find that spot, or else move on.

It could be worse, though. I know people who go through the cycle I described above, not with games, or comic books, or athletic fandom, but with wives.

 

[Ulrick]

Were you able to find out how many of those booing you had actually read any of it or (what a concept) played at all? I can't say 4E is my favorite by a longshot but booing at a game that you have never tried isn't fair.

I don't know if the people who booed me tried 4e D&D. But I can find out.

I've only played 4e once, I ran the adventure in the back for a group of players. I liked, the players enjoyed it for the most part. It did take getting used to however. I'd love to try 4e again.

One of my concerns is that the game system has become more important than the players or the DM. People are willing to sit out rather than hang out with friends and game. This is a shame.

 

[Howndawg]

Luckily my group tried 4th edition a few times (I agreed to give it a fair shot and not disparage the game as we played) and decided that it's a good, tactical boardgame but doesn't have the depth of options and simulationist charm of 3rd edition.

I find it amusing that a game is called simulationist when you can't even use a spear one-handed.

 

[The Little Raven]

When I went to pick up my 4e books at my FLGS, there was a guy hanging out near the display that was being an obnoxious twit and harassing anyone that came near the books. I went to grab a set and he stepped in my way, proclaiming that I should be smarter than to play such a dumbed down game. I tried to be polite and ignore his insults, but he kept stepping in my way. I finally got my hands on my PHB and he grabbed my arm, and I totally lost my temper. I grabbed him by his collar and dragged him out of the store and told him if he ever interfered with the owner's business again, I would force feed him every d20 in the store. I got a small round of applause when I came back inside from the people that were trying to buy 4e, but the jerk was preventing them from doing so.

And of course, three weeks later, who do I see playing a 4e game in the store?

 

[brunswick]

Just out of curiosity, do you guys find that 4th edition helps or hinders role-playing or are things pretty much the same in your games? There seems to be a lot of stuff in there about "sliding target x amount of squares" and such, which I suppose is why many players talk about 4th Ed feeling like a boardgame (to the detriment of role playing?)...I know that ultimately its up to the players and DM as to how much role-playing goes on but I was just wondering about peoples experience with 4th Ed.

 

[Greg K]

. One of my concerns is that the game system has become more important than the players or the DM. People are willing to sit out rather than hang out with friends and game. This is a shame.

I'm one of those people to whom system does matter. I have better things to do then play a game whose mechanics I dislike. Therefore, I'll skip such a game and just spend time with my friends on another day or evening.

 

[Howndawg]

Just out of curiosity, do you guys find that 4th edition helps or hinders role-playing or are things pretty much the same in your games? There seems to be a lot of stuff in there about "sliding target x amount of squares" and such, which I suppose is why many players talk about 4th Ed feeling like a boardgame (to the detriment of role playing?)...I know that ultimately its up to the players and DM as to how much role-playing goes on but I was just wondering about peoples experience with 4th Ed.

I've been waiting for the FR books to come out before I started a campaign, so my sole playing experience is a test drive of H1. From my short experience, I find 4e no more of a boardgame than Champions, which in my experience did not hinder roleplaying at all.

 

[Halivar]

Just out of curiosity, do you guys find that 4th edition helps or hinders role-playing or are things pretty much the same in your games?

My roleplay is divorced from the mechanics. When I roleplay, I portray my character concept, not my character sheet.

EDIT: Do you call this "narrativist"? I'm definitely not a "gamist" or "simulationist". But those terms confuse me, so.

 

[The Little Raven]

When I roleplay, I portray my character concept, not my character sheet.

Same, except for the fact that my character sheet is a guide for my character's strengths and limitations. If I have a low Charisma score, I'm not acting like a social powerhouse.

 

[Greg K]

my character sheet is a guide for my character's strengths and limitations. If I have a low Charisma score, I'm not acting like a social powerhouse.

Wow, I actually agree with Mourn... er, Little Raven.