I'm Done with "I'm Done "Threads

[Nifft]

Yes, but what are the threads of tommmmmmmmmmmmooooorrrrrrrrowwwwwwwww?
<said in a echoing, campy-pulp voice>

I'm through with tomorrow.

But apparently thread-crapping still holds some appeal. Still, given the "vent" nature of the "I'm through with" threads, crapping may be therapeutic and thus on-topic...

Cheers, -- N

 

[RFisher]

If nothing else, people completely fail to rationally consider the cost-benefit ratio.

Emotions have never been rational. Why would you expect any difference in this case?

 

[Satori]

I'm done with people taking my name.

"Will the real Satori please stand up?"

((Although, technically, satori01 joined before me, yet chose to add a number to the end of his name...which means that I'm not the real Satori, and therefore need to stop typing before I'm unmasked for the fake that I am...))

 

[Fifth Element]

But at the end of the day, if someone came to this forum and said "That's it, I'm done with Pizza Ditch. I can't stand the cramping. I want delicious pizza but this is just too high a price." I'd say that they're just venting a very natural frustration in the appropriate place.

I don't think your analogy is valid. The pizza causing stomach cramps implies that there's something actually wrong with the pizza, that it's unhealthy or causes illness.

A better analogy would be people posting that they're done with Pizza Ditch because they don't like how the pizza tastes, but try to dress it up by arguing that there's something objectively wrong with the pizza because of its taste. Most people would probably respond with something like this:

"Good for you. Taste is a matter of taste (obviously). Don't eat the pizza if you don't like it, but don't pretend it has to do with anything other than personal tastes. I realize that some people don't share my tastes, and I don't need to be told about it every couple of days. This is why I crap on your thread, because you're broadcasting your opinion about personal taste and claiming that it's something more."

 

[Ry]

I don't think your analogy is valid. The pizza causing stomach cramps implies that there's something actually wrong with the pizza, that it's unhealthy or causes illness.

What if the pizza is just heavily, heavily seasoned? Remember, not everyone gets the cramps, or cares. What I'm saying is that there are those with a constitution that is not agreeable to Pizza Ditch pizza, and those with a sturdy, Pizza-Ditch OK constitution.

There is objectivity that can come in here: D&D 3rd Edition is not a rules light game. Rules mastery is required for fast play, especially at higher levels. Adhering strictly to the rules produces a specific kind of play experiences that we can talk about in terms of strengths and weaknesses. Some of these strengths and weaknesses are verifiable - and these are areas where we often see a lot of errata, optional rules, or just advice for how to smooth the rough edges (like training players in sample combats for how Grappling works).

"I'm done with this" threads are about those weaknesses, why someone thinks they're sufficient to leave the game, and how to choose or change your game to avoid those weaknesses.

The fact that such threads exaggerate or fixate on those weaknesses doesn't mean that they're invalid - or even uninteresting - discussions for the board.

 

[Fifth Element]

The fact that such threads exaggerate or fixate on those weaknesses doesn't mean that they're invalid - or even uninteresting - discussions for the board.

Indeed. But discussion implies more than one view being expressed, which is what I was saying. If you bring an "I'm done with" thread to a board, you should be prepared for many people arguing that your perceived flaws are their strong points, etc, etc.

You also need to be careful in how you express your thoughts. Don't try to imply objectivity where none can be had. Especially on a message board. Even if "D&D is too rules-heavy" could easily be interpreted as "D&D is too rules-heavy for my tastes", you should know that a significant proportion of people will take it literally. That's a problem with a written medium.

On the other hand, the weaknesses are often exaggerated in these threads. And when they are, people have a right to mention that. It's difficult to have a valid, interesting discussion with someone who exaggerates the problem or fixates on a minor aspect.

 

[Chainsaw Mage]

In the spirit of Lampooning what is becoming a regular occurrence, I am going to reveal loudly, publicly, and with great fanfare a feeling of the most personal relevance....I am sick of " I am sick of" threads...

The irony is of course overwhelming.

No offense to the poster that recently quit 3.5, (D&D I cant quit you), but some days I am sick of bagels, but I do not go into a Noah's Bagels, stand on a table and shout to the rafters.

I am being facetious . . . .

No you're not. I think you mean every word. Not that that's a bad thing, of course. But as Lord Byron told us, "Nothing is said in jest."

 

[Herobizkit]

For ENWorld I'd switch those percentages around.

Although I haven't found the adult-oriented content here yet...

Eric's grandmother censors all the adult content. Personally, I think she keeps it all to herself for her own jollies. Try asking her, or making a Diplomacy check.

 

[Ry]

Sad to say, you're a little mistaken. I guess you didn't hear; you'll need true ressurection before getting to work on that Diplomacy check.

 

[Ry]

No you're not. I think you mean every word. Not that that's a bad thing, of course. But as Lord Byron told us, "Nothing is said in jest."

A horse and Lord Byron walk into a bar. Bartender asks, "Why the long face?" The horse says "He's rejected the basic premise of comedy."