I'm getting Edition War fatigue

[clip]

As an infidel member of Dragonsfoot, my take on edition war is a little different.

I started playing 1e back in the early 80s, and didn't change editions until recently when I was converted to 4e by playing at a club.

I have to say that my opinions on 3e, 3.5e and 4e had previously been very much similar to all the other grognards - quite simply the edition itself was irrelevant - the only thing that mattered was that the old school players felt gratified and exclusive by playing an obsolete edition.

They might deny it (and I certainly did) but the attraction was the messiness and incoherence of 1e. The idea is very much that in the old days, the game had to be taught rather than learned because of the nightmarish rulebooks - and that the namby-pamby newer editions spoonfeed everything.

All the other criticisms were just excuses to justify the central theme of uber-nostalgia. All the WotC hate is just a re-hash of the old Games Workshop wars, the videogame stuff, the "dumbing down" etc.

Now that I'm older and I run my own business, I can see the commercial realities of RPG companies, so I appreciate that whilst not everyone will agree, 4e had to be a product that meant continuous sales to not just DMs, but players too.

I personally don't have a "war" position, as I loved 1e as well as happily playing 4e now- but for the good of the hobby at large, I don't understand how encouraging new players into obsolete prodcucts is in any way helpful.

 

[Cyronax]

I would seriously love it if there was a General 4e forum, a General Pathfinder/3e forum, and a general General forum.

I think it would then be easier to realise the troll posts for what they are, as well as have generally general discussion that isn't edition specific. Everyone gets to eat their cake and mods lives are made easier.

At least, that's the theory.

I like it in 'theory,' but I think that trolling exists no matter what. I used to find reading trolls on ENWorld more enjoyable before the 3.X/PF vs 4e divide simply because it was treated as more 'common humor' based around a broader consensus.

But in fact I think ENWorld's General forum should remain the way it is -- slightly more focused on 4e than the other systems.

I'm in agreement about a separate edition wars thread however. Maybe it could be called 'Fight Club' or something -- taking that name from Comic Resoures Forums. The rules for discourse could be slackened slightly to allow for more bite but still no ad hominem attacks.

C.I.D.

 

[Maggan]

There are any number of real world debates where one side of the debate is wrong, and the other one is right.

Soooo ... which one is right when both claim that they are right? I would find it singularily peculiar if any debate could be reduced to one side being 100% right and the other 100% wrong.

IMO, I don't believe it to be even possible to say "this is right, and that is wrong" unless any argument is reduced to extremely common denominators. Even then, it is a question of who I chose to belive is right.

I have no clue whether global warming is real or not. I have chosen to believe it is, but I have no way of verifying for myself that it is.

As for religion, for my sister, her view of life is right. I think she is wrong. Is there any way to prove either? Nope, not until we both have passed on ...

So, in this sub-debate are you 100% right and I'm 100% wrong? Or is it the other way round. If so, how do we prove it?

/M

 

[lutecius]

Edition warring--far worse than what we see now--started the second 4e was announced, and all the evidence we have indicates 4e still outsold 3.5e easily. The argument doesn't have much to do with how many people are playing each edition. It has to do with the fact that ENWorld was a dedicated 3.5e site. Non-3.5e-dedicated sites, like rpg.net, do not have the problems ENWorld now has. I second Spatula's and Wormwood's recommendations: broaden your forum-going horizons, and use your ignore list.

a bit off topic: not sure what evidence you're referring to, but 4e outselling 3.5 isn't really an indication of the number of people playing 3.x and d20.

concerning rpg.net, as another poster put it:

This is great advice if you like 4e and really hate everything else. [...] EN World, for all the edition war snippiness, has the least problems with it. By all means go to rpg.net and talk about how you enjoy Pathfinder and dislike 4e.

But I think this is not the way General RPG was used before 4E entered the scene.
The rules forum was for rules questions, and maybe min-maxing. It was not about adventure design, handling player issues, discussing GM experiences, asking for DM suggestions and all that.
All these questions can very directly depend on the edition. Can, but don't have to.

If a 4e general forum makes it easier to discuss those that do depend on a particular edition, i'm all for it.

But in fact I think ENWorld's General forum should remain the way it is -- slightly more focused on 4e than the other systems.

let me guess... you play 4e?

 

[Benimoto]

I feel compelled to chime in a "me too" I am finding EN less and less interesting/useful.

Another "me too". I love EN World, but all the edition warring is just tiresome.

I disagree with the concept of having a "4e general" forum. It would be nice to have a forum where you could talk about general adventure concepts and not rules, but unfortunately it seems like as soon as a 4e-ism is mentioned, the thread suffers from drive-by (or prolonged) attacks by edition warriors.

I know it was mentioned in jest, but I think that once the thread moving tools are back in place, the concept of moving edition war threads into an "edition war" forum has merit.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

If a 4e general forum makes it easier to discuss those that do depend on a particular edition, i'm all for it.

I think a General Pathfinder/4E/3E/OD&D forum is just fundamentally wrong. Just because diaglo has a cool OD&D idea doesn't mean a 4E player shouldn't read it and adopt it for his own game. The only bad thing is when the 4E player comes into his thread: "Hey, I can do that better in 4E" or similar edition warring nonsense.

diaglo won't be able to explain a newbie how the Fey Pact Boon works, nor will he give good min/max advice for a Fighter, and he might have a hard time coming up with a good injury system for 4E, but he sure can tell me his strategies for game preparation. Even if I am asking from an D&D 4 context. Of course, he could also screw it up with edition warring and say "if you wouldn't play one of these pale imaginations of the real game, you wouldn't have this problem..."

 

[Aus_Snow]

If you're getting edition war fatigues. . . where from?!

Want.

 

[Stoat]

Re: a "4E General Forum"

Back before 4E was announced, the General Forum was the place where folks posted info about upcoming books and interesting articles in Dragon/Dungeon. It was the place to post a thread about Book of Nine Swords, FC1 and FC2, Savage Tide, etc. etc.

In other words, General was the place for general discussions about 3.X. (as well as gaming in general, previous edition of D&D and other RPG's).

As others have noted, there is no General 4E Forum. AFAICT, general discussions about 4E should still happen in the General forum.

Re: The OP.

I've seen less edition warring in the last few months and more "playstyle warring". I'm thinking about the spate of "sandbox" threads that went around a month or two ago.

My biggest beef is that ENWorld is getting dull. I see the same dozen or so posters beating the same half-dozen or so issues to death over and over.

 

[Spatula]

Bolded section: Hah hah what.

This is great advice if you like 4e and really hate everything else. Otherwise? No.

EN World, for all the edition war snippiness, has the least problems with it. By all means go to rpg.net and talk about how you enjoy Pathfinder and dislike 4e. Or go to the Paizo forums and do the opposite.

I like how you apparently must be able to talk about hating other games. That right there is the crux of the problem, IMO.

 

[lutecius]

I disagree with the concept of having a "4e general" forum. It would be nice to have a forum where you could talk about general adventure concepts and not rules, but unfortunately it seems like as soon as a 4e-ism is mentioned, the thread suffers from drive-by (or prolonged) attacks by edition warriors.

so wouldn't a separate forum reduce the chances of this happening?

I think a General Pathfinder/4E/3E/OD&D forum is just fundamentally wrong.

funny. weren't you defending the creation of a separate pathfinder forum on CM?

Just because diaglo has a cool OD&D idea doesn't mean a 4E player shouldn't read it and adopt it for his own game.

If said cool idea can be easily ported to other systems I don't see why he wouldn't post it in 'general'. I don't see why a 4e player interested in OD&D ideas couldn't read threads in another forum either.

The only bad thing is when the 4E player comes into his thread: "Hey, I can do that better in 4E" or similar edition warring nonsense. [...]
Of course, he could also screw it up with edition warring and say "if you wouldn't play one of these pale imaginations of the real game, you wouldn't have this problem..."

exactly.

Back before 4E was announced, the General Forum was the place where folks posted info about upcoming books and interesting articles in Dragon/Dungeon. It was the place to post a thread about Book of Nine Swords, FC1 and FC2, Savage Tide, etc. etc.

In other words, General was the place for general discussions about 3.X. (as well as gaming in general, previous edition of D&D and other RPG's).

enworld started out as a 3e and then d20 site. there was really little discussion about older editions and non compatible systems so it wasn't a problem back then.

I think important 4e news still belong in 'general' but not every 4e book or ddi article needs to be discussed here.