I don't think you're being fair here, though you have some points buried in here.
Oddly enough, I don't think you're being fair, either.
As somebody later in the thread said, 4E haters didn't start it, WotC started it. It was a combination of WotC releasing a new edition that "fired customers" and disgruntled 3E fans coming out with pitchforks that started the edition war.
I vertainly think that WOTC made moves that aliented people, but let's be frank here- the 4e haters have exagerated and read into that process time and time again, in a way which proves that they were looking to start a fight.
At every stage of the introduction of 4e ane GSL, you have agitators who are clearly looking for excuses to label WOTC and 4e as a bad thing. A good example of this is the GSL- there were certainly bonehead moves made WRT to the GSL. But when we look at those early threads (and i looked over one from ages ago a few days ago), you can see the way people read their anger and anxiety into the GSL, exagerated the implications of mostly standard clauses, loudly speculated on bizzare predatory corporate motives, and generally stirred
up in the worst way and, frankly, for the worst reasons.
WOTC didn't do that, that was done by people who had hated 4e from the moment that the devs (quite reasonably) talked about slaughtering sacred cows.
And there are other examples, like the way people attached emotive language to the explanations that WOTC gave for it's design decisions. I mean, how dare they criticse 3e?!?! HOW DARE THEY- I joke, but people weren't joking. They took even basic, self-evident statements about the flaws of 3e and recast the devs as smirking, 3e hating iconoclasts.
I'm going to say it- WOTC didn't start the edition wars. You can't blame the makrers of a new edition for the fact that edition wars exist. And despite the GDL botch and other issues, it's unfair not to recognise that there were people dead set against 4e from the start, who used ever scrap of data they got to rationalise their hostility.
In addition, edition war flareups can be started by 4E fans, even inadvertently.
I don't deny that 4e supporters have started edition war threads and contributed to the general conflagration.
The thing is, preferring 4E does involve an existential rejection and criticism of the 3E era, as when you buy into and embrace the new system, you are setting the old edition aside and relegating to the dustbin of history.
You're going too far, and you're not being fair about who is doing what- this may be what people interpret endorsement of 4e as, but it's not fair to insist that people who play 4e own all that baggage.
This may be the perception amongst 3e players, but it's not the reality amongst 4e supporters, and I say this as somebody who probably
does qualify as a member of the league of 3e dustbin relegators. That isn't the norm, and it's certainly not the norm on these threads.
When you say that you like X, Y, and Z about 4E and XYZ weren't present in 3E, you are criticizing 3E for not having them. This may seem silly, but look at the context-- D&D used to be a big tent, with almost everybody embracing and playing 3E.
Counting variant playstyles, and other systems, i'd say the tent is a lot more diverse than you're implying. And again, I don't think that it's fair that you expect 4e supporters to wear what is clearly the perception of 3e supporters.
Then 4E comes along, and a large number of people(some would say a majority) in D&D's tent leave to live under a new tent, and call that tent D&D. That situation involves casting 3E as "old D&D" alongside OD&D, BECM, 1E and 2E. In addition, the design of 4E had the effect of "firing customers" and embracing 4E does put your stamp of approval on that firing.
Again, you're atributing all this to the 4e side of this, and that's not fair. I agree that 3e people certainly interpreted events somewhat like this, but they're the agressors in this debate, and they're the ones who can't reconcile themselves to these events. It's not fair, or rational, or frankly, constructive, to expect us to carry their baggage.
They have to deal with their issues, and there's nothing fundmental stopping them from doing so- man of them already have.
To put it bluntly, when we play 4E, we are taking(or at least attempting to) their game away from them. We might not say it in that way, but its true.
No, it's not. You've clearly not suggesting a pragmatic assesment of what you're saying, but I draw your attention back to points liek this:
*They can still play their game.
*There is even strong, ongoiing support for their game.
*Everybody of any authority over the brand is overtly, repeatedly saying that 'every edition is D&D'.
*There's no problems at conventions getting 3e games, especially if you're willing to play pathfinder.
*In local gaming groups, the people forcing segregation aren't 4e supporters, they're 3e supporters. We hear about this over and over again, while there may be cases where people are mising out on play, it's clear that the people forcing the skism in most local gaming comunities are feverent opponents of 4e.
*The reality is that all RPGs are diverse and yet the broader hobby manages to have enough overlap that they can usually talk about this stuff and share a comunity despite radical differences in genre, theme, mechanics, and even design philosophy of their games. Only the most extreme deviate from this norm, for instance, high theory indy game forums/comunities, and strict, one-system or one playstyle forums/comunities.
You can talk about ownership of the concept as an abstract ideal, but in pragmatic terms, this abandonment just plain isn't there. People feel abandoned, but the facts don't support their claims.
Now, when you think about the cycle continuing, you have to speculate on what the different sides want. I would speculate that 3E edition warriors want 4E's star to ebb, and for 3E to be the prevailing edition of D&D again, like it was in the past. 4E edition warriors want 3E put to bed and relegated to history, so we can get on with our gaming future. The difference is that if 3E fans shut up, 4E fans would get what they want, while if 4E fans shut up it doesn't change much for the 3E fan.
I disagree with your central claim. I agree that 4e fans should simply abandon the threads, but I don't agree with your reasoning.
4e fans, mostly, don't want 3e relegated to anything, they either like 3e, or hate it and don't care if other people play it. Some hate it and think people would have more fun playing 4e than 3e, but we're a minority or rather, rarely dare to suggest such on forums liek this.
Again let me say that I am quite critical of 3e, and often encourage people to make the change. But I'm not the norm, and it's unfair to claim that everyone, or even most people, are like me. And I would certainly not seek to deprive 3e fans in any real way.
I think you're basically taking the perception 4e haters have, and insisting that 4e supporters wear it. They don't have to, and it's not fair or constructive to demand that they do.
Anti-4e zealots need to come to terms with their baggage, and reocognise that they're being unfair, and using excuses to keep venting when they should be getting over their resentment and moving on themselves. At no point does this involve them moving on to a dustbin or a prior era- quite the contrary. Only when they accept that things have changed, can they make the most of the still substantial comunity they clearly have.
