D&D 4E Is my friend's unwillingness to try 4e irrational?

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Just as a vaguely related side note:

Why are so many gamers unwilling to switch to a different game, and focus only on one?

In our group, every player also DMs. The DM is responsible for creating the campaign or finding a suitable module to run, and he also can freely choose the system he wants to use. Nobody would ever object to playing a different system.

Most of us run a D&D or D20 campaign, but we occassionally run Midgard, Torg, Shadowrun, Warhammer Fantasy Roleplay and even Das Schwarze Auge. I'd never consider just saying no to any of that, in fact I am often eager to try out a new game.

We would probably never try an older D&D edition, and there might be some other games we wouldn't touch again, but that's only because some of the group had their experience with them and disliked them. But we would never stop a DM that wants to try out a new game.

 

[Dragon Snack]

Yeah we aren't badgering him about it. We have had roughly two conversations at our game about it and we are letting it drop.

2 conversations? Doesn't look like he had much input into the decision.

I'm also wondering why 2 conversations leads to an internet post about him being "utterly irrational"...

I've had people leave my group, I never took it as a personal insult (even gamed with some of them again). I left a group that switched from SWSE to a Superheros game (it's not my bag). My D&D group doesn't want to switch to Savage Worlds (which I think they would enjoy more), no biggie (I play it with another group). I hang out with lots of people who don't play RPGs (which is downright crazy, I know).

 

[thalmin]

I think it's too early to be making this decision, anyway. I am optimistic about 4E. I'm really looking forward to it. But we have not made a decision to start playing it yet because we haven't seen it yet. Our decision is too look at it and probably try out The Keep on the Shadowfell. Then we will have to decide about continuing the campaign as is, convert the campaign, or start a new game in 4E.

 

[Dragonblade]

Villifying? Give an example?

Perhaps vilifying isn't the right word. Although you in particular seem to be taking this awfully personally.

Comments like this seem to illustrate my point:

It's going to be hi-larious if the original group turns out to not like 4e after all and come crawling back to Bob's game...

 

[Cadfan]

Don't fall into the trap of trying to reason with him. He clearly has reasons, and he's clearly not going to TELL you those reasons. You COULD play the "Yes, but..." game:

You: WOOHOO! 4e, here we come! Ready to play?
Him: Yeah... but I don't really want to spend the money on 4e.
You: Its cool, you can use my books.
Him: Yeah... but I don't like borrowing books.
You: No worries! We'll chip in and get you a PHB.
Him: Yeah... but my other group won't switch.
You: So? Just play 3e there, and 4e here.
Him: Yeah... but I just won't play 4e.

This is a neurotic game. As in, this is an actual neurotic game documented by psychologists. There's a slightly out of date but relatively landmark book called "The Games People Play" in which this game, amongst others, is described. The key to understanding it is to realize that you BOTH are being neurotic. He is concealing his real reasons, and hiding behind a series of excuses. You, on the other hand, should be able to figure out by now that he's doing that, and by insisting that he give you reasons so that you can counter them, you are enabling the game to continue.

Its obvious what he's doing, so the solution is to be the adult in the interaction and accept that he's just not going to agree to play 4e at this point. Offer him the chance again when 4e is released, perhaps in an email where you can make your point nicely and give him the chance to read it without social anxiety, and maybe he'll come around and hang with you guys. Or maybe not. But you'll have done your best.

PS- In the email, play up the "we've got a really cool campaign planned, and we want you to play because you're our friend" angle, not the "we've got a really cool set of rules here and you should want to play them" angle. That will make it easier for him to agree.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

There's asshattery afoot enough in both the pro and anti 4e camps.

 

[Dragonblade]

2 conversations? Doesn't look like he had much input into the decision.

I'm also wondering why 2 conversations leads to an internet post about him being "utterly irrational"...

The comment about 2 conversations was referring to try to get him to play with us. We have been discussing 4e since the announcement in August. Bob has not participated in the conversation in any way other than to declare he won't be switching no matter what. And he declared that immediately after the announcement. He could have participated in those discussion in a meaningful manner but did not.

When he has given us reasons, they were cost or logistic reasons (don't have the books, can't afford them, etc.) we have offered to help him overcome those barriers. At no point has he ever given us a reason related to fluff or mechanics such as I don't like 4e because I don't like X. That would be something I could understand.

Refusing to even to participate in a discussion about 4e is irrational, IMO.

 

[Dragonblade]

PS- In the email, play up the "we've got a really cool campaign planned, and we want you to play because you're our friend" angle, not the "we've got a really cool set of rules here and you should want to play them" angle.

Thank you for the advice. This is what we intend to do.

 

[zjordi]

I've been reading through this thread and I have a question for you, Dragonblade. Answer it only if you want because it might be too forward: how old is "Bob"?

And before someone begins calling me names let me explain that I'm in charge of Spanish Translations for D&D and we're experiencing more or less the same issues amongst Spanish-speaking players. There's a sizeable bunch of avant la lettre 4th. Ed-haters and I'm trying to ascertain whether this is an across-the-board attitude or it can be associated with a given age group.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

But some of the most insightful are those of you who seem to be taking this thread awfully personally in your identification with Bob and villification of the rest of us. As if you feel personally betrayed by 4e or anyone who intends on switching. Perhaps that is how Bob views it as well. Well he won't say and I don't want to bug him about it.

You are consistently assigning motivations to other people. This, to me, is worthy of villification regardless of topic, and the fact that the motivations are insulting (by implying an irrationally emotional motivation to explain a simple opinion difference) makes it worse.

Now, as one of the many folks who simply isn't yet impressed with 4e and gets labeled a hater for it, I do find one part of your story very interesting. If I understand you correctly, you have stated the intent to simply end 3 different campaigns (maybe 4, the status of the Saga campaign isn't clear to me) all at once, just to switch rules. So this player is losing three characters (if your group does only one character per campaign) that he may have been enjoying the stories of, potentially three different mechanical builds he was exploring and three different campaigns that he may well have been interested in the outcome of. All because you guys have decided, sight unseen, to start over within a new ruleset which we know will not support all the character types currently playable in 3e until we've waited a year or so and bought even more books. If he was enjoying all those campaigns, why wouldn't he develop a bit of a grudge against the system whose release is causing this?

Folks keep mocking 4e doubters, saying that "the game police aren't going to steal all your game books and arrest you for playing 3e, why do you care about 4e?" But it looks like for at least one guy out there, the release of 4e really is the trigger for taking his games away. I feel for the guy.