D&D 4E Is there a "Cliffs Notes" summary of the entire 4E experience?

[Rygar]

Hi. I'm Nemesis Destiny. Some of you may remember me from such threads as Pemertonian Scene Framing and its continuation, as well as Nemesis Destiny's Houserules Thread. I have also participated in my share of 4dvocating for my edition of choice when I see it baselessly attacked as being unworthy of the D&D name, which is sadly oftener than it should be.

...

Unfortunately, the 4e-bashing started almost right away, and from the designers to boot! Elation turned to disappointment, and my hopes crashed as interview after interview, Mike Mearls and his staff continued throwing 4e and its design assumptions under the bus, in order to curry favour with lapsed players. On the one hand, I understood why they were doing it, but I resented it all the same. I had never failed to have sympathy for the folks that felt betrayed by WotC in the leadup to 4e, but I couldn't understand their anger. I still don't. Resentment and disappointment, sure, but not the anger.

What I'm getting out of your that paragraph is: "4th edition is obviously superior, so anything relating to editions prior to 4th edition must be "Sucking up" to some group of people". It strongly indicates to me that you do not accept that for a very substantial number of people 4th edition is not better than the pre-existing systems.

The anger is very easy to understand. For 35 years D&D played a certain way, because WOTC wanted to force people to increase their average expenses and kill the OGL, they abandoned 35 years of precedent. Then the "4vengers" made matters exponentially worse by relentlessly insulting anyone who dared criticize 4th edition for years, basically making it personal. Generally, abandoning a 35 year invested customer base and letting a small group of individuals taunt and belittle them for 4 years is going to generate some pretty strong feelings.

 

[Savage Wombat]

"predictable and tiresome anti-4e vitriol"
"game was coming apart at the seams"
"a ruleset so utterly alien from AD&D that it was D&D (as I understood it) only superficially"
"pissed at WotC for making me rebuy all the books, and their continuous treadmill of crappy splatbooks"
"the 4e-bashing started almost right away, and from the designers to boot"
"Mike Mearls and his staff continued throwing 4e and its design assumptions under the bus, in order to curry favour with lapsed players"
"everything I detested about 3.x, with only the thin veneer of nostalgia imparted by superficial touches from AD&D, and occasional, ineffective nods to 4e design"

This is what I see as the core problem. Here's someone trying to state his preference for one game over another, and critical of attacks on his favored edition. And yet, despite his concerns, even he can't avoid using loaded and vaguely argumentative language. This is one of the most polite posts I've seen, and yet it's easy to pick out the lines to start fights over.

Should I get angry with him, and nitpick his criticisms of editions that I like? Because that seems to be the real cause of the edition warring to me. An individual cannot express his opinion on an edition he doesn't care for without the supporters of that edition accusing them of "hating" on it.

There are simply too many people on this forum unwilling to accept that other people have different opinions about things.

P.S. I think Rygar's post above supports my point nicely.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

What I'm getting out of your that paragraph is: "4th edition is obviously superior, so anything relating to editions prior to 4th edition must be "Sucking up" to some group of people". It strongly indicates to me that you do not accept that for a very substantial number of people 4th edition is not better than the pre-existing systems.

Well, that's not the intent. I'm sorry if you took it that way. I fully accept that a "substantial number of people" 4e is not better than prior editions. That is not in question. I don't agree with them, but that's neither here nor there. The difference is that I don't care what other people like, because I like what moves me, and really, I only need to worry about what I like. As I mentioned upthread, Ad populum arguments score no points with me. I have always done my own thing in life and will continue to do so.

"Just because something is popular, doesn't mean that it has merit, and just because something has merit, doesn't ensure that it will be popular." That's an adage I basically live by. Obviously, what has merit is entirely in the eye of the beholder.

I don't know how closely you were following things after the announcement, but I digested every single thing I could for a while after, and the things that came from the developer's mouths could only be described as intentionally disparaging at best.

Criticism of what they may have wanted to improve upon is one thing, but their approach was, and as of the last time I cared what came out of their mouths, was beyond any reasonable criticism and fully into intentionally insulting territory.

The anger is very easy to understand. For 35 years D&D played a certain way, because WOTC wanted to force people to increase their average expenses and kill the OGL, they abandoned 35 years of precedent. Then the "4vengers" made matters exponentially worse by relentlessly insulting anyone who dared criticize 4th edition for years, basically making it personal. Generally, abandoning a 35 year invested customer base and letting a small group of individuals taunt and belittle them for 4 years is going to generate some pretty strong feelings.

I think that you're mischaracterizing what happened, but I can see how some people feel this way. I don't agree that the "4vengers" made things worse, at least, not on our own. As I said, criticism is one thing, but some of what we inevitably see in any of these threads can only be characterized as blind hate. There are those, not saying that you're one of them, but there are those who only popped into otherwise civil 4e threads to spew their vitriol. Maybe it was cathartic for them, who knows, but it wasn't just limited to 4e threads. Mention 4e in an edition neutral or 5e thread, even in neutral terms, and see what happens. The h4te will come.

I don't think it's justified. It's just a game.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

This is what I see as the core problem. Here's someone trying to state his preference for one game over another, and critical of attacks on his favored edition. And yet, despite his concerns, even he can't avoid using loaded and vaguely argumentative language. This is one of the most polite posts I've seen, and yet it's easy to pick out the lines to start fights over.

Yes, and I deliberately used loaded language, or rather, deliberately did not avoid it, because I was recounting my experiences, and how I felt at the time, in part to show that the bad feelings weren't entirely limited to one edition or another. The edition wars have been going on since basic. Ever read through back issues of The Dragon? So many people hated the very idea of 2e and now, more often than not, it gets lumped right along side 1e as "AD&D". I also wanted to illustrate how the feelings "a lot of folks" have about 4e were also common in the switch from 2e to 3s. Contrary to how revisionist history is painting it, it was not a universally accepted and loved change to the game. Some got over it, some leaned to love it, some kept right on hating it and are happy to continue playing AD&D or an OSR retroclone.

Should I get angry with him, and nitpick his criticisms of editions that I like? Because that seems to be the real cause of the edition warring to me. An individual cannot express his opinion on an edition he doesn't care for without the supporters of that edition accusing them of "hating" on it.

The best part is that in my criticism, I bashed all editions, basically, but the one that would draw the most ire is my criticism of 3.x. Maybe there aren't enough AD&D grognards left who care anymore? Or maybe 3e is just a tender nerve with a lot of folks.

There are simply too many people on this forum unwilling to accept that other people have different opinions about things.

The funny part is, I used to get more angry and involved. Now I just find it tiresome. I think a lot of it comes from seeing parallels to things in "real life". Us D&Ders approach editions like religious fanatics do their particular brand of faith. As an atheist, it actually helps me, somewhat, to understand both religion and edition wars to compare them. I will speak no more of this, however.

 

[Nergal Pendragon]

I don't see a disconnect, not on a personal level, at any rate.

It's fine and dandy that WotC cares. It's their job to do so. I'm not bitter anymore. I simply don't care. All that has given way to disappointed indifference concerning the future of the game. I don't care if 4e ever sees another ounce of support, or if 5e never supports that playstyle. I have what I need and enough ideas to last a lifetime.

Would I like them to revisit 4e at some point, maybe even offer a potential 4.5? Yes, I would. Heck even if it fell to the 3PP (which won't happen, of course). But I'll not get worked up about it. Would I like them to make a version of next that cuts to the core of the 4e experience? Yes, I would. But I it doesn't matter to me if they actually do, because I still have 4e, and what I don't have, is the slightest confidence that they could even do it without screwing it up.

The disconnect I spoke of is not only personal, but a disconnect between your reasoning and some of what has been stated on this thread. And, yes, there is a personal disconnect involved; I'll illustrate the personal disconnect first.

You yourself describe the game as having "videogamey, keyword-infested stat blocks" and compare it to WoW. For stating you wish to fight misinformation, you go out of your way to state one of the biggest pieces of it. Especially since it's physically impossible for DnD not to have elements of WoW, since WoW stole massive portions of its game from DnD. So every edition of DnD is like WoW (though, ironically, 4E may be the least like it, given that they don't have the mass use of potions and healing spells native to WoW and 3.x).

Others have pointed out other problematic language items of your post; I won't belabor their points.

As for the other aspect of the disconnect: You accuse the very developers of bashing the edition and currying favor. Is it possible they were stating their own opinions and that 4E actually was a failure of what they set out to do? That does happen on occasion with a game, and DnD has always been a game riddled with design errors and problems the developers did not intend. Even more so in that WotC suffered such of a loss of power and income.

I'm not defending them any on this. TSR and Gygax didn't exactly do a better job when they were in control (just look at why psionics are known for being overpowered in DnD). What I am saying is that if you wish to fight misinformation, you must not state that misinformation. And if you are truly weary of fighting, try your best to avoid inflammatory language. Because as it stands, you're sending conflicting messages on both of those fronts. And if you wished to just relate your experiences, there are better ways you could have worded what you said.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

The disconnect I spoke of is not only personal, but a disconnect between your reasoning and some of what has been stated on this thread. And, yes, there is a personal disconnect involved; I'll illustrate the personal disconnect first.

You yourself describe the game as having "videogamey, keyword-infested stat blocks" and compare it to WoW. For stating you wish to fight misinformation, you go out of your way to state one of the biggest pieces of it. Especially since it's physically impossible for DnD not to have elements of WoW, since WoW stole massive portions of its game from DnD. So every edition of DnD is like WoW (though, ironically, 4E may be the least like it, given that they don't have the mass use of potions and healing spells native to WoW and 3.x).

Yes, I did describe it that way. It was a historical monologue of how I felt at the time. I obviously don't feel that way now. I changed my mind after examining the evidence by playing the game. So there's no disconnect here.

As for the other aspect of the disconnect: You accuse the very developers of bashing the edition and currying favor. Is it possible they were stating their own opinions and that 4E actually was a failure of what they set out to do? That does happen on occasion with a game, and DnD has always been a game riddled with design errors and problems the developers did not intend. Even more so in that WotC suffered such of a loss of power and income.

If that's legitimately the way the devs felt, fine, whatever, but the way they went about it was actually just as bad as the edition wars you see on forums such as this. It was downright unprofessional. They should be setting a better example. I think they know that, so that's why I think that it was an intentional attempt to curry favour, but then again WotC has had some fantastically bad blunders in the past, so you never know.

I'm not defending them any on this.

Good, because their position is basically indefensible. Their behaviour is/was ignorant at best, and shameful at worst. But it sure got a lot of cathartic giggles and posts from the folks who felt "wronged" by 4e.

Criticism is fine, but they were just stirring the pot. They had to know what effect their statements would have on and within the community.

What I am saying is that if you wish to fight misinformation, you must not state that misinformation. And if you are truly weary of fighting, try your best to avoid inflammatory language. Because as it stands, you're sending conflicting messages on both of those fronts. And if you wished to just relate your experiences, there are better ways you could have worded what you said.

I disagree. I think that I needed to say things how I felt at the time. My comments, in the historical context that they were presented, are not misinformation. They were my opinion at the time. I can't sugar coat it.

And as for my comments on the current state of things, this thread more than proves there is still plenty of anti-4e vitriol to be had around here. I don't see how stating a fact that we are witnessing is at all problematic.

 

[Savage Wombat]

And as for my comments on the current state of things, this thread more than proves there is still plenty of anti-4e vitriol to be had around here. I don't see how stating a fact that we are witnessing is at all problematic.

Why doesn't this thread prove that there is still plenty of vitriol on both sides?

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

Why doesn't this thread prove that there is still plenty of vitriol on both sides?

Perhaps it does. I didn't indicate otherwise. My statement that you replied to was referencing my statement in my first post about "anti-4e vitriol" still being present, so that I what I referenced.

 

[Savage Wombat]

Perhaps it does. I didn't indicate otherwise. My statement that you replied to was referencing my statement in my first post about "anti-4e vitriol" still being present, so that I what I referenced.

By omission, you did. It's like saying "those Wildcats can't go a game without fouling out half their players" when the same can be said for the Jayhawks.

 

[Nemesis Destiny]

By omission, you did. It's like saying "those Wildcats can't go a game without fouling out half their players" when the same can be said for the Jayhawks.

That is what you are choosing to read into it. That was not specifically my intent.