Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mercurius" data-source="post: 6366945" data-attributes="member: 59082">Sorry Tony, but my interpretation of what went down is different. I've met plenty of folks who actively disliked 4E. I work at a private high school (ironically for the last six years! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" />) and there has been a prevalent meme of dislike for 4E - among high school kids. In fact, the tradition has been 3.5 and then a bit of Pathfinder, with 4E completely bypassed. I was even surprised when some of them told me they didn't like 4E because it was too "video gamey" (or something like that).To be honest, I've always been a bit surprised about the hatred of 4E I've come across. I can understand not liking a specific game or edition, but hatred?The bottom line is that you don't understand what I'm saying. I'm not blaming kids for preferring junk food when it is offered to them - who wouldn't prefer a bag of chips over a plate of kale? But the thing is, kale is more nutritious and if you develop the palate for it, it actually tastes better, at least as a regular food (at least in my humble opinion, in my subjective world experience, according to my personal bias, etc).Sorry, I call BS. I am not edition warring, unless you call an edition warrior someone who makes any comments about an edition that aren't raving accolades. Remarking that 4E fizzled is not edition warring. It is pointing out the obvious for anyone who is willing to, ahem, look beyond their personal biases.Also please note: I am not attacking 4E. Feel free to search or quotes in this thread or the Golden Era thread where I actually said something negative about 4E as a game. You might find something but nothing worthy of an "attack."OK, fair enough.I'm not saying "objectively" superior. Objectively refers to objects. It is hard to speak of imagination, or qualities of consciousness, in that way.Subjectively superior? Sure. Intersubjectively? Yeah, that too. In the same way that not all art is just "different." Now I don't think the universe cares for one piece of art or another - they are, objectively speaking, just different. But when we come to subjects, to human beings, that's a different thing.And it isn't merely a popularity contest either, otherwise Justin Bieber would be a far greater "artist" than Arvo Part (an example I used in some other conversation here, I believe). Aesthetics is a very complex, subtle thing, but I'm not willing to reduce it all to mere subjectivity and personal bias.What's wrong with ranking? I get that it can and has been misused, but hierarchies exist in the world, both natural and human. In other words, hierarchies (ranking) aren't inherently pathological or domineering. Yeah, I hear that - and to be honest, very few gaming sessions I've run have been "refined" in any meaningful way. But let me clarify what I was talking about: I'm not talking about your average game session. I'm talking about the internal, imaginative experience, and saying that tabletop RPGs have the potential to be far richer, deeper, more profound than video games - if only by virtue of the fact that TTRPGs actually utilize imagination while video games don't (except in their conception and design).Or compare, for instance, Peter Jackson's balrog with the words Tolkien used. Jackson just gives it to you, and quite effectively - there it is, the demon of fire. Cool and scary. But the thing is, I'm not doing anything, I'm just seeing the image he created, how he interpreted it from Tolkien (and various artists, particularly John Howe and Alan Lee, I believe).  When I read Tolkien, he offers me words--and only  few of them, really--which I take and create my own images (or rather, co-create with him). That is a far richer, deeper imaginative experience because I'm actively engaging with it.Don't get me wrong, I love movies (although not video games so much). Just as I love certain junk foods. But I'm pointing out that there is a spectrum of depth, imagination, and "nutrition" and that in order to differentiate levels/depths/ranks, some kind of palate needs to be developed. At the risk of going on too long, here's another example. I make homemade, organic gelato - including a mint chocolate chip with mint that I wild-craft (there's a high horse idea for you). My 9-year old daughter loves it, but likes the mint chocolate chip we get at the local ice cream stand better. Why? For one reason and one only: they use green food coloring. Mine has a slight but very subtle green hue, but she likes the bright green.But from my perspective, mine is far superior - I use all organic, higher quality ingredients - and it is fresher. We could say that this is just personal bias, but I think it also has to do with palate, which takes time to develop.</blockquote>

Verification