On homogeneity, or how I finally got past the people talking past each other part

Reported for ignorance in the face of a reasonable discussion on why some believe 4e is too homogeneous.
Of course, the only reasonable discussion is one where nobody is allowed to disagree with you- everyone has to not only tolerate your opinion, but accept your argument as gospel.

Well, maybe from now on i'm going to argue that 3rd edition is too Communist, and me and a few other people will make endless huge posts arguing that point, and ignore any argument to the contrary. And if anyone dares to suggest that we're being unreasonable, we'll report them.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

I believe I said this to BryonD and I'll repeat it for you. Stating your opinion as fact does not make it so. The rules "sucked" for you. Other people may feel that the rules do not, in fact, suck. .
To be clear, I very much agree with this. I don't think I have EVER claimed that a game sucks for someone else just because it sucks for me.
I have most absolutely stated that certain rules suck for one play style or another. There is a very big difference.
Seriously, I go out of my way on a regular basis to point out that 4E is probably a great game for people with very different game styles than mine.

But Reigan, I did not intend to imply anything. I was simply stating a fact. It may be as simple as your mistake was playing a game that harshly grated against your personal play style. But if you strayed with a game that for that long, even though it sucked, you have no one to blame but yourself.
The vast numbers of people who had (and continue to have) great experiences disprove your myopic proclamation of it being the rules fault.

But just go back up in this very thread and you will see where I clearly stated that 4E is preferable for certain games styles. It seems absurd to dispute that. And yet you are the one making that absurd claim toward 3E.
 
Last edited:

don'tmazemebro said:
The "homogenous" argument is particularly perplexing to me. Would you consider a kicker, wide receiver, and linebacker "homogenous" because they all play on a football field and adhere to the same laws of physics? Heck no. Even though they are playing the same game, the experience is totally different for each player. Just like 4E. A shielding swordmage plays nothing like a tactical warlord who in turn plays nothing like a chaos sorcerer who are all playing on the same battlemap.

I actually would call them homogenous when I'm looking for a team made up of a linebacker, a shortstop, a golf pro, and a world-class swimmer. Earlier editions gave me more freedom to represent extremely different powers and abilities usefully in the game. 4e limits these all to football, but what if I don't particularly want to play football? 3e was able (with some difficulty, in some areas) to rise to the occasion, why can't 4e?

4E turned D&D from a game of auto-attacking melees and kitchen-sink casters to an actual team effort where everyone abides by the same laws of physics.

Your experience with earlier editions is different then mine, but combat has always been just one pillar of my gameplay experience, so *shrug*.


D&D has always had a great mystique and "feel" to it, thanks to its iconic monsters and fantastic settings. The ruleset that has always been the Achilles' Heel of D&D. To this day, I still shudder when I think back to the arbitrary nature of 2E saving throw tables and multi/dual classing rules. Or the broken nature of 3E level progressions (e.g. Ur-priests). With 4E, for the first time in D&D's history, the rules make sense... the rules are f****** awesome now... and people are complaining... it's just plain bizarre to me.

Not everyone agrees with your assessment of 4e rules, man. I happen to think cherry pie is effin' awesome, but some folks are allergic to cherries, and some folks don't like cherries, and some folks are bored with cherries, and some people have a phobia about pies...these aren't bizarre to me, they're just different. It doesn't mean I shouldn't enjoy my pie, and maybe, if I'm making desert for everyone, I should find out what they do like.
 
Last edited:


Of course, the only reasonable discussion is one where nobody is allowed to disagree with you- everyone has to not only tolerate your opinion, but accept your argument as gospel.

Well, maybe from now on i'm going to argue that 3rd edition is too Communist, and me and a few other people will make endless huge posts arguing that point, and ignore any argument to the contrary. And if anyone dares to suggest that we're being unreasonable, we'll report them.
enjoy yourself
If the mods don't mind, I certainly don't mind.
It may make amusing reading.
 

There may be other issues that I have missed. But I pretty much limit myself to actual problems from my own personal preference.
You are welcome to stick your head in the sand and pretend that different points of view don't exist. It makes no difference to me.
Coming from you that is astoundingly ironic. You are exactly what i'm talking about. This is a planetary-scale irony event. For real, somebody get the EU on the line, I think Cern just exploded from all the irony.

You can hide behind this ridiculous line about respecting points of view, but this isn't about different points of view. This is about people hating 4e and reaching to the point of absurdity in order to rationalise and legitimise their hostility. And once they do that, they post over and over and over again and, don't pretend that those debates ever go anywhere. Yes, they gratify you, I get that, but otherwise they're toxic and destructive and pointless.

You're not respecting different points of view when you endlessly bludgeon everyone with your posts on these threads for page after page after page. Don't pretend you have any respect for people's points of view, you certainly don't show any respect for the people who try and reason with you.
 

I'm not going to cop the blame for calling this thread, and these arguments, what they so obviously are. It also doesn't surpise me that you mark out somebody else as an 'edition warrior' because they too, refuse to give these criticisms more credit than they deserve.

Some of people make valid criticisms of 4e, but unfortunatly, other people who post a lot more make invalid contrived criticisms because they don't want to admit that their hostility to the new system doesn't really have anything to do with how it actually plays.

Well it's a good thing we have an established expert like catastrophic to let everyone know what is or isn't a "credible", "valid" or "invalid" criticism of 4e (is that a paying gig or just volunteer work).

I mean where would we be if he hadn't come in here and told everyone who believes 4e has a certain amount of homogeneity, as well as those interested in presenting an opposing viewpoint that they in fact shouldn't be discussing it at all (according to him).

Dude really, nothing forces you to click on a thread and post in it multiple times, if you don't like the discussion going on then ignore it... but running in here and trying to "defend" 4e against the evils of others opinions is well just threadcrapping.
 

This is about people hating 4e and reaching to the point of absurdity in order to rationalise and legitimise their hostility.

Not really. I just had a 4e game yesterday. I hardly hate the system. That don't mean it's perfect.
 

Coming from you that is astoundingly ironic. You are exactly what i'm talking about. This is a planetary-scale irony event. For real, somebody get the EU on the line, I think Cern just exploded from all the irony.

You can hide behind this ridiculous line about respecting points of view, but this isn't about different points of view. This is about people hating 4e and reaching to the point of absurdity in order to rationalise and legitimise their hostility. And once they do that, they post over and over and over again and, don't pretend that those debates ever go anywhere. Yes, they gratify you, I get that, but otherwise they're toxic and destructive and pointless.

You're not respecting different points of view when you endlessly bludgeon everyone with your posts on these threads for page after page after page. Don't pretend you have any respect for people's points of view, you certainly don't show any respect for the people who try and reason with you.

4e killed my dog.

Happy now?
 

Well it's a good thing we have an established expert like catastrophic to let everyone know what is or isn't a "credible", "valid" or "invalid" criticism of 4e (is that a paying gig or just volunteer work).
So what you're saying is that nobody is allowed to say anything is valid or invalid, or credible? Ok so where does that leave the discussion? Or do you tolerate certain experts, IE people you agree with?

I mean where would we be if he hadn't come in here and told everyone who believes 4e has a certain amount of homogeneity, as well as those interested in presenting an opposing viewpoint that they in fact shouldn't be discussing it at all (according to him).
Well if you'd taken my advice you could be having a much more constructive discussion, but please, by all means, keep fumbling around in your bizzare limbo-zone where everythining is just, like, your opinion, man, and nobody is allowed to actually SAY anything. I'm sure that will be a very fruitful discussion.

I suspect at the end of this discussion you'll be very similar to where you began, and in another day or two another very important conversation will begin about why 4e allows fewer angels to dance on the head of a pin.

Dude really, nothing forces you to click on a thread and post in it multiple times, if you don't like the discussion going on then ignore it... but running in here and trying to "defend" 4e against the evils of others opinions is well just threadcrapping.
If people weren't crapping all over the forum with this garbage it would not be an issue, but this cycle of nonsense is endless, and I have as much right to comment on that as you have to post a thread about how 4e is too Unitarian for you.
 

Remove ads

Top