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

[thecasualoblivion]

I find your phrasing a little odd... as if only those who don't like 4e can cause edition wars. This thread was pretty peaceful and interesting (and I found the views of both sides interesting) until a 4e fan came charging in all taking no prisoners and ready for a fight.

It goes both ways. The 4E side of the edition war I don't think would exist in the absence of the 3E side. If people weren't complaining, why would there be any reason to do anything besides happily play and discuss 4E? 4E fans didn't start the Edition War, and neither did anti-4E people. WotC started it by dumping 3E and releasing 4E. When people throw mud at 4E/WotC on forums, 4E/WotC doesn't get hit. 4E fans get hit. It basically stems from reacting to all negativity no matter what the validity with the same violence because of being sick of all the crap that gets thrown at a game we like. Some 4E claims are valid, some are not, and some are people venting because the game they preferred has been lessened. The invalid claims and venting have just gotten to the point were all of it gets lumped in the same boat.

I think catastrophic is way out of line here making a crusade out of this, but he has a point all the same.

 

[I'm A Banana]

When people throw mud at 4E/WotC on forums, 4E/WotC doesn't get hit. 4E fans get hit.

Why? I mean, why do certain fans (of any edition) take it like a personal slight when people have problems with the edition? If I say 4e is too homogeneous (implied "for me, in my experience, relative to other stuff I've played and the ways I've played that other stuff"), that's nothing against 4e fans. As someone who does enjoy his 4e games, I don't feel like I'm insulting myself by pointing out areas where 4e struggles. I feel like I'm exposing weaknesses to make a better game. If the Coasties don't hear it, it doesn't matter, because it helps me to make my game a better game by finding areas where players aren't having a tremendous amount of fun and letting them have more fun.

Now, if I say "4e is great if you're a mental midget with all the creativity of an ironing board who likes getting spoon-fed gruel and being told it's duck l'orange" that IS a slight against 4e fans, and I'm wrong to say that.

Just like saying "Anyone who has a problem with 4e is obviously concealing their true hatred of change!" is wrong.

If people weren't complaining, why would there be any reason to do anything besides happily play and discuss 4E?

I'm of a mind that discussions of substance cannot occur unless there's a problem to be solved. If someone makes a new 4e class, for instance, the implication is that 4e has a flaw in that it didn't already have the class (and maybe it's just a flaw for the person who made the class).

If people weren't "complaining" (which is a pretty derogatory way to put it), then there would be no discussion of any relevance. Post after post of "I LOVE 4E AND IT IS BETTER THAN SEX" is not a discussion, it's just a dogma, a mantra.

If people weren't complaining, it would also be because nobody cared, which would be a dang tragedy for the game as a whole.

No, people try to correct problems with things they care about, and want to see get better. Problems always exist -- no edition is perfection -- so there are always things to work on, discuss, and maybe fix.

Some 4E claims are valid, some are not, and some are people venting because the game they preferred has been lessened.

I'm a pretty regular poster here at ENWorld, and I haven't seen an invalid 4e claim in months, if not years (same thing with invalid 3e claims). The edition wars here aren't really fiery anymore -- simmering flames with people picking up the games they like and going off to play and discuss them.

To come in 5 pages into a constructive thread and spew venom about how everyone who is a critic is ignorant and mean-spirited, is, well, ignorant and mean-spirited.

Anyone who reacts like that is at best jumping at shadows, at worst, trolling.

 

[Obryn]

EDITION WARS:

They're Not Just for 2008 Anymore!

-O

 

[thecasualoblivion]

Why? I mean, why do certain fans (of any edition) take it like a personal slight when people have problems with the edition? If I say 4e is too homogeneous (implied "for me, in my experience, relative to other stuff I've played and the ways I've played that other stuff"), that's nothing against 4e fans. As someone who does enjoy his 4e games, I don't feel like I'm insulting myself by pointing out areas where 4e struggles. I feel like I'm exposing weaknesses to make a better game. If the Coasties don't hear it, it doesn't matter, because it helps me to make my game a better game by finding areas where players aren't having a tremendous amount of fun and letting them have more fun.

Its a difference of tone. Simply stating a preference isn't an issue. A lot of the times, stating a preference in opposition to 4E takes on the tone of a political crusade. Its the political crusade that draws people to fire back, not the opinion. The political crusade got to be big enough that it became inseparatable from the opinions, and people who have simple opinions are being jumped by 4E fans responding to the political crusades.

Now, if I say "4e is great if you're a mental midget with all the creativity of an ironing board who likes getting spoon-fed gruel and being told it's duck l'orange" that IS a slight against 4e fans, and I'm wrong to say that.

Just like saying "Anyone who has a problem with 4e is obviously concealing their true hatred of change!" is wrong.

Again, this got so bitter that its difficult to separate things, and has been this way from almost the beginning and it hasn't healed.

I'm of a mind that discussions of substance cannot occur unless there's a problem to be solved. If someone makes a new 4e class, for instance, the implication is that 4e has a flaw in that it didn't already have the class (and maybe it's just a flaw for the person who made the class).

If people weren't "complaining" (which is a pretty derogatory way to put it), then there would be no discussion of any relevance. Post after post of "I LOVE 4E AND IT IS BETTER THAN SEX" is not a discussion, it's just a dogma, a mantra.

If people weren't complaining, it would also be because nobody cared, which would be a dang tragedy for the game as a whole.

No, people try to correct problems with things they care about, and want to see get better. Problems always exist -- no edition is perfection -- so there are always things to work on, discuss, and maybe fix.

The issue here is that some problems can't be solved. If you prefer 3E to 4E whole cloth, than there is nothing that can be done to 4E to fix it for you. When people who prefer 3E whole cloth start posting in complaint threads, it leads to mudslinging because of a divide that cannot be bridged.

I'm a pretty regular poster here at ENWorld, and I haven't seen an invalid 4e claim in months, if not years (same thing with invalid 3e claims). The edition wars here aren't really fiery anymore -- simmering flames with people picking up the games they like and going off to play and discuss them.

To come in 5 pages into a constructive thread and spew venom about how everyone who is a critic is ignorant and mean-spirited, is, well, ignorant and mean-spirited.

Anyone who reacts like that is at best jumping at shadows, at worst, trolling.

It might be running cold, but its still there. I should know, as I generally only show up for the edition wars. They're interesting, more interesting than the polite discussions. That doesn't reflect well on me, but I try to think of myself as one who doesn't start fires where none exist, but shows up to play with fires when they break out.


This flamed into an edition war, but I gave the guy XP(before the war started I might add) for pointing out that a lot of anti-4e attacks aren't motivated by a simple dislike of the system, but dissatisfaction from having a favored game being replaced by an edition a person doesn't like without saying such. Its hard to discuss simple opinions when the real issue is something unsaid in the post.


4E fans can be just as bad, as we have a tendency to respond to the edition war and not to the poster.

 

[BryonD]

3E's lack of balance really detracted from things in light of the games combat focus IMO.

Yes. This is a fair statement.

I'll admit that my 1/2 second knee-jerk reaction is to express surprise, because I find 3E to be quite reasonably balanced.

But, if balance were the most important factor to me and I was moving from 4E to 3E, I would likely be appalled by the amount of balance I was giving up. That is not to say that 3E has no balance. Again, I find it more than sufficient. But, why would I as a 4E fan even consider playing 3E when I can have such a better game experience sitting right there? When there is a much better option sitting there that meets my standard of excellent balance, the difference between "more than sufficient" and "nowhere near good enough" becomes negligible. They are both settling for less.


And I can see how the reaction of 4E fans could be dismay when some claims that 4E does not offer enough diversity. But the same reasoning applies.

 

[thecasualoblivion]

The phrase "talking past each other" is listed in this thread's title.

A lot of the trouble comes from people who are unhappy with the edition change posting simple opinions while subconsciously including their unhappiness in the form of passive agressive hostility, and 4E fans responding aggressively to the undercurrent of hostility and the past history of the "Edition War" instead of responding to the simple opinion.

In other words, "talking past each other".

 

[The Little Raven]

Why? I mean, why do certain fans (of any edition) take it like a personal slight when people have problems with the edition?

I can answer this.

People take it personally because criticism of an edition by someone who emphatically does not like it is often phrased in a way to be insulting to the intelligence or tastes of the people who like it.

People have suggested that 4e fans are attention-starved immature kids who can't handle complex rules. In one fell swoop, they've attacked my maturity, attention span, and intelligence.

Now, most people who have problems with 4e have either moved away from incendiary rhetoric to make their points, or they've been banned (like Razz), so you don't see it as often, but it does still happen sometimes.

If I say 4e is too homogeneous (implied "for me, in my experience, relative to other stuff I've played and the ways I've played that other stuff"), that's nothing against 4e fans.

No, but when its phrased in a way that suggests we are unable to perceive the truth about the game we like, or its suggested we're suffering from Stockholm Syndrome (like someone did earlier in this thread), that is something definitely against the fans. That's intentionally offensive, and it will provoke a reaction... and not a pleasant one.

 

[Rechan]

Why? I mean, why do certain fans (of any edition) take it like a personal slight when people have problems with the edition?

When people say "4e is not D&D" or "4e ruined D&D", then that's insulting my game. It's telling me "You're not a D&D player because you play 4e".

Quite a number of people say that. And quite a number who do not still say it with the tone. There's a difference between saying "I don't like it" or "I prefer 3e" or "It's too similar" than "It's just WoW with Dice".

Again saying "It's WoW with Dice" insults me because it's implying it's dumbed down and I'm dumbed down for liking it.

And when someone says "You just CAN'T roleplay with 4e", and I roleplay with 4e, what does that say about my game? If you can't roleplay with 4e, then what I'm doing isn't roleplaying, is it?

To put it back in the sports analogy, it's the difference between saying "Baseball is boring - it's slow, takes a long time to resolve, and the moments of excitement are brief spikes in between the dullness" and "Baseball is a wuss's game". And quite frankly, KM, I see more of the latter than the former around the internet.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Great. I understand all of those reasons.

Now I'm wondering why this thread -- which had none of that -- turned into what it did.

Oh, right. One poster with an axe to grind.

I suppose it was fun while it lasted.

 

[Rechan]

No, people try to correct problems with things they care about, and want to see get better. Problems always exist -- no edition is perfection -- so there are always things to work on, discuss, and maybe fix.

Now, hold a moment, KM.

Some people will make a criticism about 4e because they want to houserule the game. Like the "Let's make the classes less homogenous". If that's what you're talking about, then For instance, "I don't like the saving mechanic - it's a pure 50/50 thing for every person, no matter the condition or what it targeted. It doesn't relate to the character's strengths/weaknesses at all." Valid criticism, easy to fix. If that's what you're trying to say, sure.

I rarely see this.

What I see the majority of the time is this: 3e fans who do not like or want to play 4e, and who want to register their complaints because they don't like the direction that D&D has taken. And they don't want WotC to make 5e anything like 4e. If WotC sees the unhappiness with their product, they will halt the direction they are going, and swing back in the direction of 3e. I've seen many posters say this is their intention for complaining about 4e here.

Then the posters start listing all the things wrong with 4e. Which is going to cause friction when one person sees X as a bug, and the next sees it as a feature. You may say it's a "problem" you want to "correct", and I see it as an "innovation" I want to "stay".

I think that the poster with the axe to grind went way out of line. On the other hand, one can't also dismiss that for some posters, there is more going on behind the posts than face value and a desire for discussion. For instance, apparently the way the 4e designers previewed 4e really insulted some people, and they are still sensitive about it. That's going to have some influence, intentional or not, on their discussion of the topic.