D&D 4E Rant on the 4E "Presentation"

[Nifft]

I'm basically questioning the whole idea of "human progress" and more particularly the way we've been thinking about it since the industrial revolution at the very least. It's mostly bogus.

I'm always filled with deep amusement whenever I see this thought expressed on the Internet.

Dude, there are still places on Earth where you can go which don't have any of that "progress" stuff. You're not in one of them.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Odhanan]

I'm always filled with deep amusement whenever I see this thought expressed on the Internet.

Dude, there are still places on Earth where you can go which don't have any of that "progress" stuff. You're not in one of them.

Cheers, -- N

Does that mean that I have to avoid all technology and all changes because I refute the idea of progress?

I said change happens. Sometimes in good. Sometimes in bad. Most of the time both at the same time, actually (Internet certainly doesn't have only advantages. What about allowing terrorist and criminal networks to form and communicate much more easily on the planet, just as a single example?)

I don't think change is always bad. Where did I write this ?!

 

[Prince of Happiness]

Does that mean that I have to avoid all technology and all changes because I refute the idea of progress?

I said change happens. Sometimes in good. Sometimes in bad. Most of the time both at the same time, actually (Internet certainly doesn't have only advantages. What about allowing terrorist and criminal networks to form and communicate much more easily on the planet, just as a single example?)

I don't think change is always bad. Where did I write this ?!

I took your stance to mean that progress =/= good. We have lots of nice appliances to make our lives convenient, but at the same, the lifestyles that that convenience leads to unhealthy bodies and environments. Progress? Maybe. Good? Maybe. Depends. I like showers and antibiotics. Cleaning supplies, nice, but I would rather not have the ill-side effects that I tend to get when I use them.

So, changes in the rules for 4E may be progress, but that doesn't automatically make them universally good in a subjective environment.

 

[Nifft]

Does that mean that I have to avoid all technology and all changes because I refute the idea of progress?

No. Nothing in this world prevents hypocrisy. You could even vote to end Democracy -- and be in the company of millions.

But it does mean your rhetorical authority is going to take a nosedive. You don't have to practice what you preach, but we as a society tend to mock those who preach what they can't practice.

I don't think change is always bad. Where did I write this ?!

Your first post in this thread. Refutation of progress == refutation of the idea that change can be for the better.

Here, this was three posts above your first:

Isn't there a difference between progress and change? I would think progress would be defined as "good change" and so the statement "progress is good" is somewhat circular.

So that's the definition of "progress" present as the context of your first post.

Your first:

I don't even know that things get that much "better" with "progress". To me, that's a human illusion. Progress, change... these things just "happen". No better. No worse.

This is where you say progress is not for the better.

If you want to say that "change is not always for the better", you'll be on firmer ground. If you want to fight the idea of progress -- the idea that change can be for the better -- good luck with that.

Cheers, -- N

 

[BadMojo]

Same reason why I still don't have a cell phone or an iPod, by the way.

Nothing to do with the current topic (whatever that originally was), but MP3 players/digitial audio players kick butt. I've listened to more of my music collection since transferring it over to my MP3 player than I ever would have done in the past.

I've listened to really good albums that I completely forgot about just because I stumbled upon them while browsing through the contents of my iPod. Having my entire music library at my fingertips in a little metal thing the size of a pack of cigarettes is just amazing and very handy.

I could do without the cell phone, except for the excellent bowling game that was included on it.

 

[Crazy Jerome]

If you want to say that "change is not always for the better", you'll be on firmer ground. If you want to fight the idea of progress -- the idea that change can be for the better -- good luck with that.

G. K. Chesterton answered you almost 100 years ago. The "idea of progress" has never been that "change can be for the better"--at least not in people espousing "progress" for its own sake. Rather, it is that there is some direction that we are "progressing" towards, with the very carefully unstated implication that the direction is a good one. It also usually comes with the assumption that there is nothing fundamental about the human condition (that is, all parts of the human condition are subject to improvement via "progress"). The problem arises when you delve into the details, because then agreement about direction goes poof.

As GKC also said, given clear goals, you can progress towards a bad goal, a good goal, or even an indifferent goal--as long as you have a clear goal. Only problem is that the more clear the goal, the more people jump off the bandwagon. And if you get fuzzy on the goal to avoid that, then you are sacrificing the goal for the concept of "progress". You can't "progress" anywhere going seven different directions at once.

I think we see the truth of GKC's points already, in the nature of the discussion since the 4E was announced. I'm fairly certain that the 4E designers have a goal in mind, and have a pretty decent shot of attaining it. If they set out to fix X, Y, and Z, they will probably nail X to the wall, send Y scurrying for the shadows, and at least make Z hunker down in the corner most of the time. What the side effects will be, and how this will interact with the (human) legions of fans, and their goals and perceptions, remains to be seen.

 

[Odhanan]

Ok... that's nonsensical. I just explained what I meant. Nothing more to add here.

 

[Nifft]

G. K. Chesterton answered you almost 100 years ago. The "idea of progress" has never been that "change can be for the better"--at least not in people espousing "progress" for its own sake

You're quoting me, but answering someone else -- someone whom I've quoted.

I'm fairly certain that the 4E designers have a goal in mind, and have a pretty decent shot of attaining it.

Yup. And from what I've seen, it'll be a game that plays better, just as PHB-II + ToB > 3.5e > 3e > 1e.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Hussar]

As far as D&D not being a cheap hobby, I strongly disagree. Oh sure, you CAN spend all sorts of money on D&D, but, it's not required. You can also go out and buy that 50 inch plasma TV for your Wii, but, it's not required either. Those are just extras.

The only required material is the Core 3 and some dice. That's it. You can play D&D for about 200 bucks. There are very, very few hobbies that you can do that with. Never mind video gaming, look at other hobbies like model trains, or RC airplanes, camping. Try going camping for 200 bucks. There's a group activity that you can do every week. Good luck doing it for that money though. Try playing any team sport for 200 bucks a year. Might get you a pair of skates, but no pads.

Yes, D&D can be expensive. But, that's an option, not a requirement. Nothing forces you to buy the latest supplement. That you choose to is no different than the hobbyist who buys the latest goodies for whatever hobby strikes his or her fancy. It's not needed.

 

[Imaro]

As far as D&D not being a cheap hobby, I strongly disagree. Oh sure, you CAN spend all sorts of money on D&D, but, it's not required. You can also go out and buy that 50 inch plasma TV for your Wii, but, it's not required either. Those are just extras.

The only required material is the Core 3 and some dice. That's it. You can play D&D for about 200 bucks. There are very, very few hobbies that you can do that with. Never mind video gaming, look at other hobbies like model trains, or RC airplanes, camping. Try going camping for 200 bucks. There's a group activity that you can do every week. Good luck doing it for that money though. Try playing any team sport for 200 bucks a year. Might get you a pair of skates, but no pads.

Yes, D&D can be expensive. But, that's an option, not a requirement. Nothing forces you to buy the latest supplement. That you choose to is no different than the hobbyist who buys the latest goodies for whatever hobby strikes his or her fancy. It's not needed.

The biggest problem is D&D is not a hobby you can enjoy alone. All the others you list can be enjoyed with or without other people. If you can't find people to play with then D&D becomes a substantial investment with little or no return. People never seem to factor this in when discussing "cost". If I buy the core and can't convince others to play I essentially spent money for no reason... I'm just sayin