Roleplaying since the 80s and I'm really tired!

[innerdude]

Please, no one respond to Umbran's response. Seems he has personal issues to address, and quite frankly, I don't appreciate the tone, or the hostility, of his reply. It seems not only overly harsh, but also uncalled for especially from a MOD! I am willing to let it drop here for the sake of the discussion with more pleasant people, including those who can express their differences much more nicely than this. I appreciate everyone's conduct up until this point, and hope we may continue like intelligent people should. Thank you.

Couple things here:

First, I don't know anything about Umbran in real life--but if you post around here for a while (I notice you've only got 30-some-odd posts so far, Jacob), you'll come to understand that's just Umbran's general online "persona" on these boards. Some of it comes from his being a moderator, and wanting to maintain a sense of non-partisanship, and some of it is just his natural communication style. He's pretty straightforward, to the point of being blunt at times. More to the point, though, he's also very much about playing "devil's advocate" in a lot of ways, trying to get posters to think through statements or assumptions that aren't necessarily "prima facie" true, though the poster is generally convinced that their statement is "ironclad." I'll admit, on occasion it's grated me the wrong way, but when you start to see the pattern as a whole, there's a definite method to his comments. (And yes, it does feel a bit strange to stick up for Umbran, since he's more than capable of handling his own "stuff," but nonetheless . . .)

Second, I don't know anything about you in real life either, Jacob, but I have to say, I didn't find anything particularly inflammatory in Umbran's comments. He very clearly pointed out several areas where there were "holes" in your statements that didn't necessarily match up to the facts, and noted that if you were willing to do some additional exploration, you might find ways to expand your gaming horizons.

I know sometimes we use message boards for validation, to express a view and have other people say, "Yeah! ME TOO! I know exactly what you're saying!" If this is the kind of discussion you're really wanting, then I can see why getting an oppositional response might irk a bit. And yes, Umbran didn't stand up and start waving pom-poms and shouting "GO TEAM!" to your comments, but if you want to have a discussion, with back-and-forth and giving yourself an opportunity to really THINK about your assertions, then I think your response was unwarranted, and even a bit petulant.

Right now it just sounds like a "The bad man said mean things to me! Ignore the bad man!" If you'd go back and take a look at what was said, I think there's some pretty salient advice in Umbran's post.

You're wholly justified in feeling the way you feel about your own personal gaming experiences, they're yours alone and no one else's. But it's a bit unrealistic to expect that people aren't going to offer opposing, alternative viewpoints to your experience. And being dismissive to those opposing viewpoints isn't a great catalyst to holding productive discussion. Anyway, just a thought, because I think you've brought up an interesting point about the struggle between RPGs as a business, and RPGs as an entertainment medium, and I think the conversation can continue to be productive.

 

[Gorgoroth]

Come on though, you just know you're gonna play Next. download the PDFs or read your friend's book if you have to. Gonna be fun as hell! IMO of course

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

No version of D&D has an expiration date.

 

[Blackbrrd]

Weirdly enough, 5e looks to be the first edition I won't jump on from the start. I was a pretty big 3e and 4e advocate. 5e looks really nice and all, but currently, it looks to be missing the meaty parts. I am going to check it out when it's published, but I am not too entusiastic about it.

What could turn me around was if they published some really good adventures that really highlighted the system and it's strenghts. I do feel that 4e was the worst when it came down to adventures. So much of it is so detailed it's easy as a DM to just run the whole module as written, which in many ways detract from the role-playing aspect of the game.

Regarding the OP, and me agreeing with him or not, I think we are partially in agreement. 4e does feel a bit monolithic, where 3.x felt a lot more modulized. This mainly stems from how the character building works in 3.x where it looks more like a tree, while in 4e, it looks more like a bush that is going to get you stuck.

On the other hand, I have no problem with them churning out books. I do think that 4e is incomplete with just the three first books (PHB/DMG/MM) and I think WotC is aware of this with 5e. It looks like they will be making a much less verbose 5e where you again feel like you get the complete game with just those three and that the additonal books will be seen as optional supplements.

I think part of the reason I don't anticipate the next edition as much as I did with the previous ones is that I have grown fond of the encounter powers of 4e that every character gets which I really feel give a lot of depth to the characters in combat. Nothing is like blasting away with Lightning Bolt or Glorious Presence - or for the Wizard you also have some encounter chaning Dailies I really enjoy. I think will miss the crunch.

 

[Nellisir]

You're wholly justified in feeling the way you feel about your own personal gaming experiences, they're yours alone and no one else's. But it's a bit unrealistic to expect that people aren't going to offer opposing, alternative viewpoints to your experience. And being dismissive to those opposing viewpoints isn't a great catalyst to holding productive discussion. Anyway, just a thought, because I think you've brought up an interesting point about the struggle between RPGs as a business, and RPGs as an entertainment medium, and I think the conversation can continue to be productive.

Alright, who let the grown-up in?

 

[Aeolius]

Alright, who let the grown-up in?

Twarn't Me!

 

[Jacob Lewis]

You're wholly justified in feeling the way you feel about your own personal gaming experiences, they're yours alone and no one else's. But it's a bit unrealistic to expect that people aren't going to offer opposing, alternative viewpoints to your experience. And being dismissive to those opposing viewpoints isn't a great catalyst to holding productive discussion. Anyway, just a thought, because I think you've brought up an interesting point about the struggle between RPGs as a business, and RPGs as an entertainment medium, and I think the conversation can continue to be productive.

Its funny how many people (not just you) think that because I only started posting here recently that I must be new to... well, *everything*!

I've done the message board-thing. This isn't new to me. I know how people get. I let it get to me in the past until I learned that *most* people who hang around too long/too much have this driving need to be right, no matter what. They've never developed the skill of real conversation, or even simple debate because they think all they need to know or learn can be found online behind a keyboard. I can say that because I used to be one of them.

So before you to tell me what I sound like, you need to go back and reread my other 20+ posts in this thread. I DO respond to both positive and negative, but only if a) there's a legitimate argument to be had, and b) the person so doing isn't trying to be a real jerk about it. In fact, I moderated one of my own posts by removing what I wrote because I thought it might have come off a little harsher than was necessary or intended. And I specifically asked for people not to respond directly to Umbran's particular comment because...wait for it!... you don't want to fan Flames on a message board! (Bet you didn't think I knew terms like that?? )

While you're at it, see if you can spot the differences in tone and attitude between your response and his. I'm not going to get into specifics about his post, but I can see neither you nor anyone else felt the need to use offensive language, like "ignorant", no matter how much you disagreed with me. I may not particularly care for your advice, but because you talk to me like a mature, semi-intelligent person who obviously wants to be addressed in the same polite manner, I have no problem having a conversation with you and even discuss our differences at length. And that is a lesson we can all learn

 

[Lwaxy]

Maybe you should look into publishing rights

Oh if any of the adventures were organized enough.. hehehe.

 

[Water Bob]

No version of D&D has an expiration date.

Thank you!

These are brilliant words. I'm not sure, but many people think that, because a game goes out of print, it's no longer worthy of being played. I used to be one of these people--always trying to keep up with the newest edition, until I realized that, once I found a game I like, there's no real reason to stop playing a "dead" game in favor of one that is currently in print.

When I play Traveller, now, I play Classic Traveller (which, through the years, I've purchased most everything ever published for the game). I don't care about any of the other versions (well, maybe T5. I just purchased that out of curiosity, but it hasn't arrived yet).

When I play Star Wars, I play D6 Star Wars, not d20 or SAGA Star Wars, or even the new Fantasy Flight stuff. When I play Star Trek, I play the old FASA version---because I really like it.

With D&D, I play several versions, because I don't yet have a favorite. But, I've never tried 4E, and I'm not that interested in 5E. I play 1E and 1E AD&D, and 3E D&D.

And, when I get in the mood for espionage, I play Top Secret/SI or the James Bond RPG. I own Mercenaries, Spies & Private Eyes, and I may play that one day, but I haven't yet.

I'm likely to buy a new RPG if it really strikes my fancy. And, I'm just as likely to buy an out of print RPG: I've always wanted to play Blue Planet and Fading Suns.

My point: I no longer look at "dead" games as less desireable than a new game in print. Many of the old games still have a lot of play left in them.

 

[Lwaxy]

My point: I no longer look at "dead" games as less desireable than a new game in print. Many of the old games still have a lot of play left in them.

Yeah, and to top it off - you won't be missing any "must have" books either that way