Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 8353375" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Neat, canned examples are not easy to find, but I can give you two, but be forewarned that both are arguments often levied in edition warring (which is often the result of people doing this):1. &quot;If we get rid of THAC0, then anyone could learn to play D&amp;D!&quot;Read: &quot;I've staked part of my identity on D&amp;D being an exclusive club that only an elite few can join, due to artificial difficulty. If you remove that artificial difficulty, I will no longer be special solely because I play D&amp;D.&quot; And yes; before you ask, I have actually seen people argue this in forum posts (and other documentation of the 2e/3e edition wars).2. &quot;4e isn't D&amp;D because &lt;insert reason here&gt;&quot; (e.g. &quot;it's an MMO on paper&quot;)Read: &quot;D&amp;D is a game made to appeal to me and my interests. I don't see the appeal of 4e. Therefore, 4e cannot actually be D&amp;D, it has to be some other thing.&quot;Most other examples are more subtle or require more analysis. E.g. several arguments for why dragonborn shouldn't exist or shouldn't have breasts (the latter mostly stated by male players rather than female ones...), or how anything that isn't a pure ideal sandbox is a horrific railroad. Or for a more narrow one, that multiclassing HAS to be 3e-style à la carte MC or else it's just bad. Setting details have a tendency to do the same, e.g. if a product bungles some fluff element you may get dramatic pronouncements of abandoning an edition entirely purely for that one error.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 8353375, member: 6790260"] Neat, canned examples are not easy to find, but I can give you two, but be forewarned that both are arguments often levied in edition warring (which is often the result of people doing this): 1. "If we get rid of THAC0, then [I]anyone[/I] could learn to play D&D!" Read: "I've staked part of my identity on D&D being an exclusive club that only an elite few can join, due to artificial difficulty. If you remove that artificial difficulty, I will no longer be special solely because I play D&D." And yes; before you ask, I have actually seen people argue this in forum posts (and other documentation of the 2e/3e edition wars). 2. "4e isn't D&D because <insert reason here>" (e.g. "it's an MMO on paper") Read: "D&D is a game made to appeal to me and my interests. I don't see the appeal of 4e. Therefore, 4e cannot [I]actually[/I] be D&D, it has to be some [I]other[/I] thing." Most other examples are more subtle or require more analysis. E.g. several arguments for why dragonborn shouldn't exist or shouldn't have breasts (the latter mostly stated by male players rather than female ones...), or how anything that isn't a pure ideal sandbox is a horrific railroad. Or for a more narrow one, that multiclassing HAS to be 3e-style [I]à la carte[/I] MC or else it's just bad. Setting details have a tendency to do the same, e.g. if a product bungles some fluff element you may get dramatic pronouncements of abandoning an edition entirely purely for that one error. [/QUOTE]

Verification