The end of all edition wars?

[Spatula]

I normally wouldn't launch into full-on sarcasm as I did, but I keep getting these baiting "I've read what you wrote. . . " responses to my posts on this thread followed by a remark that clearly demonstrates the individual hasn't read what I've written (e.g., "If you enjoy D&D. . ." when I've said several times now that I no longer do) coupled with a dismissive "silly" or "excessive" condemnation/value judgement.

They read what you wrote, and it didn't make sense to them. They then asked for clarification. And then you ascribe motives to them that you've invented from wholecloth...

It has dawned on me that many of these people probably don't want an explantion — they want an argument. I think that this is evidenced by their continued refusal to read the explanation that I've both offered and elaborated on several times now in this very thread. They just keep ignoring it and making value judgements based on motives that they've invented from wholecloth, as if I haven't written a single word explaining my decision.

This is why civil D&D discussion isn't possible.

No one argues on the internet outside of D&D message boards?

 

[kibbitz]

D&D is serious business, my friend. If there was anything fun to it, that couldn't be the case.

The only thing I wonder is - if you dislike the kind of hatred and vitriol sometimes (often?) spread around in the D&D community - why are you still in the community. I can see not being able to play if you can't have a community to bounce ideas off, or because you constantly reminded of the latest edition war. But then I would avoid visiting the very forums where I meet these guys all the time?

Oh, well, unless maybe I am a masochist or it's a kind of addiction, I suppose. (If I was in the situation it would certainly be the latter...)

Personally, I guess I still like the community in general and the discussions that take place, at least if there's no squabbling involved. I don't even game anymore, so my relevance here is even less than jdrakeh's, since he at least still games?

I've been to RPG.net, and a couple of other places I've totally forgot about. Went away for months a few times. I still come back there though. People still seem slightly angrier than what I remember from a couple of years back, but it's still a place I want to be. Maybe you're right. Maybe I'm a masochist or addicted... or worse, BOTH!

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Maybe I'm a masochist or addicted... or worse, BOTH!

I am certainly addicted. Masochist - I don't think so.

 

[kibbitz]

I am certainly addicted. Masochist - I don't think so.

Would it be bad to say that I'm glad you're addicted?

 

[resistor]

I, Wisdom Penalty, who have suffered the scorn and scars of the Edition War, mostly due to my lack of wisdom, do hereby relinquish my sword. I shall return to farming in the manner of the great Cicero.

Cincinnatus, you mean.

 

[diaglo]

...I honestly say that I had plenty of fun back then too, despite me not being able to talk about certain aspects of D&D with my friends.

we don't talk about some subjects when we game. the edition we are playing at the time/session is one of them.

it is how i don't blow up and drag the session into an edition war.

it has been this way for me since 1979.

you have to know your breaking point.

jdrakeh has met or i guess exceeded his.

 

[Jack99]

we don't talk about some subjects when we game. the edition we are playing at the time/session is one of them.

it is how i don't blow up and drag the session into an edition war.

it has been this way for me since 1979.

We never had that kind of issues. At every edition change I have decided to "upgrade" and told that my future campaigns would be in the new edition. After that we have switched and never looked back. So there has never really been a edition problem which we haven't been able to talk about.

The things I need Enworld for is more like.. well, details about the game. Most of my players just want to show up and have a good time. Sure, they learn the rules quickly and know their characters, but they do not like to ponder over minute details about obscure rules or whatever else is brought up on these boards. Sure, we talk about D&D a lot - but mostly things that happened at the table, not so much the best way to build encounters or create believable pantheons.

 

[BryonD]

"TETSNBN"

Don't believe me?

Interesting. I've been highly active on the boards for a long time now. (As with many of us, I was there the day Eric opened his).

I have NEVER heard that particular term before you presented it here.

I saw serious dispute as you mention. But what I saw burned less brightly and for a hell of a lot less time. Not at all the same as this time around. The magnitude is vastly different.

Granted, I also think that a lot of the reason for this difference has nothing to do with 4E or the realtive merits of 3E vs. 4E. I think that the overall community was a lot more "done" with 2E when 3E came along than was the case with 3E when 4E came along. Of course, the whole target audience issue is also important.

But back to the original point, I saw minimal nerd rage when 3E came out. Not because it was not there but because I wasn't where that rage could be found. I didn't (and still don't) frequent a variety of gaming boards. Eric Noah's / ENWorld are pretty much it for me. And there was a great deal less rage over 3E here because the foundation of this place was the coming of 3E.

Why is there no blossoming "just for 4e" community site as there was for 3E?

 

[Hussar]

Probably because when 3e was coming down the pipe, there were quite a lot less of us online talking about the game, there was no central web site for talking about D&D like En World or the WOTC boards to hold on to either. When you've already got a D&D site of tens of thousands of gamers, it's pretty hard to start up a completely new site and try to draw the userbase away.

In other words, the landscape of D&D fansites is pretty much entirely different now than it was ten years ago when 3e started coming into the picture.

 

[Shazman]

Yes, but you sum up the position that I've already explained at length, multiple times now, quite eloquently.

I normally wouldn't launch into full-on sarcasm as I did, but I keep getting these baiting "I've read what you wrote. . . " responses to my posts on this thread followed by a remark that clearly demonstrates the individual hasn't read what I've written (e.g., "If you enjoy D&D. . ." when I've said several times now that I no longer do) coupled with a dismissive "silly" or "excessive" condemnation/value judgement.

It has dawned on me that many of these people probably don't want an explantion — they want an argument. I think that this is evidenced by their continued refusal to read the explanation that I've both offered and elaborated on several times now in this very thread. They just keep ignoring it and making value judgements based on motives that they've invented from wholecloth, as if I haven't written a single word explaining my decision.

This is why civil D&D discussion isn't possible. This is why I no longer wish to discuss D&D at the current time. Undoubtedly, some 'concerned individual' will come back with a "Well, you're talking about it now, you big liar!" remark. I'll go ahead and address it right now by acknowledging that they're absolutely right. I am talking about D&D in this thread. And I apologize — I should have known better.

I don't think we are looking for an argument. Most of us just can't relate to your reasoning. The idea of letting clamoring on messageboards ruin your enjoyment of D&D is a foreign concept to us. We can't fathom how not being able to discuss D&D on messageboards means that you cannot play D&D with your friends. To us, they are two completely different things, and we can't understand why they are one and the same to you.