Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Desdichado" data-source="post: 6250704" data-attributes="member: 2205">Why would we?  Until this whole revision vs. edition thing started getting a little bit silly, this was an interesting discussion.  Which means that yeah, I disagreed with a bunch of people about a bunch of things, but it was largely still an interesting discussion nonetheless.  What's the value in us all having the same opinion about things?  There's a reason I used to have the tagline "Most opinionated guy on the Internet" on my blog.  But that doesn't mean that just because gamers are opinionated and their opinions differ that there's anything wrong with that.If Bluenose is correct, and the whole revision vs. edition thing hinges on demonstrating that 3e (plus 3.5 plus Pathfinder) is the BEST D&D EVAR because it's been around for such a long time, then that would explain why the discussion took a turn that makes no sense to me.  Having a discussion that is fruitful tends to work less well when folks are so personally invested in championing their editions that any dissenting opinion has to be immediately shut down because, "ZOMG, people might think that I'm wrong" or something.Contrary to  [MENTION=48965]Imaro[/MENTION]'s assertion (see, I actually appreciated his sarcasm there, Umbran.  It was kinda clever) I'm not really invested in defining 3.5 as an edition or a revision.  Sure, I have an opinion on it.  And I put my own definition out there for anyone to critique, shoot down, accept, condemn, or do whatever they like with it.  I think my definition (do you need to rebuy all the books) makes more sense than "because the developers said so," and I'll stick by my definition, but I hardly think it's the last word on the question.So why is healthy discussion about something seen as signs of a "schism" and why is it bad?For that matter, what is this schism?  I thought the premise of the original post was that the schism was precipitated by the release of 4e and how that was handled.  Now, you're suggesting that their's a schism between gamers about the role of sarcasm, or one about European languages?  All that suggests it that gamers are opinionated, or at least some of them are.  That makes perfect sense to me, but isn't necessarily evidence of a schism.  (Not saying that I don't think a schism related to the release of 4e isn't likely, but this certainly isn't evidence of it.  Let's not mistake healthy discussion with deep-felt bitterness or whatever!)</blockquote>

Verification