D&D 4E Why is this board so down on 4E critics?

[Rpgraccoon]

I don't see this place as a happy happy 4e is great forum. It is just a good mellow community. I like it. I like that fence sitters can talk without all fights. I have my dislikes about the new edition and I have my likes. However, I do believe I could voice my dislikes here without much hassle. - Kudos to the Mods and Community for making me feel welcome.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

I voiced my opinion. Feel free to dogpile me if you want. Is this better? It is my personal opinion that 4E will not feel like D&D to me. There are too many changes with too little justification for those changes. <snip grain of salt part I won't address>. I would like 4E to feel like D&D to me , and maybe it eventually will. At this point, howver, I am not at all convinced that it will be D&D for me.

Yes, that feels indeed a lot better to me. You're speaking about your feelings about something, without generalising these feelings to apply for everyone, and without implicitely alienating someone that might have different feelings.
That's the kind of "anti-D&D 4" post I feel like sympathizing with.

 

[mudbunny]

I heard enough from people who actually saw the e-mail or knew one or more people who had received the e-mail to give it some credibility with me. What really makes it believable, is that it is right in line with WotC's amateurish, hamhanded, inept, marketing of 4E.

The email isn't anything wrong. Think "Prior Written Consent". As in: Prior Written Consent must be given prior to the release of any information covered by this NDA.

The NDA thing isn't marketing!! It is a perfectly normal, ordinary and ethical way that NDAs work. The people who are under an NDA to playtest 4e and release their experience with it aren't reviewing the game. They are describing their playtesting experience.

Now if they were reviewers who were told that they could only review it if they only said positive things, there would be every justification for the outcry. But while something is in playtesting?? Tempest in a teapot.

The negative things that are described by the playtesters may not even survive to be in the final release of the game!!

 

[Lackhand]

I voiced my opinion. Feel free to dogpile me if you want. Is this better? It is my personal opinion that 4E will not feel like D&D to me. There are too many changes with too little justification for those changes. Some of the same people that reported on the e-mail also spoke of comments from playtesters they knew (the same ones who received the e-mail who wouldn't post themselves becasue of the NDA) that it played very much like a minis game with no soul or drama. Obviously, you can take that commentary with a grain of salt. However, the pit fiend entry, which I believe reads a whole lot like the info on a minis card (even having ranges in squares instead of feet), tends to make me think that there may be something to this. I would like 4E to feel like D&D to me , and maybe it eventually will. At this point, howver, I am not at all convinced that it will be D&D for me.

It may amaze you, but yes -- "to me" language makes it a lot better -- while I still disagree with your assertions (well, I don't get the same reaction out of the same raw material, anyway), it's not nearly as easy to take offense at, and it makes you sound a whole lot more sane.

Yes, it's better.

You're still wrong.

 

[Slander]

I do think that they are trying to make a game different enough from D&D that it won't really be D&D anymore.

...

4E will not feel like D&D to me.

The first is an aspersion on the game developers, the second is an expression of opinion. Those who don't see the difference tend to get dog-piled.

 

[Rel]

The troll has been fed, i bet he's pretty full now.

Guild, I'm going to recommend that you read my post #39 above and apply those methods to your future posts. Your future posts will not of course be in this thread because you are no longer allowed to post in this thread. Thank you.

 

[Agamon]

If you're getting 'dogpiled', that simply means more people disagree with you than agree. If I went to the OT board and made thread called "Chocolate Sucks!", I expect a lot of people would disagree with me, too. Not saying 4E is as good or widely accepted as chocolate, just using an easy example. So it's as simple as that, it's a minority position.

As for that stuff from the Paizo 4E board that closed the thread, it was the negative attack with a unsubstantiated rumour that did that. That kind of stuff can stay where it came from. I'd rather discuss the pros and cons of stuff WotC actually announces rather than argue over things someone probably made up.

 

[Desdichado]

Please, don't "fix" the original message, no matter the intent. I consider this to be rude, I'm sorry.

FIFY.

I'm sorry too, but just because you consider it to be rude doesn't make it so. It's a pretty common practice.

 

[AZRogue]

The first is an aspersion on the game developers, the second is an expression of opinion. Those who don't see the difference tend to get dog-piled.

Exactly.

While it can be emotionally satisfying, it isn't very effective to voice opinions in broad terms, as though they are "fact", and in an abrasive tone. That's not helpful and it doesn't promote conversation; it promotes satisfying your emotional desire to lash out just a little bit. It makes a huge difference.

The way the OP voiced his opinion the second time is completely normal and has been voiced many times by others on this board.

It's a subtle difference (I imagine it must be since it is so often overlooked) but an important one. Expressing your opinion and doing so in such a way that it encourages conversation is always welcome. Maybe not as emotionally satisfying, but much more effective.

 

[Eridanis]

Moving to Meta. Carry on - politely!