Why the hate, people?

[Stone Angel]

I think that a lot of the bashers or the hate starts when someone talks about a system that they like or don't like. Someone replies, another person takes it as a personal attack on them, and their likes or dislikes. Like it's infringing on their rights to an opinion.

I have played lots of systems, for various amounts of time, I have enjoyed them all. Right now I stick with d20 because that is what my group wants. I would not object to something else though.

As to this site this is about the only message board that I actually post on. People troll too much and take themselves to seriously. Say one wrong thing and it's like you've spilt beer on a drunken frat boys shirt or something. And it just spirals out of control from there. I find that the people on this board are generally are nice and civil and can usually voice the respective opinions and defend them without it becoming a pissing contest. And if I get to much flak I just remind people that I roll with the likes of Alsih20, Crothian, Teflon Billy, and Cthullu's Librarian. Whats up now?!!

LOL

The Seraph of Earth and Stone

 

[Morpheus]

Life's too short

...to be going around p***ed off all the time. Great movie-one of my all-time favorites! American History X

 

[Buttercup]

I wouldn't say that I hate other systems, I just have no interest in them. For me, it's d20 or nothing. I don't want to learn multiple rule sets. My players don't want to learn multiple rule sets. I have a great deal of money invested in d20 products. Why would I switch?

Note that EN World makes no bones about being a 3E D&D board, so it shouldn't surprise anyone to find that the majority of posters prefer that particular system.

 

[Keeper of Secrets]

I crtainly have preferences to the kinds of games I run. As a GM I have to feel comfortable and confident in my ability to know the system inside and out and I have to enjoy running it. There are some games I will never run again because they just didn't appeal to me and I could not do everything I wanted to do or I felt that I was limited in some capacity. Being a PLAYER in a game is a different story. I will try anything and will often play in a game that I would not run.

 

[DungeonMaster]

Hrmm... before 3.5 I'de have to say I was nonchalant about the game system. I played all versions of D&D and enjoyed them. 3.5 really changed that. Partially the timing of the "new" edition but mostly because of the complete lack of design insight that went into it. You could try to screw up 3rd edition and D&D more than what 3.5 did but it would take effort. Darkness spells that aren't you know dark and actually light up rooms. Forbiddance spells that don't actually forbid you. Rings of wishes that allow you to wish for more rings of wishes. Blending of archetypes through PrC and making the druid some sort of wizard/cleric hybrid. The list goes on and on.
I guess in some sense I thought the designers could never go wrong and as time progressed the D&D game would become more and more refined, adjusted and a better game. I really hadn't been dissapointed up until that point a year ago. I think that's why 3.5 gets so much hatred from me. I knew something was wrong when in a thread set up for that purpose I asked Andy Collins if he fixed the balance between the divine destruction spell and the arcane finger of death and he replied "they're both sorta bad". That made my stomach churn. I knew we were in for a surprise then.
It didn't help that there were literally 3.5 edition zealots criticizing every little aspect of 3rd edition while tacitly ignoring the gaping holes in 3.5 - that stimulus probably led to my inveterate hatred of the game system being openly displayed in every second thread.

 

[Desdichado]

With 15 posts to your name, I think you've got a long way to go before you've got inveterate hatred of 3.5 in every second thread.

 

[maddman75]

Hrmm... before 3.5 I'de have to say I was nonchalant about the game system. I played all versions of D&D and enjoyed them. 3.5 really changed that. Partially the timing of the "new" edition but mostly because of the complete lack of design insight that went into it. You could try to screw up 3rd edition and D&D more than what 3.5 did but it would take effort. Darkness spells that aren't you know dark and actually light up rooms. Forbiddance spells that don't actually forbid you. Rings of wishes that allow you to wish for more rings of wishes. Blending of archetypes through PrC and making the druid some sort of wizard/cleric hybrid. The list goes on and on.
I guess in some sense I thought the designers could never go wrong and as time progressed the D&D game would become more and more refined, adjusted and a better game. I really hadn't been dissapointed up until that point a year ago. I think that's why 3.5 gets so much hatred from me. I knew something was wrong when in a thread set up for that purpose I asked Andy Collins if he fixed the balance between the divine destruction spell and the arcane finger of death and he replied "they're both sorta bad". That made my stomach churn. I knew we were in for a surprise then.
It didn't help that there were literally 3.5 edition zealots criticizing every little aspect of 3rd edition while tacitly ignoring the gaping holes in 3.5 - that stimulus probably led to my inveterate hatred of the game system being openly displayed in every second thread.

Heh - you're not alone. THe main crimes of 3.5 IMO are not fixing several problems, changing things that didn't need fixing (weapon size - I'm looking at you. Not a bad change per se, but not a needed one in a revision), rewriting nearly all the spells, and introducing new problems. In the lead up we were told we would have all the errata and fixes in the main book, some rebalancing of selected problem classes and spells (harm, polymorph, Ranger, Bard), and some new content. That is not what we got.

Heretics of 3.0 unite!

Not to go off totally on a tanget, I just looked at it like any other game. I didn't like the fixes or unrelated changes, and otherwise converting would seem to accomplish little other than making my players' PHBs obsolete. So I chose against it, and got some other books/games instead.

 

[Arnwyn]

I've never had to reconcile it, since I've never spent any time on non-gaming messageboards where anything similar has occurred.

Well, now thanks to the information in this thread, looks like you're going to have to!

 

[Ankh-Morpork Guard]

THe main crimes of 3.5 IMO are not fixing several problems

I like that its a crime.

 

[taliesin15]

Well, just speaking for myself, possibly for others, I am mainly just an eager advocate for the kinds of campaigns I like. There are some things I don't like and I'll certainly say why. A recent example, talking about favorite AD&D tomes of all time, I dissed the 3.5/3.0 PHB for some of its artwork. I consider this constructive criticism. Back in the day, people would just badmouth Gary Gygax, and since there was no forum, maybe it was worse because people tended to be a little paranoid? Here I can say I don't like higher technology-oriented games and say precisely why: its an expression of aesthetics, right?