Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sacrosanct" data-source="post: 9163908" data-attributes="member: 15700">I think it's a reasonable position to take that if someone says they like a particular thing, and someone says that the thing is dumbed down and meant for the lowest common denominator, that the first person might take it personally because the second person is directly inferring that only dumbed down or the lowest common denominator kind of people would like it. I don't think that's a stretch. Especially since we have person after person who likes the thing directly telling us that's how they are feeling about those comments.I'm also pointing out what certainly seems like a double standard. We have 15 years of 4e fans getting really upset every time someone makes a derogatory comment about 4e. &quot;It's just an MMO&quot; &quot;It's not real D&amp;D&quot;, etc. etc. I think it's a pretty big double standard to spend the last 15 years allowing those comments, but now suddenly tell 5e fans &quot;Don't take it personally, I'm just taking about the game, not you.&quot; Especially when it's some of the same people who have been getting so upset at snide comments directed at 4e now telling 5e fans not to do what they've been doing for 15 years.Maybe instead of dismissing people with &quot;I'm talking about the game, not you.&quot;, we should look closer at what you're (general you) saying about the game. If you're calling it an apologist edition that is meant for the lowest common denominator, you're making a pejorative association with the people who like it. Dismissive hyperbolic attacks aren't criticisms. They are veiled personal attacks meant to rile up fans of that particular thing (regardless of what edition you're talking about).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sacrosanct, post: 9163908, member: 15700"] I think it's a reasonable position to take that if someone says they like a particular thing, and someone says that the thing is dumbed down and meant for the lowest common denominator, that the first person might take it personally because the second person is directly inferring that only dumbed down or the lowest common denominator kind of people would like it. I don't think that's a stretch. Especially since we have person after person who likes the thing directly telling us that's how they are feeling about those comments. I'm also pointing out what certainly seems like a double standard. We have 15 years of 4e fans getting really upset every time someone makes a derogatory comment about 4e. "It's just an MMO" "It's not real D&D", etc. etc. I think it's a pretty big double standard to spend the last 15 years allowing those comments, but now suddenly tell 5e fans "Don't take it personally, I'm just taking about the game, not you." Especially when it's some of the same people who have been getting so upset at snide comments directed at 4e now telling 5e fans not to do what they've been doing for 15 years. Maybe instead of dismissing people with "I'm talking about the game, not you.", we should look closer at what you're (general you) saying about the game. If you're calling it an apologist edition that is meant for the lowest common denominator, you're making a pejorative association with the people who like it. Dismissive hyperbolic attacks aren't criticisms. They are veiled personal attacks meant to rile up fans of that particular thing (regardless of what edition you're talking about). [/QUOTE]

Verification