DrDeth wrote:Jiggy wrote:I had been under the impression that "grognard" was a dismissive and somewhat ageist term, and thus I try not to use it. Am I mistaken?
Yes you are mistaken, it is a badge of honor.
Sure doesn't seem that way when used by folks who don't self-identify as such. But I'm glad to see this thread is going in a more positive direction than I first feared when I saw the thread title.
Carry on, then.
Seems to me that the term used to be hung on any older player too inflexible and bitter to adapt to changes to systems (or certain new systems or game types) without at least constant complaining, if not outright rejection of same. The sort of secondary definition was somebody old enough to have been playing when many of the games and gaming conventions we take for granted, were first introduced.
Whether a person fits the first definition is largely objective. You can see them acting that way. (That is not to make any judgment on whether they are right or wrong in their opinions).
Whether a person fits the second definition is relative to their age and length of experience in the gaming community. I, for instance, already fit the second definition back when I first heard the term, because I was already a mini-painting, map-making freak before 1st Edition AD&D hit its greatest heights.
And by that definition I began to humorously refer to myself as a grognard some time back. But I have never identified with the original definition. I don't as a rule automatically like or dislike any new development out of some weird devotion to the good old days (even though I have very fond memories of those days). I tend to approach new things without the baggage.