Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

PaizoCon 2014!

Do you still call Pathfinder "DND" in conversation?


Pathfinder RPG General Discussion

151 to 200 of 236 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

ProfessorCirno wrote:
I see more talk about 4e on these forums then I do in the 4e forums. Y'all are obsessed.

+1, this situation reminds me of a recent divorcee being on a date and talking about nothing but his ex-wife. LOL


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
LilithsThrall wrote:
You, Prof, and people like you who try to berate others into keeping their opinions of 4e a dirty little secret are the people who keep the edition war in full swing.

No one is being asked to keep their opinion secret. They're being asked to refrain from crapping 4E hate in every thread, no matter how tenuously related.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Companion, Maps, Tales Subscriber

I call it Pathfinder. If i have to explain myself I do. The laymen, muggles and commoners didn't know what "D&D" was back in the day, so now we just have to make them aware of Pathfinder. So no I don't play D&D anymore and I don't call my game night D&D night, it's Pathfinder night. I think Gary and Dave would approve.


LilithsThrall wrote:

The current edition war isn't about people who say they don't like 4e. That's just stating an opinion. Everybody has an opinion and we should respect opinions that are different from ours.

No, the current edition war is about people trying to berate others into not expressing any opinions about 4e that aren't all lollipops and sunshine. You, Prof, and people like you who try to berate others into keeping their opinions of 4e a dirty little secret are the people who keep the edition war in full swing.

Indeed.

I'm not impressed with 4e at all. As far as I'm concerned, it's gone too far back into "war-game" territory. But any issues that I have with its fans are specifically issues with particularly ill-mannered individuals.

bugleyman wrote:
No one is being asked to keep their opinion secret. They're being asked to refrain from crapping 4E hate in every thread, no matter how tenuously related.

When the definition of "crapping 4e hate" seems to include any and all less than positive (or, indeed, less than popular) opinions of the game, the line becomes fairly thin.

I'm not saying that that's your definition, mind you—just that I've seen it. Not all of the bad behavior is on either side.


LilithsThrall wrote:

The current edition war isn't about people who say they don't like 4e. That's just stating an opinion. Everybody has an opinion and we should respect opinions that are different from ours.

No, the current edition war is about people trying to berate others into not expressing any opinions about 4e that aren't all lollipops and sunshine. You, Prof, and people like you who try to berate others into keeping their opinions of 4e a dirty little secret are the people who keep the edition war in full swing.

The current edition war is about people who have spent literally the past three years ranting at every chance they get on how much they hate an elfgame and then crying that they're being discriminated when others tell them it's gotten old and stale.

You keep claiming we're trying to keep your opinion of 4e a dirty secret. Nobody's doing this. You're just legit obsessed with the idea of being a martyr for a cause (in this case the cause is a nerd elfgame so have fun with that).


"I'm so tired of being oppressed and censored for my belief that I hate 4e, let me tell you about it in detail on every other thread I visit openly and publically, that's how censored I am."

I mean come on.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Arevashti wrote:
When the definition of "crapping 4e hate" seems to include any and all less than positive (or, indeed, less than popular) opinions of the game, the line becomes fairly thin.

"Less than positive?" Here are some example from this thread:

Mok wrote:
...I do also call 4e an abomination...

An abomination? Are you serious?

The NPC wrote:
Especially as I tend to think of 4E as...a world of warcraft game
EWHM wrote:
PF is heir to the house that Gary and Dave built, not 4th edition.

Patently false, as has already been demonstrated.

Fing Mandragoran wrote:
I only call 4E by 4E, or kindling, fossil fuel, or something of the sort.

Now 4E is worthy only of burning.

Buddah668 wrote:
I wouldn't refer to 4th edition as D&D, I have much worse names for it.

Here 4E is unmentionable.

Kalanth wrote:
...I once tried to give away about 10 4E books for free and I could not find a single interested party. It is like trying to hand out the Satanic Bible in a Catholic church...
Elthbert wrote:
Yes we call it D&D. We speak of 4th edition with contempt as 4th edition, it is never called by the most holy name of D&D.

Finally, 4E is contemptible.

So yeah: This seems a lot more like hatred to me than it does like being "less than positive." Especially since this thread isn't about 4E!


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
ProfessorCirno wrote:

"I'm so tired of being oppressed and censored for my belief that I hate 4e, let me tell you about it in detail on every other thread I visit openly and publically, that's how censored I am."

I mean come on.

Help, help! I'm being repressed! =P

Andoran

bugleyman wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
You, Prof, and people like you who try to berate others into keeping their opinions of 4e a dirty little secret are the people who keep the edition war in full swing.
No one is being asked to keep their opinion secret. They're being asked to refrain from crapping 4E hate in every thread, no matter how tenuously related.

+500


Actually, I don't think the person calling 4e an "abomination" was serious. In fact, most of those examples don't sound serious at all.

Of the two that might have been, one was the one that you insisted wasn't true anyway (although, to be fair, the quote "demonstrating" its falsity didn't actually have anything to do with 4e). The other was neutral.

And yes, claiming that one was "oppressed and censored" would be over-the-top. Claiming that one was "harassed and insulted," or "mocked, or "patronized," or even "scolded like a puppy that wet the floor" would be closer to the truth of it. And, again, I've seen plenty of that at both ends.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Arevashti wrote:
Actually, I don't think the person calling 4e an "abomination" was serious. In fact, most of those examples don't sound serious at all.

Don't they? I honestly can't tell anymore. Ever heard of Poe's law?

Arevashti wrote:
Of the two that might have been, one was the one that you insisted wasn't true anyway (although, to be fair, the quote "demonstrating" its falsity didn't actually have anything to do with 4e).

Correct...but it had everything to do with discrediting 3.5 (and by extension PF) as "heir to the house that Gary and Dave built."

Arevashti wrote:
And yes, claiming that one was "oppressed and censored" would be over-the-top. Claiming that one was "harassed and insulted," or "mocked, or "patronized," or even "scolded like a puppy that wet the floor" would be closer to the truth of it. And, again, I've seen plenty of that at both ends.

There is absolutely bad behavior on "both ends" -- but I maintain that requesting the 4E thread-crapping end does not qualify as such.


bugleyman wrote:
Don't they? I honestly can't tell anymore. Ever heard of Poe's law?

Yes, I'm familiar with Poe's Law. Those all still came off as jokes to me. Not my style of humor, but even so.

Quote:
Correct...but it had everything to do with discrediting 3.5 (and by extension PF) as "heir to the house that Gary and Dave built."

But still nothing to do with confirming 4e as such.

Quote:
There is absolutely bad behavior on "both ends" -- but I maintain that requesting the 4E thread-crapping end does not qualify as such.

But, again, where does one draw the line?


bugleyman wrote:
LilithsThrall wrote:
You, Prof, and people like you who try to berate others into keeping their opinions of 4e a dirty little secret are the people who keep the edition war in full swing.
No one is being asked to keep their opinion secret. They're being asked to refrain from crapping 4E hate in every thread, no matter how tenuously related.

-500 (not actually directed at you, bugleyman, but just to offset the ppl giving it pluses)

This thread was 4E hate flamebait from the very start. "Do you even consider 4E to be D&D?"


Arevashti wrote:
And yes, claiming that one was "oppressed and censored" would be over-the-top. Claiming that one was "harassed and insulted," or "mocked, or "patronized," or even "scolded like a puppy that wet the floor" would be closer to the truth of it. And, again, I've seen plenty of that at both ends.

Spending an entire thread not about 4e insulting it = fine.

Telling people they're a bit obsessed = mocking, insulting, harassment.

Look people are totally free to obsess over hating 4e to the point of mentioning it at the drop of a hat. That means they're also free to have people call them out on it.

Someone compared the attitude to being on a date and spending the whole date talking about their ex-wife. It's pretty applicable. There's definately some people who are still bitter over 4e, and that's cool, you're free to your feelings. But that doesn't mean you aren't bitter.


Arevashti wrote:
But still nothing to do with confirming 4e as such.

Most 4e fans I know don't really care if their game is "the house Gary and Dave built." I've seen 3e and 2e fans talk about it, which is funny because their game most certainly isn't that.

Honestly the only people that talk about that and are right are the ones still playing OD&D or AD&D1e. Everyone else is just trying to appeal to an authority that didn't agree with them in the first place.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Arevashti wrote:
But still nothing to do with confirming 4e as such.

...which isn't logically necessary to demonstrate that the statement is false. No one asserted 4E was heir to anything...only that PF was.

Edit: Removed snark.


ProfessorCirno wrote:

Spending an entire thread not about 4e insulting it = fine.

Telling people they're a bit obsessed = mocking, insulting, harassment.

So...making generally one-off comments (many snarky, some less so) about 4e = "obsession," then?

bugleyman wrote:
No one asserted 4E was heir to anything...only that PF was.

It certainly seemed to be implied.

And while what is the heir to what really seems rather irrelevant? It should be added that some of Gygax's stated gripes with 3.5 were a bit ironic in light of both 4e and AD&D, and that Pathfinder has brought back (at least) archetypes. (I have not yet had the opportunity to compare any of the above to Lejendary Adventures.)


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Arevashti wrote:
It certainly seemed to be implied.

I apologize...that was not my intent.

Arevashti wrote:
And while what is the heir to what really seems rather irrelevant?

Sure does...which is why I mentioned it. ;-) It was off-topic at best, flame-bait at worst.


bugleyman wrote:
I apologize...that was not my intent.

I apologize for having inferred it, then.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Arevashti wrote:
bugleyman wrote:
I apologize...that was not my intent.
I apologize for having inferred it, then.

No worries.

I don't play 4E...I play Pathfinder. If/when Pathfinder 2E and/or D&D 5E come out, I'm sure I'll try both. I'm just tired of so many threads degenerating into what seem to me to be 4E hate-fests.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion Subscriber

C'mon folks, stop bashing 4E. Kicking somebody when he's lying down is neither hard nor ambitious.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Arevashti wrote:
But, again, where does one draw the line?

I've never really understood why that's difficult. Replace all instances of PF for 4E and all instances of Paizo for WoTC in the comment you're about to make (and vice versa). If you think the altered comment might reasonably offend someone, dont make the first.

I dont object to people declaring they dislike a system - I actually quite enjoy hearing why people dont like different systems. I find negative hyperbole unhelpful and imputation of motive to be flat-out inappropriate.

Whatever someone else said two years ago doesnt have much bearing on what we should say now, in my view.


I play nothing but Pathfinder but I still refer to it as D&D... Especially when speaking to those who aren't into the game. They wouldn't know what "Pathfinder" is but they recognize "D&D".

Osirion

1 person marked this as a favorite.
ProfessorCirno wrote:
Paizo fans have grown quite a bad reputation outside of these forums. This thread is why.

And so gracious of you to have taken impersonal statements of whether or not one prefers game X or game Y and turn it into a personal attack on the *fans* of one of those games.

Flag it and move on, dude. Don't escalate from statements about a product to statements about people.


Set wrote:
And so gracious of you to have taken impersonal statements of whether or not one prefers game X or game Y and turn it into a personal attack on the *fans* of one of those games.

"I like Pathfinder"

"I call Pathfinder D&D bcause, to me, it is."

"I call it Pathfinder because Paizo has earned the usage of that trademark"

"I perfer to call it Pathfinder because I like people to know exactly what I play."

"I call it D&D because most people outside of other D&D fans don't know the differences, so it's easier."

"4e books should literally be burned."

Do you see the one that stands out?

Shadow Lodge

ProfessorCirno wrote:
Most 4e fans I know don't really care if their game is "the house Gary and Dave built." I've seen 3e and 2e fans talk about it, which is funny because their game most certainly isn't that.

With 1E, you can drop Dave from that.

But, realistically, the differences between 0E, 1E, 2E, and the variations of Basic D&D are pretty minimal compared to the huge changes they made when 3.0 came.

Taldor

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
ProfessorCirno wrote:
Set wrote:
And so gracious of you to have taken impersonal statements of whether or not one prefers game X or game Y and turn it into a personal attack on the *fans* of one of those games.

"I like Pathfinder"

"I call Pathfinder D&D bcause, to me, it is."

"I call it Pathfinder because Paizo has earned the usage of that trademark"

"I perfer to call it Pathfinder because I like people to know exactly what I play."

"I call it D&D because most people outside of other D&D fans don't know the differences, so it's easier."

"4e books should literally be burned."

Do you see the one that stands out?

I have to agree with Set here. People are going to be incendiary on the Internets its better to flag and move on. I say this as someone who likes your posts most of the time. Please dont be a warrior. I am not trying to single you out im posting because I think you actually might give a damn.


Kthulhu wrote:
ProfessorCirno wrote:
Most 4e fans I know don't really care if their game is "the house Gary and Dave built." I've seen 3e and 2e fans talk about it, which is funny because their game most certainly isn't that.

With 1E, you can drop Dave from that.

But, realistically, the differences between 0E, 1E, 2E, and the variations of Basic D&D are pretty minimal compared to the huge changes they made when 3.0 came.

I dunno, I think there's a huge number of differences. They just tend to be subtle ones with a lot of pull that are initially hard to see.

Let's take 2e. If you read the AD&D book, it explicitly states that getting experience by collecting gold is done to keep the flavor and push for adventurer-based gaming. It calls it out as being unrealistic, but overall better. It even makes a snide remark about how boring a game would be if you got experience by ppraying as a cleric or reading books as a wizard.

2e...then goes right ahead and does exactly that.

Overall, I think 2e represented a major shift away from purely adventurer based games and started to walk into trying to be more "simulationistic" to use a term. The overall design philosophies of Gygax (regardless of if you like or dislike them) were entirely founded on RPGs being a game first and foremost, and he had a fair amount of disdain for the "play acting" that would sometimes arise.

Cheliax

beej67 wrote:


Anyone else notice the same thing? Note for the sake of discussion, nobody I've talked to bothered playing DND4thED.

I've always hated the abbreviation "DND." :)

I usually call it "D&D" because we're playing PF with D&D 3.5 books, though occasionally I call it Pathfinder. If we were playing pure Pathfinder with no D&D books (which I'm unlikely to ever do, honestly), I'd call it Pathfinder without question.


Steve Geddes wrote:
I've never really understood why that's difficult. Replace all instances of PF for 4E and all instances of Paizo for WoTC in the comment you're about to make (and vice versa). If you think the altered comment might reasonably offend someone, dont make the first.

Statements that were almost indubitably jokes are being taken at absolute face value here. So, no, it's not nearly that cut-and-dried.

Now, one could argue that they weren't good jokes. Cheap shots are far from being the highest form of humor. But even so.

ProfessorCirno wrote:

"I like Pathfinder"

"I call Pathfinder D&D bcause, to me, it is."

"I call it Pathfinder because Paizo has earned the usage of that trademark"

"I perfer to call it Pathfinder because I like people to know exactly what I play."

"I call it D&D because most people outside of other D&D fans don't know the differences, so it's easier."

"4e books should literally be burned."

Do you see the one that stands out?

Yes, because I can't take #6 seriously. At all.

Set's point still stands.


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Arevashti wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
I've never really understood why that's difficult. Replace all instances of PF for 4E and all instances of Paizo for WoTC in the comment you're about to make (and vice versa). If you think the altered comment might reasonably offend someone, dont make the first.
Statements that were almost indubitably jokes are being taken at absolute face value here. So, no, it's not nearly that cut-and-dried.

I think it is cut and dried - express your views but be sensitive to other people. This includes jokes, since I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect people to choose appropriate jokes to suit their audience in any setting - crude jokes have no place in church, imo, no matter whether you intend to offend people or not.

There is, of course, a subjective element in my suggested algorithm, since it depends on what you think is reasonable. To be clear though, I'm not 'taking sides' - I broadly agree with you that one should be free to make jokes and I definitely agree that one should be free to express dislike for an RPG on an RPG forum. I'm merely advocating a pretty straightforward filter that anyone can apply - irrespective of their particular view. A filter which I think would reduce some of the sniping.

If the poster wouldnt expect "I once tried to give away about 10 pathfinder books for free and I could not find a single interested party. It is like trying to hand out the Satanic Bible in a Catholic church" to be reasonably likely to offend people then I think they should go ahead and post their 4th-Edition-equivalent joke.

If people thought "3.5 is badwrongfun" was inappropriate three years ago, they shouldnt say "4ed is badwrongfun".


Steve Geddes wrote:

I think it is cut and dried - express your views but be sensitive to other people. This includes jokes, since I think it's perfectly reasonable to expect people to choose appropriate jokes to suit their audience in any setting - crude jokes have no place in church, imo, no matter whether you intend to offend people or not.

There is, of course, a subjective element in my suggested algorithm, since it depends on what you think is reasonable. To be clear though, I'm not 'taking sides' - I broadly agree with you that one should be free to make jokes and I definitely agree that one should be free to express dislike for an RPG on an RPG forum. I'm merely advocating a pretty straightforward filter that anyone can apply - irrespective of their particular view. A filter which I think would reduce some of the sniping.

If the poster wouldnt expect "I once tried to give away about 10 pathfinder books for free and I could not find a single interested party. It is like trying to hand out the Satanic Bible in a Catholic church" to be reasonably likely to offend people then I think they should go ahead and post their 4th-Edition-equivalent joke.

If people thought "3.5 is badwrongfun" was inappropriate three years ago, they shouldnt say "4ed is badwrongfun".

I'm actually inclined to agree with you, for the most part. But I doubt that the people who made those jokes counted on anyone being offended by them.

As for the joke about being unable to give away Pathfinder books? My response to that would probably be something along the lines of "well, send them my way already, and pay the shipping fee while you're at it."


Paizo Superscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Arevashti wrote:
I'm actually inclined to agree with you, for the most part. But I doubt that the people who made those jokes counted on anyone being offended by them.

Me too - one of the things I was surprised by in this thread was the number of posts along the lines of '4th edition is an abomination/crime against nature/not my cup of tea' from people I'd never seen express an opinion on it before. I'm a big fan of the principle of charity (a philosophical principle I think should be required reading for any internet poster) and am happy to assume they didnt think anyone would get upset and that they probably didnt even consider it as an option. I dont think there's any harm in making such a post given those circumstances (even if it does upset someone) - my point is a general one. Given such language did offend people I'd avoid it in future. Just on general 'don't be a dick' principles.

Quote:
As for the joke about being unable to give away Pathfinder books? My response to that would probably be something along the lines of "well, send them my way already, and pay the shipping fee while you're at it."

I personally find hyperbole irritating - but that's more a tangential objection to the style of debate popular today, not something specific to RPG forums. Nor did I take any kind of 'offense' at this remark. It seems to me the poster was saying "I bought lots of 4th edition stuff, didnt like it and neither did my friends. I dont think it's very popular around my area" and none of that seems objectionable. I wish he'd posted about it here - I'd have paid the shipping, that's for sure. :)

Andoran

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Due to that confusion thing we have;

D&D (= 3.5e D&D) and Pathfinder and 4e (= 4e D&D) we also have Warhammer (= 2e WHRP)

Guess it depends how many differing D&D-clones you are playing currently I guess?

S.

Andoran

ProfessorCirno, some advice?

Let it go dude. Not worth the effort and its not going to change anything though I do get what you're trying to do.

I think there WAS a topic here though and to throw in, I separate the two to an extent.

4th Edition is 4th edition D&D.

3rd Edition = 3.5 and such

Then there's 3rd edition with Pathfinder updates or just calling it Pathfinder out right.

Heh, actually we even call 2nd edition D&D Baldur's Gate ... but thats just because that game series is the greatest D&D game series that will ever hope to spawn ...

Thats how we do it at the house.

Andoran

So thats the flimsy defence that is being used. Don't be offended because really the posters were not serious it's a "joke". That works maybe once or twice. When anti-4E comments keep popping up in a thread that really is anything but along with many other threads that have no bearing or onclude anything about 4E. Well I suppose those other threads that had anti-4E comments were meant to be a joke too I take it. It's anything and everything on this forum. As both a fan of PF and 4E I'm just supposed to smile and laugh when either rpg I like is made fun. Yeah okay sure. I see the sterotypes of rpg fans is alive and well on this forum. Either way I'm not the one who is hurting PF and Paizo with their bad behavior. Since I expected posters on this board to have a certain level of class, maturity and to actually act like adults.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
many different people on this thread wrote:
Stuff about 4E being lame
many different people on this thread wrote:
Stuff about shut up
many different people on this thread wrote:
Stuff about you shut up
many different people on this thread wrote:
Stuff about your mom
many different people on this thread wrote:
Stuff about your mom's face
many different people on this thread wrote:
Stuff about your mom's 4E
many different people on this thread wrote:
Stuff about your mom's lack of 4E
many different people on this thread wrote:
Edition Wars ad nauseum even as they're speaking against edition wars including me

ENOUGH. Guys, seriously. Please. Let my post, here, the one you're reading, be the last one on this discussion. We get it. Some like it. Some don't. Some are rude. Some aren't. Some are trolls. Some are anti-trolls. Let's all just stop feeding trolls. If you're a troll hush. If you're not a troll... hush.

To take the parental tone (a new father's gotta practice, y'know?)...
*AHEM*
"I don't care who started it, and I don't care who's at fault. This is now over."

See? I didn't even tell you to go to your rooms! I have to work on that... :)


A lot of the problem with the whole 4E discussion is that becuase it almost always gets shunted to a small part of the forums where people are expecting very specific types of discussions, it's hard to have a genuine conversation about the larger issues without the hard heads on either side taking it over, which also makes it harder to have the narrow discussions because neither side trusts each other. I understand that the mods don't want to fan edition wars, but by limiting the discussion so narrowly, they are actually keeping the embers alive by preventing a full discussion. Such a discussion could get ugly, but it may be what is needed at some point, with proper warning to any who choose to read it or post to it, just to get the venting on both sides said, done, and in the past. Right now, it seems like a lot of people are afraid to even hint at bringing up 4E, even when it's legitimate in the context of topic, for fear of starting a firestorm on both sides; that's not a healthy atmosphere. There are a number of industry wide effecting topics, such as how the different game systems compare in how they try to do similar things, or how the paper book to digital resources transition is best accomplished, that require a frank and honest, and, yes, sometimes unpleasant, debate that can lead to a better understanding for all, and a better environment to discuss differences. In such a debate, getting upset is perfectly legitimately, as that can create the energy needed to look seriously at the issue, but getting offended gets nobody anywhere, as that usually leads to defensive stances and stock answers.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
sunshadow21 wrote:
Good stuff

I agree, I just figure this, of all places, isn't the thread for it.

Also, just to contribute for real (sort of) in an on-topic way:

My wife (who doesn't have an account) usually calls it Pathfinder.

My newborn-baby (or my "n00b", as I like to call him sometimes) usually calls it "aaaaaaAAAAaagghh*drool*" or something similar to that. Also he's usually passing gas (or other things) while doing so. Does the same thing for other editions too. Hm. Make of that what you will.


There are legitimate reasons to bring 4E up in this thread. Afterall, before you can say whether or not Pathfinder could be considered "D&D," you have to define what "D&D" means to you, and with the different edtions out there, that means a certain amount of discussion of where every edtion, including 4E, fits into your thought process.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I think most of the rational people here can agree that the 4E bashing has got to stop. It's entirely possible to talk about 4E without being a douche about it. If you cant then that means youre not trying to.

I also think however that when it does occur that jumping into the fray with snark and a combatative attitude in defense of 4E doesn't help either. And I dont see anyone here really acknowledging that plays into the atmosphere here as well. And as long as people are going to basically blanket the Paizo community as one big 4E bashing fest (which I've seen come up by several different posters) I dont see this issue making any progress toward a peaceful resolution.

The die-hard pro pathfinder people really need to help in keeping these flare ups to a minimum, but it's only going to work if other people can refrain from also jumping in and throwing gas on the fire. Which if this thread is any example isn't going to happen.

My beefs are less about 4E and more about certain personalities on this forum. The recent addition of a Chrome based ignore script has been a HUGE help, but at this rate im going to have half the forum on ignore and that doesn't help anyone...


ShinHakkaider wrote:

I think most of the rational people here can agree that the 4E bashing has got to stop. It's entirely possible to talk about 4E without being a douche about it. If you cant then that means youre not trying to.

I also think however that when it does occur that jumping into the fray with snark and a commutative attitude in defense of 4E doesn't help either. And I dont see anyone here really acknowledging that plays into the atmosphere here as well. And as long as people are going to basically blanket the Paizo community as one big 4E bashing fest (which I've seen come up by several different posters) I dont see this issue making any progress toward a peaceful resolution.

The die-hard pro pathfinder people really need to help in keeping these flare ups to a minimum, but it's only going to work if other people can refrain from also jumping in and throwing gas on the fire. Which if this thread is any example isn't going to happen.

My beefs are less about 4E and more about certain personalities on this forum. The recent addition of a Chrome based ignore script has been a HUGE help, but at this rate im going to have half the forum on ignore and that doesn't help anyone...

That's why I personally think a single thread labeled with big warning signs is needed. That way, those who genuinely want to vent and are willing to accept the reaction to it can do so, but the 4E section can comfortably used for just system related discussions, and other topics that crop up around the system can be rationally debated in their appropriate places. As it is, the current methods of handling anything 4E don't really cut it.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
sunshadow21 wrote:
That's why I personally think a single thread labeled with big warning signs is needed. That way, those who genuinely want to vent and are willing to accept the reaction to it can do so, but the 4E section can comfortably used for just system related discussions, and other topics that crop up around the system can be rationally debated in their appropriate places. As it is, the current methods of handling anything 4E don't really cut it.

Sadly, such a thread would be ineffective. While I agree that it would be nice if people would exercise some restraint, it just isn't happening, folks. The sad truth is that as long as blatant 4E thread-crapping is tolerated (by Paizo, as well as by the a large chunk of the community), it will continue.

Furthermore, I reject the assertion that calling for an end to edition war b@+%&+$+ makes one an edition warrior. By that logic, anyone attempting to prevent a crime is himself a criminal. Does. Not. Compute.

Shadow Lodge

A list of things I consider "Dungeons & Dragons":

Dungeons & Dragons (0E)
Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (1E)
Dungeons & Dragons: Basic Set (Holmes)
Dungeons & Dragons (B/X)
Dungeons & Dragons (BECMI)
Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (2E)
Dungeons & Dragons: Rules Cyclopedia
Advanced Dungeons & Dragons (2E Revised)
Dungeons & Dragons (3.0)
Dungeons & Dragons (3.5)
Dungeons & Dragons (4E)
Dungeons & Dragons: Essentials


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
bugleyman wrote:
Furthermore, I reject the assertion that calling for an end to edition war b%!+~##& makes one an edition warrior. By that logic, anyone attempting to prevent a crime is himself a criminal. Does. Not. Compute.

Calling for an end to the edition warring while taking potshots and insulting the edition warriors (whether it's warranted or not) makes them just as bad and part of the problem.

I've seen examples of people calling for the end of the edition warring in a civil fashion and examples of what I just mentioned.

Again I agree that the edition warring has to stop (really, the snipes at 4E literally OUT OF NOWHERE are just unnecessary) but it cant be this sort of "it's not my side who starts it so tie one hand behind your back so I can slap you around with my moral high ground" thing that's going on around here. Both sides have to come into this with at least civil intentions otherwise it's pointless.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Both sides have to come into this with at least civil intentions otherwise it's pointless.

I agree, though I too often let my annoyance at the whole thing get the better of me.


Kthulhu wrote:


But, realistically, the differences between 0E, 1E, 2E, and the variations of Basic D&D are pretty minimal compared to the huge changes they made when 3.0 came.

You're kidding, right? You have GOT to be kidding.

My first roleplaying game was Basic D&D. There is a HUGE difference between Basic D&D and AD&D.

In Basic, for nonhumans, your race = your class; There are only 3 alignments (Lawful, Neutral, and Chaotic); the Saving Throws are different; Only 4 types of Armor* (Leather, Chain, Plate, and Shield); a maximum of 36th level (for the human classes)**; no weapon speeds; two types of timekeeping (Rounds and Turns), as opposed to AD&D's 3 types (Rounds, Turns, and Segments)... I could go on.

Why am I getting sucked into this edition-wars debate?

* this would eventually be expanded to include Scale and Banded in the 3rd set (Levels 15-25) and a "Suit" of armor in the Master's set (Levels 26-36)

** The Immortals set would let you play beyond 36th level, but the mechanics of the game changed enough that you were essentially playing a different game (for example, you had to record how many limbs you had).

Andoran

I used to have nore of a thicker skin when it came to criticism against 4E. I also admit that sometimes I can be too defensive about it. I will also mnetion that I was not a huge fan of PF at first. Neither did I go into every PF thread and use any topic as an excuse to troll against PF. When it seems to happen on a weekly basis your tolerence starts to wear thin. And some on this board have said 4E is not their cup of tea without insulting either the game, fanbase or Wotc. One does not have to do that to get his point across. If no one says anything why would it stop. It's easy to say if you respond back your being an edition warrior. which I find to BS, a copout and as another posters has pointed out thats like saying your criminal for trying to stop a criminal. Does it help either side no. Neither should it be ignored. And imo if it was directed towards Paizo or PF instead of Wotc or 4E posters would be bending over backwards to defend it. Since it is not many close their eyes and act like nothing is wrong imo.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
memorax wrote:
It's easy to say if you respond back your being an edition warrior. which I find to BS, a copout and as another posters has pointed out thats like saying your criminal for trying to stop a criminal. Does it help either side no. Neither should it be ignored.

You can think that it's BS all you want. It still doesn't change the fact that YOU ARE engaging in edition warring when you respond to being baited. Or you respond aggressively to something that may or may not be a slight vs your game of choice. YOU ARE ACTIVELY ENGAGING in a behavior. You're making a decision to do so when you can simply flag the post and ignore it and move on. I understand how you feel, really. But it doesn't change the fact that you make a decision to either ignore the fray or jump head first into it.

Japan attacks the US. The US jumps into the conflict because it was attacked by japan.

BOTH SIDES ARE STILL ENGAGED IN A WAR.

Doesn't much matter how or who started it.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

I removed some edition bashing.

151 to 200 of 236 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / General Discussion / Do you still call Pathfinder "DND" in conversation? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.