|
4E is on its way. You may play it, or you might not. You may love it, or you might hate it.
But it is coming, and at some point this forum needs to shift from debate to discuss.
I don't see anyone complaining about 3.5 over in the d20/OGL forum. I see a bunch of folk talking about the game they love to play.
This place (the 4E forum) needs to shift to that kind of dynamic at some point.
So when can we accept that 4E is what it is (like it or not) and those that want to play it deserve a space where they can talk about it freely without the sniping and rancor.
|
|
Possibly not until both 4E is on the shelves in stores AND it is clear which way Paizo will go.
You know what - that is it. I think the reason for all the rancor is that the folks that dislike 4E (or just plain hate it) and do not want Paizo to adopt it are hoping to influence that decision.
I think you could be right. I hope it cools down sooner but I hold out little hope.
The tone of the debate will certainly change. Some anti-4E people will just give up. The odd venom ball will be lobbed.
People who take up 4E will start debating among themselves. There will be house rules (some stuff is already looking lame). The same as 3E.
Others will continue with 3.5 and start posting conversions. House rules. Yadda yadda, 3.75, blah blah blah.
You know what - that is it. I think the reason for all the rancor is that the folks that dislike 4E (or just plain hate it) and do not want Paizo to adopt it are hoping to influence that decision.
You think?
;)
|
I'm not really sure when it'll happen.
But here's a step that will help go in that direction:
Discuss 4e without comparing it to a previous Edition.
For instance:
Greater Invisibility Wizard Utility 16
'With a wave of your hand, you or another creature nearby fades away, becoming invisible'
Daily * Arcane, Illusion
Standard Action Ranged 20
Target: You or one creature
Effect: The target is invisible until the end of your next turn. If the target attacks, the target becomes visible.
Sustain Minor: If the target is within range, you can sustain the effect.
A 4e discussion of this would be along the lines of
You can turn an ally invisible and keep them invisible indefinitely by spending a minor action. This will be great for your rogue to scout ahead, get combat advantage for her first strike (SNEAK ATTACK! Thanks Boomer), etc.
OR
Hey, no save, and I could make one of my enemies just disappear. I wonder why it has no Attack vs. Defense listed. Did they consider that it might be used to turn an enemy invisible? "But guys, I'm right here! Waddya mean I'm gone?"
OR
Speculation: I wonder if Invisibility will only be Target:You
NOT
Man, they totally nerfed Greater Invisibility, I mean one attack and it's gone, this suxxor vs. every other edition.
NOR
It's about time they fixed Greater Invisibility, I mean come on, in 3.X it was just way to powerful!
I don't see it changing to the first kind of conversation without the second kind trying to jack the thread any time soon, though. Doesn't mean people can't have the first kind while ignoring the second, though.
|
|
When the books are actually released and people are actually playing the game, and the fence sitters, the undecided and the people who aren’t either rabidly pro or anti 4E get a good chance to look at and understand the game – that’s the point where meaningful debate can start (And maybe it even will). At the moment it’s mainly just noise.
I suspect that the meaningful discussion will begin at about the same, but it might be a while before it outshines the debate.
4E is on its way. You may play it, or you might not. You may love it, or you might hate it.
But it is coming, and at some point this forum needs to shift from debate to discuss.
I don't see anyone complaining about 3.5 over in the d20/OGL forum. I see a bunch of folk talking about the game they love to play.
This place (the 4E forum) needs to shift to that kind of dynamic at some point.
So when can we accept that 4E is what it is (like it or not) and those that want to play it deserve a space where they can talk about it freely without the sniping and rancor.
Ironic. While I would like nothing more than for both camps to go to their respective corners and enjoy the games they love, you Sir, have been dropping in and offering your own pro-4E slant in virtually every thread for the past three months. For your proposal to work, and I really do LOVE the idea, it requires you to buy into the reverse proposition and not go into 3.5 threads and drop your opinions.
And just to clarify, this is not a personal diatribe. CrossWiredMind has been perfectly civil the few times we have bumped heads. But... it flows both ways. 3.5ers need to refrain from unloading on the 4.0 discussions and 4.0ers need to refrain from the reverse. The only exception is the voting threads like Which Way Should Paizo Go?
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
So when can we accept that 4E is what it is (like it or not) and those that want to play it deserve a space where they can talk about it freely without the sniping and rancor.
Only after absolute uncompromised victory by one side over the other!
(it's the same route to Middle East peace - duh)
Only after absolute uncompromised victory by one side over the other!
(it's the same route to Middle East peace - duh)
:|
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!
|
I think the reason for all the rancor is that the folks that dislike 4E (or just plain hate it) and do not want Paizo to adopt it are hoping to influence that decision.
Nearly everyone on the board is guilty of trying to influence Paizo's decision to some degree. We all have a desire on what we hope Paizo decides to do, and nearly everyone has voiced that desire (some more loudly than others).
-Skeld
|
|
Ironic. While I would like nothing more than for both camps to go to their respective corners and enjoy the games they love, you Sir, have been dropping in and offering your own pro-4E slant in virtually every thread for the past three months. For your proposal to work, and I really do LOVE the idea, it requires you to buy into the reverse proposition and not go into 3.5 threads and drop your opinions.
I've never been to a 3.5 thread. I have only ever posted here in the 4E forum. If there is a 3.5 thread here, then it should be elsewhere.
And just to clarify, this is not a personal diatribe. CrossWiredMind has been perfectly civil the few times we have bumped heads. But... it flows both ways. 3.5ers need to refrain from unloading on the 4.0 discussions and 4.0ers need to refrain from the reverse. The only exception is the voting threads like Which Way Should Paizo Go?
Maybe the 3.5 folk should just stick to the boards about their favored edition except for the poll type threads?
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32
|
Funny, all the forums (gaming or otherwise) i saw that "agreed to disagree", and stopped discussing the merits and limits of something related to their original purpose of discussion withered and died in short order.
While it may be not very nice, i doubt what crosswiredmind proposes is sensible. 4th Ed enthusiasts will preach the merits of their new drug, skeptics will bash what they perceive to be an assault on their beloved game. Either side to stay on their line of the fence would mean essentially giving up on the issue - and hence stop caring.
So let the fires burn, as long as they will. We know we live as long as we do battle, and we know we are dead as the battle runs out!
This overly dramatic post was brought to you by: Sleep deprivation.
Only after absolute uncompromised victory by one side over the other!
I hate to admit it, but I believe Sebastian is right. However, there will be several markers that will take alot of the wind out of 1 group's sails.
Maybe the 3.5 folk should just stick to the boards about their favored edition except for the poll type threads?
We want to discuss the new edition, even if we do not have something positive to contribute. Besides, some of us will probably steal an idea from 4E and use it in our home games. My DM already has 2nd wind as a house rule. He has not plans of ever going 4E, but he has no problem stealing ideas from it.
I've never been to a 3.5 thread. I have only ever posted here in the 4E forum. If there is a 3.5 thread here, then it should be elsewhere.
This might be influencing your perception to some degree then. Most threads in the 3.5 section are either new optional material that a poster wants the community to check out and comment on or threads along the lines of "My players are being inconsiderate/My DM is being a jerk".
We really can't have constructive threads about fixing aspects of adventures or asking if others think their Forrest Gnome variant race is balanced until we have the actual rules. So its just going to be one long debate until the books are released - and then its going to explode for a bit. After that I figure it will slowly shift into discussions about actually playing the game.
Generally those that don't plan to convert won't tell you about it on a thread devoted to debating the play balance of the Forrest Gnome race since it will be off topic.
I don't see anyone complaining about 3.5 over in the d20/OGL forum. I see a bunch of folk talking about the game they love to play.
There was complaining on the open boards until Paizo put up a 4E discussion board. Now all 4E discussion, pro and con, has moved here, leaving the other forums free for their focussed discussions. Perhaps once 4E has been released and, more importantly, Paizo has made their decision regarding which edition to produce products for, then, and only then, will the 3.XE folks leave the 4E forum for the 4E folks. Until then, however...
Maybe the 3.5 folk should just stick to the boards about their favored edition except for the poll type threads?
Except that the discussions that have been posted have been valid to the forum: discussion of 4E. Because those of us who will not be "upgrading" wish to relate what is known of 4E to 3.XE, and further explain to Paizo, the company we all know and love, why we would prefer their products be based on one edition or another, does not invalidate our posts as appropriate to this forum. If it did, the mods would shut down and/or delete inappropriate threads.
If we 3.XE folks limit our responses to polls, our words become little more than soap box speeches, having little or no weight. If, however, we enter into debate with 4E proponents, and offer intelligent discourse on the particular rules elements as they become known, we can better provide for Paizo the wants and needs of their consumers with regards to the products they produce. We're providing market research for them, FOC!
As much as Paizo loves their fans, make no mistake, they ARE a company. They are in this business to make money, and if they just rush out and switch to an edition of the game without first determining if 1) they can publish the products they want in that system and 2) publish products that the majority of their customers will want to buy... well, they wouldn't be the success they are today if they were that naive.
So which would you rather suffer: five more months of 3.XE folks posting their opinions of 4E and providing feedback to Paizo, or a year or two from now having a Paizo-less world because they made the wrong decision based on not having that feedback?
When can we stop the debate?
That is a tricky question.
For you, you can stop anytime you like.
For the rest of us, it assumes that we feel the debate is negative. And therefor, desire its end. Maybe some of us do, maybe some of us don't.
|
|
Maybe the 3.5 folk should just stick to the boards about their favored edition except for the poll type threads?
Much as I usually like your reasonable posts, I cannot agree in the slightest possible way with you on this.
You know, some people are not sheep, and will not accept automatically everything 4e as being great. And it is their right to tell it.
Pro 4e people keep spamming us with praise about that game, and how we will automatically convert, sooner or later. They may believe that in their newfound faith, but what happens when it fails to happen ? An identity crisis ?
It might be better for everybody if everyone agrees with you all the time, but I would not like to live in that kind of world.
I learned on message boards long ago debate stops with you. If you really want a thread to go away, you have to be willing to let a subject lie, no matter how strongly you feel about it. No snarky responses, no “you’re wrong because,” no responses to obvious jabs. Just because you don’t post doesn’t mean you have “lost” an argument, since when it comes down to it, it isn’t a competition. For a thread to die, you have to be the bigger person, which pretty much runs contrary to the whole message board concept, as no one will ever know about it.
|
|
3.5 Boards? Ummm... there actually are no specifically 3.5 boards, or 3.x boards, or 1st ed boards...
The debate will not stop for quite some time. First we need the books and the Paizo decision. Then we need separate boards created for different types of discussion.
Discussing (civilly) the merits of the 2 systems is still a valid exercise for a while, especially for those of us who plan to cobble together a system using the best aspects of both.
If Paizo declares it's going 4E all the way, I'm sure you'll get your wish crosswiredmind, as many of the ones (like me) that want Paizo to stay 3.5 will probably have no reason to post in this particular forum anymore.
I'd really like to see the ripple through the industry if Paizo stays 3.5. It may not matter one bit, but if it did, fun times!
|
|
So when can we accept that 4E is what it is (like it or not) and those that want to play it deserve a space where they can talk about it freely without the sniping and rancor.Only after absolute uncompromised victory by one side over the other!
(it's the same route to Middle East peace - duh)
Oddly enough, I agree.
|
|
When can we stop the debate?That is a tricky question.
For you, you can stop anytime you like.
For the rest of us, it assumes that we feel the debate is negative. And therefor, desire its end. Maybe some of us do, maybe some of us don't.
You may have missed my point.
Why is there a debate at all? Yes, trying to influence Paizo is one reason. But once the game is inevitable and Paizo makes its decision I don't see why this argument needs to keep going.
|
|
I learned on message boards long ago debate stops with you. If you really want a thread to go away, you have to be willing to let a subject lie, no matter how strongly you feel about it. No snarky responses, no “you’re wrong because,” no responses to obvious jabs. Just because you don’t post doesn’t mean you have “lost” an argument, since when it comes down to it, it isn’t a competition. For a thread to die, you have to be the bigger person, which pretty much runs contrary to the whole message board concept, as no one will ever know about it.
I would hold that to be true in this case if it were not for the agenda - keep Paizo printing 3.5 material.
So when folks start talking about 4E invariably there will be a post about how much 4E sucks.
There is no safe place for people to talk about 4E without thread disruption.
|
|
Pro 4e people keep spamming us with praise about that game, and how we will automatically convert, sooner or later. They may believe that in their newfound faith, but what happens when it fails to happen ? An identity crisis ?
It might be better for everybody if everyone agrees with you all the time, but I would not like to live in that kind of world.
But are 4E people spamming in the other boards? If it is okay for those set to stay with 3.5 to keep posting here about how much they loath 4E should the 4E boosters go to the d20/OGL boards and post about how backwards people are for playing an older version of the game?
No. So why should that be tolerated here? Well, I agree that it will die down once the game is out but I just don't see why it can't happen sooner.
|
|
I am really unclear as to the point of this thread. You state that you want a place to discuss 4E without rancour. what exactly do you mean by that- without disagreement? discussing specifics? I am not sure how you can have a discussion without differing points of view. If you want to discuss specifics, make sure that the thread is appropriately specific. I.E The new invisibility spell is XXX. Threads that are to the negative or the positive (XXX sucks, rocks etc.) will always bring out the opposite because there will always be contrarian points of view.
|
I dunno:
While I'll say that I'm thus far unimpressed with 4e (to put it mildly) Yes, it is coming, bar some unforeseen act of God (I'm praying, how about you?). The problem is that we're only getting dibs and dabs of info, so that we don't have a full picture (the idea of being class-bound again like in 1st appalls me)and can have meaningful debate. So I agree that all debating before the launch and some more serious playtesting is meaningless. Though entertaining.
|
|
I am really unclear as to the point of this thread. You state that you want a place to discuss 4E without rancour. what exactly do you mean by that- without disagreement? discussing specifics? I am not sure how you can have a discussion without differing points of view. If you want to discuss specifics, make sure that the thread is appropriately specific. I.E The new invisibility spell is XXX. Threads that are to the negative or the positive (XXX sucks, rocks etc.) will always bring out the opposite because there will always be contrarian points of view.
Disagreement is great. It is an essential part of reaching understanding and learning from a different perspective. But the foundation of that kind of discussion is one of fundamental agreement. In this case I see it as - I play (or want to play) 4E. Discuss.
What I am asking is when can we have that here.
Now the discussion is about why 4E does or does not suck. There are people that post here that never intend to play 4E. Their only purpose is to tell the rest of us to stay away from it.
Why? 4E is a game that some of us want to try out, some are excited about it and know they want to play it, and some hope that it is good and come here to see why other people like what they see.
It seems to me that the people that come here just to dump on 4E are just trying to decrease the signal to noise ratio. They don't want to see people talking in a positive way about 4E.
It is as if they believe they can stop 4E from happening if they just put their fingers in their ears and tell the rest of us how crappy it will be, or that it is a game for the lazy, or for people with ADHD, or for those with very few brain cells.
I think the point is swiftly approaching when that has to stop so people can discuss the game from a common agreement that it is worth playing.
I post here mainly because I want Paizo to come along with me and my group to 4E. I like Paizo's adventures and subscribed to Dragon and Dungeon for years, but eventually had to drop my sub to Pathfinder when 4E was announced (like many here have said, I'll never play through all my 3E stuff and just can't rationalize buying MORE when I'm almost assuredly going to 4E ...)
But I do believe in fair fights, so I don't begrudge those trying to keep Paizo 3.5 too much (except for trying to take MY Paizo away! :P) So I suspect this debate will continue, until Paizo makes a descision, at which point the battle will be over, the victors chosen, and to them the spoils (of sweet, sweet APs!)
|
|
I think the reason for all the rancor is that the folks that dislike 4E (or just plain hate it) and do not want Paizo to adopt it are hoping to influence that decision.
Oh, most definitely.
The decision whether Paizo changes edition has a huge effect on people's home game, especially those who are currently buying, reading, enjoying and maybe even running Pathfinder & Gamesmastery products.The 4E announcement came out after many had commited themselves to a subscription, and ever since, the possibility that Paizo may convert to a new edition has dismayed these people, who fear their campaign may be derailed.
It will also have put off many from even starting to buy into this line, in the belief that the line is going to end or radically change, so 'Why Bother?'.
There are also many who would like to subscribe, but are paralysed from making a decision.
The delays over the GSL are therefore, costing Paizo cold hard cash, and the people hoping to persuade Paizo to declare Golarion stays 3.5 are doing so, with (mostly) the best of intentions, to let them know how large a customer base they could count on.
None of this prevents Paizo from starting a separate 4E product line, in a brand new setting, built around the 4E concepts from day one, rather than hammering a 3.5 peg into a 4E-shaped hole.
If they choose to make 4E product (which I feel is inevitable), I hope that is what they do. Apart from easing the outcry from customers who fear their campaign setting will be ruined, it will allow items to be reprinted in the future, and serve to avoid any confusion which could occur, if Golarion/Pathfinder/Gamesmastery had products out under both rulesets.
I remember when Dragonlance had product out under the 2nd Edition and the Saga Edition (card-based), and hearing customers who were confused over which products were compatible with what. That was yet another decision by TSR that helped fracture & confuse the fanbase, and look what happened to them?
Why is there a debate at all?
Because the involved parties are D&D players.
Seriously. Have you ever spent time over at the WotC boards?
They debate all the time about the same system. So don't expect debate to ever disappear.
|
|
I think the point is swiftly approaching when that has to stop so people can discuss the game from a common agreement that it is worth playing.
Yeah, threads like these really need to die, so that we can have threads that discuss the various aspects of 4th edition, some of which we might like, and some of which we might not, but all of which we'd like to hear about so that we can make an informed decision, rather than just hear marketing sunshine of dubious provenance or gloom-and-doom naysaying of similar value.
For that to happen, we need to hear both sides. Even if that bothers those with delicate sensibilities who only want to cling to one viewpoint and deny the existence (or voice) of any other.
Maybe the 3.5 folk should just stick to the boards about their favored edition except for the poll type threads?
This made me abit uncomfortable. 3.5 folk? Are we a separate race in this new world order?
Now I'm not saying I disagree with your original post, even though I do at a certain level. But perhaps you shouldn't tell people to "stay away from our boards". I've seen alot of flaming going on on the OGL-board too, and even more argumentation, that's what the boards are for.
I stick with 3.5 because of monetary reasons. But perhaps I still want to see what all the fuss is about. Perhaps I see something I disagree with. Shouldn't I be able to ad to the discussion?
It sure is rough being a 3.5 man, in a 4.0 world.
Lots of good stuff...
Snorter makes lots of excellent points this morning.
For me, it's less about the rules.. and more about the fact that I know spending limitations.
I can buy 3 new rules books without much hardship.. But Campaign Settings have lots of books, and that's an investment.
Here's the truth about me: For the last decade I've played with rabid diceless people who freeform, play Amber DRPG, and summarily judge anybody who uses a randomizer as a mini/maxing munchkins. Now I know that's not true at all. Which is why I'm here.
But I don't care that much about the rules, as long as they're fairly functional. Hell, it would take me a month to analyze the math that you guys dissect in 15 minutes. I wouldn't know bad rules if they bit me in the butt (or until all my players complained). That's why I go where Paizo goes, because I'm relying on the Paizo Editorial Team to tell me if 4th Edition sucks or not. They're like attorneys on retainer.
BUT TO GET BACK ON SUBJECT:
I don't want to buy all the Eberron or Forgotten Realms books in order to use 4th Edition Rules. That's too much money. Core Books? Sure.. why not? I can probably spring for those. But I already have a campaign setting, it's called Pathfinder.
WOTC doesn't owe me a system to match my campaign setting, but if they'd like to do business, we need to discuss compatibility. That starts with the GSL.
None of what I've written has much to do whether the debate should continue or not.. but we all have varied reasons for being concerned the new edition. Understanding all those varied reasons helps all of us look at the choices we'll be faced that much clearer.
It's not just who has the best rules, it's a great many factors.
I think the point is swiftly approaching when that has to stop so people can discuss the game from a common agreement that it is worth playing.Yeah, threads like these really need to die, so that we can have threads that discuss the various aspects of 4th edition, some of which we might like, and some of which we might not, but all of which we'd like to hear about so that we can make an informed decision, rather than just hear marketing sunshine of dubious provenance or gloom-and-doom naysaying of similar value.
For that to happen, we need to hear both sides. Even if that bothers those with delicate sensibilities who only want to cling to one viewpoint and deny the existence (or voice) of any other.
I don't disagree, but to add to go back to what I just posted a moment ago.. discussing the various aspects of 4th Edition is more than just the mechanics.
Not that you said it was just the mechanics, but I just wanted to clarify.
Hiya
Now the discussion is about why 4E does or does not suck. There are people that post here that never intend to play 4E. Their only purpose is to tell the rest of us to stay away from it.Why? 4E is a game that some of us want to try out, some are excited about it and know they want to play it, and some hope that it is good and come here to see why other people like what they see.
It seems to me that the people that come here just to dump on 4E are just trying to decrease the signal to noise ratio. They don't want to see people talking in a positive way about 4E.
Why? I'd guess that the 3.x'ers are being reminded of what sorta happened when AD&D went from 2e to 3e. They liked the 3e stuff. They heard all the 2e and 1e folks shouting out "Yuk!", "Ick!" and "WTF?!?". But, the new 3e converts just thought like some 4e fans now..."This new version is awesome! I don't know why all those prior edition guys keep complaining.". Now, if I (a die-hard 1e gamer) go to a game convention...how many official games are going to be offered for my preferred edition? How many for the 2e folks? Hell, how many for the 3.0e folks? Little...VERY little. It's all about 3.5e. The same thing is likely to happen with regards to 4e. And the 3.x'ers are getting nervous. In two years time, how many official games and tournaments for 3.5e are going to be running at conventions? ... ... ... ...not many. That's the point.
So...the more they point out the 'flaws and drastic changes' of 4e, the more people they *might* convince to just not buy into 4e. This would cause 4e to not gain as much footing (or even outright fail). In the long run, this would mean that it would be much more likely for other companies and game conventions to provide 3.5e game stuff.
It is as if they believe they can stop 4E from happening if they just put their fingers in their ears and tell the rest of us how crappy it will be, or that it is a game for the lazy, or for people with ADHD, or for those with very few brain cells.
I think the point is swiftly approaching when that has to stop so people can discuss the game from a common agreement that it is worth playing.
I think this statement is a bit arrogant (no offense meant). It assumes that 4e *is* "worth playing". Personally, I don't think it's even worth a 30-second flip through at the game store...but, as I said, I'm a hard-core 1e/hackmaster guy, so I can say the same thing about most 3.x and 2e stuff... ;)
The bottom line is that the feel, premise, and general 'target audience play style' of 4e is *VERY* different from every incarnation of (A)D&D. This, IMHO, is going to cause even more of a schism between the D&D fans than the 1e/2e to 3e change did. I can easily see this as a "take it or leave it" edition of the game; there will be very little 'crossover' between 4e gamers and all prior (A)D&D gamers. Almost as bad as the difference between Star Wars fans and Star Trek fans; most fall firmly into one or the other, with very few liking both 'just as much'.
I don't think we will hear the opponents of 4e quiet down anytime soon. And, honestly, I hope they never quiet down. Nothing serves a monopoly more than all the ones who don't like it doing nothing but shutting up. Marketers interpret 'no complaining' as 'See? Everyone LOVES our product!'. So, keep up the complaining! :)
^_^
Paul L. Ming
|
Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games
|
It seems to me that the people that come here just to dump on 4E are just trying to decrease the signal to noise ratio. They don't want to see people talking in a positive way about 4E.
So, you're feeling persecuted because not everyone who posts shares the same views you do? Sounds like you want an area that restricts the kinds of posts that appear so that everyone agrees with your views and no one questions them. Sounds like censorship to me.
Forums are areas to debate ideas freely. Your proposal goes against that idea, so I don't think you'll ever get what you want (at least not on these boards).
Disagreement is good. It allows the learning process to occur more rapidly, and allows you to expand your awareness of the world around you. I find that I learn more from posts that disagree with my views than those that agree with me.
CWM, you may want to be careful what you wish for. People who surround thameselve with only those that agree with them face a danger of losing touch with the world around them, as they only see one side of an issue.
|
|
I am not trying to convince anyone to not play 4E. I would probably have an easier time persuading Red Sox fans to root for the Yankees.
I just want to add my voice to the significant percentage of those sticking with 3.5 so they will be inspired to keep playing it (and so that Paizo or some other company will continue to support it).
Here here! ...except, I wish the really good companies (Paizo, Necro, Goodman, Blackdirge, LPJ, and others) would keep producing 3.5 stuff for us.
I dont think the question should be "When can we stop the debate?" and instead be "When can we start a fully informed civil debate?".
The answer is when 4E is out. Otherwise people can't debate about the complete information including the math and options. They can just debate about incomplete information. Which leads to personal attacks. Why? Because some things can't be answered.
Poster A: "I think that this change is great. The abilty really allows (insert class name here) to finally be able to (insert combat choice here)."
Poster B: "Hmmm but isn't the original concept design for (insert class name here) kinda invalidated if that is so?"
Poster C: "Bah now (insert class name here) can (insert combat choice here)?!?! But now it completely overshadows (insert class name here)! Also it might tilt the party balance towards (insert class name here)!"
Poster A: "Well I'm sure they have thought of that. I think that they might have done (insert combat choice here) to the other class to balance it."
Poster C: "Well we have no proof of that! Your just speculating! It totally sucks and eats puppies!"
Poster A: "You suck and eat puppies! And it's so awesome that I'm buying it yesterday!"
Poster B: " What the.... Weren't we discussing (insert class name here) ability to do (insert combat choice here)? Where did the puppies come from?"
|
|
I am really unclear as to the point of this thread. You state that you want a place to discuss 4E without rancour. what exactly do you mean by that- without disagreement? discussing specifics? I am not sure how you can have a discussion without differing points of view. If you want to discuss specifics, make sure that the thread is appropriately specific. I.E The new invisibility spell is XXX. Threads that are to the negative or the positive (XXX sucks, rocks etc.) will always bring out the opposite because there will always be contrarian points of view.Disagreement is great. It is an essential part of reaching understanding and learning from a different perspective. But the foundation of that kind of discussion is one of fundamental agreement. In this case I see it as - I play (or want to play) 4E. Discuss.
What I am asking is when can we have that here.
Now the discussion is about why 4E does or does not suck. There are people that post here that never intend to play 4E. Their only purpose is to tell the rest of us to stay away from it.
Why? 4E is a game that some of us want to try out, some are excited about it and know they want to play it, and some hope that it is good and come here to see why other people like what they see.
It seems to me that the people that come here just to dump on 4E are just trying to decrease the signal to noise ratio. They don't want to see people talking in a positive way about 4E.
It is as if they believe they can stop 4E from happening if they just put their fingers in their ears and tell the rest of us how crappy it will be, or that it is a game for the lazy, or for people with ADHD, or for those with very few brain cells.
I think the point is swiftly approaching when that has to stop so people can discuss the game from a common agreement that it is worth playing.
At this point no one has played 4E ( other than a select few) and the product is yet to be released. Further, none of us have seen the complete product to truly discuss the merits of the game; a discussion of the nature of the game as you would like is impossible until the release of 4e. As such, any discussion is speculative to some degree and everyone should feel free to participate,if they have something of value to add to the said discourse.
There needs to be no underlying assumption that the poster has to want to play 4E- indeed, the most introspective posts might come from those that have not made up their mind one way of the other due to a lack of bias or agenda. I don't think anyone rational would ever say that 4E is not worth playing for anyone; it might be that some might enjoy playing it for XXX reasons and others won't. There is indeed a good amount of signial to noise ratio and it comes from both extremes ( as extremes tend to be inherently entrenched no matter what the topic). However, I have found by and large, most posters to have some value in what they say, one way or the other.
|
|
Since some folks seem to be missing my point let me ask you a question:
Is it okay with you to have a large vocal group post to the d20/OGL board to tell everyone that they are ignorant cavemen for playing an older edition?
Sure; ultimately what you post is a reflection of yourself- making generalizations, name calling, using/assigning terms that are derogatory just reflects on who the poster is. IMHO most people see that and tend to ignore such posts.