|
OK, I'm probably going to regret this, but.... A sort of plea for healing.
Why is there still back-and-forth about 4e vs 3e?
OK, there was anger when it was announced (especially as part of the package was the death of Dungeon and Dragon magazines in print), but how long ago was that - over a year? Then there was the speculation and rumour about what was in and what was out (gnomes out, dragonborn in) but we have actually had the game (if we wanted it) in our hands for a month or so now, so those issues are now settled. There is the GSL, but the OGL still exists and, off the back of it, we are getting Pathfinder products of acknowledged quality and the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game next year, plus the OGL is still out there online and we still presumably have out books from before.
So what exactly are the arguments about now? What is the point? If you don't like 4e, what exactly do you achieve by posting about it, when instead you could post about the ongoing and exciting developments in 3e as it heads boldly into an admittedly uncertain future. Is there much point posting on the 4e threads how much you dislike the new game, when no one has actually taken away your old one and it continues to enjoy support from the best writers of adventures in the business?
So why do we still see arguments on the threads? I just don't understand it. Didn't the horse bolt ages ago?
(Try and keep this nice if you can.)
Why is there still back-and-forth about 4e vs 3e?
Aubrey I think I have come to the conclusion that there can be no nice debate anymore because many of the people not heavily emotionally invested in the process have left for other threads. I am still lurking and throwing in the occasional plea for civility, but I think it is human nature to argue. Whether sports, politics, religion, school budgets, games, etc. etc. people get so involved with issues that they start to identify emotionally with them. Once you make that leap any disparaging comment about your identified system becomes a personal attack.
Example:
"I think [game edition here] stinks because they did [X and Y] to the mechanics.
Someone who has become emotionally involved with the disparaged edition is going to interpret the message as:
"I think YOU stink because your stupid [game edition here] changed [x and Y], which totally makes YOU and IT TEH SUXXORS!
Another problem I see is the avalanche effect (which I am sure we are going to see here in this very thread). A thread gets started for one reason or another and a lively debate occurs. Then someone posts a little flamey. The next defense post ups the flame temperature. Then the thread descends into shreiking gibbering Hell.
Not really much we can do, except point out to folks when they get a little overheated and keep on playing.
|
|
Aubrey no offense but this is almost as likely to cause trouble as sitting Wales and England supporters in the same pub when their playing a Six Nations final.
If you have the option I suggest deleting it if possible.
I don't, and I'm aware that this could start a flame war. But anyone starting a thread here runs that risk. Also, I wanted to post something like this in the Insult thread, but it didn't really seem appropriate.
Maybe I should set out my stall. I don't see the point of the aggro now (if it ever had one). It's so old. I have the books for 4e and 3e and don't feel the need to choose between editions. There is plently of support for 3e (possibly better than it is for 4e at the moment) so why fulminate against the new edition - you can just ignore it. 4e is a good game, with a different feel to 3e - it solves some 3e problems but has others of its own. I'll happily play either edition - my pbp's are 3.5, but I'll play 4e with a group of relative newbies to give it a try. With my normal group, we are actually playing Runequest, but which edition we play when that ends is moot - 3.5, PFRPG beta or 4e, depending on my group's preferences. So I fail to see the Manichean dichotomy others seem to - I judge each game on its merits.
It seems to me positions got hardened before the games came out, but now they are here... Why carry on fighting old battles? There is plenty for lovers of all editions. Why grapple with each other over faults of this system or that? None of them is perfect. Pretending otherwise is foolish - but we simply got used to them (Vancian casting is an odd concept on the face of it, though its general loss in 4e feels weird to me; spellcasters and multiclassing didn't work well in 4e, though 4e multiclassing is more feat-based than anyhting else and doesn't feel much like multiclassing of old).
Given that the mess of the 4e and GSL launch has actually led to what appears to be a new flowering of 3e from under the dead hand of WotC/Hasbro's corporate approach, and given that 4e is, no matter which way you look at it, a damn fine game even if you don't think it feels like D&D, what is there to argue about now? It seems to me, as D&D players, we are getting our cake and eating it too.
|
My analysis:
First off, I'm ernestly staying out of the whole 4e section, pretty much because I agree with Aubrey here, and argle bargling on and on about it doesn't have an angle.
I think there's fear still, on both sides.
I think the whole character of the GSL was motivated by fear.
I think the whole Edition Wars is motivated by fear of loss on both sides.
"Oh no! We lost Paizo!"
"Oh no! We lost The Mainstream Juggernaut!"
"Oh no! WOW IS the Mainstream Juggernaut!"
Fear, plain and simple.
|
|
My analysis:
First off, I'm ernestly staying out of the whole 4e section, pretty much because I agree with Aubrey here, and argle bargling on and on about it doesn't have an angle.
I think there's fear still, on both sides.
I think the whole character of the GSL was motivated by fear.
I think the whole Edition Wars is motivated by fear of loss on both sides.
"Oh no! We lost Paizo!"
"Oh no! We lost The Mainstream Juggernaut!"
"Oh no! WOW IS the Mainstream Juggernaut!"
Fear, plain and simple.
I can't speak for everyone but I do not post out of fear. I post because I have chosen to play 4e and would love to actually talk about it.
The reason I defend 4e is simple - I have little tolerance for the active spread of disinformation that is far too often the subject of many posts in this section of Paizo's boards.
|
Ok, in the interest of being constructive 8-) I'll respond to your post as if its not destined to go down the tubes.
Primarily I think the antagonism breaks down to Wotc poor customer management but also peoples misconceived opinion as to what rights they have regarding their IP and licences.
Point one Wotc - the 4E campaign sucked, it failed to achieve what it should have intended. What was that you ask? It failed to get a percentage of the core supporters behind the game, it doesn't matter if its a large percentage or small its still a group of very passionate people who took the change as a personal affront, right or wrong (Wrong in my opinion (I SAID MY OPINION)).
Point two - The licences, magazines and IP in general. A lot of very good companies were managing Wotc's products (and yes it is Wotc's even if their only getting a licence fee), Paizo with the mags, Sovereign Press with DL excetera. People, as you may have noticed become very attached to things, particularly friendly companies like Paizo and Sov Press. When Wotc took back what is essentially theirs, in an admittedly poor fashion, people reacted as though Wotc had attacked family members. They forget that all involved are businesses and essentially looking to make a profit for themselves regardless of how nice they are or how much we might like them. And as has been stated elsewhere the could have been bigger dicks, but were generally meh, ok.
Point three - On this board are a large number of those passionate people I mentioned earlier and they don't like to be disagreed with, they seem to take it as a personal affront that some might not agree with them or their conlusions. They dislike that their articulate arguments (in their opinion) doesn't completely change peoples minds. This is true of both camps and it is incredibly childish and nonconstructive (that word!!).
Probably rambled on more than I intended and i hope I actually addressed your points as opposed to going off on a tangent,
|
|
The reason I defend 4e is simple - I have little tolerance for the active spread of disinformation that is far too often the subject of many posts in this section of Paizo's boards.[HUMOR]Yeah, you should really STOP doing that.[/HUMOR]
Vance, putting your comment in Humour brackets doesn't change the fact you know it'll rile CWM, and in this case rightly so.
Hears a thunderous rumbling up the snowy slope
|
|
The reason I defend 4e is simple - I have little tolerance for the active spread of disinformation that is far too often the subject of many posts in this section of Paizo's boards.But WHY? Why the ethical outrage?
Porn and disinformation are the cornerstones of the internet, last time I checked.
Well, the disinformation here is being used to push 4e off of Paizo's boards. I get the sense that folks here would like to see this board shut down for good.
Why should I have to go elsewhere to talk about 4e? I love Paizo and I love 4e.
|
|
Vance, putting your comment in Humour brackets doesn't change the fact you know it'll rile CWM, and in this case rightly so.You're right. But it is true. The method he choses to 'defend 4E' has actually severely hampered my ability to get straight and honest answers about the system.
If 4E lacks 'commoners' (as it does), having him come on to say 'Yes it Does!'.. "You make them with minions".. "You use the GM fiat"... isn't going to help me if I just need commoners. Yet that is exactly what the typical 'defense' is.
And that's a huge reason as to why the edition war 'continues'. No one needs to be WotC's Dark Knight for Truth for 4E... the books alone will do that job just fine. If there's a question or issue, please just point out the answers that were in them rather than make crap up as gospel and counter-attack all the time.
That's all I'm asking.
Vance, with respect, we have another thread for you to take potshots at CWM, which he started for the purpose. While this will inevitably collapse in flames, can we cool it a bit here for the moment?
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
You're right. But it is true. The method he choses to 'defend 4E' has actually severely hampered my ability to get straight and honest answers about the system.
If 4E lacks 'commoners' (as it does), having him come on to say 'Yes it Does!'.. "You make them with minions".. "You use the GM fiat"... isn't going to help me if I just need commoners. Yet that is exactly what the typical 'defense' is.
I happen to agree. If your answer to a missing 4E rule is "you can make one up", you aren't saying anything to defend the edition's lack of the rule. We're all aware we can make stuff up here :)
|
|
I happen to agree. If your answer to a missing 4E rule is "you can make one up", you aren't saying anything to defend the edition's lack of the rule. We're all aware we can make stuff up here :)
Then why is the gap a problem if it is easily remedied with a simple fix? People have been doing that since OD&D.
|
|
The reason I defend 4e is simple - I have little tolerance for the active spread of disinformation that is far too often the subject of many posts in this section of Paizo's boards.But WHY? Why the ethical outrage?
Porn and disinformation are the cornerstones of the internet, last time I checked.Well, the disinformation here is being used to push 4e off of Paizo's boards. I get the sense that folks here would like to see this board shut down for good.
Why should I have to go elsewhere to talk about 4e? I love Paizo and I love 4e.
I don't see that as being vance's ulterior motive. I can't speak for him, but he looks like a writer who has hit a roadbump with creation of commoners.
I can't see where this equates to an attempt to drive the 4e section off of the boards.|
|
I don't see that as being vance's ulterior motive. I can't speak for him, but he looks like a writer who has hit a roadbump with creation of commoners.
I can't see where this equates to an attempt to drive the 4e section off of the boards.
If that is the case then why not just ask how people handle creating stats for commoners in 4e?
|
|
You cannot fix a problem and then claim that the problem doesn't exist. It's a logical fallacy. (Oberoni Fallacy)
Because I do not see this particular gap as a problem. 4e has no commoners - cool, I don't need stats for them anyway. If you do need stats for commoners then 4e can do that with a quick shot of gap filler.
My analysis:
First off, I'm ernestly staying out of the whole 4e section, pretty much because I agree with Aubrey here, and argle bargling on and on about it doesn't have an angle.
I think there's fear still, on both sides.
I think the whole character of the GSL was motivated by fear.
I think the whole Edition Wars is motivated by fear of loss on both sides.
"Oh no! We lost Paizo!"
"Oh no! We lost The Mainstream Juggernaut!"
"Oh no! WOW IS the Mainstream Juggernaut!"
Fear, plain and simple.
Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering...
What's a pessen? You pervert.
It involves a goat, a copy of F.A.T.A.L and Heathansson ... more information than that I can't divulge on these G-rated boards.
Vance, putting your comment in Humour brackets doesn't change the fact you know it'll rile CWM, and in this case rightly so.You're right. But it is true. The method he choses to 'defend 4E' has actually severely hampered my ability to get straight and honest answers about the system.
If 4E lacks 'commoners' (as it does), having him come on to say 'Yes it Does!'.. "You make them with minions".. "You use the GM fiat"... isn't going to help me if I just need commoners. Yet that is exactly what the typical 'defense' is.
And that's a huge reason as to why the edition war 'continues'. No one needs to be WotC's Dark Knight for Truth for 4E... the books alone will do that job just fine. If there's a question or issue, please just point out the answers that were in them rather than make crap up as gospel and counter-attack all the time.
That's all I'm asking.
vance, if you truly want answers to your questions about 4E, you likely will have better luck in getting them if you don't start from the assumption that no answer is suitable.
If a minion doesn't fulfill your need for a commoner, let us know how it fails. There may be something that fits your need better. In my estimation, a human minion does a pretty good job of representing Joe Farmer.
But since this thread is supposed to be about cooling the board, I'll leave things like that.
|
|
Well, the disinformation here is being used to push 4e off of Paizo's boards. I get the sense that folks here would like to see this board shut down for good.
Who was it that wrote out the thread in which they asked for the 4e forum to be closed? I don't recall that being an 'anti-4e' person. :)
On Topic - I observe that there are really only two vocal anti-4e people posting in the 4e threads. They are regularly responded to by two or three die hards who have to answer every percieved slight against 4e. So I'm not sure there's a lot of real vitriol, aside from a half dozen or so regulars. But in fairness, the latest dustups did not seem to really involve any 4e opponents per se.
|
|
I can only answer for myself to Aubrey's questions.
I must say that I appreciate some parts of 4E's design, and see gross flaws to others (sometimes the same things, actually). I disagree with the game's philosophy and want to be able to exchange ideas and opinions on the topic with an open mind and intellectual honesty. I don't think that's too much to ask, despite us being on the intrawebz.
I absolutely abhor everything surrounding 4E: the PR, the reasons for its release that early, the DDI, the lies and half-truths WotC comes up with for damage control, the biased moderations of various message boards associated upfront or not with WotC... and so on. That part I can't swallow. Notice this has nothing to do with the game itself.
So... why talk about it? I'm willing to discuss about all these topics for one main reason: because 4E is our hobby's flagship, whether we want it or not. As such, I feel I have as much right to talk about it as anybody else who dearly loves this hobby of ours.
I also want people to know that for me at least, this particular change of edition has nothing to do with "yet another edition change". I wasn't bitter about any previous edition change. I welcomed 3rd edition in particular with open arms. I suspect that many people are in my socks as well. So the whole "this is just normal for an edition change - the trolling will die down" is just something that is so unfair, so arrogant, so dismissive of my own opinions that it does exactly the opposite as what it's supposed to do.
Anyway... that's enough for a first post on the topic. Don't expect me to stop posting about what I like and dislike about 4E. Don't hesitate to call out on me if I unfairly attack people, however. That shouldn't happen, on either/all sides of the various issues we discuss. I will still defend myself if mistreated by dicks, though.
I'm not ready to take on the mantle of priesthood, I guess.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
I thought things had mostly turned the corner, plus or minus one new poster with an axe to grind who has darkened the community doorstep as of late (though he's easy enough to ignore given the lack of reasoning and blatant lies in his posts).
Plus, ponies make everyone happy!
|
|
Why is there still back-and-forth about 4e vs 3e?
Two reasons:
First,People just like to argue.And second(mostly observed on another board, so I don't know if this holds true for paizo.com as well): There seems to have been a slight shift in the discussions since 4e was released. Before, there were a lot of fears and a lot of venting on the side of the 4E opponents which was dismissed as baseless pessimism by the 4e fans. Sometimes, they were right, sometimes not so.
Now the situation has changed. While the 4e hasn't destroyed the universe (and in fact can be called a good system by people who like the style of play presented within) the 4e opponents now have a base from which to critizise exactly what they don't like. And all to often I see the 4e fans react in the same way they accused the opponents so far. They cannot deny each and every argument so they get offending.
But the main reason may simply be that on both sides there are people who cannot admit that they were (or are) wrong.
|
|
I thought things had mostly turned the corner, plus or minus one new poster with an axe to grind who has darkened the community doorstep as of late (though he's easy enough to ignore given the lack of reasoning and blatant lies in his posts).
Plus, ponies make everyone happy!
I (cough....ulp) agree with you.
|
|
I thought things had mostly turned the corner, plus or minus one new poster with an axe to grind who has darkened the community doorstep as of late (though he's easy enough to ignore given the lack of reasoning and blatant lies in his posts).
Are you sure you are not holding people up to an impossible standard - maybe he only lacks reasoning because he fails to live up to your standards of forensic logic.
By the way - dude, I still cannot get used to the fluffy, equine you. Though you do seem very cute and huggable. Isn't there a 3e monster that looks like that and then eats you - jujamus or something?
|
|
Sebastian, I haven't paid much attention to it of late, but what you're saying seems to be the conclusion I'm slowly working toward.
It also looks like there might be complaints from people who can't be arbitrarily lumped into the anti-camp (along with me) who might have to take some flak from the "defenders of the faith" if you will. I don't have any concrete proof of this.
|
|
It also looks like there might be complaints from people who can't be arbitrarily lumped into the anti-camp (along with me) who might have to take some flak from the "defenders of the faith" if you will. I don't have any concrete proof of this.
That's how I see my own situation, here. The whole "pro" and "anti" thing is just a debate-killer, as far as I'm concerned.
I personally like and dislike some aspects of 4E. I really can't stand the "4E can do no right" and "4E can do no wrong" stances. This goes against the intellectual honesty I was talking about. Intrawebz may be the intrawebz, but darn, that's not too much to ask, is it?
|
|
Why is there still back-and-forth about 4e vs 3e?
Good question, and I found myself wondering why have so much ire towards 4e. I dont begrudge the players wanting to play the game. I dont begrudge WotC for wanting to create a new whatsis to try and bring younger players into the RPG world.
So why do I feel ire?
Simple...My feelings got hurt (yeah yeah yeah poke some fun at me ;) )
Im a passionate person. I don't approach anything half heartedly, let alone the hobby that has been a centerpoint for a good portion of my life for at least 33 years.
Here Id given my all for defending WotC rights to create new edition after new edition to my circle of influence. I always thought of them as a corporation run by gamers...and here my little bubble gets burst when i come to the cold hard realization its a corporation run by businessmen. Alas and Alack what is the world coming to ;)
Ive actually tried to stay out of most the flame wars, but when i see something that is so blatently a continuance of the slap in the face i felt...My fingers move of their own accord and before I realize it, Im posting...(I really need to find that cleric that turned my hands into crawling claws)
Now why did my feelings get stung? Its all been said before by me on other threads...and I wont bring it up again. My boycott will not end. But my pointy fingers will stay in my pockets for the good of the board :D
Long live the Sacred Cows!
Dread.
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Are you sure you are not holding people up to an impossible standard - maybe he only lacks reasoning because he fails to live up to your standards of forensic logic.
I could stomach the lack of logical reasoning if it weren't padded with lies. It's the nexus of the two that makes the posts useless noise.
By the way - dude, I still cannot get used to the fluffy, equine you. Though you do seem very cute and huggable. Isn't there a 3e monster that looks like that and then eats you - jujamus or something?
The only thing that I can think of is the old 1e monster that looks like a bunny on a tree stump. I'm undecided if I will change it back once I regain that ability - I like the way it misdirects from the contents of my posts...
|
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
Sebastian, I haven't paid much attention to it of late, but what you're saying seems to be the conclusion I'm slowly working toward.
It also looks like there might be complaints from people who can't be arbitrarily lumped into the anti-camp (along with me) who might have to take some flak from the "defenders of the faith" if you will. I don't have any concrete proof of this.
I feel it on the other end too. It's so funny - if I go to the WotC boards, I get pissed off immediately and start feeling very anti-4e just from being there. I don't see anything nearly as bad on these boards as there, but I guess if you're sensitive to such comments, you're likely to see them and respond despite yourself. Anyway, I guess my point is that a lot of people have some residual emotional reactions regarding the edition change and it spills into their posts. If you want to be offended, it's easy to do so (regardless of whether you view 4e positively or not-so-much), but at this point, most of the posters (with a few exceptions) aren't on a warpath anymore and it's just as easy to turn to the other cheek. Those who are on a warpath still are fairly easy to ignore because there's no reasoning to their rants, just anger.
So yeah, mostly at this point, I'm resigned to taking some flak and making an effort to reduce the amount of flak I generate.