There are quite a few people on this board who obviously dislike 4th edition, and who have made it clear that they thoroughly enjoyed 3.5. So why are you all hanging around here? Go to your forums, play your game, and let us enjoy ours. It's a simple request. How would you all like it if I went to the 3.5 forums and started pointing out all it's faults?
Just because 4th edition has it's faults does not make 3.5 a faultless system, but that's besides the point.
The point is that you guys have your game system. Why not go and discuss it with like minded people rather than hang around here bashing a game system that you're never going to play?
Why outright refuse to leave us alone and go play your games and have fun?
Claiming that you want to "find something to like" or that you think you've missed something that will make the game perfect for you is a weak excuse. You do not like 4th edition. Nothing will change that. clinkzdps (and meaning no disrespect here) was probably the biggest 4E hater around here, and actively trolled and flamed, however he seems to have just vanished from the 4th edition forums. I'm willing to bet he started posting in the 3.X forums around the same time.
Thank you, clinkz, for being so mature about it. I may not agree with you, but the fact that you decided to allow us to enjoy our game is admirable. In a good way
. Why flame us when we say something that 4E does differently (thought not necessarily better) is "a nice touch" or "pretty cool" or "a welcome change, in my opinion"?
This thread is not meant to be baiting or trolling, as I've said before. It is simply meant to say the following:
3.Xer's. I am fed up with you guys. You hate 4th edition. Nothing anyone says will change that. Flaming us and trolling these boards is getting you, and us, nowhere fast. You have boards where you opinions will be welcomed, where your game is played, where like-minded people lie waiting for you to return, so that you can talk about your latest game, a pretty cool house rule, that new class you found online etc.
Now let's just drop this stupid edition war and go in separate directions.
I would also point out that "our game" is Dungeons and Dragons, and wether or not fourth edition improves or not many maintain interest in their favorite franchise in hopes of a brighter future.
If you want to make demands, demand that WotC extend all OGL liscences permenantly and that they allow companies to produce for both platforms instead of artificially forcing us from one to the other.
Rorlins
Second;
Also, WotC's draconic measures to end production of content for 3.5 more or less means we can't "just play our game". If we want to see a game with further updates, clarifications, more campaign source material, more tools ect, we have to move to 4th ed.
If you want to make demands, demand that WotC extend all OGL liscences permenantly and that they allow companies to produce for both platforms instead of artificially forcing us from one to the other.
Rorlins
The wording of the OGL for 3.5 is such that it can't be revoked. It is a document that exists in perpetuity and can be utilized to produce 3.5-based materials from now until doomsday. There is absolutely nothing keeping 3PP from supporting it at this point other than speculation that supporting 4E will be more lucrative.
WotC can't be "draconic" about something they don't have any control over. There are legitimate reasons to be unhappy with the edition shift, but this just isn't one of them, sorry.
Just speaking from my limited personal experience however, I was once told by a 4e supporter that I should stick to the 3.5 boards. Keep in mind, this was in a thread about 4e, where I posted a polite and non-hostile response (directly to the OP, which I agreed with).
It goes both ways. Some people use things like an "edition war" as an excuse to pick fights. Why? Because they like to fight. It's the internet, after all; any reason to fight is good enough. Other people are genuinely upset and they just want people to know "I mad as hell! . . . and I don't care who knows it". Either way, these people are causing trouble.
We are all responsible for this latest edition war, whether we love 3.5 or hate it, whether we love 4e or hate it. All of us. So, making ultimatums isn't as helpful as might be expected. Best thing to do is for everyone take responsibility for their words and attitude and decide to "do better".
Easier said than done of course. No one likes to lose, and admitting you're wrong is a test of character. That's not going to happen here-- ever. The edition war will continue until we find something better to fight about or until our anger burns itself out; either of which could happen, eventually.
I agree with others; we've had both pro and anti 4e "ultimatum" threads and they always end badly. The harrasment is going on both ways. I try to avoid the edition war (it is very real).
.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8256153668361525232&q=you+are+either+with+us+or+against+us+george+bush&ei=BBGCSOCyIJzaqAKA5LGxCw&hl=en
For those people who like some things about 4e, yet refuse to except ideas when they post... well, it's just about as bad as the trolls and flamers.
We can't help people who don't want it and that causes no end of resentment on both sides of the fence.
Maybe a clause at the start of a thread? "I'm here to say what I don't like, will not be looking for suggestions and will ignore or bash any attempts to help me."
This way, we can ignore the thread altogether and just go away and let it die?
I purpose we do this if we find such a thread. It will help avoid flaming on both sides and might help lower the simmering 'edition war'.
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/38773
... I wish the forums could sticky the link, because to me, it really is the essence of this "conflict".
I loved 3.5, and I love 4.
I was a playtester for 4e. I offered feedback from both a players and a DM's perspective. Few if any of the comments we made to Wizards were recognized and/or acknowledged. I have received similar feedback from other playtester groups as well. Wizards had a vision of what they wanted from the beginning, whether a majority of players wanted it or not. They've created something very different from the game we know and now they'll have to see that distinction reflected in deflated sales figures. Yeah, there'll be another edition in five years or so, but til then I'm sticking with 3.5, as are many of my fellow gamers.
We will see how things turn out, but I doubt 4e will sell badly. If you're happy with 3.x, it's all good. Play, have fun and enjoy D&D. But do you think it's okay for people who won't even touch the books to come onto the 4e boards and troll?
Also, WotC's draconic measures to end production of content for 3.5 more or less means we can't "just play our game". If we want to see a game with further updates, clarifications, more campaign source material, more tools ect, we have to move to 4th ed.
If you want to make demands, demand that WotC extend all OGL liscences permenantly and that they allow companies to produce for both platforms instead of artificially forcing us from one to the other.
First, the OGL is already perpetual, WotC has little to no way of stopping it, nothing about hte GSL can stop that.
Second, The GSL may be worded badly, and needs to have its lawsuit related materials rewritten, but the part about dropping the OGL to support the GSL is a smart move and good for both WotC and us as gamers. No one who really matters in the "riding on WotC's coattails" industry are slighting WotC for that part of the license. The only part of the GSL that is in any way bad are the "we can change the GSL without warning" and the "we think you mess up we sure you, and even if you win, you pay." clauses. Everything else is fine.
If a company begins making 4th edition products, they have until Dec 1 to move their 3.5 material or destroy it.
This is from one of the GSL faq's I've reviewed, but I'm not going to waste my afternoon looking for it. Not a lie. Thank you.
Rorlins
If a company begins making 4th edition products, they have until Dec 1 to move their 3.5 material or destroy it.
This is from one of the GSL faq's I've reviewed, but I'm not going to waste my afternoon looking for it. Not a lie. Thank you.
Rorlins
IF they sign the GSL. That's a pretty big if, especially if they think there's enough demand for 3.5 materials that it can still be profitable.
Either way, the 3.5 OGL isn't going anywhere.
3.Xer's, do me a favour? Play your game, and let us get on with ours?
You're playing 4.0 while on these boards?
Great insights and ideas don't come from people's comfort zones. People need to be challenged to do great things.
Homogenizing the voices of those in a discussion makes the discussion futile. Asking people who think differently from you to "go away" is a horrifying idea.
Also, there are no "4.0ers" yet. That's a misconception. The 4th edition game is too young to have die hard fans, period. It's still in its honeymoon phase. 3.5 has had years for people to pick and twist at every word and rule. Its fan are well aware of its flaws and strengths. 4th edition players are still discovering where it works well, and where it falls short. You can talk about "theory," but in something like a role playing game, theory is not as valuable as the experience. That's why they "play test" games - because only through actual play do the strengths and weaknesses truly emerge.
No one has had time to play enough of the new edition to be a die hard fan, or an adamant critic of it. And, telling the people who have had negative first impressions of the new edition, who are not some backwards-thinking minority, to simply go away...
I want to hear more than my own voice and opinions echoed back to me. That's why I'm grateful for other people.
Also, WotC's draconic measures to end production of content for 3.5 more or less means we can't "just play our game". If we want to see a game with further updates, clarifications, more campaign source material, more tools ect, we have to move to 4th ed.
The point is, you have over 70 resource books for your game. There are infinite
possibilities there. 4E has 3 books. There is no unwritten rule that says you can't use your 3.5 books anymore.
I was a playtester for 4e. I offered feedback from both a players and a DM's perspective. Few if any of the comments we made to Wizards were recognized and/or acknowledged. I have received similar feedback from other playtester groups as well. Wizards had a vision of what they wanted from the beginning, whether a majority of players wanted it or not. They've created something very different from the game we know and now they'll have to see that distinction reflected in deflated sales figures. Yeah, there'll be another edition in five years or so, but til then I'm sticking with 3.5, as are many of my fellow gamers.
Interesting. Are you allowed to tell us what your suggestions for 4th edition actually were? Because if you are, I would love to hear your input.
You're playing 4.0 while on these boards?
This board is the place where I discuss 4th edition. It's difficult to do so when every alternate post, or nearly every alternate post, is trolling and bashing the game I'm trying to play and discuss.
No one is stopping you from playing your game. You certainly don't have to go out of your way to read and respond to posts by people who don't like 4E, and even if you decide to do that it doesn't stop you playing 4E. Instead of being such a busybody and trying to tell people what to do on the forums, and what opinions to express, why don't you put that same energy into ignoring anti-4E trolls and playing your game (which is what you claim you want to do)?
Instead of trolling and flaming "Pro 4E" posters, why don't these nay-sayers, I dunno, stop? Why do they insist on posting here for a game they clearly do not enjoy, and have no intentions of playing?
It's a fair enough response to say "No one is stopping you from playing your game" and that is true. Maybe the title of the thread is misleading. These are the 4th edition forums. I come here to discuss various parts of a game I enjoy playing. I do not come here to read why I'm a stupid, unintelligent 12 year old WoW playing fool for liking a D&D gaming system.
Instead of trolling and flaming "Pro 4E" posters, why don't these nay-sayers, I dunno, stop? Why do they insist on posting here for a game they clearly do not enjoy, and have no intentions of playing?
For the record, in the "Previous Editions" forum, there are(or where) quite a lot of discussions about 4.0 v. 3.x in which quite a lot of ppl who supported 4.0 "bashed" 3.5 and the people that refuse to play 4.0.
Just saying, its not like we are terrorizing "your" forum here. As said by many people throughout history(and a few ppl in this thread) if you don't like what someone has to say, then why do you read it?
The thread names are normally quite an advertisement for what will be inside the thread, for instance, ppl that hate flaming and arguement would probably NOT come into this thread, as just by reading the title they can probably assume what this is going to turn into.
Now, as for trollers and spammers, well... Uh... No offense? But you asking them to leave you alone aint gonna do much. I have asked for it for quite a while, but there should be an "ignore" switch for accounts(like you click on their name and can auto ignore any response that they post). But, until that happy day, they are going to do what they want to while taking great pleasure in obviously upsetting you.
Case in point, ignore the ****wads, if you enjoy playing 4.0, then I hope you have a great time in your campaign.
May the dice gods favor you.
My advice for everyone is to quit worrying so much about what everyone else does; quit trying to tell everyone else how to use the forums; go in and have the conversations you want, ignore the ones you don't want to have, and if something is really bad, report it.
All of this "you guys leave us alone," "no you leave US alone" is getting ridiculous in my opinion.
All of this "you guys leave us alone," "no you leave US alone" is getting ridiculous in my opinion.
Sorry have to put this in, did anyone else scanning that msg first read it as Leave the US(as in USA) alone and suddenly wonder "How the HELL did this thread get there?!"...
/Derailment of thread
p.s. Thanks for making me laugh out loud and scare my dog:P
I should note in fairness that your post isn't particularly bad or anything, I'm more just venting some frustration on this thread. If I had any sense I'd probably say screw both sides and never come back to these forums.
I can't decide whether the pro-4E or anti-4E people are the biggest babies; my opinion on that changes from day to day.
Sorry have to put this in, did anyone else scanning that msg first read it as Leave the US(as in USA) alone and suddenly wonder "How the HELL did this thread get there?!"...
Heh...I hadn't noticed that.
Hope your dog's ok.
This forum might yet be saved...
I think the danger of your proposal is that you will not have any real varying opinions, and that will cause any discussion to become entirely useless.
Great insights and ideas don't come from people's comfort zones. People need to be challenged to do great things.
Homogenizing the voices of those in a discussion makes the discussion futile. Asking people who think differently from you to "go away" is a horrifying idea.
Unfortunately, these great insights you're looking for are the exact opposite of what a lot of 4ed bashers are giving: Misleading generalizations, malicious statements, and retreads of misinformation that was debunked on June 6th, 2008.
So I'm all for shutting up people who have nothing useful to say and (I suspect) would hate to see meaningful discussion on 4ed occur.
Maybe the title of the thread is misleading.
I've known some that would call it trolling. But that's just their opinion...
4E is clearly a better system than 3E. There is no way to argue it isn't.
I'm sorry, but that's something that someone should be able to decide for themself.
It's like arguing which original Star Wars film is the best of the three, or which of the new Star Wars films is the worst of the three. It's a matter of opinion and preference. You can argue specific points of interest to reinforce your camp, but a flat declaration of superiority is ridiculous.
Which is better? A maxed-out PC with state-of-the-art hardware playing (insert recent, graphically beautiful videogame with great gameplay) or an old-school Donkey Kong machine? There is no answer.
Who is right? Christianity or Judaism?
For the record, I think 4th is great, but I had a blast playing 3.5 as well.
For the record, I think 4th is great, but I had a blast playing 3.5 as well.
I liked 3e too, in its day, but it has been so overshadowed by 4e in terms of quality, I can now see what a terrible system it was.
I'm sorry, but that's something that someone should be able to decide for themself.
You fell for the troll post, El...
I've played in every edition of D&D, from the original white boxed set (with 3 booklets), to 4E. The rules are a vehicle for the game. Find the vehicle you like and drive it like a madman. So I'll agree with the OP: be civil to those that have preferences different than yours.
I have asked for it for quite a while, but there should be an "ignore" switch for accounts(like you click on their name and can auto ignore any response that they post). But, until that happy day, they are going to do what they want to while taking great pleasure in obviously upsetting you.
There is one. It isn't a nice easy button, but copy the name of anyone you wish to ignore, go to My Account > My User Control Panel > Buddy/Ignore List and past the name in the ignore spot.
I liked 3e too, in its day, but it has been so overshadowed by 4e in terms of quality, I can now see what a terrible system it was.
I feel just the opposite. I wasn't able to fully appreciate 3.5 until 4e came along. Takes all kinds, I guess ;). On the other hand, I liked 2nd edition but it was overshadowed (in my mind) by 3.5 when it came along.
Don't get me wrong, 4e is a solid system, and I appreciate that. Given a choice however, I prefer 3.5. Some of the guys really enjoy 4e however, so I'm hoping it will eventually grow on me the more I play, and as the system evolves. I play mostly to stay in the loop of what's current.
You fell for the troll post, El...
D'oh!
Some 3.X's also enjoy the new edition,but are unhappy with certain parts of it. There will eventually be a new edition and without objective feedback, it will suck. For what it is worth the edition war seems to be winding down despite certain peoples best efforts...
I would also point out that "our game" is Dungeons and Dragons, and wether or not fourth edition improves or not many maintain interest in their favorite franchise in hopes of a brighter future.
It's kind of funny how the edition wars seemed most heated before 4th ed. even came out, and then seemed to die down since then. Seriously if you search google for "4e sucks" or something like that, you find tons of threads on various D&D forums taking place sometime between Oct 2007 and June 2008. I'm not trying to imply that all the 3.x'ers (and fans of previous editions for that matter) converted once they saw the actual rules or anything, as that's obviously not true, it just seems like a lot of the hype - on both the rabidly-pro and rabidly-anti side - is dying down, and I'd say that's a good thing.
I agree with OP. You don't see fans of OD&D, or Classic D&D, or AD&D 1E or AD&D2E starting threads on 3.x/4e forums about how their systems are superior and bashing any dissenters . . . they stay in their niches and talk about the games they think are fun. I don't see why 3.x'ers can't do the same. The reviews are all basically the same, most of the edition war arguments have become practically word-for-word repeats on both sides; conclusion: it's time to move on.
Goes to show not everyone is on one 'side' or the other.
There is no good that can come from hypercritical and over reactive responses. If people (on both sides) can’t parse statements made in favor or against each edition in an objective, non-hostile manner, then frankly they should err on the side of caution and just not post.
Or at least report what they object to and leave it to the WizO’s to decide.
IMO those of us that come here to enjoy ourselves shouldn’t have to put up with defenders and detractors from either camp.
If all of you on both sides would kindly step back and chill out for awhile, the rest of us will be able to resume enjoying friendly discussions and debates about Dungeons and Dragons.
Thank you.
Also, WotC's draconic measures to end production of content for 3.5 more or less means we can't "just play our game". If we want to see a game with further updates, clarifications, more campaign source material, more tools ect, we have to move to 4th ed.
If you want to make demands, demand that WotC extend all OGL liscences permenantly and that they allow companies to produce for both platforms instead of artificially forcing us from one to the other.
Rorlins
Actually 3x is getting continuing support from the folks at PAIZO under their brand name Pathfinder. I have not played this 'version' but have downloaded some sample pdf's from the publisher and they seem pretty consistent with typical 3x rules/content style.
BTW I currently play 4E and played 3x for it's entire run and also Advanced and Basic D&D before that. So far I have liked every edition but for very different reasons.
When you call one game system "vastly superior", you're starting to skirt a line. When you go on to say things like "there is nothing good about 3.5" or even "4th Edition is just for kiddies" then you're starting to cross into left handed insults.
Let's say I like 4th ed. You say to me that "4th ed is only appealing if you're a kiddy video gamer". Okay, now you've insulted me. You probably didn't mean to. It probably wasn't enough to get a mod to do anything but my dander IS going to go up.
The refusal to acknowledge that some people like to play a certain game over another is what fuels most of the Version Wars. It's not enough to have a game you like. It's not enough to want to talk about the merits of that game. You have to work to convince people that their opinions are wrong and that they're foolish to have them. Or Ignorant. Or Misguided. Pick your word, but the attitude is bandied about so much I can only assume that 90% of the people don't realize they do it.
It's worse then arguing politics....
Rorlins
I too have played the game since the basic set and there were things I liked and didn't like about each version. Overall,(insert my opinion) the game design was to allow maxium creativity for its players(thus house ruling). Would it be that much of a stretch to simply use the core mechanics to modify any version to the most recent release?
I'm not really sure; it seems like with every new edition, house ruling gets more difficult as the system becomes more complex and well-planned-out. I just think designers put more thought into the rules now than they used to (whether that's good or bad isn't a matter for this thread), and changing things is more likely to break the system than it used to be.
Most of the arguments about 4e are basically subjective, and just depend on what you're looking for in a game. Sometimes people say things that are objectively wrong, but this isn't the root of the edition war. For example, the increased "complexity" of the rules - or rather the fact that designers are a lot more careful now than they used to be - and the resultant discouragement of house-ruling, doesn't bother me one bit because I've never been that into house-ruling. It will bother the hell out of other people, and if they want to stick with 3.5 or any other edition I'm not going to mind; whatever floats your cheerios. On the other hand, I was really disappointed that they ditched the Vancian magic system. I understand that it is, in many ways, a broken system, but it's been around for more than 30 years now and I've actually started to like it a lot just for its own sake. I think it was one of the few concepts that is iconically D&D, and has been with us since '74. Other people don't care about the Vancian magic system, and think the new system is better and funner . . . totally subjective, and I'm not offended if people believe that.
The entire concept of an "edition war" is ridiculous because edition preferences are totally subjective. Just let the people who play 4e play and discuss their game in peace. It's childish to start all these hackneyed "4e is a pen-and-paper MMORPG" threads over and over again, and they're not doing any good. Few people who play 4e are being "converted" by these threads, and vice versa. There are trolls on both sides but let's face it . . . the trolling is coming disproportionately from the anti- side, and we really just want to be left alone. Stop evangelizing for your opinion. I'm just calling it like I see it.
P.S. I agree that the whole concept of an "anti-" and "pro-" side is silly, since I don't think most people dislike or like every single thing in 4e. It's more a question of people who are willing to accept 4e's flaws (whatever they believe those to be) and play anyway, perhaps while simultaneously playing 3.x, and those who believe 4e's flaws are offensive enough to ignore the system entirely.
P.S. I agree that the whole concept of an "anti-" and "pro-" side is silly, since I don't think most people dislike or like every single thing in 4e. It's more a question of people who are willing to accept 4e's flaws (whatever they believe those to be) and play anyway, perhaps while simultaneously playing 3.x, and those who believe 4e's flaws are offensive enough to ignore the system entirely.
No.. there are people who are happy to tell you that if you are still playing in a 3.5 system that you are a moron, a fool, and an ignorant lack wit.
They'd probably accuse you of causing global warming but that might be a CoC violation.
A smaller group of people will say the same, happily, of those that have adopted the new game.
The reality is that too many people are taking this as an opportunity to "win the innerwebs" by showing off how much better they are than someone else because they have the that lets them , and that kind of arrogance ruins any potential for objective comparison.
Rorlins
I am indifferent to 4.0. When I played it, I felt confined by the rules, not freer. The characters I made just didn't have as much uniqueness to them. When I played, it did not feel like my character, it felt like a pregenerated character. As for speed- The group I play with is exceptionally fast when it comes to the mechanics of 3.5. It is a heavy system, but despite that I noticed no changes in speed playing 4.0.
For me, 4.0 does not bring enough to the table to warrant paying for a bunch of material I already own in a previous edition. WotC's attack on the OGL and its actions on these forums show it to be hostile to 3rd edition. In conclusion- WotC released a sub par product, and are now doing everything they can to make us buy it. Sorry, but I'm not taking the hook, and if I have to see yet another one of my favorite publishers lose the OGL, I will not buy another product from WotC again.
-Told they are just looking for things to complain about
-Labeled grognards
-Expected to support their entirely subjective opinion with an abundance of evidence, and if they fail to do so they are bullied into submission by so called 4E avengers
-Immediately labeled as trolls looking to stir up trouble
-Told that their opinions are factually innacurate for some reason (particularly if you were happy using the skill system in 3E).
-Tend to get banned more frequently for relatively minor offenses while the 4E avengers don't even recieve so much as a warning for all the flaming, baiting and trolling they do.
I have found that people who dislike 4E or prefer 3E are:
-Told they are just looking for things to complain about
-Labeled grognards
-Expected to support their entirely subjective opinion with an abundance of evidence, and if they fail to do so they are bullied into submission by so called 4E avengers
-Immediately labeled as trolls looking to stir up trouble
-Told that their opinions are factually innacurate for some reason (particularly if you were happy using the skill system in 3E).
-Tend to get banned more frequently for relatively minor offenses while the 4E avengers don't even recieve so much as a warning for all the flaming, baiting and trolling they do.
And I've found that people who like 4E or are willing to point out their dislikes with 3E are:
-Told that they're just buying into the hype around 4E (and against 3E)
-Labeled "kids" or just generally looked down upon.
-Expected to nod their heads solemnly while the "real gamers" tell them how it should be.
-Told that they're so wrapped up in their shiny new toy that they can't see straight, and that they're "killing D&D" by supporting an "inferior system."
-Tend to be trolled and flamed for acting excited about playing D&D (if it's 4E), particularly if they're these "Avengers" that keep being put forward as boogeymen by the people who don't like 4E.
-Tend to be trolled and flamed for acting excited about playing D&D (if it's 4E), particularly if they're these "Avengers" that keep being put forward as boogeymen by the people who don't like 4E.
They are not boogeymen, the are people with 4E Avenger as their sig.
They are not boogeymen, the are people with 4E Avenger as their sig.
Nope. As was shown in the last thread about this that you took over, it's not the people with the "Avenger" tag that are doing the flaming. To continue to insinuate that is disingenuous. There are certainly fans of 4E who could stand to dial back their rhetoric, just like those on the other side could, but those people aren't "Avengers."
If you're going to paint with a broad brush, at least use a color that doesn't falsely incriminate people.
I have found that people who dislike 4E or prefer 3E are:
-Told they are just looking for things to complain about
-Labeled grognards
-Expected to support their entirely subjective opinion with an abundance of evidence, and if they fail to do so they are bullied into submission by so called 4E avengers
-Immediately labeled as trolls looking to stir up trouble
-Told that their opinions are factually innacurate for some reason (particularly if you were happy using the skill system in 3E).
-Tend to get banned more frequently for relatively minor offenses while the 4E avengers don't even recieve so much as a warning for all the flaming, baiting and trolling they do.
Didn't we have a thread where several days ago we discussed the fact that the 4e avengers aren't the people flaming, baiting and trolling? There are pro-4e trolls, I just don't see what is gained by blaming the wrong people.
What exactly do you want people to say? You have stated before, (I will find the post if you want) that you find it offensive for people who like 4e to basically say "It sounds like you prefer3.5. Maybe you should keep playing it." You have also said that you don't think it is helpful for people to offer to create houserules to change 4e, because you want it to play the way you want out of the box. How should people respond?
EDIT: I strongly agree that baiting and calling names for not liking either game is wrong and non-helpful. That wasn't the point of my post.
Didn't we have a thread where several days ago we discussed the fact that the 4e avengers aren't the people flaming, baiting and trolling? There are pro-4e trolls, I just don't see what is gained by blaming the wrong people.
What exactly do you want people to say? You have stated before, (I will find the post if you want) that you find it offensive for people who like 4e to basically say "It sounds like you prefer3.5. Maybe you should keep playing it." You have also said that you don't think it is helpful for people to offer to create houserules to change 4e, because you want it to play the way you want out of the box. How should people respond?
EDIT: I strongly agree that baiting and calling names for not liking either game is wrong and non-helpful. That wasn't the point of my post.
I don't believe it was demonstrated. I was banned and the thread was closed before I could respond.
This is a total mischaracterization of my argument. That should be clear if you had read all of my posts.
I don't believe it was demonstrated. I was banned and the thread was closed before I could respond.
This is a total mischaracterization of my argument. That should be clear if you had read all of my posts.
I was a little bit sad the thread was closed, I think we were getting to some good discussion. I did read all your posts and I am still confused as to what you think an ideal response it. Please demonstrate one, I will write a sample post for you to respond to:
Hi,
I played my first 4e game yesterday with my normal group and we just didn't have as much fun as we did we 3.5. I didn't like feel of the game with healing surges or the new skill system, I like having a mechanical representation of the uniqueness of my character. Also with the limited selection of classes available right now we weren't able to create the characters that we are used to playing. To top it off the skill challenges also seemed nearly impossible with RAW.
Thanks but I will continue playing 3.5 games.
Peace out.
That said, 2E remains my game of choice for the real tabletop.
I was a little bit sad the thread was closed, I think we were getting to some good discussion. I did read all your posts and I am still confused as to what you think an ideal response it. Please demonstrate one, I will write a sample post for you to respond to:
Hi,
I played my first 4e game yesterday with my normal group and we just didn't have as much fun as we did we 3.5. I didn't like feel of the game with healing surges or the new skill system, I like having a mechanical representation of the uniqueness of my character. Also with the limited selection of classes available right now we weren't able to create the characters that we are used to playing. To top it off the skill challenges also seemed nearly impossible with RAW.
Thanks but I will continue playing 3.5 games.
Peace out.
Respond however you would like, but be polite and keep the hostility to a minimum (this was all I was really trying to say). Particularly avoid sarcasm and avoid telling the person "Your are absolutely wrong. You must not have read the rules if you feel that way about skill challenges". Accept that their experience with the mechanics may have been different than yours. You can certainly point out why you think skill challenges do work. But remember this is all theoretical mechanic stuff. We all know that even the best mechanics yield bizarre results at times. The guy is telling you how the game worked out for them at the table. If you are going to build an argument for the current skill system, just do it without saying to the guy that his feelings about it are wrong. For whatever reason having those options makes him feel more in control of his characters background. Accept that people have preferences, and while 4e skills may work for you (and you may even think of them as more flexible) that is just your opinion. State it. But keep things open so that the poster doesn't feel attacked for forming a different conclusino that you:
Looks like you had a different reaciton to the new game than I did. I think it is a really great system. While it is true that they changed the skill system a great deal, it was done to help balance out the game and there are techniques you can use to inject more variety into the skill system. Remember while the new system is more simple at times, it is also more open to ad hoc rulings by the DM and house rules. You can always give character bonuses when they use a skill for something they are specifically trained in (Just give them a +2 circumstance bonus). You can also use ability checks (with circumstance bonuses) for things not covered by the skill list.
It is true that if you want to play a druid, you will probably have to wait for the second PHB to come out, but there are alternatives. Remember the descriptions of the powers can be altered to reflect your character. You could play a cleric or paladin and just color the powers to be more druid like [gives other more convincing example]....
All of this makes me think of:
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/38773
... I wish the forums could sticky the link, because to me, it really is the essence of this "conflict".
I loved 3.5, and I love 4.
BAHAHAHAHA! That is the funniest article I have read in a looooong time. I have seen this exact thing in our local punk scene and it always makes me laugh. And yes, that does sum up the 3.X vs 4 debate quite well...
I have been playing since the time of the Red Box Basic Edition of D&D and edition changes are part of the game. Having books from old editions is kind of like a badge of honor for "old school" gamers. I remember when the argument was "2nd Edition AD&D sucks compared to the original AD&D - I'm not going to buy any of the new books!" So people making a fuss about the new game is quite like "'90s Punk Decries Punks Of Today!"
"You weren't there man, back in the good old days of 3rd Edition! You're not D&D man!"
LOL.
I am just about to start my first 4ed game...but I don't really care what edition I play (or what game for that matter) as long as everyone at the table is having a good time. I still know lots of people that haven't switched and they still enjoy themselves. I am pretty sure we are going to have a hoot with our 4e game. I choose to not give a crap about what all the Edition fanboys say. I think it's funny to watch everyone get worked up about.
INTERNETS - The most heated debate about everything ever.
If you want me to answer your questions, repeat them here.
Otherwise you're just wasting your time and space on the forums.
LordFlashheart, if you want to talk to me please do so here.
If you want me to answer your questions, repeat them here.
Couldn't have raised that here. I have been banned twice already. Wanted to stay on topic. I answered your question (above).
I don't believe it was demonstrated. I was banned and the thread was closed before I could respond.
Please show me some quotes.
There are only two or three 4e avengers left and they are pretty level-headed from the posts that I have read.
There are pro-4e trolls. Nobody is denying this. The issue is with you referring to the trolls as part of the 4e avengers when they aren't and calling the 4e avengers trolls when they aren't.
Please show me some quotes.
There are only two or three 4e avengers left and they are pretty level-headed from the posts that I have read.
There are pro-4e trolls. Nobody is denying this. The issue is with you referring to the trolls as part of the 4e avengers when they aren't and calling the 4e avengers trolls when they aren't.
Again, I am happy to engage you on the subject in PM. But I will risk getting band or having there be a misunderstanding by going into it here. I received a warning for that thread, so I want to steer clear of it for now. For the record I never meant to accuse them of being trolls, just flaming and baiting.
Again, I am happy to engage you on the subject in PM. But I will risk getting band or having there be a misunderstanding by going into it here. I received a warning for that thread, so I want to steer clear of it for now. For the record I never meant to accuse them of being trolls, just flaming and baiting.
Stupid question, isn't that what trolls do?
For the record I never meant to accuse them of being trolls, just flaming and baiting.
"I'm not saying you're ugly, just that you look that way."
Right?
Looks like you had a different reaciton to the new game than I did. I think it is a really great system. While it is true that they changed the skill system a great deal, it was done to help balance out the game and there are techniques you can use to inject more variety into the skill system. Remember while the new system is more simple at times, it is also more open to ad hoc rulings by the DM and house rules. You can always give character bonuses when they use a skill for something they are specifically trained in (Just give them a +2 circumstance bonus). You can also use ability checks (with circumstance bonuses) for things not covered by the skill list.
Thing is... you're arguing about impressions. You're arguing about experiences. She had a bad time and from her experience couldnt' pass a skill challenge. You had a good time and had a DM that made it work.
What tends to happen is that these discussions, such as the skill check thing, just devolve into "you're doing it wrong" and "well the rules as written suck". In the end asside from "oh.. well I do'nt agree" that's the only place it can go since you're both right about your own opinions.
And realistically speaking, both "camps" have their share of trolls, baiters, and flamers. The difference though is that one group has an additional investment. The adopters of 4th ed are between 100 and 200 in the hole for new books. If the books were to be bad, then they just wasted money, and no one likes that. The 3rd ed crew might be a touch better off as they are less likely to have spent any if close to that ammount on new books but they're feeling jaded that what they are invested in is getting dumped.
Best peace is to stick to the rules as rules and avoid all editorializations upone them.
Rorlins
Seems my post was cut. Okay... Last time I checked, it wasn't okay to bash people and then expect them to be nice...
Right?
No, it's not okay to bash people, but, even if people do get bashed (surprise, surprise), people are expected to be nice ;). Easier said than done (of course), but dose be the rules we're s'posed to play by.
I swear, I'm reminded of parenting: Just because little brother smacks little sister in the head with a big honkin' Tonka truck doesn't give her an excuse to knock him down, bounce his head off the floor, and make him holler. At which point, mommy or daddy runs in: "You two, behave! We don't hit! How many times do I have to tell you?"
"He hit me first!", "Did not!", "Did too!"
"Okay, that it. All the toys in the box . . . now! Time for bed."
"I'm not tired!"
Kids! Gotta love 'em, but sometimes you just wanna rip their little heads off and shove 'em in closet somewhere. I don't envy the mods their job around here.
snipped perfect example
FYI, we were arguing the opposite sides as an example.
However, this illustrates rather well the fact that no matter how polite a post seems, somebody can take offense. How long would it take before you got tired of being accused of being the bad guy?
All along my argument has been that everybody needs to calm down and stop assuming the worst of every post. Accusing one side of being the bigger problem doesn't solve anything or even contribute to moving that direction.
Snipped the truth.
See, while I agree with this, it seems that some people feel it is their right to dictate what posters can and can not do... even when they were far worse to people then the supposed flamers and baiters they say they have a problem with.
It makes little sense to me, but I have been making an effort not to think people are trolls until they prove it is so.
This doesn't mean I need to get on my knees and baby-talk people on the internet. We are all old enough to understand life isn't cute and cuddly, I help people on the boards and I do call out lier's.
Disinformation is a kill-joy for noobs.
If a company begins making 4th edition products, they have until Dec 1 to move their 3.5 material or destroy it.
This is from one of the GSL faq's I've reviewed, but I'm not going to waste my afternoon looking for it. Not a lie. Thank you.
Rorlins
Any company worth its salt would print material through another company with a terribly similar name.
Like,
Mike's RPG Company Publishing, Inc.
Mike's RPG Company Publishing, Ltd.
... if there was enough money in it, anyway.
I don't hate 4e, it just needs to be fixed. Right now its too rigid and the rules are clunky but, I'm not going to raise cane about it since it did just come out. I expect tons of errata for it, and in 2 or 3 years I may adopt it as my primary RP system, but as it stands I wholly prefer 3.5.
What is it, exactly, that you have a problem with?
What is it, exactly, that you have a problem with?
If he prefers 3.5 what does it matter?
If he wanted advice on how to change 4e to his liking, or how to reframe the fluff so it worked for him he would have asked.
D&D is a game, people should play what they find fun.
No.. there are people who are happy to tell you that if you are still playing in a 3.5 system that you are a moron, a fool, and an ignorant lack wit.
They'd probably accuse you of causing global warming but that might be a CoC violation.
A smaller group of people will say the same, happily, of those that have adopted the new game.
The reality is that too many people are taking this as an opportunity to "win the innerwebs" by showing off how much better they are than someone else because they have the that lets them , and that kind of arrogance ruins any potential for objective comparison.
Rorlins
Hmm you have a good point. Maybe I just haven't read enough of the edition war threads to notice this. Overall I've been trying to avoid it; I read a few threads, realized they were all repetitive, and pretty much ignore it now.
This isn't your forum. Although I'm sure WotC would love for that to be true- seeing as they merged forums, jamming every other edition into a tight space at the bottom of the page. Way to show your consumer base the respect they deserve...
I am indifferent to 4.0. When I played it, I felt confined by the rules, not freer. The characters I made just didn't have as much uniqueness to them. When I played, it did not feel like my character, it felt like a pregenerated character. As for speed- The group I play with is exceptionally fast when it comes to the mechanics of 3.5. It is a heavy system, but despite that I noticed no changes in speed playing 4.0.
For me, 4.0 does not bring enough to the table to warrant paying for a bunch of material I already own in a previous edition. WotC's attack on the OGL and its actions on these forums show it to be hostile to 3rd edition. In conclusion- WotC released a sub par product, and are now doing everything they can to make us buy it. Sorry, but I'm not taking the hook, and if I have to see yet another one of my favorite publishers lose the OGL, I will not buy another product from WotC again.
If WoTC/Gleemax is showing the 4e'ers preferential treatment (and I have no clue if this is true or not, being a new member), so what? There are already many many forums packed with 3.x fans, and I'm sure you'd get along fine there. That is assuming WoTC *is* doing this, and I'm rather doubtful that it is.
Even if it was, this is their website. They can treat us however they want as far as I'm concerned, as long as they're the ones moderating and paying the server costs ;) Of course this is checked by their wanting to preserve membership, etc.
If he prefers 3.5 what does it matter?
If he wanted advice on how to change 4e to his liking, or how to reframe the fluff so it worked for him he would have asked.
D&D is a game, people should play what they find fun.
Understanding is the key to enlightenment. I just wanted to know if there was anything we might be able to help him with.
Understanding is the key to enlightenment. I just wanted to know if there was anything we might be able to help him with.
But whose understanding, and whose enlightenment? Your own, or Galeigh's?
I agree with Kistra, and the most of the OP's original thoughts. Most of the 3.x'ers in question aren't looking for advice, conversion or help. When someone tries to offer it to them, it almost always becomes a debate. For whatever reason, Galeigh thinks 4e is too "clunky" and "rigid". You're not going to convince him otherwise, and unless you're sitting at a table across from him, it will never make any difference.
There's no need for debate. 3.x'ers have their game, 4e enthusiasts have theirs. I play 4e and, as far as I'm concerned, the 3.x'ers are playing a different game. I have no opinion on their game, and no interest in their opinion of mine. No one is taking their rules, modules and imaginations away, so I really don't see the point of this ongoing nonsense.
"If you prefer 3.5, maybe you should keep playing it" seems to be perfectly reasonable advice. IMO, if they don't like the answer, chances are they either wanted something that's not going to happen (like WOTC changing their mind), or they were just looking for an argument and they're upset they're not going to get one.
But whose understanding, and whose enlightenment? Your own, or Galeigh's?
Everyone's... talking and sharing thoughts is mutually beneficial to all.
And, no, frankly, I didn't learn anything nor benefit in anyway when Galeigh ventured that 4e was "clunky" and "rigid", anymore than he'd learn anything if I popped into the Previous Editions forum and said that 3.5 was "bloated" and "broken". Not that I'd be likely to say any such thing as I skipped right from OD&D and AD&D to 4e. :D
See, it isn't anyone's right to tell others what they can or can not do on the forums. If it is against CoC, report it.
Otherwise you're just wasting your time and space on the forums.
qft
"If you prefer 3.5, maybe you should keep playing it" seems to be perfectly reasonable advice. IMO, if they don't like the answer, chances are they either wanted something that's not going to happen (like WOTC changing their mind), or they were just looking for an argument and they're upset they're not going to get one.
Very well put
+1 internets for you.
"If you prefer 3.5, maybe you should keep playing it" seems to be perfectly reasonable advice. IMO, if they don't like the answer, chances are they either wanted something that's not going to happen (like WOTC changing their mind), or they were just looking for an argument and they're upset they're not going to get one.
Bingo !!!
except the not getting that argument part.
So that probably means that most of it is just bitterness and an attempt to spoil everyone else's fun, too, since they feel they were somehow robbed of something. In other words, they're looking for an argument, and "Play 3.5, then" is an effective comeback. Certainly more effective than trying to get them to embrace 4e through reasoned (or not) discussion, IMO. I'm beginning to think that those who makes dozens of posts each day ragging on 4e have decided that that is their new hobby, and I can't help but wonder what their actual ratio is of playing D&D vs. whining about it on messageboards these past few weeks.
Having said that, there seem to be a number of 4e folks that seem to find some joy in poking at the wounds of the 3.x crowd, or feel compelled to "convince" them. To them I say, "Don't waste energy worrying about those who want to stick with 3.5, or feel compelled to disrupt 4e discussions. That energy is put to much better use by enjoying and discussing 4e."
In other words, "If you prefer 4e, maybe you should go play it." :D
And, no, frankly, I didn't learn anything nor benefit in anyway when Galeigh ventured that 4e was "clunky" and "rigid", anymore than he'd learn anything if I popped into the Previous Editions forum and said that 3.5 was "bloated" and "broken". Not that I'd be likely to say any such thing as I skipped right from OD&D and AD&D to 4e. :D
Sure you did. You learned that he doesn't like 4th Edition. You benefit form knowing that 4th edition isn't for everyone.
And you seemed genuinely interested in what he didn't like until you went on about elightenment and understanding, which from what I"ve seen around here I took to be "oh, I'll enlighten him to the errors of his ways".
For example, one of my beefs with 4th ed is that I find the whole 'okay and now I use THIS power' in combat a bit distracting. I somewhat miss the "okay I shoot him", though in my games I've never had a player just say "I hit him". It's always wrapped up in a description of their manuevering, which direction their 5 foot step is going to be, etc. But that's my beef.
And nearly everytime I bring it up, someone has to come in and say:
a) Well you just don't get that having powers is better.
b) You just like killing of your lowbie characters because now they can actually do stuff at 1 st level.
c) You don't understand how much smoother combat is now that we have powers to use.
d) Shut up and go play your own game; we don't care what advice you want on running your game.
The DM's forum consistantly has people popping into threads when some asks about 3.5 rules to say "buy 4th, it's superior in all respscts and will solve your problem". Frankly I think that for everytime someone says that, there should be an automatic charge of $120 to their account so a full suite of books can be bought for the original poster.
Rorlins
I don't think there are very many 3.x'ers who actually think that 4e is going to fail :D
There you go. I don't think anybody in their right mind thinks 4E is going to fail.
All that is really up for debate will be the measure of the succes of 4E. Personally, as is it will bring in many new gamers, far more than it drives away. If they get the DDI up and functioning as hyped, it will do more to increase P&P role playing games than the invention of Dungeons & Dragons in the first place.
There you go. I don't think anybody in their right mind thinks 4E is going to fail.
.
4E will fail. Inside word is the wizos are very dissapointed with the reaction the game has been getting and the 3rd party developments. 4e will be remembered as the New Coke of D&D.
4E will fail. Inside word is the wizos are very dissapointed with the reaction the game has been getting and the 3rd party developments. 4e will be remembered as the New Coke of D&D.
I'd appreciate a citation to support this assertion.
The Wall Street Joiurnal had the 4E PHB on the non-fiction best seller list. By any economic measure, 4E is HUGELY successful.
Sure you did. You learned that he doesn't like 4th Edition. You benefit form knowing that 4th edition isn't for everyone.
Do you really think anybody on these forums for more than 5 minutes is unaware of the fact that some people prefer 3rd edition and some people prefer 4th?
What did that post add to the discussion? You don't like people jumping into the DM forums and answering a 3.5 question with "buy 4e", I think that people may be equally bothered by people randomly dropping in with a post like that in a thread discussing say, how a certain power works. I don't even find that post particularly relevant or helpful to the discussion here in this thread.
4E will fail. Inside word is the wizos are very dissapointed with the reaction the game has been getting and the 3rd party developments. 4e will be remembered as the New Coke of D&D.
Yes, I'm sure you've got a direct line to the mindset of the Wizos (nevermind that most of them don't have any control whatsoever over whether or not 4E continues to be supported).
Your willingness to throw out statements without any factual backing continues to amaze.
Yes, I'm sure you've got a direct line to the mindset of the Wizos (nevermind that most of them don't have any control whatsoever over whether or not 4E continues to be supported).
Yeah, the statement struck me as odd as the Wizos are not in any way shape or form members of the design, marketing, or sales teams and have absolutely no input into corporate decisions about the game.
I don't think there are very many 3.x'ers who actually think that 4e is going to fail in such a way that WOTC comes back shamefacedly and says "You're right, 4e didn't work. So here's 5.0 and it's like 3.6." Do you?
No, I don't expect them to, and I wouldn't want them to, either. As much as I really love 3.5, and as ambivalent as I am about 4e), I would hope they would continue to evolve the game into a better game system that brings more of us, as D&D players, together. I like the fact that they worked to improve the game and gave us 2e, 3.0, 3.5, and 4e, even if I may not really care for 4e much.
So that probably means that most of it is just bitterness and an attempt to spoil everyone else's fun, too, since they feel they were somehow robbed of something. In other words, they're looking for an argument, and "Play 3.5, then" is an effective comeback. Certainly more effective than trying to get them to embrace 4e through reasoned (or not) discussion, IMO. I'm beginning to think that those who makes dozens of posts each day ragging on 4e have decided that that is their new hobby, and I can't help but wonder what their actual ratio is of playing D&D vs. whining about it on messageboards these past few weeks.
It is precisely this attitude that has really upset a number of 3.5 players, myself included. It is the smug, "oh, if they don't like it, it's because they are bitter" commentary that is insulting. Did you even read what you wrote before you posted it? I mean, really - can't people disagree on the merits of 4e without being considered "haters" or bitter?
I've read 4e. I've played 4e under the 2nd most experienced DM in all my gaming groups (I'm the most experienced.) We played with veteran players and even a player entirely new to D&D. Not ONE person in our group, not ONE, liked 4e. I can sum up our feelings this way:
(1) the new player doesn't think there is a lot of variety between the classes - that they are all basically the same, with just flavor differences. Her view is to wait a year until more supplments come out and see then whether or not there are enough variations to make another go at it. That doesn't sound bitter to me - that sounds like a reasonable and mature solution (and one, I might add, that we are likely to adopt.)
(2) *I* do not believe there is any difference between clerics (despite the fact that the class is insanely powerful.) I don't want to rehash the arguments I've made in other postings, but I don't think, from a mechancial perspective, there are any differences between clerics of different gods. In this regard, it is my opinion, that 4e is weaker than 2e, 3.0, and 3.5 (I think 2e, with its specialty priests, did the best job of mechanically differentiating the priests of different deities.) Now, based on some feeback some 4e players suggested, I'm inclined to look at them again - and that included using multi-class and power swap feats, and developing new channel divinity feats. I don't think that gets me to quite where I want clerics to be, but I think it is a reasonable and doable alternative, so if we continue with 4e at some point down the road, I'll likely do this.
(3) We don't find combat any faster, more efficient, or more streamlined than in 3.5. To us, it's about the same - we found no advantage in the 4e system.
(4) One of our players absolutely loves 3.5, and I doubt anything will change her mind.
(5) At the end, our conclusion was that 4e was neither better nor worse than 3.5. Certainly, some areas seemed neat or slightly improved (character creation, getting rid of racial ability penalties, the improvement of both half-elves and humans), or the same (combat.) Because, to us, there was nothing in playing 4e that said, "oh, look how much better it is," we came to the conclusion that it is neither better nor worse, and so there was no incentive for us to switch.
Now, that's not the point of a "hater" and that's not someone being bitter. Those are the points of a group of 30-somethings, who (with the exception of one person), have played virtually every role-playing game, and certainly almost every edition of D&D - we just don't think 4e offers us anything that 3.5 can't already do. Given that, we've chosen to remain with 3.5 (which is what the OP asked folks to do.)
I fail to see how that makes us "haters" or bitter.
But, to answer some questions. Talking with people who have a issue with 4e can help everyone. They might find another way to look at the problem or see the benefits that come with it and the people helping them might see an issue that they failed to the first time.
That is the point of these boards. This is not meant as a place to come crying and spiting venom for your self imposed hurt. This is a place to ask questions, seek answers and help people who have problems.
Problem is, you get people who get kicks out of trolling, bashing and lying to turn people off of the game... and these boards.
I, for one, will not be nice to or try to reason with them anymore. I'll call out their lies, show people the truth do my best to show they are foolish.
It is precisely this attitude that has really upset a number of 3.5 players, myself included. It is the smug, "oh, if they don't like it, it's because they are bitter" commentary that is insulting. Did you even read what you wrote before you posted it? I mean, really - can't people disagree on the merits of 4e without being considered "haters" or bitter?
The problem is that the people who constantly bombard the 4E forums aren't the ones who have made a qualified judgment about the new system, decided it wasn't for them and walked away wishing it's players well. They're the ones who actually are there because they are unhappy about the new edition usurping the support of the old one, or that they're going to have to look harder for new players, or that they aren't the target audience of all the new material anymore. It's those folks that cause all the problems, not the ones that look at the new edition, decide it's not for them and leave the ones who do like to their game.
I fail to see how that makes us "haters" or bitter.
It doesn't. Just because some (or more then a few) people say that, it doesn't make it true. If, on the other hand, you post in a manner that seems similar to other posters, who are known to be haters, I can see how it might turn up.
Personally, I don't see it myself. But I have only your last post to go by...
4E will fail. Inside word is the wizos are very dissapointed with the reaction the game has been getting and the 3rd party developments. 4e will be remembered as the New Coke of D&D.
You did a good job of not falling into the usual anti-4E nonsense at first. I guess three pages is your limit eh? ;)
You did a good job of not falling into the usual anti-4E nonsense at first. I guess three pages is your limit eh? ;)
*Chuckles*
It doesn't. Just because some (or more then a few) people say that, it doesn't make it true. If, on the other hand, you post in a manner that seems similar to other posters, who are known to be haters, I can see how it might turn up.
Personally, I don't see it myself. But I have only your last post to go by...
I've had many at-legnth discussions on other boards regarding my views on the 4e cleric. In one posting, I was told that I didn't know how to role-play (I'm parphrasing, but that is pretty close to what was said.) That's the type of stuff I'm talking about - because I don't think there's a mechanical difference, I don't know how to role-play? For heaven's sake, I wasn't talking about role-playing, I was talking about mechanics!
The attitude expressed by some who favor 4e makes me *never* want to play. I'm well aware of some of those who oppose 4e is just as bad, and I don't condone that either.
The part I cannot comprehend is that we're talking about a game here, regardless of the version. I can see having disagreements about game mechanics and so on, but a true difference of opinion on which is better cannot be resolved.
I just don't understand some people some times. Good points are being made by both sides regarding 4e, but those points get lost in all of the other nonsense going on here.
.......
Now, that's not the point of a "hater" and that's not someone being bitter. Those are the points of a group of 30-somethings, who (with the exception of one person), have played virtually every role-playing game, and certainly almost every edition of D&D - we just don't think 4e offers us anything that 3.5 can't already do. Given that, we've chosen to remain with 3.5 (which is what the OP asked folks to do.)
I fail to see how that makes us "haters" or bitter.
Unless you are one of those who, as I specifically indicated, "makes dozens of posts each day ragging on 4e", then I also don't see how that makes you a hater or bitter. Not sure why you felt my comments were aimed at those in your shoes. It sounds like your group tried 4e out and made a choice. I wouldn't think for a moment of trying to convince you otherwise, nor say anything nagative about your decision. I encourage others to support your decision as well. That was my point, which you seem to have missed.
The problem is that the people who constantly bombard the 4E forums aren't the ones who have made a qualified judgment about the new system, decided it wasn't for them and walked away wishing it's players well. They're the ones who actually are there because they are unhappy about the new edition usurping the support of the old one, or that they're going to have to look harder for new players, or that they aren't the target audience of all the new material anymore. It's those folks that cause all the problems, not the ones that look at the new edition, decide it's not for them and leave the ones who do like to their game.
My thoughts exactly.
It is precisely this attitude that has really upset a number of 3.5 players, myself included. It is the smug, "oh, if they don't like it, it's because they are bitter" commentary that is insulting. Did you even read what you wrote before you posted it? I mean, really - can't people disagree on the merits of 4e without being considered "haters" or bitter?
Is it possible that the person you are quoting wasn't referring to you? I think the following quote illustrates very well the fact that there are people who seem rather bitter about 4e. Personally I enjoyed reading your discussion of 4e, I enjoy reading well thought out and put together posts and debating the ideas inside. It is posts like the one below that get old after a while and that is what I interpreted people to be complaining about in this thread.
4E will fail. Inside word is the wizos are very dissapointed with the reaction the game has been getting and the 3rd party developments. 4e will be remembered as the New Coke of D&D.
Yes there have been insulting things said about people who don't like 4e. What some people here are missing is that equally insulting things have been said about people who like 4e. No, two wrongs don't make a right, but I think we need to see the problem as a whole before starting to figure out how to fix it. (We all calm down and stop taking statements personally when they aren't even intended to include us? maybe?)
The attitude expressed by some who favor 4e makes me *never* want to play.
To the day I die, I will never understand this attitude.
"Yeah, pizza is delicious and I love all the toppings you can add to it, but some people who like pizza are real jerks, so I don't want to eat pizza."
"Jazz is really fun to listen to and it's so free form. It's a real original American musical style, which I really admire. But there a handful of jazz musicians called me stupid so I will never listen to jazz!"
Your enjoyment of the product should never be affected by the behavior of some of its fans.
What is it, exactly, that you have a problem with?
This is your basic problem. You keep treating people who don't like 4E as unenlightened.
Is even that question is going to be seen as a veiled insult?
I've had many at-legnth discussions on other boards regarding my views on the 4e cleric. In one posting, I was told that I didn't know how to role-play (I'm parphrasing, but that is pretty close to what was said.) That's the type of stuff I'm talking about - because I don't think there's a mechanical difference, I don't know how to role-play? For heaven's sake, I wasn't talking about role-playing, I was talking about mechanics!
The attitude expressed by some who favor 4e makes me *never* want to play. I'm well aware of some of those who oppose 4e is just as bad, and I don't condone that either.
The part I cannot comprehend is that we're talking about a game here, regardless of the version. I can see having disagreements about game mechanics and so on, but a true difference of opinion on which is better cannot be resolved.
I just don't understand some people some times. Good points are being made by both sides regarding 4e, but those points get lost in all of the other nonsense going on here.
There was talk about swapping out Radiant for Nerco or energy type to go with the theme of w/e god you choose. Have you heard about that?
This is your basic problem. You keep treating people who don't like 4E as unenlightened.
At least he's not presuming to make proclamations of doom as self-proclaimed spokesman for the Wizos and WotC.
Still noticing how you're not actually defending those statements, btw.
Edit:
I am good friends with some higher ups at Hasbro. Basically sales are good, but opinion and reaction has been less than expected. They expect to lose about half of their customer base in the next year. Trust me, heads will roll in the coming year or two. You will see a lot of names change on the Staff Blogging board.
Ah, the nebulous "I know people who say things" defense. Well played.
I see nothing in that statement that implies krownhunter07 thinks that the prior poster is unenlightened. That poster said some of 4E's rules are clunky and krownhunter07 asked him what, exactly, he was talking about?
Is even that question is going to be seen as a veiled insult?
Somehow the rest of the quote was removed. He said something about understanding being the key to enlightenement following the first statement. He has made many such remarks in the past month toward people who don't like 4E. Yet he claims he hasn't even recieved a warning. Rather amazing.
Understanding is the key to enlightenment. I just wanted to know if there was anything we might be able to help him with.
Somehow the rest of the quote was removed. He said something about understanding being the key to enlightenement following the first statement. He has made many such remarks in the past month toward people who don't like 4E. Yet he claims he hasn't even recieved a warning. Rather amazing.
Actually the 'rest' of his quote was his next post in response to me asking what the point of asking that guy what exactly he dislikes about 4e.
It sounds to me like krownhunter07 is saying that he would be enlightened by understanding what the poster dislikes about 4e.
Once again it comes down to there are a lot of people that have been taking the worst possible view of a post and we need to stop and starting looking at posts in a more forgiving light if we want these forums to be more friendly.
When lack of proof is evident, they attack.... very sad and childish.
Somehow the rest of the quote was removed. He said something about understanding being the key to enlightenement following the first statement. He has made many such remarks in the past month toward people who don't like 4E. Yet he claims he hasn't even recieved a warning. Rather amazing.
Krownhunter07's posts in this thread have been completely innocuous and obviously aimed at looking for ways to bridge the gap between the two sides. Seems obvious that no matter what he'd write, you and Rorlins will choose to take offense. That's the worst kind of 3xer zealotry. Sad.
I look forward to the end of the edition wars on here. I personally didn't like
3e but I have friends who do, and still play one online game with them. Some of them don't like 4e; they don't bother me about it anymore than I do them. It's a game; enjoy whatever version(s) you like. Belittling others for it is petty.
The Wall Street Joiurnal had the 4E PHB on the non-fiction best seller list. By any economic measure, 4E is HUGELY successful.
I think that the real question though isn't whether the 4th edition PHB will sell well, that was never in doubt. I don't plan on playing 4th edition and I bought it anyway just because it's the new D&D edition and that's something I want to read.
The question is whether people enjoy it and play it enough to want to purchase the subsequent publications. The PHB II next year will be a much better indicator of the viability of the production line as a whole.
I don't think D&D is in any danger personaly. It has brand loyalty that you could write blank checks with. Still, I don't think the flagship launch is the point to judge the success of the entire line on.
Krownhunter07's posts in this thread have been completely innocuous and obviously aimed at looking for ways to bridge the gap between the two sides. Seems obvious that no matter what he'd write, you and Rorlins will choose to take offense. That's the worst kind of 3xer zealotry. Sad.
I take no offense to any of this.
Honestly what's to be gained? You all have your opinions not only of a game but the people who both play it and chose not to. As long as I can have a conversation in the DM forum without having someone come in and try to ram 4th ed down my throat as the only game system EVAH, then I couldn't care less what you think of me or my gaming preferences.
But I'm also not going to fall into the trap of spending an hour documenting 100 things I don't like with the game only to have some fanboi pop in and tell me I'm a moron for my efforts to read the books, read the blogs, review the rules, and make my judgements about where I want to spend the $200+ I'd have to (assumign DDI ever comes on line) over the next year.
As for the "people at Wizards are disappointed"....
You call it a lie if you want but to be honest, I'd be stunned if they weren't. Look at the reactions. A lot of people I know who are gamers are not entralled and are not rushing out to buy it.
Of the people I know who own it, less than half say they want to play it as a replacement to 3rd ed, most saying "it's a game they might want to try later". Now, I am one person with a small group of friends.
If they were expecting it to completely replace 3rd ed, then they're going to be disappointed just as they would have been with similar expectations when 3rd rolled out. Or 3.5 for that matter...
Perosnally I'd love to live a life where I could drop the money for a whole new set of books to sit on a shelf and maybe get used... I don't though so until I win the lottery I have to take my time.
Rorlins
Better watch what you say, mechascorpio; the higher ups in Hasbro might learn about you in the next day or two!
I'm afraid I may have already accomplished that last week with my ultra-critical review of the D&D Character Sheets product! :D No one can accuse me of being a 4E fanboy!
The attitude expressed by some who favor 4e makes me *never* want to play. I'm well aware of some of those who oppose 4e is just as bad, and I don't condone that either.
-Indeed. Some of the ardent pro-4e posters are very...evangelical, to the point of annoyance. I liken it to those evangelical Christians who go door to door, annoying you about converting and "finding Jesus" and all of that. Since 4e has come out, I've been involved in three conversations via PM, from people trying to "convert" me. While I've made my non-interest in 4e fairly well known, I know someone who has the books, and I've been reading them with her. Some of the stuff, I like, and some of it, I don't. The attitude that I (and others) need to "see the light" is what bugs me, personally. When/If I want to convert the rules I use, I'll do so.
-And then, of course, all of the ardent anti-4e/pro-3e posters don't make matters much better, with the trolling and spamming and such. That just fans the flames...
Trust me, heads will roll in the coming year or two. You will see a lot of names change on the Staff Blogging board.
I am going to remember this quote. I would ask you to let me know what you consider a "lot" and what you would imagine is a normal turnover for staff at Wizards in the role-playing industry.
Here is the Staff Blogger list as of today:
Rich Baker, Senior Designer
Greg Bilsland, Game Editor
Logan Bonner, Designer
Bart Carroll, On-Line Media Producer
Andy Collins, System Design & Development Manager
Bruce Cordell, Designer
Rob Heinsoo, Lead Designer
Sara Girard, Marketing
Mike Lescault, Community Management
Courtney Marabatta, Marketing (?)
Mike Mearls, Leqad Developer
Dave Noonan, Designer/Developer
Christopher Perkins, RPG Manager
Stephen Radney-MacFarland, RPG R&D
Scott Rouse, Brand Manager
Peter Schaefer, Developer
Stephen Schubert, D&D Minis
Matthew Sernett, Digital Games R&D
Chris Sims, Story Designer
Bill Slavicsek, R&D Director for Roleplaying Games, Miniatures, and Book Publishing
Rodney Thompson, game designer
Chris Tulach, RPGA Director
Jonathan Tweet, Developer
Rob Watkins, R&D Developer
Jennifer Clarke-Wilkes, Game Editor
Steve Winter, Game Designer
James Wyatt, Game Designer
Chris Youngs, Dungeon and Dragon Editor
That's 28 staffers (though not all of them work on D&D and not all of them are game developers). How many of these people would have to be gone next year for your prediction of "You will see a lot of names change" to be true?
Translation:
If you don't like 4th Ed it's because you don't "get it" and people smarter than you will explain it to you so that you will like it.
Gotcha.
Rorlins
As opposed to the argument that if you play 4E instead of 3.5 you are a 12 year-old ADD WoW playing idiot.
Gotcha.
As opposed to the argument that if you play 4E instead of 3.5 you are a 12 year-old ADD WoW playing idiot.
Gotcha.
I never said anything that could even be TWISTED that way.... but hey, if it floats your boat to put words in mouths, feel free to put away. We all need hobbies.
Some people collect stamps.
Rorlins
Translation:
it floats your boat to put words in mouths, feel free to put away. We all need hobbies.
Anti-4ers have nothing to contribute to the conversation. They keep saying the same stuff, no matter how many of us debunk their arguments. 4E is clearly a better system than 3E. There is no way to argue it isn't.
THe arguments that 4th is a better system are just as arbitrary. Arguing better systems is fruitless and ridiculous. I tend to think both systems are pretty equal, for every bash against 3rd edition I can come up with one against 4th. Not a bad thing just the way it goes. If we all wanted the perfect system we would not be playing D&D.
THe arguments that 4th is a better system are just as arbitrary. Arguing better systems is fruitless and ridiculous. I tend to think both systems are pretty equal, for every bash against 3rd edition I can come up with one against 4th. Not a bad thing just the way it goes. If we all wanted the perfect system we would not be playing D&D.
For what it's worth, you should probably know that you're just feeding an equal opportunity troll here. He's an obnoxious pro in one post and an equally obnoxious anti in the next.
For what it's worth, you should probably know that you're just feeding an equal opportunity troll here. He's an obnoxious pro in one post and an equally obnoxious anti in the next.
-That's pretty funny, in a dry humor kind of way. Just shows the kind of mindset...
Please show me some quotes.
There are only two or three 4e avengers left and they are pretty level-headed from the posts that I have read.
There are pro-4e trolls. Nobody is denying this. The issue is with you referring to the trolls as part of the 4e avengers when they aren't and calling the 4e avengers trolls when they aren't.
AHHH the 4E avengers all follow that government Punk IRON MAN. They are not the real avengers.
Luke cage had the right idea in supporting Captain America with the true ideals!!!
For what it's worth, you should probably know that you're just feeding an equal opportunity troll here. He's an obnoxious pro in one post and an equally obnoxious anti in the next.
Its hard for me to recognize a troll... they're all so much like SKRULLS.
I never said anything that could even be TWISTED that way.... but hey, if it floats your boat to put words in mouths, feel free to put away. We all need hobbies.
You mean like this?
Sure you did. You learned that he doesn't like 4th Edition. You benefit form knowing that 4th edition isn't for everyone.
And you seemed genuinely interested in what he didn't like until you went on about elightenment and understanding, which from what I"ve seen around here I took to be "oh, I'll enlighten him to the errors of his ways"
...because I wasn't the one who brought up "elightenment and understanding". I was going to let it pass until you brought up putting words in mouths... ;)
Here's a completely out of context, direct quote from your mouth, btw:
...4th ed is only appealing if you're a kiddy video gamer...
Just for laughs to lighten things up a bit.
-That's pretty funny, in a dry humor kind of way. Just shows the kind of mindset...
Hmm. A look at his posting history shows that he's purely a pro-troll. Maybe I'm lumping them all together at this point, or maybe I was mistaking him for someone else. Third option is his really nasty stuff got deleted and it's not in his post history.
Either way, those types of posters don't need fed.
Its hard for me to recognize a troll... they're all so much like SKRULLS.
It happens. Some of these guys you've got to be paying pretty close attention to see the patterns.
There is one. It isn't a nice easy button, but copy the name of anyone you wish to ignore, go to My Account > My User Control Panel > Buddy/Ignore List and past the name in the ignore spot.
You can also click on their username in any post that person made, and select "view public profile." From there, right below the box with the avatar and such, is a link to add the user to your ignore list.
Actually the 'rest' of his quote was his next post in response to me asking what the point of asking that guy what exactly he dislikes about 4e.
It sounds to me like krownhunter07 is saying that he would be enlightened by understanding what the poster dislikes about 4e.
Once again it comes down to there are a lot of people that have been taking the worst possible view of a post and we need to stop and starting looking at posts in a more forgiving light if we want these forums to be more friendly.
Not at all. He has used the "UNderstanding is the key to enlightenment" thing as an attack on posters who don't like 4E in lots of other threads.
I am good friends with some higher ups at Hasbro. Basically sales are good, but opinion and reaction has been less than expected. They expect to lose about half of their customer base in the next year. Trust me, heads will roll in the coming year or two. You will see a lot of names change on the Staff Blogging board.
Posts like these seem to be made out of desperation. I am not for or against your case. I don't need to. I have a girlfriend. She lives in Canada. I see her every summer.
For what is the guillotine dropping? The fact that all the print run sold out? I don't see any heads rolling unless DDI crash and burns.
4E will fail. Inside word is the wizos are very dissapointed with the reaction the game has been getting and the 3rd party developments. 4e will be remembered as the New Coke of D&D.
Obvious troll is obvious.
Play 3.5, let us play 4e.
I can't tell if you're actually trolling or not, but it does seem like you enjoy getting people riled up. Just stop, you're part of the problem. I'd also wager any amount of money that you don't know anybody at hasbro.
No, I don't expect them to, and I wouldn't want them to, either. As much as I really love 3.5, and as ambivalent as I am about 4e), I would hope they would continue to evolve the game into a better game system that brings more of us, as D&D players, together. I like the fact that they worked to improve the game and gave us 2e, 3.0, 3.5, and 4e, even if I may not really care for 4e much.
It is precisely this attitude that has really upset a number of 3.5 players, myself included. It is the smug, "oh, if they don't like it, it's because they are bitter" commentary that is insulting. Did you even read what you wrote before you posted it? I mean, really - can't people disagree on the merits of 4e without being considered "haters" or bitter?
I've read 4e. I've played 4e under the 2nd most experienced DM in all my gaming groups (I'm the most experienced.) We played with veteran players and even a player entirely new to D&D. Not ONE person in our group, not ONE, liked 4e. I can sum up our feelings this way:
(1) the new player doesn't think there is a lot of variety between the classes - that they are all basically the same, with just flavor differences. Her view is to wait a year until more supplments come out and see then whether or not there are enough variations to make another go at it. That doesn't sound bitter to me - that sounds like a reasonable and mature solution (and one, I might add, that we are likely to adopt.)
(2) *I* do not believe there is any difference between clerics (despite the fact that the class is insanely powerful.) I don't want to rehash the arguments I've made in other postings, but I don't think, from a mechancial perspective, there are any differences between clerics of different gods. In this regard, it is my opinion, that 4e is weaker than 2e, 3.0, and 3.5 (I think 2e, with its specialty priests, did the best job of mechanically differentiating the priests of different deities.) Now, based on some feeback some 4e players suggested, I'm inclined to look at them again - and that included using multi-class and power swap feats, and developing new channel divinity feats. I don't think that gets me to quite where I want clerics to be, but I think it is a reasonable and doable alternative, so if we continue with 4e at some point down the road, I'll likely do this.
(3) We don't find combat any faster, more efficient, or more streamlined than in 3.5. To us, it's about the same - we found no advantage in the 4e system.
(4) One of our players absolutely loves 3.5, and I doubt anything will change her mind.
(5) At the end, our conclusion was that 4e was neither better nor worse than 3.5. Certainly, some areas seemed neat or slightly improved (character creation, getting rid of racial ability penalties, the improvement of both half-elves and humans), or the same (combat.) Because, to us, there was nothing in playing 4e that said, "oh, look how much better it is," we came to the conclusion that it is neither better nor worse, and so there was no incentive for us to switch.
Now, that's not the point of a "hater" and that's not someone being bitter. Those are the points of a group of 30-somethings, who (with the exception of one person), have played virtually every role-playing game, and certainly almost every edition of D&D - we just don't think 4e offers us anything that 3.5 can't already do. Given that, we've chosen to remain with 3.5 (which is what the OP asked folks to do.)
I fail to see how that makes us "haters" or bitter.
That's fine by me; you sound plenty reasonable, and I could totally see someone not liking 4e for that. I think both "sides" in this stupid war are getting too defensive because people like you are rare, or at least much less vocal, than people who start threads like "4e is destroying our hobby and only a munchkin would play it!!!" Those are the sort of people the "bitter" and "hater" comments are directed to, not someone like you
Respond however you would like, but be polite and keep the hostility to a minimum (this was all I was really trying to say). Particularly avoid sarcasm and avoid telling the person "Your are absolutely wrong.
No I am not. I am saying, don't flame. If someone gives their viewpoint, and you offer a counterpoint, don't get mad at them if they continue to disagree. You simply might not have convinced them of your position.
Hypocrisy is a wonderful thing...
You dont know what the **** your talking about fanboy.
I'd rather stomp on your face.
anytime, anywhere pal. (this was saying he would want to do the above, in person)
For the Record, I could dig up more, but the posters best posts where modded.
Point is, it isn't a good idea to spew your Righteous Indignation and attack Pro-4e people who may have a splinter in their eye when, if you look in a mirror, you'd see a plank in your own.
*and again, for those who failed to grasp it the first few times... I said people on all sides learn from talking to one another.
It is a simple truth...
Really what are you trying to do? plz for the love of god just tell us what you want then go away and let others make up there own minds.
I am good friends with some higher ups at Hasbro. Basically sales are good, but opinion and reaction has been less than expected. They expect to lose about half of their customer base in the next year. Trust me, ...
and with those two words I must ask the question, WHY THE #$%@ SHOULD I TRUST YOU??????
Put up or shut up time. Tell me the names of the "higher ups at Hasbro" so I can attempt to contact them and verify your story, otherwise you have resorted to the fallacy of appeal to authority and I can safely ignore anything you have to say.
I was banned for those posts and have since taken the boards more seriously. Which is more than I can say for you.
Did your "good friends" who are "higher ups at Hasbro" force the mods to restore your account?
and with those two words I must ask the question, WHY THE #$%@ SHOULD I TRUST YOU??????
Put up or shut up time. Tell me the names of the "higher ups at Hasbro" so I can attempt to contact them and verify your story, otherwise you have resorted to the fallacy of appeal to authority and I can safely ignore anything you have to say.
Like I would give you their names:D
Invoking the appeal to authority fallacy and ignoring it, doesn't make my connections and the statements any less true. Keep your eyes out in the coming months. Keep you attention on the head of R&D position at Wizards. It will be changing soon.
Like I would give you their names:D
Invoking the appeal to authority fallacy and ignoring it, doesn't make my connections and the statements any less true. Keep your eyes out in the coming months. Keep you attention on the head of R&D position at Wizards. It will be changing soon.
YOU appealed to authority by invoiking connections to "higher ups at Hasbro" while never mentioning who those people were. This makes your entire argument fallacious. Cite your source or what you've posted is nothing more than nonsensical garbage.
I suggest you stop. you're bordering on bannable behavior.
1) Several Years of 3.5 Experiance, which can make combat go by quickly.
vs.
2) A brand new system that they don't have a lot of experiance with.
Just imagine how fast 4e combat will go when you have more experience with that!
If not, go play 3.5
Like I would give you their names:D
Invoking the appeal to authority fallacy and ignoring it, doesn't make my connections and the statements any less true. Keep your eyes out in the coming months. Keep you attention on the head of R&D position at Wizards. It will be changing soon.
Really quite simply if you cannot back up your claims don't make them. I can make the same claim you did.
If I made it, the claim would not be true. But how do you know that? You don't.
Again, cite your source or don't include it.
If you were a journalist, you would not have to cite your source, but the reputation of your publication would be on the line. On a forum there is no consequence to making your claim so it is really useless.
YOU appealed to authority by invoiking connections to "higher ups at Hasbro" while never mentioning who those people were. This makes your entire argument fallacious.
I suggest you stop. you're bordering on bannable behavior.
Not if it is true. I didn't give there names because I wont jeopardize their jobs by posting them on an internet forum. That doesn't make what I am saying any less true, whether you believe it or not. By the way, appeal to authority fallacy only works, if I claimed I couldn't be wrong because of my inside connection (you need to bone up on your fallacies). I am still open to that possibility.
Not if it is true. I didn't give there names because I wont jeopardize their jobs by posting them on an internet forum. That doesn't make what I am saying any less true, whether you believe it or not. By the way, appeal to authority fallacy only works, if I claimed I couldn't be wrong because of my inside connection (you need to bone up on your fallacies). I am still open to that possibility.
Bottom line is, you know NOBODY in Hasbro.
I'd also suggest a course in logic as you are lacking even basic definitions for fallacies.
I suggest you stop. you're bordering on bannable behavior.
IP bannable, I hope. In the meantime, I'm going to take advantage of Ignore feature outlined earlier, and get "Lordflashheart" out of my sight.
IP bannable, I hope. In the meantime, I'm going to take advantage of Ignore feature outlined earlier, and get "Lordflashheart" out of my sight.
Just did the same myself. Nice feature, that.
Originally Posted by Lordflashheart View Post
I am good friends with some higher ups at Hasbro. Basically sales are good, but opinion and reaction has been less than expected. They expect to lose about half of their customer base in the next year. Trust me, ...
I had you blocked but when I saw this I just could not pass it up.
First I have little doubt they would have lost ALOT more then 50% had they just kept going tell they hit 200 splat books.
2. 50% is huge. Silly huge. I am willing to bet that at projected 35% losses WOTC would announce that 4th D&D was a standalone and more 3rd was on its way.
3. I AM a higher up in Hasbro and they tell me they know you. You work for Tunnels and Trolls and have a vested interest in making people think D&D is epic fail.
You now have one year to be right. We have been warned. See you next year when you come back to tell us you told us so.
Not if it is true. I didn't give there names because I wont jeopardize their jobs by posting them on an internet forum. That doesn't make what I am saying any less true, whether you believe it or not. By the way, appeal to authority fallacy only works, if I claimed I couldn't be wrong because of my inside connection (you need to bone up on your fallacies). I am still open to that possibility.
That's not an "authority fallacy" either. An "appeal to authority" fallacy would be saying something like "I'm right because I'm an expert in the field." For example, if you said "I've been designing games for 10 years and I really think 4e will flop, therefore it will," that would be an appeal to authority fallacy.
What you did is just called lying.
I had you blocked but when I saw this I just could not pass it up.
First I have little doubt they would have lost ALOT more then 50% had they just kept going tell they hit 200 splat books.
2. 50% is huge. Silly huge. I am willing to bet that at projected 35% losses WOTC would announce that 4th D&D was a standalone and more 3rd was on its way.
3. I AM a higher up in Hasbro and they tell me they know you. You work for Tunnels and Trolls and have a vested interest in making people think D&D is epic fail.
You now have one year to be right. We have been warned. See you next year when you come back to tell us you told us so.
ROFLMDMAO!!!!
Here's my prediction for what will happen within one year:
1) All 4E supplement/splat book/adventure/accessory sales outstrip 3.x.
2) D&DI comes up and running with the virtual tabletop being wildly successful. subscriptiuon rates are in six digits with the one millionth subscriber due within months, perhaps weeks.
3) WotC, as a division of Hasbro, grows substantially.
And heck, I'm not even a major 4E backer. I can see a marketing success, though.
That's not an "authority fallacy" either. An "appeal to authority" fallacy would be saying something like "I'm right because I'm an expert in the field." For example, if you said "I've been designing games for 10 years and I really think 4e will flop, therefore it will," that would be an appeal to authority fallacy.
What you did is just called lying.
The first case of this poster was an appeal to authority fallacy via a third person. Basically he cited as his authority "higher ups in Hasbro" without naming them for validation. You can appeal to authority without it being fallacious, but the authority you appeal to must val;idate your claims and nebulous "higher ups in Hasbro" are unavailable for validation.
ROFLMDMAO!!!!
Here's my prediction for what will happen within one year:
1) All 4E supplement/splat book/adventure/accessory sales outstrip 3.x.
2) D&DI comes up and running with the virtual tabletop being wildly successful. subscriptiuon rates are in six digits with the one millionth subscriber due within months, perhaps weeks.
3) WotC, as a division of Hasbro, grows substantially.
And heck, I'm not even a major 4E backer. I can see a marketing success, though.
Here is what I truly see myself.
1) All 4E supplement/splat book/adventure/accessory sales outstrip 3.x. at first but slow down after the new car smell is gone and D&D just bought itself another 7(?) years before they need to make 5th. WOTC is in it to make money and rpg's make alot of money from splats When 4ths splats stop selling well then its time for a new game.
2) DDI will be dead in 2 years. DDI is NOT MTG online and even thats free to play.
3) 3) WotC, as a division of Hasbro, will stay about the same.
http://forums.gleemax.com/community_coc.php
Here is what I truly see myself.
1) All 4E supplement/splat book/adventure/accessory sales outstrip 3.x. at first but slow down after the new car smell is gone and D&D just bought itself another 7(?) years before they need to make 5th. WOTC is in it to make money and rpg's make alot of money from splats When 4ths splats stop selling well then its time for a new game.
2) DDI will be dead in 2 years. DDI is NOT MTG online and even thats free to play.
3) 3) WotC, as a division of Hasbro, will stay about the same.
This prediction seems a little more likely to me.
Any ideas?
Here is what I truly see myself.
1) All 4E supplement/splat book/adventure/accessory sales outstrip 3.x. at first but slow down after the new car smell is gone and D&D just bought itself another 7(?) years before they need to make 5th. WOTC is in it to make money and rpg's make alot of money from splats When 4ths splats stop selling well then its time for a new game.
2) DDI will be dead in 2 years. DDI is NOT MTG online and even thats free to play.
3) 3) WotC, as a division of Hasbro, will stay about the same.
Mine is optimistic and yours is status quo. If the marketing gurus were right, I'll be right. If not, you will.
We can only know in a year, but status quo is generally the safest bet.
I have a print screen of the PM, but I do not know how to send it to Wizo's
Any ideas?
Send it in an email. Or email a wizo and tell them about it.
I have a print screen of the PM, but I do not know how to send it to Wizo's
Any ideas?
the [img] code only works if you have the picture hosted. Try www.photobucket.com (or any other free image hosting site). After making an account, you can upload the picture from your computer and simply copy the image code from directly below the picture, paste, and viola ... all the internet can see the picture if you like.
the [img] code only works if you have the picture hosted. Try www.photobucket.com (or any other free image hosting site). After making an account, you can upload the picture from your computer and simply copy the image code from directly below the picture, paste, and viola ... all the internet can see the picture if you like.
Thanks, I'm working on that now... now back to the topic...
I have a print screen of the PM, but I do not know how to send it to Wizo's
Any ideas?
Save it as a jpg file.
Go to "Contact Us" at the bottom of the page (or use my handy-dandy link).
If you have never submitted a ticket before, you will have to register again. (It usesa different database from the Forum database.)
Submit the ticket, attaching the file.
I wont jeopardize their jobs by posting them on an internet forum.
Could you answer the questions I asked in post 111? How many staff bloggers would have to leave my next year for you to consider that your prediction came to fruition. You said "lots" of them would be gone in the next two years.
In contrast, what would you consider typical turnover rates for the people who are staff bloggers, so we can see in a year or two if the turn over rate is more than one would expect during a regular year (even if it doesn't meet your criteria for "lots")?
You can ask your friends in Hasbro for advice on what "lots" of turnover is. That way we can verify how accurate your insider knowledge may be.
Thanks in advance for the answers.
Ah, the nebulous "I know people who say things" defense. Well played.
How about I up the ante then?
Staff members who aren't fully behind 4E and the new management of WOTC are already being fired.
You'll see some quiet announcements on that front in the next few weeks.
Just sayin'
How about I up the ante then?
Staff members who aren't fully behind 4E and the new management of WOTC are already being fired.
You'll see some quiet announcements on that front in the next few weeks.
Just sayin'
Yet that is a very different reason for firing than "4E isn't selling well". Firing those that aren't fully behind the new edition/management is common in business.
How about I up the ante then?
Staff members who aren't fully behind 4E and the new management of WOTC are already being fired.
You'll see some quiet announcements on that front in the next few weeks.
Just sayin'
That's standard in any corporation. You are either on board with the direction of the product and the decisions of management or you are not a team player and should find the door.
How about I up the ante then?
Staff members who aren't fully behind 4E and the new management of WOTC are already being fired.
You'll see some quiet announcements on that front in the next few weeks.
Just sayin'
Sorry I am abit lost on that one. Who is getting fired and for what?
How about I up the ante then?
Staff members who aren't fully behind 4E and the new management of WOTC are already being fired.
You'll see some quiet announcements on that front in the next few weeks.
Just sayin'
That's the corporate world for you; you're either in line or you're out the door.
The issue with LFH's post wasn't that he was making predictions or talking about people getting fired, it was that he was making an appeal to authority in the form of a "people I know who are important said stuff" to defend his statements.
Not sure is this will work... and I can't find where I'm supposed to send it?
Remove the image from your post, and check your PMs in a couple of minutes.
Not sure is this will work... and I can't find where I'm supposed to send it?
Dude, you can't put private message on these boards. It is against the CoC.
I never said anything that could even be TWISTED that way.... but hey, if it floats your boat to put words in mouths, feel free to put away. We all need hobbies.
Some people collect stamps.
Rorlins
And the poster who you replied to with:
Translation:
If you don't like 4th Ed it's because you don't "get it" and people smarter than you will explain it to you so that you will like it.
Gotcha.
Rorlins
Didn't say anything that could be twisted that way either, but you managed to do it. And if you can dish it out, you have to be able to take it.
Remove the image from your post, and check your PMs in a couple of minutes.
Okay, thanks.
Edit; I reported my post before I removed the PM pic. Not sure if that makes a difference, but I didn't know how to send it in.
-That's pretty funny, in a dry humor kind of way. Just shows the kind of mindset...
Lord Karsus, you probably don't spend a lot of time on the 4e boards, but the poster in question is certainly a troll. He typically disrupts threads with, "4e is the best game ever and if you don't like it you're in denial about its awesomeness. No one will ever play 3e again," comments. He also spammed the 4e general board with "4e is awesome because..." threads the first day he was around. They got deleted and he probably got a temp ban, since he stopped. Why on earth someone who *immediately* starts trolling when his account is 5 minutes old doesn't get a permanent ban I will never know.
At first I thought he was an overzealous 4e fanboy and just reported everything he posted. But then I found a few posts that were actually 4e bashing disguised as more 4e fanboy nonsense, like this:
Time to get with the times and use teamwork. You can't be a square and play how ever you want now.
Then I realized he was probably a sock-puppet of some angry 3e fan who wanted to stir up controversy. I've even got a good guess who it is, especially since threads like this really illuminate certain a poster's willingness to do whatever it takes (like blatantly lie) if it fuels drama.
Anyway, that's why a lot of us point out that that poster is a troll.
By the way, appeal to authority fallacy only works, if I claimed I couldn't be wrong because of my inside connection (you need to bone up on your fallacies). I am still open to that possibility.
On a side note, it is not Xyxox who needs to refresh his knowledge of logical fallacies. The fallacy of Appeal to Authority does not require a claim of infallibility. Actually, the fallacy in question is the Appeal to Unidentified Authority, which is a subset of Appeal to Authority. In its most common definition, the Appeal to Unidentified Authority is as follows:
[indent]This fallacy is committed when a person asserts that a claim is true because an expert or authority makes the claim and the person does not actually identify the expert. Since the expert is not named or identified, there is no way to tell if the person is actually an expert. Unless the person is identified and has his expertise established, there is no reason to accept the claim.[/indent]
-Source, The Nizkor Project: Fallacies: Appeal to Authority. Appeal to Unidentified Authority is subset number 6.
-See also, about.com:Appeals to Anonymous Authority, EvoWiki,.
So, yes. Your argument does run afoul of the Appeal to Unidentified (or Anonymous) Authority.
Lord Karsus, you probably don't spend a lot of time on the 4e boards, but the poster in question is certainly a troll. He typically disrupts threads with, "4e is the best game ever and if you don't like it you're in denial about its awesomeness. No one will ever play 3e again," comments. He also spammed the 4e general board with "4e is awesome because..." threads the first day he was around. They got deleted and he probably got a temp ban, since he stopped. Why on earth someone who *immediately* starts trolling when his account is 5 minutes old doesn't get a permanent ban I will never know.
At first I thought he was an overzealous 4e fanboy and just reported everything he posted. But then I found a few posts that were actually 4e bashing disguised as more 4e fanboy nonsense, like this:
Then I realized he was probably a sock-puppet of some angry 3e fan who wanted to stir up controversy. I've even got a good guess who it is, especially since threads like this really illuminate certain a poster's willingness to do whatever it takes (like blatantly lie) if it fuels drama.
Anyway, that's why a lot of us point out that that poster is a troll.
-Like I said, that just goes to show the mindset of said kinds of individuals.
-Like I said, that just goes to show the mindset of said kinds of individuals.
Sorry, I can't tell what you mean by that. Perhaps I was also confused by your first post. Sometimes my ability to grasp subtlety is very poor.
Dude, you can't put private message on these boards. It is against the CoC.
Nothing at all in the CoC says it's against the rules to post the contents of a private message.
On a side note, it is not Xyxox who needs to refresh his knowledge of logical fallacies. The fallacy of Appeal to Authority does not require a claim of infallibility. Actually, the fallacy in question is the Appeal to Unidentified Authority, which is a subset of Appeal to Authority. In its most common definition, the Appeal to Unidentified Authority is as follows:
[indent]This fallacy is committed when a person asserts that a claim is true because an expert or authority makes the claim and the person does not actually identify the expert. Since the expert is not named or identified, there is no way to tell if the person is actually an expert. Unless the person is identified and has his expertise established, there is no reason to accept the claim.[/indent]
-Source, The Nizkor Project: Fallacies: Appeal to Authority. Appeal to Unidentified Authority is subset number 6.
-See also, about.com:Appeals to Anonymous Authority, EvoWiki,.
So, yes. Your argument does run afoul of the Appeal to Unidentified (or Anonymous) Authority.
I didn't want to get into the fact that it was a subset of the Appeal to Authority fallacy. I thought that might be getting a bit too granular for the purposes of this discussion.
Nothing at all in the CoC says it's against the rules to post the contents of a private message.
Rule # 1 of the internet:
If you don't want someone else to see it, you shouldn't post it on the internet.
Check your PMs. I just sent you a step-by-step set of instructions that will walk you through the procedure.
Thanks, got it and reported.
Nothing at all in the CoC says it's against the rules to post the contents of a private message.
There used to be a specific rule against it, and it is pretty standard in most forums. but it still might be covered by # 4:
Do not harass, bully, threaten, harm or cause discomfort for other persons, including any other members. For example:
1)Use hate speech or racial, ethnic, sexist, homophobic or religious slurs
2) Harass a specific person (repeated flaming, personal attacks or posting their private information)
3)Troll or bait the community in general with inflammatory statements, such as ones designed to elicit a negative response from the community
4)Post or otherwise disclose any personal or private information of another person, or any confidential information pertaining to a business, without consent
There used to be a specific rule against it, and it is pretty standard in most forums. but it still might be covered by # 4:
Hmmm... I'm not sure if his attacking me via PM is considered privte...
But, back to the topic at hand, it's that kind of non-sense that makes it hard for fans (of D&D in general) to come here seeking knowledge from other posters.
Hmmm... I'm not sure if his attacking me via PM is considered privte...
But, back to the topic at hand, it's that kind of non-sense that makes it hard for fans (of D&D in general) to come here seeking knowledge from other posters.
Yes. It is discouraging to say the least. I say fight fire with fire.
So, please, please, oh PLEASE, guys, keep doing this and proving to everyone that how much, as a group, that "4E Supporters" are such the innocent victims of those mean "haters" out there.
a) repeatedly flaming another user is a violation of the CoC
I saw no such repeated flaming. If you do, you should really report it.
b) publically calling for disciplinary action is a violation of the CoC
He only did so because he did not know how to report a CoC violation that occurred in PM. After mudbunny explained the process to him, he both deleted the image of that alleged violation and returned ot the topic at hand.
c) publically discussing another poster's disciplinary actions is a violation of the CoC.
No, it doesn't.
Just to point out your blatant, flagrat hypocrasy.. you do know that a) repeatedly flaming another user is a violation of the CoC, b) publically calling for disciplinary action is a violation of the CoC, and c) publically discussing another poster's disciplinary actions is a violation of the CoC.
So, please, please, oh PLEASE, guys, keep doing this and proving to everyone that how much, as a group, that "4E Supporters" are such the innocent victims of those mean "haters" out there.
Eh, guess that's intended for me. If so, my apologies to all, and sorry for ruining your day.
Sniped.... because it needed it...
*chuckles*
I'll try not to do so in the future, -k-
So, please, please, oh PLEASE, guys, keep doing this and proving to everyone that how much, as a group, that "4E Supporters" are such the innocent victims of those mean "haters" out there.
If I recall correctly, nobody was saying that. We were saying there are annoying trolls on both sides, and that we want it to end. The "troll de jour" happens to be on the anti-4e side, but there was a pro-4e troll in this thread too, earlier on, who was called out on it.
Why'd we team up on this one more than the other? The pro-4e troll was, in this case, such an obvious troll that no real discussion was needed. The anti-4e troll you're referring to is much more disruptive.
Eh, guess that's intended for me. If so, my apologies to all, and sorry for ruining your day.
I thought that was aimed at me, actually. I'd like to be sorry, but I'm not =\
Sorry, I can't tell what you mean by that. Perhaps I was also confused by your first post. Sometimes my ability to grasp subtlety is very poor.
-It shows the kind of mindsets that trolls/spammers/flamers have. They're willing to go to such lengths, for stupidity.
-It shows the kind of mindsets that trolls/spammers/flamers have. They're willing to go to such lengths, for stupidity.
LK! you killed the thread.... tisk, tisk, tisk...
:P
I’ve removed content from this thread because harassment is a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code of Conduct here: http://forums.gleemax.com/community_coc.php
Please return discussion to the topic of the thread, or it may need to be closed.
I’ve removed content from this thread because harassment is a violation of the Code of Conduct. You can review the Code of Conduct here: http://forums.gleemax.com/community_coc.php
Fair enough
Something constructive: maybe instead of starting threads to discuss/debate 4e, which attract trolls like a giant troll-beacon or something, those sorts of discussions should be held through PM. That way if you want to argue about it, you can do so without inadvertently disrupting things. I understand that some people like debating the comparative merits of different editions, I just think threads about this cause too many problems.
Just my .02
you have your own forums, so stay in them.....no reason to dump all over our forums and clutter it with trash....
when im trying to find useful information i have to sift through 3.X posters complaining before i find what im looking for. i wish i had some sort of a filter...... i cant block everyone!!!
i agree with the op.
you have your own forums, so stay in them.....no reason to dump all over our forums and clutter it with trash....
when im trying to find useful information i have to sift through 3.X posters complaining before i find what im looking for. i wish i had some sort of a filter...... i cant block everyone!!!
I think the real problem comes in some forums that may be cross-platform.
Take, for instance, the FR and Eberron forums. Are they exclusively 4E or can 3.x discussions happen there, too?
Also, since 4E has just been released, when questions arise about mechanics and what-not, there will inevitably be comparisons to 3.x.
Overall, though, the 4E bashing is crazy, just as the anti-anything-but-4E bashing is, too.
In truth this is hardly a new thing as it can be seen in all sorts of fandoms as any change is seen as "OmyGodTheyKillzIt".
Also when something as important to you as a set of rules that you have used to tell unknown numbers of story's is being replaced people grow protective even if it is childish.
When the "new" Volkswagen bug was first sold I knew this one guy that grew so mad that they tried to replace the old "better" Bug that he would go out and throw eggs at the new Bugs.
This sort of behaver is only made worse on the internet as people feel the need to be more extreme.
If people would just grow up a little bit and stop jumping into a thread to shout "IT SUCKS" we could make this a better and more inviting community to new players and I am sure that is something we all want.
right now the rabid nerd rage would have any new player wondering if playing is worth the bother.
LK! you killed the thread.... tisk, tisk, tisk...
:P
-I...don't get it.
I think the real problem comes in some forums that may be cross-platform.
Take, for instance, the FR and Eberron forums. Are they exclusively 4E or can 3.x discussions happen there, too?
-The Forgotten Realms and Eberron sections are edition neutral. Majority of posts in either are lore related, not mechanical related. That being said, there is very little spam of pro/anti-4e anything in the Forgotten Realms section. People grumble and moan and groan about things, but they're related to the direction the setting is going itself. Majority of "angry" posts aren't related to the mechanics of 4e. It's never to the point of flame wars or anything, though.
-I...don't get it.
-The Forgotten Realms and Eberron sections are edition neutral. Majority of posts in either are lore related, not mechanical related. That being said, there is very little spam of pro/anti-4e anything in the Forgotten Realms section. People grumble and moan and groan about things, but they're related to the direction the setting is going itself. Majority of "angry" posts aren't related to the mechanics of 4e. It's never to the point of flame wars or anything, though.
well there are realms and eberron sections in the 3.5 area so i disagree that they are neutral. i still see a lot of old edition fanboys posting mountains of complaints about the new realms book..... eberron is not so bad....eberron fans just seem more agreeable and pleaseant in nature...less uppity..
well there are realms and eberron sections in the 3.5 area
No there aren't. There are six forums in the "Previous Editions" section and none of them refer to Eberron or Forgotten Realms.
i still see a lot of old edition fanboys posting mountains of complaints about the new realms book..... eberron is not so bad....eberron fans just seem more agreeable and pleaseant in nature...less uppity..
Well, Eberron is changing a lot less between editions, so that's to be expected. The Eberron forum is also pretty dead, so they're probably happy to have anybody to talk to. ;)
-I...don't get it.
nm... no posts for awhile after yours... I guess some people like to sleep and do things other then sit at a computer...
nm... no posts for awhile after yours... I guess some people like to sleep and do things other then sit at a computer...
I would of liked to do better things than sit on a computer, but it took me two freakin hours to fill out a visa application to get married in the UK. Only problem is, all the appointments are AFTER my fiance and I are leaving for SCOTLAND. GRRRR...
2 hours filling out an application carefully to find out there are no appointments....
Now I have to get married here instead of the HIGHLANDS!
Sorry...
Venting...
Status normal
well there are realms and eberron sections in the 3.5 area so i disagree that they are neutral.
-Wrong on both counts.
i still see a lot of old edition fanboys posting mountains of complaints about the new realms book..... eberron is not so bad....eberron fans just seem more agreeable and pleaseant in nature...less uppity..
-Like I said, it's not related to the mechanics of D&D.
-Weren't you a participant in the thread where it was agreed upon that the use of the term 'fanboy' wasn't becoming of a forum contributor?
nm... no posts for awhile after yours... I guess some people like to sleep and do things other then sit at a computer...
-Oh.
Well, Eberron is changing a lot less between editions, so that's to be expected. The Eberron forum is also pretty dead, so they're probably happy to have anybody to talk to. ;)
-They could try to chat with the 'Other Published Settings' people, but they'd probably yell at them or something. G-d knows, I tried.
[...] -Weren't you a participant in the thread where it was agreed upon that the use of the term 'fanboy' wasn't becoming of a forum contributor?
Now, no need to get snippy. After all, it was you who coined the term "4-gotten Realms" as a term to deride the new version of the setting instead of using a neutral term like "4E FR" or something, even if you said your intent wasn't so.
;)Now, no need to get snippy. After all, it was you who coined the term "4-gotten Realms" as a term to deride the new version of the setting instead of using a neutral term like "4E FR" or something, even if you said your intent wasn't so.
-Only those who want to interpret it as a negative term do so. Notice how majority of posters do not? ;)
And yes, the term “4-Gotten-Realms” was coined by Lord Karsus as an anti-4E term and is used in that manner to this day.
I think it’s entirely inappropriate for a Forum Lead to promote the term and to use it, as well as justify it with the tepid excuse that “most people” supposedly don’t care.
But (so far) the WizO’s don’t seem to care at all.
The big mistake I made was complaining about it publicly, which only served to solidify its use amongst the established 4E Realms haters on the Realms forums.
I should have kept it behind the scenes. Oh well, lesson learned.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
On the other hand, thanks to Karsus' consistent efforts and hard work, we now have 2 FR Forums.
This should allow us to increase the number of posts and discussions related to running campaigns in the Realms (regardless of the rules edition used) and hopefully create the kind of room that allows for everyone for and against the 4E Realms to have their say without the threat of off-topic chicanery steering every other thread away from the subject brought up by an OP.
That kind of balance will serve to dilute the regular negativity on the Forums and (I hope) bring more people onto the fold who otherwise would be turned away by such behavior.
I think the FR Forums are solidly edition neutral.
Thanks again to Karsus for making the split happen.
My thoughts exactly. They've created an interesting game with $E, but its not D&D. My friends and I already have the books for D&D, we don't need to buy any more. Hope WotC is ok with that.
$E
This is exactly the kind of crap that we don't need.
I think it’s entirely inappropriate for a Forum Lead to promote the term and to use it, as well as justify it with the tepid excuse that “most people” supposedly don’t care. But (so far) the WizO’s don’t seem to care at all.
Has anybody made this known in the proper thread, such as [thread=964362]this one[/thread], or have you been complaining to Lord Karsus in threads not about his conduct as a forum lead and depending on the presumed omniscience of Community Management to figure it out?
Also, WizOs have nothing to do with Forum Leads. Community Management manages the forum leads. The WizOs are a part of Customer Service. The WizOs shouldn't care about Lord Karsus' coining of the term "4gotten Realms".
This is exactly the kind of crap that we don't need.
Why? It's pretty funny actually. Plus is 5 years there'll be a 0.45 or 5.0 version anyway.
Why? It's pretty funny actually. Plus is 5 years there'll be a 0.45 or 5.0 version anyway.
Yes, because you've got a perfectly objective view of all this.
It's an attack on the system, just like your insistence that it's going to be replaced quickly. If you can't see that, you're either blinded by your own feelings or blatantly trolling.
Yes, because you've got a perfectly objective view of all this.
It's an attack on the system, just like your insistence that it's going to be replaced quickly. If you can't see that, you're either blinded by your own feelings or blatantly trolling.
Please, chill out. 5 years is probably the projected product life cycle based on the 3.0 to 4.0 product life cycle. If you can't see that, it is probably due to your lack of business experience. Lack of bus experience is not your fault. It it is just part of being young and inexperienced in general.
Please, chill out. 5 years is probably the projected product life cycle based on the 3.0 to 4.0 product life cycle.
3E lasted for 8 years. Implying that 4E won't is a dig. Period.
If you can't see that, it is probably due to your lack of business experience. Lack of bus experience is not your fault. It it is just part of being young and inexperienced in general.
Ah, and this is you being an *******; either trying to be funny or taking a shot at 4E's fanbase. Either way, you're still being an *******.
If you can't see that, it is probably due to your lack of business experience. Lack of bus experience is not your fault. It it is just part of being young and inexperienced in general.
You're really not good at this.
So, in the immortal words of Donald Fagan and Walter Becker:
"You go back, Jack, do it again…"
Ah, and this is you being an *******; either trying to be funny or taking a shot at 4E's fanbase. Either way, you're still being an *******.
And when I lived in the Bay Area, many years ago, the people seemed so pleasant.
You're really not good at this.
So, in the immortal words of Donald Fagan and Walter Becker:
"You go back, Jack, do it again…"
Good at what? Explaining product life cycles? You want me to deliver full on Prod mgr training on a forum?
If you want to pay my going rate I guess I could.
Good at what? Explaining product life cycles?
Almost cute, but you know what you're trying to do.
…and I'm just saying you're not good at it.
Practice, practice!
You're really not good at this.
So, in the immortal words of Donald Fagan and Walter Becker:
"You go back, Jack, do it again…"
Bonus points for quoting an awesome song.
And when I lived in the Bay Area, many years ago, the people seemed so pleasant.
Some of us still are.
But I think the cost of living here has raised the the overall grumpy quotient.*points to self*
Almost cute, but you know what you're trying to do.
…and I'm just saying you're not good at it.
Practice, practice!
I just saw your sig.
Now I get why you are imagining things...
Those that are still going at it look like they will fight anyone on anything to prove that 4th is not fun and we need to stop playing it right now.
Overall I don't think this will ever stop as there are still people out and around that say anything other then AD&D is crap but I do think that in another month or two most people will pay them little mind as new posters will have a host of rule Q's and gripes about the 4th's greatsword.
The WizOs shouldn't care about Lord Karsus' coining of the term "4gotten Realms".
Yes they should.
Assuming they've any interest in protecting the idea that these forums are here to promote WotC's products.
Assuming they've any interest in preventing baiting.
Etc...
Regardless, thanks for providing that link.
http://forums.gleemax.com/community_coc.php
Yes they should.
Assuming they've any interest in protecting the idea that these forums are here to promote WotC's products.
Assuming they've any interest in preventing baiting.
Etc...
Regardless, thanks for providing that link.
While I don't really like the term 4vengar as goes with that "l337" style of typing, 4 has been used to denote four and for in more ways prior to 4th edition, so this abbreviation should not be considered to be a problem by anyone.
Now if someone were to say "4 the sake of so-an-so" to mean "for" that is kind of lazy netspeak, but acceptable.
w8 is also lazy but is a hold over for some maybe from IM era, and now with more people texting I think people will be more likely to use such shortcuts to writing in forums.
4got, 4ever, etc are valid shortcuts even though they are a bit lazy, and should not otherwise be directly related to the misspelling of using 4 to replace A.
I owuld hope that moderation does no go through posts to correct netspeak when it occurs as that would be 1) altering peoples posts without reason, and 2) a severe waste of time correcting spelling and grammar errors, even possibly 3) a violation of the CoC as Gamer_Zer0 has stated "fixing" posts is.
4gotten Realms is not that big a deal even though FR is shorter, but the other way at least gives more information from having to sort out acronyms.
Assuming they've any interest in protecting the idea that these forums are here to promote WotC's products.
Their job is to enforce the CoC, not to police the activities of Community Management.
Assuming they've any interest in preventing baiting.
Sometimes a number is just a number. Sometimes fish bite hooks that don't have bait on it. Some fish may even go looking for hooks and then cry "bait!"
Sometimes fish bite hooks that don't have bait on it. Some fish may even go looking for hooks and then cry "bait!"
May I quote you on that?
Well other than just then that is...
This is exactly the kind of crap that we don't need.
What's wrong with "$E"? Nerds have been crying "T$R" since the 90s at least.
Also, for 3rd edition fans who say "omfg 4e isn't D&D! It's nothing like D&D!!!" I say bullcrap. Look at OD&D: there were basically no combat rules besides initiative, morale, to-hit (sometimes used 2d6 and a complex chart based on weapon-type,sometimes a d20), and damage (1d6 for all weapons). There were also some primitive flanking/backstabbing rules, and rules for things like "mounted vs. foot" if you used the Chainmail (d6-based) combat system, as well as a better defined combat-sequence under the Chainmail rules. There were three classes: Fighting-Men, Magic-Users, and Clerics; there were also four races: Humans (could be any class), Dwarves (had to be FM, level restriction), Elves (multi-classed FM/MU, divided XP, level restrictions), and Hobbits (had to be FM, level restriction at 4).
Not only that, but the game was far MORE video-game like than it is now, and the Altair 8800 wasn't even invented yet (let alone the consoles)! Player Characters were adventurers of various backgrounds, all coming together in some sort of civilized area, and exploring an unfathomably large dungeon called "the underdark" (designed by the DM), with different entrances throughout the world. Once PCs were high-level, or had at least acquired enough treasure to hire soldiers, they would venture into the Wilderness. The wilderness was very dangerous; players would sometimes game for a year before really exploring it. At very high level, some PCs were able to build castles/strongholds/fortresses, and then even attack other civilizations with the wargaming rules found in Chainmail.
That was it. The skill system is NOT part of "D&D". And if you're going to say "Well OD&D was so different it's not even worth comparing!" I say you're wrong there too. All of the iconic elements are there: hit-points, saving-throws, the Vancian magic system, many classic monsters and tons of spells that still exist today, not to mention lots of other rules (endurance, etc). Instead of having a weak "jack-of-all-trades" Thief class, all players would find traps based on a d6 roll (and race), and traps were disarmed by smart thinking (10' pole ftw!)
As I read somewhere once on these internets of ours, D&D is a game where you make fun of your friends for/while killing Orcs. That's it. 4E is not 3rd edition (what the **** do you expect?) but it's still D&D, if you use a fair definition of the term.
Note also that what I said for OD&D goes for Classic D&D and AD&D 1st Edition for the most part, except the part about Thieves obviously - which were added in Supplement I: Greyhawk in February '75 (there were more multiclassing options and many other classes too, scattered across supplements and TSR articles, but these were all "sub-classes" of one of the "big four").
This post is not directed at people who don't like 4e; it is directed at rabid 3.x fanboys who troll all over the place (i.e. not all 3.x fans) with no understanding of what they're talking about.
*Honest question... I really don't get it anymore. Other then to troll, flame, bait or keep this so called 'war' going, what is the point?
I haven't read all the way through just wanted to say I hate that they just read the books and then post on it. That is like judging a book by it's cover isn't it. Play the game a month or two then post on it. You can't tell how a game really works without playing it first.
Some posters haven't even read them. Nor do they plan too, they just come to troll.
Their job is to enforce the CoC, not to police the activities of Community Management.
And the term is a form of baiting.
It ticks people off to see it, especially when the “leader” of the FR Forums uses it repeatedly.
However, the WizO’s don’t see the term as baiting. They are mistaken.
Just so we’re clear: Although I didn’t nominate or second Karsus into his position (I believe you had a hand in that, yes, wrecan?) I don’t want to see Karsus lose his Forum Lead job.
He’s grown into it, appears to have mellowed out a bit and he works hard.
I've observed that he works consistently to keep the FR Forums clutter free and he worked to get us two FR Forums.
And I haven't seen the term used all that much on the FR Forums of late. I'd like to think Karsus had a hand in that.
So much the better.
Sometimes a number is just a number. Sometimes fish bite hooks that don't have bait on it. Some fish may even go looking for hooks and then cry "bait!"
I’m sorry, did you have a point here? If so, I missed it.
Maybe you could restate it in clear, concise language? Innuendo doesn’t work for me.
Bonus points for quoting an awesome song.
Thanks, obviously I'm a big fan.
I just saw your sig.
Now I get why you are imagining things...
Wow, you're really not good at this.
So yeah, please stop, it's getting embarrassing, for all of us, I mean, didn't you read some of the previous posts from Bay Area dwellers – you're not looking too good at the moment.
Maybe they should start a separate forum just for the bitter malcontents to spew their groundless opinions, suspect speculations, and wild conjecture?
And the term is a form of baiting.
The fact that you get riled up by it doesn't make it baiting. The definition of baiting is nto placed in the hands of the most sensitive members of the forum. Sometimes you have to accept that people can disagree about stuff. In this case, people disagree that 4gotten Realms is a bating term.
I play 4th and will probably play in a 4th edition FR campaign. I might use "4gotten Realms" to refer to the campaign world to distinguish it from, say the R3alms"
However, the WizO’s don’t see the term as baiting. They are mistaken.
Since "baiting" is by nature a subjective determination they can't be mistaken. They are merely using a different standard than you.
I’m sorry, did you have a point here? If so, I missed it.
Yes, clearly you did. It's okay. Other people seem to have gotten it just fine.
Maybe you could restate it in clear, concise language? Innuendo doesn’t work for me.
I think restating it in a way that you would understand would cause it to lose its sublime poetry, so I think I'm not going to try. Have fun.
Hmm. It is actually sort of a haiku:
Numbers are numbers
Some fish bite unbaited hooks
Some seek them -- cry "Bait!"
I just wish the rabid 3.X fanboys would stop crying, get a clue and go check out Paizo's Pathfinder. There is indeed more 3.5+ stuff coming out, just not by Wizards of the Coast but then considering the bile most of you have for WotC why would you care? Pathfinder looks like it will be great though they ARE taking some ideas from 4th from what I've seen.
I just wish the rabid 4E fans would take a deep breath and not act like a holy inquisition when people disagree. One of the reason that the "pro-3.5" crowd hangs out in the 4e forums is because they are playing 4e, and want to give feedback. I haven't played 3.5 since 4e came out. So I have been on the 4e forums. What you guys really want is to ban all negative opinions of 4e, and characterize any anti-4e person as 1) misguided 2) ignorant of the rules.
What you guys really want is to ban all negative opinions of 4e
Not at all, we just don't want uninformed/biased belligerence.
Not at all, we just don't want uninformed/biased belligerence.
That is coming from both sides. But there are lots of people here who don't like 4e and have good reasons for not liking it. They are also not all being belligerent about it. You have simply decided that people who don't like the game are uninformed and hostile. I have recieved plenty of hostility from the both sides, so I think it swings both ways.
I just wish the rabid 4E fans would take a deep breath and not act like a holy inquisition when people disagree. One of the reason that the "pro-3.5" crowd hangs out in the 4e forums is because they are playing 4e, and want to give feedback. I haven't played 3.5 since 4e came out. So I have been on the 4e forums. What you guys really want is to ban all negative opinions of 4e, and characterize any anti-4e person as 1) misguided 2) ignorant of the rules.
Just to be clear, this is NOT about criticism of the actual works. That is a Hatedom. This is about those who don't think people should like a certain work.
Most of the pro 4th only get riled up when a 4th hater say something thats just not true or more designed to chase off new players.
Most people here are just telling the Op's to give 4th a shot but keep playing 3.5 if they like it. Then you got afew haters trying to scare the new players off.
This is about those who don't think people should like a certain work and are trying to stop people from playing 4th.
But there are lots of people here who don't like 4e and have good reasons for not liking it. They are also not all being belligerent about it. You have simply decided that people who don't like the game are uninformed and hostile.
I have not decided anything, I agree that a lot of people have genuine concerns/disappointments with 4th Ed, there are things I'm not too keen on, I'm talking about…well, you know the ones.
Just to be clear, this is NOT about criticism of the actual works. That is a Hatedom. This is about those who don't think people should like a certain work.
Most of the pro 4th only get riled up when a 4th hater say something thats just not true or more designed to chase off new players.
Most people here are just telling the Op's to give 4th a shot but keep playing 3.5 if they like it. Then you got afew haters trying to scare the new players off.
This is about those who don't think people should like a certain work and are trying to stop people from playing 4th.
Funny. Because anytime I have seen someone voice any negative opinion about 4e, they get chased away by the "let me dispell that misconception" brigade. Even when it clearly about something that is a matter of taste. The skill debate is a good example.
Funny. Because anytime I have seen someone voice any negative opinion about 4e, they get chased away by the "let me dispell that misconception" brigade. Even when it clearly about something that is a matter of taste. The skill debate is a good example.
Most of the pro 4th only get riled up when a 4th hater say something thats just not true or more designed to chase off new players.
Hater: In 4th you can't make a sword or a flower arrangement as a gift for the king so 4th kills RP.
4th fan: Um sure you can and it won't even wast skill points.
Hater & 4th fan: FLAMEWAR!!!!!
I am finding that most of the bad TYPES of gamers will not be going to 4e because there are less chances to abuse the system.
I do think that most of the people that are considered munchkins will not switch to 4.0. The system is too rigid to get away with the junk they're used to pulling on newbie DMs.
Most of the pro 4th only get riled up when a 4th hater say something thats just not true or more designed to chase off new players.
Hater: In 4th you can't make a sword or a flower arrangement as a gift for the king so 4th kills RP.
4th fan: Um sure you can and it won't even wast skill points.
Hater & 4th fan: FLAMEWAR!!!!!
What they mean when they saw you can't is there is no mechanic in the game for lots of non-combat stuff. SHouting "page 42!" doesn't change the fact that the designers created a system for people who can't be bothered to memorize some simple rules.
What they mean when they saw you can't is there is no mechanic in the game for lots of non-combat stuff. SHouting "page 42!" doesn't change the fact that the designers created a system for people who can't be bothered to memorize some simple rules.
I guess 2e was for people you couldn't remember rules, too. Not too many rules at all, actually. I hate it when the zealots shout "page 42!!11eleventy!1bbqpewpew!!1" too, but the idea for the non-combat stuff in 4e really does harken back to the days where the DM and the players made the game - not some list of skills and DCs. And I, for one, like that. Do we really need rules to determine how nice the scarf we knitted for our Eladrin grandma is? I think not. Believe it or not, being limited to the choices for character flavor printed in the pages of a book is just that - limiting. We are now allowed to think up all kinds of stuff because the rules are simple to follow. Want to be a knitter? Write it into your background and get a +5 if you ever (for reasons unknown) need to make a super special sock. I guess the thing to remember here is that simpler != dumb. And, try to keep this old adage in mind: Work smarter, not harder. Adding a bunch of rules for stuff that never comes up and really doesn't need a measuring device to begin with makes it unnecessarily harder. And that doesn't make any kind of sense.
I just wish the rabid 4E fans would take a deep breath and not act like a holy inquisition when people disagree. One of the reason that the "pro-3.5" crowd hangs out in the 4e forums is because they are playing 4e, and want to give feedback. I haven't played 3.5 since 4e came out. So I have been on the 4e forums. What you guys really want is to ban all negative opinions of 4e, and characterize any anti-4e person as 1) misguided 2) ignorant of the rules.
I just wish people like you would actually READ what I said. All I said was to stop crying that you can't play 3.5 anymore because no new content was coming out and open your tear stained eyes, go to Paizo and check out Pathfinder. So wrong about wanting to ban all negative opinions of 4th ed. I just want to get rid of IGNORANT and wrong opinions. Saying you can't play 3.5 anymore is pretty much wrong. There are many places you can still get 3.5 material and as I stated, Paizo is making their own 3.5+ setting and it looks very good. But people don't want to hear that. They just want to hear their own voices, crying against 4th edition.
Free speech (at least as defined in the US Constitution) doesn't apply here. The Constitution protects against the government censoring what we say. It doesn't do jack diddly to what a company like WotC can control.
EXACTLY.
For instance when the Dixie Chicks Spoke out about George Bush, they had every right to do so.
However the fanbase had every right to exercise their right of free speech by NOT SUPPORTING the Dixie Chicks.
The trouble people get into with 'free speech' is people do not agree with them and will react accordingly.
If someone at a company makes a remark (Perfectly clean) that the company does not like, they can fire the said individual. Free speech does not protect against that.
Funny. Because anytime I have seen someone voice any negative opinion about 4e, they get chased away by the "let me dispell that misconception" brigade. Even when it clearly about something that is a matter of taste. The skill debate is a good example.
If it's a matter of taste then explain to me why certain people are stating, as fact, that the 3.5 skill system is just outright better than 4E's?
If it's a matter of taste then explain to me why certain people are stating, as fact, that the 3.5 skill system is just outright better than 4E's?
It depends on what they mean by 'better.' If you are talking about being able to specialize your character and have more checks for areas of your character's life and adventuring - then yes, it is better. If you are talking about having a system that isn't bogged down by requiring multiple skill rolls due to so many skills being related to the task at hand, then it isn't better.
I personally like more facets to a character but it isn't for the more simplified version of play of 4e.
You would have to be able to prove, possible in court in some cases, that they are causing big problems.
It would be better for wizards to come up with ways to convert 3.5 so that it could be used in 4e. Right now it just seems more important to sell books then what people think. And the ones that have this problem are just treated the same as the others. It is not right for them to act that way,3.5 people, but Is it OK to treat them rude just because we don't believe that way? I think not. There has been rudeness on both sides. We all still play D&D.
What they mean when they saw you can't is there is no mechanic in the game for lots of non-combat stuff. SHouting "page 42!" doesn't change the fact that the designers created a system for people who can't be bothered to memorize some simple rules.
Then thats just a matter of taste is it not? How odd that so many (I think its really just like 4-5?) feel the need to jump into as many topics as they can and tell everyone to stop having fun right now and go back to the better 3.5.
Just to be clear, this is NOT about criticism of the actual works.
This is about those who don't think people should like a certain work and it would be nice if those people stopped hijacking threads.
But their not going to ban something they think the government would see as wrong. They set up guidelines for people to follow when posting on their site. As long as the people follow those guidelines they should be free to post what they want. That doesn't stop it from being annoying.
You would have to be able to prove, possible in court in some cases, that they are causing big problems.
What does the gov't have to with posting on a message board?
If it's a matter of taste then explain to me why certain people are stating, as fact, that the 3.5 skill system is just outright better than 4E's?
Which skill system is just outright better than whichever other skill system is a completely subjective matter, ergo, is a matter of taste.
You're living up to that 4E AVENGER moniker, I see.
You would have to be able to prove, possible in court in some cases, that they are causing big problems.[/b]
No, you wouldn't. This is a private internet site. The rules are what the owners of the site say are the rules. IF the site owners say any criticism of fourth edition D&D ios a bannable offense, it is 100% within their rights to do so.
If they want to say the moniker of Xyxox or Ace_of_Time is hereby banned and nobody can use those names, they are 100% within their rights to do so.
IF they want to say signatures that evoke the name AVENGERS are bannable, they are 100% within their rights to do so.
IF they want to say they just don't want you posting on their site "because" and for no other reason, they are 100% within their rights to do so.
This is WotC's property and they makes the rules.
civil rights: an overview
A civil right is an enforceable right or privilege, which if interfered with by another gives rise to an action for injury. Examples of civil rights are freedom of speech, press, and assembly; the right to vote; freedom from involuntary servitude; and the right to equality in public places. Discrimination occurs when the civil rights of an individual are denied or interfered with because of their membership in a particular group or class. Statutes have been enacted to prevent discrimination based on a person's race, sex, religion, age, previous condition of servitude, physical limitation, national origin, and in some instances sexual preference.
And those people are with in their rights to take WotC to court if they feel and can prove they were unjustly treated or singled out for some reason other then going against the CoC. Single people out and banning then from certain forums just because they don't like 4e would fall under those lines. If they are being bad and not following CoC then OK. But Single out certain people because of what they believe, think, and feel, I don't think would look to good. Even to the Gov. Private does not mean do what ever you want. You have to think of what the actions will cause. That is why they have a legal team for.
You're wrong. They can ban you for no reason at all and be within their rights. This is thier property, not yours. You agreed to a terms of service and that terms of service gives WotC the right to ban you any time for any reason or no reason at all.
The first amendment does not protect you on D&D forums. If they decide you are not conducive to their corporate strategy, to the ban bin you go.
You need to brush up on what a protected class is. HEre's a hint, being opposed to 4.0 D&D is not a protected class. Religion discussions are not allowed, so religion as a protected class is a moot point. You have no basis to bring suit if WotC determines they simply don;t want you on their site.
No one is stopping you from playing your game. You certainly don't have to go out of your way to read and respond to posts by people who don't like 4E, and even if you decide to do that it doesn't stop you playing 4E. Instead of being such a busybody and trying to tell people what to do on the forums, and what opinions to express, why don't you put that same energy into ignoring anti-4E trolls and playing your game (which is what you claim you want to do)?
preach it. that first post just stirred up the pot and ****** everyone off. i dont go and read threads about psionics, or weird half dragon/half wererhino duskblade/assassin/monk/spellfire/underwater basket-weaver PrC, because i want nothing to do with them. I ignore them.
And those people are with in their rights to take WotC to court if they feel and can prove they were unjustly treated or singled out for some reason other then going against the CoC.
No, they can't. (Well, I guess people technically can bring frivolous lawusuits, but I think it would be a monumentally bad idea.
Wizards could simply say "You are banned, Ace_of_Time. We don't have a good reason. Our head of operations just woke up this morning and decided to ban the first poster I saw and it happened to be you." You would have no recourse at law. No more than I could wake up one mornign and kick out my in-laws who were visiting from Wisconsin for no reason. My house, my rules.
This is Wizards' house. If they decide to ban all discussion of Third Edition they could.
Note that they haven't. There are six forums dedicated to Previous Editions. They don't even ban criticism of 4th edition. But nor do they ban responses to criticisms of 4th edition. So critics and boosters alike have to learn to live together. The best way is for people to report posts that violate the CoC and not respond to them.
I feel that would be up to the courts to decide. You can not sign over your civil rights.
No, they can't. (Well, I guess people technically can bring frivolous lawusuits, but I think it would be a monumentally bad idea.
Wizards could simply say "You are banned, Ace_of_Time. We don't have a good reason. Our head of operations just woke up this morning and decided to ban the first poster I saw and it happened to be you." You would have no recourse at law. No more than I could wake up one mornign and kick out my in-laws who were visiting from Wisconsin for no reason. My house, my rules.
This is Wizards' house. If they decide to ban all discussion of Third Edition they could.
Note that they haven't. There are six forums dedicated to Previous Editions. They don't even ban criticism of 4th edition. But nor do they ban responses to criticisms of 4th edition. So critics and boosters alike have to learn to live together. The best way is for people to report posts that violate the CoC and not respond to them.
That is skipping the subject. Banning a group of people for their views is not the same as no reason at all. Whether they can or can't doesn't really matter to me. Saying acts of discrimination are OK because they are not PROTECTED. Not OK with me. There laws in place that protect people civil rights from all that would try to take them.
You would be better off just saying this is not a public place.
Note: To the last part I was refering to those who were saying to "just bann all of them" or those type of statements.
I think I will stop posting now because it sounds like you're saying it is OK and legal for WotC to perform acts of discriminations as long as they are not the four list. "race, color, religion, or national origin"
Discrimination, at least in Canada, only occurs when it is over a very small set of circumstances. The following are the only situations, in Canada, where it is considered discrimination:
* Race
* National or ethnic origin
* Colour
* Religion
* Age
* Sex (including pregnancy and childbearing)
* Sexual Orientation
* Marital status
* Family status
* Physical or mental disability (including dependence on alcohol or drugs)
* Pardoned criminal conviction
I feel that would be up to the courts to decide. You can not sign over your civil rights.
Actually, you can, and it is quite common, especially with jobs. High profile jobs, or jobs for employers that are very visible in the public eye, often come with conditions attached whereby you voluntarily limit your actions so as to remain employed.
For example - If you are in the military, there are certain actions that you should not do, and certain things that you should not be associated with.
The same if you are a member of the government.
Cheerleaders for NFL teams. You don't think that they have a long list of clauses in their contracts that prohibit them from doing certain things??
You would be better off just saying this is not a public place.
This isn't a public place.
Main Entry: dis·crim·i·na·tion
Pronunciation: \dis-ˌkri-mə-ˈnā-shən\
Function: noun
Date: 1648
1 a: the act of discriminating b: the process by which two stimuli differing in some aspect are responded to differently
2: the quality or power of finely distinguishing
3 a: the act, practice, or an instance of discriminating categorically rather than individually b: prejudiced or prejudicial outlook, action, or treatment
I just wish the rabid 4E fans would take a deep breath and not act like a holy inquisition when people disagree. One of the reason that the "pro-3.5" crowd hangs out in the 4e forums is because they are playing 4e, and want to give feedback. I haven't played 3.5 since 4e came out. So I have been on the 4e forums. What you guys really want is to ban all negative opinions of 4e, and characterize any anti-4e person as 1) misguided 2) ignorant of the rules.
You're part of the ******* problem. This post right here.
Do we go onto the 3e forums and spam "Old editions suck! Join 4e you stupid grognards!"? No. A small minority is a bit too rabid, but *you* guys are the one acting confrontational (then innocent), and accusing us all of "oppressing" you and trolling things which don't even make sense, like "4e is basically WoW; only a 12 year old would play it".
Also, "free speech" does not nor did it ever mean "say whatever you want wherever". It mean "say whatever you wan *within* the guidelines of property". Study constitutional and political history moar.
Sorry continuning with this will only lead to fighting. It would still be wrong.
That is not the legal definition. Webster's only shows colloquial definitions. Legally, it is not actionable discrimination to kick someone out of a forum base don what they say.
You will notice that the First Amendment, which you cited as the baseis for the idea that you can't be kicked off an internet forum for what you speak says as follows:
[indent]Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.[/indent]
-Cite
See how it begins "Congress shall make no law"? That means the First Amendment only applies to acts of the federal government. (The Fourteenth Amendment expanded this so that the First Amendment also applies to acts of the governments of individual States.)
Wizards of the Coast is a corporation, not a governmental agency. The First Amendment does not apply to them and they are allowed to kick people out because of what those people say, is they so choose. (They haven't chosen to do so, but they could.)
Private discrimination is only illegal if there is a specific statute making it illegal. At the moment the only statutes that make discrimination illegal are those that ban racial discrimination, gender discrimination, disability discrimination (i.e., discriminating against the blind or wheelchair-bound), age discrimination and some very limited forms of religious discrimination. (Some states have also restricted discrimination based on sexual gender preference.)
There is no statute of which I am aware in any State in the United States that forbids corporations for banning users of their internet forums based on the content of their speech.
I think I will stop posting now because it sounds like you're saying it is OK and legal for WotC to perform acts of discriminations as long as they are not the four list. "race, color, religion, or national origin"
I feel that would be up to the courts to decide. You can not sign over your civil rights.
You have no 1st Amend rights on a private board. The courts decided this AGES
ago. You don't have those types of rights here...
WoTC could make this place a private game club for blacks only & everyone else would be SOL.
Also didn't know I need the LEGAL DICTIONARY, so here you go.
discrimination
n. unequal treatment of persons, for a reason which has nothing to do with legal rights or ability.
Private clubs have been take to court over this type of thing because of holding womens night. Of course I'm sure you were typing about other types of clubs. WotC is not going to take bad press and the eye of the government just to make some people happy. It is still wrong. It doesn't matter if you or anyone else thinks it is lawfull or unlawful.
TITLE 42 > CHAPTER 21 > SUBCHAPTER I > § 1983Prev | Next § 1983. Civil action for deprivation of rights
How Current is This? Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer’s judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable. For the purposes of this section, any Act of Congress applicable exclusively to the District of Columbia shall be considered to be a statute of the District of Columbia.
And to be fair here is one for your side.
(e) Private establishments
The provisions of this subchapter shall not apply to a private club or other establishment not in fact open to the public, except to the extent that the facilities of such establishment are made available to the customers or patrons of an establishment within the scope of subsection (b) of this section.
Private clubs have been take to court over this type of thing because of holding womens night.
Because there is a statute banning gender discrimination, as I said.
It is still wrong. It doesn't matter if you or anyone else thinks it is lawfull or unlawful.
The law only cares if it's unlawful and it's not. You are wrong and telling people that it would be illegal to ban someone from a forum because of what they say is irresponsible.
Frankly, I don't think it would be wrong either. If someone is in my house and starts using racial epithets, I have every right to kick them out of my house.
If someone in the forums starts posting racial epithets they will be banned. And they won't be successful if they sue WotC for some notion of censorship.
Don't believe me? Maybe you'll believe Michael Troy, an attorney for the Center for Individual Rights, who has successfully argued numerous First Amentment cases before the United States Supreme Court. Or maybe Mark Methenitis whose career is largely in the realm of the law and the internet, or perhaps Rodney Smolla, the Dean of the University of Virginia School of Law.
Because there is a statute banning gender discrimination, as I said.
The law only cares if it's unlawful and it's not. You are wrong and telling people that it would be illegal to ban someone from a forum because of what they say is irresponsible.
Frankly, I don't think it would be wrong either. If someone is in my house and starts using racial epithets, I have every right to kick them out of my house.
If someone in the forums starts posting racial epithets they will be banned. And they won't be successful if they sue WotC for some notion of censorship.
Don't believe me? Maybe you'll believe Michael Troy, an attorney for the Center for Individual Rights, who has successfully argued numerous First Amentment cases before the United States Supreme Court. Or maybe Mark Methenitis whose career is largely in the realm of the law and the internet, or perhaps Rodney Smolla, the Dean of the University of Virginia School of Law.
Now wait a minute. I said they it was ok to bann for what they say as long as that was against the terms and CoC, and that they could bann for no reason at all. But single out a certain group of people for what they beleive is wrong. I'm not telling anyone that they should sue. Only that it is possible for that to happen if they went through bann people just because they use 3.5 and don't like
4e.
I like how my words get twisted when others are trying to prove a point.
And it still sounds as if you are saying it is ok to discriminate against people as long it is not covered in a statute?
I'm not telling anyone that they should sue. Only that it is possible for that to happen if they went through bann people just because they use 3.5 and don't like 4e.
And that second sentence is wrong. When you write things that are factually inaccurate, such as
You would have to be able to prove, possible in court in some cases, that they are causing big problems.
and
I feel that would be up to the courts to decide. You can not sign over your civil rights.
and
There laws in place that protect people civil rights from all that would try to take them.
is irresponsible. Saying things in a forum has nothing to do with civil rights and the courts won't get involved.
And it still sounds as if you are saying it is ok to discriminate against people as long it is not covered in a statute?
What do you mean by "ok"? That's a vague term.
Do I think it's legal? yes.
Do I think that kicking people out of a forum for badmouthing products is good for business? Maybe.
Do I think that Wizards is doing it? no.
Do I think there might be times when someone should be booted from a forum even though they manage to avoid blatantly violating the Code of Conduct? Yes.
Do I think this should happen often or in the regular course of events? No.
Do I think trying to conflate getting banned from an internet forum with the fight for civil rights, gender equality or the First Amendment is an ill-informed and deliberately misleading bit of rhetorical nonsense? Absolutely.
By the way, the Code of Conduct contains the following provision:
[indent]It is only a guideline and Wizards of the Coast may deviate from this procedure at any time in any manner it deems appropriate without notice.[/indent]
This means, of course, they have reserved the right to ban people without notice even if they haven't violated the CoC. I don't know that this has ever been invoked, but there it is. Which means if they ban someone base don their speech, they didn't even violate their own guidelines.
Would it be right (or "OK") to do so? Depends on the circumstances. It wouldn't have anything to do with the First Amendment or civil rights.
Which skill system is just outright better than whichever other skill system is a completely subjective matter, ergo, is a matter of taste.
You're living up to that 4E AVENGER moniker, I see.
Yes it is a matter of taste. Which is why I asked you to explain why some people are stating as fact that the 3.5 skill system is better.
You're avoiding the point.
Yes it is a matter of taste. Which is why I asked you to explain why some people are stating as fact that the 3.5 skill system is better.
You're still doing that 4E hater thing of avoiding the point, I see.
I dont think he is. He is saying he thinks it is a better skill system than 4e. Doesn't mean he is claiming that is an objective fact. It seems to me like the 4e avengers just have a hard time letting people draw their own conclusions.
It seems to me like the 4e avengers just have a hard time letting people draw their own conclusions.
And it seems to me that you're reaching for boogeymen again.
Yes it is a matter of taste. Which is why I asked you to explain why some people are stating as fact that the 3.5 skill system is better.
I'd suggest you get used to the fact that some people consider it a fact that the 3.5 skill system is better.
I don't, but some people do.
I'd suggest you get used to the fact that some people consider it a fact that the 3.5 skill system is better.
I don't, but some people do.
Posting one's opinion as though it were an unassailable fact is debating in bad faith. It shows a complete lack of respect for anyone that disagrees with you and an utter unwillingness to engage in an honest discourse. It's also one of the most common forms of trolling on these boards.
And it seems to me that you're reaching for boogeymen again.
I don't think so. You can ignore the harrasment that 4E avengers throw at people here, doesn't make it a boogeyman. I am just pointing out that a lot of them don't like the fact that people have differing opinions, and saying "3e has a better skill system than 4e" is an opinion statement. This is how people commonly express their opinions. It is the way people communicate. The problem is, 4e avengers are taking people WAY too literally. No one honestly believes you can quantify these things.
Posting one's opinion as though it were an unassailable fact is debating in bad faith. It shows a complete lack of respect for anyone that disagrees with you and an utter unwillingness to engage in an honest discourse. It's also one of the most common forms of trolling on these boards.
As is roaming around the boards looking to defend 4e. The actions of 4e avengers qualify as trolling, just as much as my own actions have. Basically they are looking around for people who state their opinions somewhat carelessly in order to flame them.
I don't think so. You can ignore the harrasment that 4E avengers throw at people here, doesn't make it a boogeyman. I am just pointing out that a lot of them don't like the fact that people have differing opinions, and saying "3e has a better skill system than 4e" is an opinion statement. This is how people commonly express their opinions. It is the way people communicate. The problem is, 4e avengers are taking people WAY too literally. No one honestly believes you can quantify these things.
One should be able to defend one's opinions logically. Asking for clarification isn't "harassment," it's a means of figuring out how the conversation is being approached by either side. Making a statement like "4E can't do non-combat stuff" and then wailing about unfair treatment when you're asked for specifics is just victim politics.
As is roaming around the boards looking to defend 4e. The actions of 4e avengers qualify as trolling, just as much as my own actions have. Basically they are looking around for people who state their opinions somewhat carelessly in order to flame them.
I'd imagine it's less that there are roaming bands of marauding "Avengers" and more that you like to grief in the forums they hang out in. Based on your history here, that is.
One should be able to defend one's opinions logically. Asking for clarification isn't "harassment," it's a means of figuring out how the conversation is being approached by either side. Making a statement like "4E can't do non-combat stuff" and then wailing about unfair treatment when you're asked for specifics is just victim politics.
I'd imagine it's less that there are roaming bands of marauding "Avengers" and more that you like to grief in the forums they hang out in. Based on your history here, that is.
Batshido. Many have defended their opinions logically. But they continue to get flamed. After a while they stop defending their opinions and flame back or even troll out of frustration. I know this is the case with myself. I honestly think you should pay better attention to the posts of the 4E avengers. They are hostile, they flame, they bait, and they try to intimidate people out of the forums. Oh, and they don't recognize when people do make logical arguments to defend their position.
I don't think so. You can ignore the harrasment that 4E avengers throw at people here, doesn't make it a boogeyman. I am just pointing out that a lot of them don't like the fact that people have differing opinions, and saying "3e has a better skill system than 4e" is an opinion statement. This is how people commonly express their opinions. It is the way people communicate. The problem is, 4e avengers are taking people WAY too literally. No one honestly believes you can quantify these things.
The problem I see there is also that the Avengers and all other Pros are used as a boggeymen, and an excuse to fight and harass.
The call to victimisation and all that.
Many have defended their opinions logically. But they continue to get flamed. After a while they stop defending their opinions and flame back or even troll out of frustration. Oh, and they don't recognize when people do make logical arguments to defend their position.
This looks identical from the other side of the fence, just so you know. There's nothing special about the "Avengers" that makes them the bad guys here, save the fact that you disagree with them.
This looks identical from the other side of the fence, just so you know. There's nothing special about the "Avengers" that makes them the bad guys here, save the fact that you disagree with them.
The fact that they control the boards and have effectively created an echo chamber matters. While the people with minority opinions might be just as rude, their numbers are much smaller and they usually take the brunt of the majority's abuse.
The fact that they control the boards and have effectively created an echo chamber matters. While the people with minority opinions might be just as rude, their numbers are much smaller and they usually take the brunt of the majority's abuse.
"Control the boards?" Seriously? The majority of people in the 4E forums are fans of 4e (startling coincidence, that), but they by no means control anything. Fans of the new system are just as much at the mercy of trolls as those who don't like it. Until my request for a "Delete Post" button goes through, we don't have any special privileges you don't.
fans =/= uncritiqual or not free-minded.
I don't think so. You can ignore the harrasment that 4E avengers throw at people here, doesn't make it a boogeyman.
Can you prove that 4th avengers are harassing other forum members?
The fact that they control the boards and have effectively created an echo chamber matters.
It's a fact?
While the people with minority opinions might be just as rude, their numbers are much smaller and they usually take the brunt of the majority's abuse.
Actually the majority are most likely silent. Of those posting I've personally seen few that could be ID as 4th avengers.
It's a fact
.
I would refer you to my previous post about taking peoples' statements WAY TOO literally.
People should say what they mean, not say things in an inflammatory manner and then tell the reader not to take it literally. If you don't want people to take you literally, don't say things you don't mean.
People do say what they mean. Like I said it is how people normally communicate. Nothing in that post was inflammatory. Colloquial maybe, but not inflammatory.
Also, WotC's draconic measures to end production of content for 3.5 more or less means we can't "just play our game". If we want to see a game with further updates, clarifications, more campaign source material, more tools ect, we have to move to 4th ed.
If you want to make demands, demand that WotC extend all OGL liscences permenantly and that they allow companies to produce for both platforms instead of artificially forcing us from one to the other.
Rorlins
But there is 100's of 3.5 books, material and add on products. Sure there won't be new stuff, but there is more then enough to allow 3.5 or whatever to keep making up their own stuff.
Please keep your posts polite, respectful, and on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks
it is how people normally communicate.
Because this is a written medium, writing things down the way you would speak them is bound to get misinterpreted. So again, if you wish to be understood, you need to adjust your writing style for the medium. That's an "if" I'm not sure many people really want, sadly.
Because this is a written medium, writing things down the way you would speak them is bound to get misinterpreted. So again, if you wish to be understood, you need to adjust your writing style for the medium. That's an "if" I'm not sure many people really want, sadly.
No. I think it is a case of people being way too pedantic on these boards. I have little trouble understanding people. The only thing that is tricky is tone. But when someone speaks casually I have no problem. In fact I prefer a casual style to a rigid academic one on a board about gaming. There just seems to be an abundance of hall monitors and language police here. Personally I would rather continue to communicate in a style that is comfortable than change my writing style to accomodate them.
Consider this yet another call to end this retarded edition war and return these forums to some sense of "normalcy" whatever the hell that is. I see large segments of the population here that need to, yet refuse to, ignore one another.
As the Silver Surfer, hopefully i have heralded this threads destruction, now i am just waiting for Wizo_Galactus..come on moderators MODERATE!
And that second sentence is wrong. When you write things that are factually inaccurate, such as
and
and
is irresponsible. Saying things in a forum has nothing to do with civil rights and the courts won't get involved.
What do you mean by "ok"? That's a vague term.
Do I think it's legal? yes.
Do I think that kicking people out of a forum for badmouthing products is good for business? Maybe.
Do I think that Wizards is doing it? no.
Do I think there might be times when someone should be booted from a forum even though they manage to avoid blatantly violating the Code of Conduct? Yes.
Do I think this should happen often or in the regular course of events? No.
Do I think trying to conflate getting banned from an internet forum with the fight for civil rights, gender equality or the First Amendment is an ill-informed and deliberately misleading bit of rhetorical nonsense? Absolutely.
By the way, the Code of Conduct contains the following provision:
[indent]It is only a guideline and Wizards of the Coast may deviate from this procedure at any time in any manner it deems appropriate without notice.[/indent]
This means, of course, they have reserved the right to ban people without notice even if they haven't violated the CoC. I don't know that this has ever been invoked, but there it is. Which means if they ban someone base don their speech, they didn't even violate their own guidelines.
Would it be right (or "OK") to do so? Depends on the circumstances. It wouldn't have anything to do with the First Amendment or civil rights.
I think we are getting confused. You are talking about censorship. I'm not. Every person in the US has the right to free speech. NO ONE can take this right away. (with a few exceptions IE: prison) Now a person or company can ask me not to use this right. This involves, most of the time, certain subject/s. Since WotC can't take away someones right to free speech they most of the time reserve the right to cencore those subject as well as any other subject they see as course or harmful. When I decide to come on here I agree to allow cencorship and not to use my free speech when it comes to those subjects. I also agree to act the way they think I should on their site.
Now Civil rights like free speech are considered 1st amendment rights but that is not the only thing in there amendments that were added to it that cover them also. And are the ones I was talking about.
This agreement how ever does not give them the right to act unjust or unlawful. They would be free to bann john doe for no reason. They can't justly and lawfully bann 500 or so people from their site based on what they believe. That is to say they could until a court decide it was unjust. If nobody says anything about the act of dicrimination Then they can. If some one does say something then they would be free to go to court and let the courts decide if it was unjust or not.
My problem was with the statement that WotC should just bann all of the 3.Xs from the site/ forum. It was not to anything WotC has done. Nor do I have a problem with banning greenish type people that only want to use the 3e/4e problem for their own kicks. It is just that some of the ways people are going about this is causing real problems for the people who have problems with the 4e games and might switch over if they understood better. The view of "3.Xer's, do me a favour? Play your game, and let us get on with ours?" Is not a problem solver.
If everyone play his edition, stay in his place for the more technical need, well... It would cool down much of the fighting.
So the basic view is that if they don't like 4e then they shouldn't be allowed on the 4e forum?
I think it's more that if someone doesn't like 4e, doesn't want to like 4e, doesn't like the 4e community, and only wants to post the same angry opinions all day everyday, we'd like that someone to find something more constructive to do with his time. This isn't a request for censorship or banning- some of us would like people who cannot get anything healthy from the 4e forums to voluntarily not participate in those forums.
Batshido. Many have defended their opinions logically. But they continue to get flamed.
Disagreeing with someone, and showing them how their statements are incorrect, is not flaming.
After a while they stop defending their opinions and flame back or even troll out of frustration. I know this is the case with myself.
So when you went to the off-topic forum the other day, and your first comment in a calmly discussed thread that was in no way related to D&D was a snide insult to me, how do you consider that flaming back?
I would say that that is one of those people (greenish types) That was just doing it for kicks. But I have found that some people treat the the others that do have constructive criticism the same just because they are annoyed at the others.
Jerks exist everywhere. You learn to cope with what you have, but that don't means we can't deal with others...
And the problem is also what is claimed as being constructive... may not be as much.
I think it's more that if someone doesn't like 4e, doesn't want to like 4e, doesn't like the 4e community, and only wants to post the same angry opinions all day everyday, we'd like that someone to find something more constructive to do with his time. This isn't a request for censorship or banning- some of us would like people who cannot get anything healthy from the 4e forums to voluntarily not participate in those forums.
Then come up with a code word and when you come acrossed these types post the code word and then everyone will know to just ignore that post all together.
Jerks exist everywhere. You learn to cope with what you have, but that don't means we can't deal with others...
And the problem is also what is claimed as being constructive... may not be as much.
How do you expect to deal with their jerks if you can not keep you own in line?
How do you expect to deal with their jerks if you can not keep you own in line?
That kind of retort annoy me. We can deal with our own, thank you very much.
Fans =/= blind fools.
So when you went to the off-topic forum the other day, and your first comment in a calmly discussed thread that was in no way related to D&D was a snide insult to me, how do you consider that flaming back?
Do you have a link Rictras?
And what do you mean by that 'greenish' word?
Never heard of it. When do they hold it? Hope you are not refering to the thread merge thing. People don't like being forced.
Do you have a link Rictras?
If Lordflashheart's history here is any indication, it was probably laced with enough profanity, slurs and threats of physical violence to get deleted.
I would refer you to my previous post about taking peoples' statements WAY TOO literally.
People do say what they mean. Like I said it is how people normally communicate. Nothing in that post was inflammatory. Colloquial maybe, but not inflammatory.
So you say what you mean, but it shouldn't be taken too literally.
No. I think it is a case of people being way too pedantic on these boards. I have little trouble understanding people. The only thing that is tricky is tone. But when someone speaks casually I have no problem. In fact I prefer a casual style to a rigid academic one on a board about gaming. There just seems to be an abundance of hall monitors and language police here. Personally I would rather continue to communicate in a style that is comfortable than change my writing style to accomodate them.
There should be an adage or something about this.
When communicating through text many of the tells that show that your words do not match what you say do not carry over. Even literal translations can cause trouble. For example a joke followed by "ha ha ha" seems quite odd and often comes across wrong. because of that smilies came into being.
If Lordflashheart's history here is any indication, it was probably laced with enough profanity, slurs and threats of physical violence to get deleted.
This one actually didn't have those things. It was a rather subtle attack on my intelligence, in this thread (post 10, if you don't want to read through it):
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1065028
This one actually didn't have those things. It was a rather subtle attack on my intelligence, in this thread (post 10, if you don't want to read through it):
http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1065028
Honestly, that looks like two people miscommunicating more than anything else.
Honestly, that looks like two people miscommunicating more than anything else.
That's a pretty forgiving interpretation, especially given what we've seen of the poster in question.
The only thing that is tricky is tone.
That's what I said. And tone is very very important to determining whether someone should be taken literally or not. Which is why people should write what they mean and not assume that everyone else will intuit that you aren't saying what you mean on the internet.
Every person in the US has the right to free speech. NO ONE can take this right away.
You do not understand what "rights" are. A right is simply a protection from the government, not a protection from the acts of other private citizens.
When I decide to come on here I agree to allow cencorship and not to use my free speech when it comes to those subjects.
No, you agree that your presence here is at their discretion and they can boot you for any reason.
This agreement how ever does not give them the right to act unjust or unlawful.
Nothing bars people from acting "unjustly"
They would be free to bann john doe for no reason. They can't justly and lawfully bann 500 or so people from their site based on what they believe.
Yes, they can. There is no law barring companies from banning people from their internet forums for expressing a belief. You are wrong when you write these things.
If some one does say something then they would be free to go to court and let the courts decide if it was unjust or not.
Please cite the law that allows a court to determine if someone was booted from an internet forum unjustly. You are incorrect.
Please stop disseminating false information about the law. Someone might actually rely on what you say and get themselves in trouble. People who start friviolous lawsuits can be sanctioned.
They would be free to bann john doe for no reason. They can't justly and lawfully bann 500 or so people from their site based on what they believe. That is to say they could until a court decide it was unjust.
Sure they can. And, there is plenty of case law. No court would now touch it.
Check out the case law for yourself.
This thread is not meant to troll, flame or bait. If anyone takes anything I've said in the post the wrong way, e-mail me with the quote that upset you, and a reason why it upset you and I'll see about changing it.
There are quite a few people on this board who obviously dislike 4th edition, and who have made it clear that they thoroughly enjoyed 3.5. So why are you all hanging around here? Go to your forums, play your game, and let us enjoy ours. It's a simple request. How would you all like it if I went to the 3.5 forums and started pointing out all it's faults?
Just because 4th edition has it's faults does not make 3.5 a faultless system, but that's besides the point.
The point is that you guys have your game system. Why not go and discuss it with like minded people rather than hang around here bashing a game system that you're never going to play?
Why outright refuse to leave us alone and go play your games and have fun?
Claiming that you want to "find something to like" or that you think you've missed something that will make the game perfect for you is a weak excuse. You do not like 4th edition. Nothing will change that. clinkzdps (and meaning no disrespect here) was probably the biggest 4E hater around here, and actively trolled and flamed, however he seems to have just vanished from the 4th edition forums. I'm willing to bet he started posting in the 3.X forums around the same time.
Thank you, clinkz, for being so mature about it. I may not agree with you, but the fact that you decided to allow us to enjoy our game is admirable. In a good way
Why flame us when we say something that 4E does differently (thought not necessarily better) is "a nice touch" or "pretty cool" or "a welcome change, in my opinion"?
This thread is not meant to be baiting or trolling, as I've said before. It is simply meant to say the following:
3.Xer's. I am fed up with you guys. You hate 4th edition. Nothing anyone says will change that. Flaming us and trolling these boards is getting you, and us, nowhere fast. You have boards where you opinions will be welcomed, where your game is played, where like-minded people lie waiting for you to return, so that you can talk about your latest game, a pretty cool house rule, that new class you found online etc.
Now let's just drop this stupid edition war and go in separate directions.
Code of conduct rule 3
Do not harass, bully, threaten, harm or cause discomfort for other persons, including any other members. For example:
Use hate speech or racial, ethnic, sexist, homophobic or religious slurs
Harass a specific person (repeated flaming, personal attacks or posting their private information)
Troll or bait the community in general with inflammatory statements, such as ones designed to elicit a negative response from the community Post or otherwise disclose any personal or private information of another person, or any confidential information pertaining to a business, without consent
Why was this thread allowed to even be left open? Its an obvious violation of rule 3, I'm a 3.5 guy I never come hear and harrass you people but logging on and seeing things like this makes me wanna stick my head in and say where the heck is the moderation? Do they not enforce rules here? I don't personally care too much about 4.0 but seeing this as the first thing when you log in is inflamatory, an obvious flame to get a rise out of people. Well you got one. Reported.
Really, play your game... your entitled.. just like other people are entittled to speake thier mind about what they don't like about it. Threads like this, make you the bad guy.
And those contest threads aren't unique. Players have sought help with the 4e alignment system, ways to remove magic items from 4e, how to fill out a 3.5 character sheet and more. I haven't peeked at the DM forum in a while, but it's similarly composed of mixed topics and runs smoothly without any hint of "edition wars."
Why? I'd love to say it's because of the Forum Leads, but wrecan works a hell of a lot harder than I do, so either he works too much or it's not directly related to the forum leads.
And no -- this isn't an invitation for everybody to come and bring their edition war nonsense to those forums. ;)
Why? I'd love to say it's because of the Forum Leads, but wrecan works a hell of a lot harder than I do, so either he works too much or it's not directly related to the forum leads.
Short answer: The DM and Player Advice forums aren't the go-to place to air grievances with WotC and 4E's fanbase. Being "edition neutral," they don't represent the trolling equivalent of fish in a barrel the same way the 4E forums (and General Discussion specifically) do. If your primary motivation is to take shots at the new system, you shoot at it where it lives.