Positive Trend - Tone of the boards.

Hi all,

Has anyone else noticed how over the past 3-4 weeks the general tone of most posts has improved.   There seems to be more constructive criticism, and genuine sharing of experiences, and less ranting.

We've either scared all of the "Debbie Downers" and "Doubting Thomases" from posting, or the changes in the game are beginning to draw us toward common ground.

This is very good news.  Keep it going.  Thanks WotC.


        

A Brave Knight of WTF - "Wielder of the Sword of Balance"

 

Rhenny's Blog:  http://community.wizards.com/user/1497701/blog

 

 

Well, I'm all for it. There are things that I have really enjoyed over the past few weeks that I think are worth noting. There are a lot of creative home brew ideas that are happening that are really quite good. This is an area that I'm somewhat deficient in and it inspires me to see the ideas of others. I've also seen a lot of people that are very knowledgeable in the history of the game (again, far more than me) and I learn so much from these people. I feel very privileged to be able to have the forums as a resource and even though most of my contributions are comedy relief, I hope that relief does do something to help keep the tension that we sometimes feel, at a reasonable level. Hats off to all the members of the forums that love coming here to discuss something they're passionate about! (Insert Seeker's tipping hat emoticon here)
Most of the credit for that should be given to you, the community.

Specifically, the Knights of WTF (they have yet to explain the acronym :P ), Valdark, Brightmantle, Pashalik Mons and others who have made a conscious effort to bridge the gap between fans of every edition and put an end to the edition wars.

Hats off to them.  :D

All around helpful simian

I credit the second playtest packet with a lot of the change. In the first packet it looked like wizards was taking sides in an edition war but now with the changes it looks more like a blending of playstyles.
I think it's also a bit of growing pains. I'm new to the boards and just getting used to this style of communication has it's own frustrations. After some experience I'm begining to cool. Things that really bothered me before are now not so much.
I agree! I'm loving the boards these days!

Danny

True !  The plan is slowly coming togheter i guess.. THUMBS UP to the Community and its CM Team!

 

And keep up the good job all folks !  
As much as I would like to credit it to a change in the posters, my suspicion (in part due to years spent moderating boards for BioWare back when NWN was in development) is that it is more due to natural fatigue. 

When the packet drops - people are up in arms about the things they don't like.  After awhile, they've made their point, often vociferously, over and over.  They get tired or repeating themselves.    Most move on to other things - at least until something new is released that hits their hot button and they explode all over again - ranting about how "wizards having some spells that can be cast as encounter spells can only mean that they will be able to fill their entire array of daily spells with encounter attack spells cast at daily strength and will become gods" or some such.  Innocent

Just so long as people can keep their focus on the posts themselves and give everyone the benefit of assuming that they are merely excited fans of the game who want what they truely feel is best for the game and avoid insulting each other (or the WoTC employees and freelancers) - a bit of vigorous debate can't hurt.

But we shall see in October when the next packet drops.    I predict an explosion of screaming that gradually dies down to a quiet grumble.

Carl

I'm with CartT on this one.  I am looking forward to commenting on the harvest moon packet.

I do find the tone less bashy.  But at the same time, I am finding less interest in current topics. 

"The Apollo moon landing is off topic for this thread and this forum. Let's get back on topic." Crazy Monkey


I'm with CartT on this one.  I am looking forward to commenting on the harvest moon packet.

I do find the tone less bashy.  But at the same time, I am finding less interest in current topics. 



I recognize that unless there are drastic, unlikely changes to D&DNext, I'm not buying it. I don't think I'm the only person who has made that realization. And yes, they have gotten to that point where I can easily make the decision.

And as long as that's happened, there's just not much of a point to arguing about it. 
Hi all,

Has anyone else noticed how over the past 3-4 weeks the general tone of most posts has improved.   There seems to be more constructive criticism, and genuine sharing of experiences, and less ranting.

We've either scared all of the "Debbie Downers" and "Doubting Thomases" from posting, or the changes in the game are beginning to draw us toward common ground.

This is very good news.  Keep it going.  Thanks WotC.


        



You haven't scared me away. I've simply had people point out where I was using inflammatory language and ways to post an idea without seeming to be antagonistic. Instead of an Orc saying "You violated X clause of the CoC" they should instead say "You should express this thought in this way..." way more helpful. Remember people on the internet have to follow a whole different set of rules to express themselves in a clear way since you can't see facial expressions or tones of voice...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
As much as I would like to credit it to a change in the posters, my suspicion (in part due to years spent moderating boards for BioWare back when NWN was in development) is that it is more due to natural fatigue. 

When the packet drops - people are up in arms about the things they don't like.  After awhile, they've made their point, often vociferously, over and over.  They get tired or repeating themselves.    Most move on to other things - at least until something new is released that hits their hot button and they explode all over again - ranting about how "wizards having some spells that can be cast as encounter spells can only mean that they will be able to fill their entire array of daily spells with encounter attack spells cast at daily strength and will become gods" or some such.  Innocent

Just so long as people can keep their focus on the posts themselves and give everyone the benefit of assuming that they are merely excited fans of the game who want what they truely feel is best for the game and avoid insulting each other (or the WoTC employees and freelancers) - a bit of vigorous debate can't hurt.

But we shall see in October when the next packet drops.    I predict an explosion of screaming that gradually dies down to a quiet grumble.

Carl



I'm sorry CarlT, but that's not a rant its a straight forward response filled with facts. If you found it inflammatory, how would you express the same idea in a more reasonable tone without losing anything?
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
As much as I would like to credit it to a change in the posters, my suspicion (in part due to years spent moderating boards for BioWare back when NWN was in development) is that it is more due to natural fatigue. 

When the packet drops - people are up in arms about the things they don't like.  After awhile, they've made their point, often vociferously, over and over.  They get tired or repeating themselves.    Most move on to other things - at least until something new is released that hits their hot button and they explode all over again - ranting about how "wizards having some spells that can be cast as encounter spells can only mean that they will be able to fill their entire array of daily spells with encounter attack spells cast at daily strength and will become gods" or some such.  Innocent

Just so long as people can keep their focus on the posts themselves and give everyone the benefit of assuming that they are merely excited fans of the game who want what they truely feel is best for the game and avoid insulting each other (or the WoTC employees and freelancers) - a bit of vigorous debate can't hurt.

But we shall see in October when the next packet drops.    I predict an explosion of screaming that gradually dies down to a quiet grumble.

Carl



I'm sorry CarlT, but that's not a rant its a straight forward response filled with facts. If you found it inflammatory, how would you express the same idea in a more reasonable tone without losing anything?


 Personally - I would start by always clarifying the fact that it is your assumption about how it will work not (as you present it) a known and verified fact. 

Laying out what you think and why you think it might actually bring some around to see it your way; stating it as if it is an obvious and known fact only divides the board into those that already agree with you and those that do not.

At the very least - it allows people to focus on the real issue which is "is there a chance that he might be right - and if so should we start lobbying to make sure they change it?"  But as long as you simply state your assumptions as fact, you short circuit any reasonable discussion on the issue.

In my opinion.

Of course - since you don't seem to recognize that your assumptions may not actually represent the reality, this probably falls on deaf ears.


Carl

As much as I would like to credit it to a change in the posters, my suspicion (in part due to years spent moderating boards for BioWare back when NWN was in development) is that it is more due to natural fatigue. 

When the packet drops - people are up in arms about the things they don't like.  After awhile, they've made their point, often vociferously, over and over.  They get tired or repeating themselves.    Most move on to other things - at least until something new is released that hits their hot button and they explode all over again - ranting about how "wizards having some spells that can be cast as encounter spells can only mean that they will be able to fill their entire array of daily spells with encounter attack spells cast at daily strength and will become gods" or some such.  Innocent

Just so long as people can keep their focus on the posts themselves and give everyone the benefit of assuming that they are merely excited fans of the game who want what they truely feel is best for the game and avoid insulting each other (or the WoTC employees and freelancers) - a bit of vigorous debate can't hurt.

But we shall see in October when the next packet drops.    I predict an explosion of screaming that gradually dies down to a quiet grumble.

Carl



I'm sorry CarlT, but that's not a rant its a straight forward response filled with facts. If you found it inflammatory, how would you express the same idea in a more reasonable tone without losing anything?


 Personally - I would start by always clarifying the fact that it is your assumption about how it will work not (as you present it) a known and verified fact. 

Laying out what you think and why you think it might actually bring some around to see it your way; stating it as if it is an obvious and known fact only divides the board into those that already agree with you and those that do not.

At the very least - it allows people to focus on the real issue which is "is there a chance that he might be right - and if so should we start lobbying to make sure they change it?"  But as long as you simply state your assumptions as fact, you short circuit any reasonable discussion on the issue.

In my opinion.

Of course - since you don't seem to recognize that your assumptions may not actually represent the reality, this probably falls on deaf ears.


Carl




Here let me throw a matrix at you:

Wizards have access to signature spells.
Signature spells can be cast once per encounter.
Signature spells are the same as non-signature spells in power.
Signature spells can be memorized just like non-signature spells.

All of these have been stated to be true in the various articles, interviews, and videos that WotC has put out. How would I express my concern knowing these are facts and still keep my tone non-offensive? Can I get an example?
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
These boards tend to be very cordial - until alignment and/or paladins get involved.

Here let me throw a matrix at you:

Wizards have access to signature spells.
Signature spells can be cast once per encounter.
Signature spells are the same as non-signature spells in power.
Signature spells can be memorized just like non-signature spells.

All of these have been stated to be true in the various articles, interviews, and videos that WotC has put out. How would I express my concern knowing these are facts and still keep my tone non-offensive? Can I get an example?


When stated in this manner - it is a good start to a rational discussion.

However, you are also making a few assumptions not stated in the interviews.

You are assuming:

The signature spells will be damaging attack spells [quite possible - but the only example they gave was feather fall - a utility spell]
The signature spells are memorized using the same spell slots as the normal daily spells and thus the wizard can fill their entire allotment of daily spell slots with signature spells.


If either of these assumptions turns out not to be true, then most of your objections are no longer valid.  If both of these are true, then I agree with your assessment that they would be seriously breaking the game.

The difference is that I disagree on how likely it is that both of these are true - and since it would be so clealy damaging to the game and so clearly broken compared to the other classes (and so unlike how such classes have worked in any other edition, including 4E) - I consider it highly unlikely they would be taking the class in the direction you describe.

Thus, I assume that the tiny and vague glimpse we have been given into how the mechanic will work is incomplete - and thus rather than exploding all over the forums I wait until we get some actual facts about how it will actually work.

If you want to know what I assume, it is this:  Wizards will have a finite number of "signature spell slots" -["they have access to signature spells"] possibly as many as one per spell level (too many - unless they are utility spells) and possibly as few as one (likely too few) and they will be able to fill these slots by memorizing any spell they know ["These spells are memorized as are non-signature spells"] from their school into that slot OR it is possible that they will either create new spells for this purpose - or move the spells off of the normal spell list (ike the cleric domain spells) ["these spells can be cast once per encounter"; "these spells are the same as non-signature spells in power"].  But this is as much an assumption as yours - so I am stuck waiting till they decide to share.  As are you.

Carl
I don't post often for a variety of reasons. I'm in a different time zone from most of the forum for a start, so if I get involved in a discussion that a lot of people are interested in I tend to miss 10-12 pages while I sleep. By that point the conversation has mostly moved on and even if I wanted to go back to an earlier point....nobody else cares.

The biggest reason though is that I find there is a contingent of posters who disagree with me about certain aspects of the game, and do so loudly. It wouldn't bother me if there was actual debade involved but too often I see my posts refuted without any attempt to argue a point. I simply get told I'm wrong or I get ignored completely when I ask a question. 

So I usually find it easier to just not reply when I see something I want to add to a debate, because it isn't worth the headache.

Unless you post often on a forum, or have a long history with it, your opinion isn't valued. That's an observation rather than a complaint. I've been a major player in other forums before, but on this one I am a very minor one so I've seen both sides of the coin. If you swim against the current of opinion of the most prominent personalities most people will just stop bothering.

It's possible that the forum has simply reached the point were many who hold differing viewpoints from the loudest members have given up.  All my personal opinion and experience of course.  YMMV.

IMAGE(http://www.nodiatis.com/pub/12.jpg)

Yeah, this place is a lot more pleasant than the norm. I've been more inclined to interact lately. I'm hopeful that it's the spirit of the edition that's factoring into this as well; it's about getting everyone to play the way they want, so it's not as though anyone can get argumentative about what the edition's supposed to play like.

But yeah, thanks to everyone for being pleasant and open-minded. I try to be as well. Keep up the good work! 
I don't use emoticons, and I'm also pretty pleasant. So if I say something that's rude or insulting, it's probably a joke.
I don't post often for a variety of reasons. I'm in a different time zone from most of the forum for a start, so if I get involved in a discussion that a lot of people are interested in I tend to miss 10-12 pages while I sleep. By that point the conversation has mostly moved on and even if I wanted to go back to an earlier point....nobody else cares.

The biggest reason though is that I find there is a contingent of posters who disagree with me about certain aspects of the game, and do so loudly. It wouldn't bother me if there was actual debade involved but too often I see my posts refuted without any attempt to argue a point. I simply get told I'm wrong or I get ignored completely when I ask a question. 

So I usually find it easier to just not reply when I see something I want to add to a debate, because it isn't worth the headache.

Unless you post often on a forum, or have a long history with it, your opinion isn't valued. That's an observation rather than a complaint. I've been a major player in other forums before, but on this one I am a very minor one so I've seen both sides of the coin. If you swim against the current of opinion of the most prominent personalities most people will just stop bothering.

It's possible that the forum has simply reached the point were many who hold differing viewpoints from the loudest members have given up.  All my personal opinion and experience of course.  YMMV.



You should definitely post even if you don't keep up with the conversation.  Sometimes one idea can lead to many wonderful ideas, or help someone else see things differently.   I think most people who post just want to add to the mix and stimulate interesting conversations.  I wouldn't even call it debate.  The wonderful thing about this game is that each person who plays or DMs it, sees a part of it differently. 

 

A Brave Knight of WTF - "Wielder of the Sword of Balance"

 

Rhenny's Blog:  http://community.wizards.com/user/1497701/blog

 

 

After a few months I found this message board to be filled with nothing more than vapid posts involving single sentence respones (usually grafted onto seven quoted posts) or arguments which boil down to "I don't play like that and it doesn't feel like D&D to me".

Unfortunately the interest I had at the beginning of the year has faded. When it comes to feeling there is little reason for debate anymore and the playtest rules so far don't interest me. I'm still interested in the tactical combat rules, but for now I'm just a lurker.
Has anyone else noticed how over the past 3-4 weeks the general tone of most posts has improved.   There seems to be more constructive criticism, and genuine sharing of experiences, and less ranting.




No, to be honest these boards are some of the most adversarial I have ever come across (I also see moderator favouritism), especially  thanks to a few key posters who really make it unpleasant for someone who just wants to drop by here and check things out.

If I ever wanted to get someone involved in this game, I would warn them to stay clear of these boards, because if this is indicative of the type of people who play this game, there is a problem. 



I just haven't sen it. Yes there are some people that don't understand the rules of discussion, they like to throw logical fallacies around all the time, but I haven't seen anything that directly attacks another poster or is insulting to the developers.

Just to be clear disagreeing is not bad. It just means you have a difference of opinion. There is nothing wrong with that. Being straightforward is also a good thing so you don't have to beat around the bush to get what you want to say out. For instance:

"I don't like 4E because the classes used the same progression and the powers were to codified." is  not insulting or antagonistic. It is expressing an opinion and giving a reason for it. That is good to do.

"4E was too much like WoW." That is insulting and antagonistic. Those posts once you point out that they are antagonistic and that it is insulting and the people that do it realize its wrong. You can even point to the first quote and explain that it is the better way to express those sentiments. The Worst thing you can do is get an ORC temp ban for 'disruption', that just fuels the fire...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
While I do think the overall trend is positive, there are a lot of people who... while not inflamattory, seemingly have been seeping in the juices of negativity for far too long and bring things down far too easily.

There are a lot of faces you see on the forums who cause "debates" over quite needless things but one of the huge problems of this forum is something quite simple, misunderstandings over intent. I dont know if people intentionally take things out of context to start an argument but it happens a lot.

I don't mean to offend anyone here but I will use CarlT as an example, I love a lot of your posts but your writiing style without personal interaction comes across quite emotionless (robot Carl) and many players seem to react (wrongly in my opinion) very abrasively to his posts. 

I understand people see this as their game but arguments on the internet arent important, even if the thing you are arguing about is important. I just hope WotC are smart enough to take the louder members of this forums views with a pinch of salt.

*and as a side note to CarlT if you want me to take your name out I will, I just picked you because your a generally none offensive face that creeps up a lot, there are lots of gamers names I would love to use but I could see posts being removed in a matter of minutes*

While I do think the overall trend is positive, there are a lot of people who... while not inflamattory, seemingly have been seeping in the juices of negativity for far too long and bring things down far too easily.

There are a lot of faces you see on the forums who cause "debates" over quite needless things but one of the huge problems of this forum is something quite simple, misunderstandings over intent. I dont know if people intentionally take things out of context to start an argument but it happens a lot.

I don't mean to offend anyone here but I will use CarlT as an example, I love a lot of your posts but your writiing style without personal interaction comes across quite emotionless (robot Carl) and many players seem to react (wrongly in my opinion) very abrasively to his posts. 

I understand people see this as their game but arguments on the internet arent important, even if the thing you are arguing about is important. I just hope WotC are smart enough to take the louder members of this forums views with a pinch of salt.

*and as a side note to CarlT if you want me to take your name out I will, I just picked you because your a generally none offensive face that creeps up a lot, there are lots of gamers names I would love to use but I could see posts being removed in a matter of minutes*




I do the same thing. I will state something innocent but in a straight forward way and people will jump on me like I laid out a 'yo momma' joke at their mom or something.

It helps if you just imagine a smiley face on the end of each of those posts...
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.
While a few of your posts bring the facepalm meme to mind lokiare you werent actually on my list of players that i was thinking of.

I'm with CartT on this one.  I am looking forward to commenting on the harvest moon packet.

I do find the tone less bashy.  But at the same time, I am finding less interest in current topics. 



I recognize that unless there are drastic, unlikely changes to D&DNext, I'm not buying it. I don't think I'm the only person who has made that realization. And yes, they have gotten to that point where I can easily make the decision.

And as long as that's happened, there's just not much of a point to arguing about it. 



This is pretty much my take on it. The game is being developed in a direction that interests me less with every article we see about it, and is clearly being designed to appeal to a completely different sort of gamer. Combine that with a handful of prominent posters who seem to make it a personal mission to make any sort of discussion on this forum as unpleasant as possible, and I find myself less interested in contributing by the day.

I’ve removed content from this thread because trolling/baiting is a violation of the Code of Conduct.


You can review the Code of Conduct here: company.wizards.com/conduct


Please keep your posts polite, on-topic, and refrain from making personal attacks.You are welcome to disagree with one another but please do so respectfully and constructively.

 
I do the same thing. I will state something innocent but in a straight forward way and people will jump on me like I laid out a 'yo momma' joke at their mom or something.

It helps if you just imagine a smiley face on the end of each of those posts...




I always try to imagine the smiley face...and it works.   Loki...you have made very valuable contributions even though sometimes I may not agree with them.   That is the essence of productive interchange.   

Additionally, I love reading Carl T.   His posts are logical and always make me think in a constructive way.

Cheers fellas.


        

A Brave Knight of WTF - "Wielder of the Sword of Balance"

 

Rhenny's Blog:  http://community.wizards.com/user/1497701/blog

 

 

Most of the credit for that should be given to you, the community.

Specifically, the Knights of WTF (they have yet to explain the acronym :P ), Valdark, Brightmantle, Pashalik Mons and others who have made a conscious effort to bridge the gap between fans of every edition and put an end to the edition wars.

Hats off to them.  :D


Actually, I think Valdark did explain the acronym somewhere. Something about him having a WTF moment, and deciding that something had to be done about the attitudes on the forums. In any case, I agree. The Knights have made the forums a better place, IMO.
No, to be honest these boards are some of the most adversarial I have ever come across (I also see moderator favouritism), especially  thanks to a few key posters who really make it unpleasant for someone who just wants to drop by here and check things out.

If I ever wanted to get someone involved in this game, I would warn them to stay clear of these boards, because if this is indicative of the type of people who play this game, there is a problem. 



  This is also my experience, and is why I've mostly ceased to participate in the 'discussions' here. It's also half of the reason why I've written off 5E/Next, and at this point, have pretty much written off the D&D franchise.

  The other half? Well, the year might differ, but it's like the line from that Barenaked Ladies song: "... and every time I try to do something new all they want is 1973."

  It's not planned obsolescence, per se. More like by-demand obsolescence. And I find I just don't care about what happens to it anymore.
Wow. This thread turned into a bummer fast. 

Generally speaking, I'm in agreement with the OP. The tone has gotten better. But, man, it was awful. There's still a long way to go.

Lets all step up and remember that we all have a shared love of this game and mutual respect should be the default tone. 
Just from a personal standpont I post less for two reasons.

Firstly it didn't seem to help the first time, and secondly the newest playtest is slightly more to my liking. Still there are certain things I don't care for, backgrounds and specialties are one, they feel to forced, and I personally would like them to presented more as an optional ruleset, perhaps in the DM's guide, for quick creation of NPC or for the player who is new to the game with the goal of weaning him off them to more advanced options later. I'm also on the fence on the flatter math, I can forsee a up and a down sides to the idea.

But hey I can either take it or leave it. so why get angry, it's just a game.
I'm back from a somewhat short hiatus.  I'm probably just a squire awaiting to be knighted, but the effort to improve the community and unite under a common goal is indeed a heavy one.  Hats off to the other guys for doing a good job.  Remember, ranting and raving won't accomplish anything.  If you're going to criticize, be constructive and know the power (and danger) of subjectivity.  We're all full of opinions.  We should colour the world with them, not dissolve them.

An undead spectre occasionally returning to remind the fandom of its grim existence.

 

 

Some good pointers for the fellow hobbyist!:

  • KEEP D&D ALIVE, END EDITION WARS!
  • RESPECT PEOPLES' PREFERENCES
  • JUST ENJOY THE GAME!
I agree with the opening post. Good stuff!

Also, I've been noticing the playtest packet has been improving immesurably over the initial stuff. I think it's a combination of factors.

I don't think anyone intends to rant or rave, but heated opinions can get out of hand. I hope polite and civil disagreements and posts continue to prevail!

So far, I've liked most (if not all) of the changes in the playtest packet. I did notice the disadvantage/advantage thing is still around which really bugs me, and the backgrounds and specialties are currently ripe for abuse (yeah, my dwarf fighter has the magic user specialty), but other than that it's looking much improved!

Good job, guys!

--David
David L. Dostaler Author, Challenger RPG (free)
I don't post often for a variety of reasons. I'm in a different time zone from most of the forum for a start, so if I get involved in a discussion that a lot of people are interested in I tend to miss 10-12 pages while I sleep. By that point the conversation has mostly moved on and even if I wanted to go back to an earlier point....nobody else cares.

The biggest reason though is that I find there is a contingent of posters who disagree with me about certain aspects of the game, and do so loudly. It wouldn't bother me if there was actual debade involved but too often I see my posts refuted without any attempt to argue a point. I simply get told I'm wrong or I get ignored completely when I ask a question. 

So I usually find it easier to just not reply when I see something I want to add to a debate, because it isn't worth the headache.

Unless you post often on a forum, or have a long history with it, your opinion isn't valued. That's an observation rather than a complaint. I've been a major player in other forums before, but on this one I am a very minor one so I've seen both sides of the coin. If you swim against the current of opinion of the most prominent personalities most people will just stop bothering.

It's possible that the forum has simply reached the point were many who hold differing viewpoints from the loudest members have given up.  All my personal opinion and experience of course.  YMMV.


Yep, pretty spot on observation for these boards.

As one who is often not in alignment or agreement with the predominant consensus and doesn't really use the local vernacular or writing styles I can surely sympathize with your position.

That doesn't stop me from posting.  Though it may seem I am ignored often, I find solace in the fact that many times 5 pages down the line the conversation pretty much reiterates what I was trying to get across.  I can often see how I changed the course and contributed to a conversation even if my posts get not one direct response.

As far as folks telling me I'm wrong?  Well, that is nothing new since I have been told I am wrong every day of my life since I can remember.  Time often is my vindicator.  As angry as I have gotten sometimes, I must admit I have learned a lot.  Many folks on these boards not only tell me that I am wrong, but they also package it in some the best written essays I have ever read.  At least folks here can come up with reasons as to why they think I am wrong which puts these boards way ahead of other forums.

On the issue of post counts.  I pretty much ignore it and focus on the content of the post itself.  Post count doesn't ensure a quality post or response.  I do have to admit when I see a post count over 5,000-- even more so when I see 10,000 to 20,000+ of some posters--  and many of those posts are long, well written and thought out (not all, but many are)-- I really wonder how they can write so much and still have time for gaming and life?
I think it is three fold. 

One that there has been no new content as others have mentioned, and I believe them to be correct.

Two that people that want the game to move back to ADnD are getting upset in that they feel that they are not being listened to. Every release so far has moved the game closer to a 4th style to them. And to others it is not close enough to 4th for them. There is some fatigue to the posters as they feel that the game design is moving away from what they want.

Third the moderators have been much quicker to delete posts and lock threads where any heated discussion happens.

Good or bad these are the treands that I have noticed. 
DMG pg 263 "No matter what a rule's source, a rule serves you, not the other way around."
It also has to do with specific posters who aren't around all the time who are coming in more often and taking a part of the convos which is good. Theres def specific people who have a nice attitude who keep things nice whenever they post and be a part of the community. It makes me want to post more
No, to be honest these boards are some of the most adversarial I have ever come across (I also see moderator favouritism), especially  thanks to a few key posters who really make it unpleasant for someone who just wants to drop by here and check things out.

If I ever wanted to get someone involved in this game, I would warn them to stay clear of these boards, because if this is indicative of the type of people who play this game, there is a problem. 



  This is also my experience, and is why I've mostly ceased to participate in the 'discussions' here. It's also half of the reason why I've written off 5E/Next, and at this point, have pretty much written off the D&D franchise.

  The other half? Well, the year might differ, but it's like the line from that Barenaked Ladies song: "... and every time I try to do something new all they want is 1973."

  It's not planned obsolescence, per se. More like by-demand obsolescence. And I find I just don't care about what happens to it anymore.



Can you point out some threads or examples (made up of course) so we know what you find offensive?
"Unite the [fan] base? Hardly. As of right now, I doubt their ability to unite a slightly unruly teabag with a cup of water."--anjelika
1-4E play style
The 4E play style is a high action cinematic style of play where characters worry less about being killed in one hit and more about strategy and what their next move is and the one after it. The players talk back and forth about planning a battle and who can do what to influence the outcome. 4E play is filled with cinematic over the top action. An Eladrin teleports out of the grip of the Ogre. The Fighter slams the dragons foot with his hammer causing it to rear up and stagger back in pain. The Cleric creates a holy zone where their allies weapons are guided to their targets and whenever an enemy dies the Clerics allies are healed. 4E is about knowing when to lauch your nova attack, whether its a huge arcane spell that causes enemies to whirl around in a chaotic storm, or if its a trained adrenaline surge that causes you to attack many many times with two weapons on a single target, or a surge of adrenaline that keeps you going though you should already be dead. Its about tactics and the inability to carry around a bag of potions or a few wands and never have to worry about healing. Its about the guy that can barely role play having the same chance to convince the king to aid the group as the guy that takes improv acting classes and regularly stars as an extra on movies.
Stormwind Fallacy
The Stormwind Fallacy, aka the Roleplayer vs Rollplayer Fallacy Just because one optimizes his characters mechanically does not mean that they cannot also roleplay, and vice versa. Corollary: Doing one in a game does not preclude, nor infringe upon, the ability to do the other in the same game. Generalization 1: One is not automatically a worse role player if he optimizes, and vice versa. Generalization 2: A non-optimized character is not automatically role played better than an optimized one, and vice versa. ...[aside]... Proof: These two elements rely on different aspects of a player's game play. Optimization factors in to how well one understands the rules and handles synergies to produce a very effective end result. Role playing deals with how well a player can act in character and behave as if he was someone else. A person can act while understanding the rules, and can build something powerful while still handling an effective character. There is nothing in the game -- mechanical or otherwise -- restricting one if you participate in the other. Claiming that an optimizer cannot role play (or is participating in a play style that isn't supportive of role playing) because he is an optimizer, or vice versa, is committing the Stormwind Fallacy.
The spells we should getLook here to Check out my adventures and ideas. I've started a blog, about video games, table top role playing games, programming, and many other things its called Kel and Lok Games. My 4E Fantasy Grounds game is currently full.

I don't mean to offend anyone here but I will use CarlT as an example, I love a lot of your posts but your writiing style without personal interaction comes across quite emotionless (robot Carl) and many players seem to react (wrongly in my opinion) very abrasively to his posts. 
...

*and as a side note to CarlT if you want me to take your name out I will, I just picked you because your a generally none offensive face that creeps up a lot, there are lots of gamers names I would love to use but I could see posts being removed in a matter of minutes*




No offense taken.  After all - robots don't take offense.  Laughing

Although I've occasionally thought my argument style more akin to a sledgehammer. 

It is what it is.  I try to stay focused on my point and rarely use five words when fifteen will do.....

You may never agree with me - but at least you will know what I think and why.

I'm sure there are some who find my persistence frustrating and annoying - but hopefully never offensive.

(Part of this is because -after years on forums - I don't see posts as a 'private discussion' - I see them as a public debate.  Just as in a debate - I'm not really speaking to 'you' (the opponent in the debate) - I'm speaking to the audience, those who are not yet invested in the discussion and are reading because they have some interest in the topic.  Experience says you will rarely change the mind of the debatee once the debate starts - but you might sway the minds of thsoe not yet committed (which I hope includes the developers).

Carl
While I don't want to minimize the efforts made by the people making an intentional effort to class up the place - which I think is an effort that's been extremely successful and heroic - I think that a big part of what's made the boards better is the voluntary or involuntary departure (or cooling down) of some of the most caustic elements of the community. I believe that many - if not most - posters have a natural tendency to be generally level-headed and cool, even if they're still a little acerbic, but aren't so level-headed and cool that reading something extremely caustic doesn't set them off, which leads to death spirals, as their caustic in-kind reactions inflame others. With the most caustic elements gone or cooled down, the boards as a whole feel much healthier. Jerks make people around them act in a jerkier fashion. Pull the weeds, and the boards improve dramatically.
Dwarves invented beer so they could toast to their axes. Dwarves invented axes to kill people and take their beer. Swanmay Syndrome: Despite the percentages given in the Monster Manual, in reality 100% of groups of swans contain a Swanmay, because otherwise the DM would not have put any swans in the game.
And most importantly of all for me... im enjoying Next and enjoying being part of its creation even more.

Inclusion can make for happy campers. 
Most of the credit for that should be given to you, the community.

Specifically, the Knights of WTF (they have yet to explain the acronym :P ), Valdark, Brightmantle, Pashalik Mons and others who have made a conscious effort to bridge the gap between fans of every edition and put an end to the edition wars.

Hats off to them.  :D


I've been away for awhile, (and never a big poster), so while I've not heard of the Knights of WTF, I would guess since their goal is to end edition wars the acronym means "We're Truly Friendly" ;P.
Sign In to post comments