Community

Oct 8, 2011 -- 7:20AM, Gunthar wrote:

Oct 7, 2011 -- 2:33PM, zenwar wrote:

The idea that the OP is instigating something is based on the concept that critiquing WOTC or 4e or the designers is an instigation. It is not. How could it be? Forum members are taking these statements as personal insults. ...
The OP is right. Maybe not for you, but for him he is right. His feelings about what WOTC are legitimate. He is a disgruntled customer. And he feels WOTC is ignoring him. So they are losing a customer. They have been losing a lot, I suspect. It’s bad business on their part. 

The OP is most definitgely instigating. He didn't offer constructive critique, he offered straight-out complaining. The very thread title "everything you are doing is bad" is not civil, constructive or right. Were it "right" then 4E would have no players, which this forum shows is patently false. 

Your assumptions also show a clear bias not backed up by data.  

OK, I will bite yet again. Who is he instigating against? WOTC? He is their customer. They should want to hear from him, whether he is disgruntled or satisfied. A matter of fact I would want to hear from disgruntled customers more that satisfied ones. Is he instigating against you? How? He is not attacking you, he is saying he does not like the way WOTC is doing business and does not like the current design. How is that an instigation against you? 

 You also say i am biased. So are you assuming I do not like 4th edition? I do. Don’t mind essentials either. Don’t even feel there is an actual difference in the systems. 

 I do feel like many that WOTC is not really doing a lot of product support that I want to buy -- is that instigating? 

 If I have a bias it is when people say that people are whining or need security blankets. Those characterizations are insulting. I do not think they should be made. I also don’t like it when people twist the intent of a forum post away from what was the intention of the OP. Whether that is this post or one of my own.  I especially don’t like when  someone says: you are not playing right, you should play the game this way. You’re questioning of the game indicates that you do not play correctly.

 These attitudes, which I see ALOT in these forums are to me the anti-thesis of D&D. D&D was always an inclusive game where people were allowed to speak their mind and be different. Now there is a sports-team/fan boy mentality to it that I think is sad. 

 Also you say my statements are not backed up by data? BY DATA? Was I supposed to ruin some tests and gather metrics on the forums. What does that even mean? How would I back up my personal evaluation of the OPs post by data? 

Now, I do admit the the OP did know he was going to get strong reactions. He even stated that, BUT I do not feel the reactions are merited because I do not think he said anything hostile to anyone in the forum, and I do not think he's intention was to start a fight (to instigate) it was to express frustration as a customer. 

Oct 7, 2011 -- 7:55PM, Hocus-Smokus wrote:

I guess I just don't know where all the angst came from. Is it a sense of entitlement? I'm not sure. We've talked about this before, but I can't help to think that something happened between 3E and 4E, and I am so grateful and proud to say that I was not part of it. Some claim the ever-more encroaching presence of the internet is to blame. Some pass it off as "kids these days". I, for one, don't really have a clue. What I DO know is that I never saw the level of aggression and angst from the 3.X to 4E transition back when BECMI and 1E turned into 2E.

I can explain why that is.

It's because BECMI/AD&D1e & AD&D 2e are essentially the same game.

Granted, there's some differences between Basic & Advanced - most notably the seperation of race & class.  And, depending upon wich edition of Basic you had, maybe you had to adjust to a larger set of alignments. 
Then you had what is effectively a bunch of optional rules in advanced. - for ex; did you use weapon speed?  How about all the modifiers for this weapon vs that armour/AC?  Things like that.
But if you knew one or the other you were pretty much good to go the moment you picked up a 2e book.
And yes, there were some mechanics tweaks in 2e - but nothing that made the game completely different from what you were used to.  Infact you could sub in older rules & not cause any damage....

Then came 3.0 with its unified XP chart, feats, skill point system, ascending AC values, new saving throw system, & an increased emphesis on minitures.
It was noticebly different from 2e & before.  
But it was all a linear advancement of the previous editions.  You'd still easily recognize it as D&D.
Infact we (the people I played with at the time) joked that if any edition should sport "Advanced" in the title this was certainly it.....  

Enter 4e.
I'm sorry, but this is NOT the same game we'd been playing.
Oh sure, it's an RPG.  And it uses all the odd shaped dice.  And it has a bunch of familiar words/concepts....
But you know what?  So do lots of other RPGs that aren't D&D....
This edition is only D&D because that's what logo WoTC/Hasbro stuck on it.
So it shouldn't be any real surprise that a large % of customers weren't pleased.

And we should NOT discount the effect the internets played.
It is infinitely easier to argue about this stuff now - with people all over the world -  than it was back when 2e dawned.
This then spills right back over into the local scene as people discuss & react to how others (whom they'll never meet) view the product.