|
5 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 1:03PM
#21
|
|
|
I am a 2e fan that only got into 4e around the essentials, and I find next is doing well. I do believe that neither I nor my group of fellow gamers is represented on this or any board, since less then 1/4 of us use the Internet for boards
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 1:21PM
#22
|
|
|
Also, it's usually par for the course that the people who post on the official site are usually going to hold the most extreme positions (in any direction) than the average person simply by virtue of the fact that they care enough to post in the first place. They have a vested interest in the game and it's potential/eventual direction and actively want to help shape its direction. The echo chamber effect can thus be very easy to fall prey to, particularly when any given group of shared opinions fall into lockstep on a given topic.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 1:37PM
#23
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
Also, it's usually par for the course that the people who post on the official site are usually going to hold the most extreme positions (in any direction) than the average person simply by virtue of the fact that they care enough to post in the first place.
This.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 1:46PM
#24
|
|
|
I guess I would fall well into vocal minority.
It is probably weird, but I would say 4e are my favorite ruleset, but 2e is my favorite edition. I have fond memories of 2e, but 2e was really enjoyable because the friends I use to play with and the computer games. The streamline rules are the thing I like the most about 4e. What I don't like about 4e are feats and I didn't particularly like the amount of system mastery. I realized this (system mastery) wasn't new in 4e, but I was playing 2e when I was 9 or 10 and really didn't notice and had I never played 3e until after I played 4e. So I'm confident I represent no one else other then myself.
Edit: Slightly more clarity
 | Big Model: Creative Agenda
Love 4e? Concerned about its future? join the Old Guard of 4th Edition
Reality Refracted: Social Contracts
D & D: A Documentary Kickstarter (http://kck.st/SyKNzf)
Dreaming the Impossible Dream
Show
Imagine a world where the first-time D&D player rolls stats, picks a race, picks a class, picks an alignment, and buys gear to create a character. Imagine if an experienced player, maybe the person helping our theoretical player learn the ropes, could also make a character by rolling ability scores and picking a race, class, feat, skills, class features, spells or powers, and so on. Those two players used different paths to build characters, but the system design allows them to play at the same table. -Mearl |
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 1:54PM
#25
|
|
|
Most likely due to the usual topics of threads I open (usually pretty contentious issues), my impression of this forum (since the playtest began, of course) has been: More "4e" Posters, but More "-4e" Posts.
I think that's at least in part because the edition wars aren't symmetrical. I think a lot of people think of things as one side being Pro-X, Anti-Y and the other being Pro-Y, Anti-X, but things really center more around just Pro-Y vs. Anti-Y.
Consider the following 3x3 grid, which is hard to make in just text so I hope this shows up right.
Likes 4e ->
A B C
D E F ^Likes Previous Editions
G H I
The closer to ther right of the chart you are, the more you like 4e. People in the right column are actively big fans of 4e. People in the middle have no strong opinion about it or are sort of neutral; perhaps they stopped playing before it came out due to life changes or whatever, but see the playtest as a good opportunity to get back into the game. Players in the left column dislike 4e enough to post roundly negative things about it (as distinct from people who like the edition, but recognize its relative strengths and weaknesses) and might think that 4e ruined D&D.
The closer to the top of the chart you are, the more you like previous editions. People in the top row really like previous editions; people in the middle row have no strong opinions - perhaps they started playing as 4e came out. People in the bottom row actively hate previous editions.
Let's talk about how populous each group is and what they might look like.
Group A - These are people who hate 4e and love earlier editions. This, I'm comfortable saying, is a vocal and populous group. They're the bulk of the anti-4e side, to whatever extent sides really exist.
Group B - These are people who love earlier editions and have no strong opinions about 4e, or at least not strong enough to express. This feels like a much less vocal group than group A. It might in reality be a larger group than group A, but they're clearly less vocal.
Group C - These are people who love earlier editions and also love 4e. This is a very large group; it consists of the people who liked playing 3.5 or whatever and then liked 4e when it came out. Many 4e fans who have been playing for a long time fall into this group.
Group D - These are people who hate 4e and are lukewarm on previous editions. They seem unlikely to bother with D&D.
Group E - These people are without strong opinions on any edition. Maybe they prefer other systems. They seem unlikely to bother with D&D.
Group F - These people like 4e and have no strong opinions about earlier editions. This probably contains most people who started playing after 4e came out, but might also include people who were group E people but to whom 4e appealed.
Group G - These people hate D&D in general. Most likely devotees of other systems. (Though most devotees of other systems are E's). Nonplayers in edition warring for the most part.
Group H - Similar to group G. I don't really think there's a lot of people like this; most people who hated earlier editions probably just kind of hated 4e by default when it hit.
Group I - While this group - people who love 4e and hate previous editions - is not empty, it's very sparsely populated. This is one of the most interesting groups from a theoretical standpoint because it seems to me that this is a group that's assumed to exist in number, via analogy to group A or something, particularly by members of group A.
If you just leave the groups that are both populous and vocal groups on the chart, you get this -
Likes 4e ->
A B C
- - F ^Likes Previous Editions
- - -
That explains why you don't get a lot of anti-previous edition posts. There's just not very many people around who feel that way. There aren't many paths a person can go down that lead them to a place where they hate previous editions enough to bash them whole cloth. It's hard to end up in group I. It's very easy to end up in group A. You like something. You check something else out because it's billed as a successor to the thing you like, and you don't like that. Or else you like something, it feels like it's yanked out from under you, and you resent the replacement. Those really aren't experiences that have parallels in the other direction. Edition wars are asymmetrical.
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.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 2:15PM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Oct 23, 2012
|
People complain on the forums. People complain on forums, that what they kinda are. Like talk radio for the average person. But even the forum polls indicate that more people here like the game then don't. Forum posters are clearly the vocal minority, in that less then half of the playetester's post.
No reason to think we are negative. No reason to think that a complaint makes someone against the game either.
Nothings perfect.
My mind is a deal-breaker.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 3:07PM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Sep 25, 2007
|
Group G - These people hate D&D in general. Most likely devotees of other systems. (Though most devotees of other systems are E's). Nonplayers in edition warring for the most part.
Very good glimpse at the various mindsets likely involved... but I feel I should warn people about a subset of Group G as described above: there are some people out there that like one game/system and hate another, but rather than just avoiding that game/system feel compelled to seek out others that enjoy what they hate and actively try to make them hate it too, and who have just enough motivation to do this type of thing - for whatever reason - that they might even participate in the playtest process to try and sabotage their hated game/system... though I would expect such behavior is glaringly obvious to those in charge of interpreting the gathered data.
I even new a fellow like this once that had such a negative opinion of D&D that he got into game of mine with a line of "Well, maybe it wasn't the system so much as really bad DM... I'll play to see if I like it the way you do it," and then actively ignored every opportunity I presented for the game to turn out exactly like he enjoys games to be (all intrigue, double-dealing and story-heavy focus) while also refusing to take the game even remotely seriously and doing everything he possible could to prove that "D&D is crap, it's all just hack n' slash with no meaningful character growth or story."
...all because he wanted to play Vampire, the other five of us wanted to play D&D, and he hated D&D so bad that he couldn't stand to compromise and give it an honest effort while the rest of us compromised and guaranteed it wouldn't be a dungeon crawl, or just let us enjoy our game without him.
Careful, man. That much logic might be illegal on the internet. - Salla
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 3:31PM
#28
|
|
|
People complain on the forums. People complain on forums, that what they kinda are. Like talk radio for the average person. But even the forum polls indicate that more people here like the game then don't. Forum posters are clearly the vocal minority, in that less then half of the playetester's post.
No reason to think we are negative. No reason to think that a complaint makes someone against the game either.
Nothings perfect.
Only if you count "on the fence" as liking the game.
| Big Model: Creative Agenda
Love 4e? Concerned about its future? join the Old Guard of 4th Edition
Reality Refracted: Social Contracts
D & D: A Documentary Kickstarter (http://kck.st/SyKNzf)
Dreaming the Impossible Dream
Show
Imagine a world where the first-time D&D player rolls stats, picks a race, picks a class, picks an alignment, and buys gear to create a character. Imagine if an experienced player, maybe the person helping our theoretical player learn the ropes, could also make a character by rolling ability scores and picking a race, class, feat, skills, class features, spells or powers, and so on. Those two players used different paths to build characters, but the system design allows them to play at the same table. -Mearl |
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 3:46PM
#29
|
Date Joined:
Dec 25, 2009
|
Group I - While this group - people who love 4e and hate previous editions - is not empty, it's very sparsely populated. This is one of the most interesting groups from a theoretical standpoint because it seems to me that this is a group that's assumed to exist in number, via analogy to group A or something, particularly by members of group A.
I would describe myself as group B; I don't hate 4E, I've played it since release and had fun , but it is not my favorite edition of D&D or my favorite TTRPG.
That said, I think you're underrating the population of members of group I. I can't name a lot of posters off the top of my head, but I can think of at least three vocal posters who fall into this group, a few of whom are just as bad about slamming previous editions at every opportunity as any anti-4E troll.
The difference between madness and genius is determined only by degrees of success.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 31, 2013 - 3:57PM
#30
|
|
|
Group I - While this group - people who love 4e and hate previous editions - is not empty, it's very sparsely populated. This is one of the most interesting groups from a theoretical standpoint because it seems to me that this is a group that's assumed to exist in number, via analogy to group A or something, particularly by members of group A.
I would describe myself as group B; I don't hate 4E, I've played it since release and had fun , but it is not my favorite edition of D&D or my favorite TTRPG.
That said, I think you're underrating the population of members of group I. I can't name a lot of posters off the top of my head, but I can think of at least three vocal posters who fall into this group, a few of whom are just as bad about slamming previous editions at every opportunity as any anti-4E troll.
The group, to be sure, is not empty, and just like there's a lot of A's who think they're talking to I's when they're talking to C's or F's, because of assumed symmetry or something, there's a lot of people who would be C's or F's who act like I's because they feel provoked or because of assumed symmetry or whatever. I think that the bulk of the I-ish sentiment is people like that. I don't want to entirely discount the existance of people who tried 3.5, hated it on its own merits enough to bash it, and then liked 4e when it came out, but I believe them to be relatively rare. I's definitely exist, and I was probably thinking of some of the same posters you are when I described the group as "not empty", and certainly many of them have plenty to say about it.
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.
|
|
|
