[ SECRET POST #2307 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2307 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10. [tb1]


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________




















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 06 pages, 101 secrets from Secret Submission Post #330.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

If you were complaining about him starting arguments with you or ragging on you for your game choice, I'd be behind you 100%. But when you complain about him expressing his genuine opinions about 4e to customers and other gamers? No. If he's advising customers about game purchases, he shouldn't have to censor what he tells them so as not to hurt your feelings. Describing the different tone and play-style between editions is not "partisan nonsense" -- it's important information for someone making a purchase. It's like if he were trying to sell them a car, and pointed out the documented reliability issues of a particular make of vehicle that happened to be what you drove, or explaining that an automatic transmission doesn't offer experienced drivers the same level of control and finesse that a standard does. It's not a personal attack, and there's nothing "intellectually dishonest" about him trying to provide people with the benefit of his experience.

Mostly what I'm hearing is you assuming that his complaints about 4e simply boil down to "They changed it, now it sucks" or personal taste rather than a genuine conviction that it's a worse game than the previous version in a number of ways. You say he publishes Pathfinder stuff and therefore he has a "horse in the race," rather than assuming that he publishes the Pathfinder stuff because he finds 4e substantively lacking. I know gamer geeks can be snobs about their favorite systems (Don't get me started on the New World of Darkness...), but it seems like you're being just as unfair to him as you're accusing him of being to you. From what you've said, at least he doesn't malign your motives for supporting the edition you do.

tl;dr: Stop interpreting his conversations with other people as personal attacks against YOU, and stop assuming that your opinions are an "informed decision" while his are "partisan nonsense."

[(Anonymous)]

You can have an informed opinion about the game that results in you disliking it that doesn't require you to call it dumbed-down or boardgamey.

[(Anonymous)]

And re: "informed decision"; I meant with that that I have play experience - lots! - both with his preferred game and mine, whereas he doesn't have play experience with 4e. I didn't mean to insinuate that my preferences are inherently better or anything. Sorry if that wasn't clear.

[(Anonymous)]

What if his informed opinion IS that it's overly-simplified and feels like a board game, though? Having played a bit of 4e myself, it felt more like an MMO to me than a board game, but that may be because my DM hated using miniatures or terrain maps. I also felt restricted by the lack of character options (though that may have been because fewer supplements were out yet at the time), so I can see where the criticisms of it being overly-streamlined and too simple come from.

Is it the opinions he has, or the way he phrases them, that bothers you? If he avoided using those words, but still told people that he considered it to be an objectively inferior game because it offered fewer customization options and forced combat into a more linear mode (or whatever, but phrased more objectively), would you still feel offended?

[(Anonymous)]

Yeah, it's mostly the way he phrases it. There's ways to say "This game doesn't offer a robust enough out-of-combat experience in my opinion" that don't rely on saying it's just a board game or whatever.

[(Anonymous)]

Have you been to a gaming store where someone does what you're saying is "good" for the customer? It's uncomfortable as hell.

I went into a store to see if I could snag some used 4e books, not because I was all YAY 4E IS THE BEST AND I CAN'T WAIT TO RUN A GAME but because a friend of mine was GMing a game and HE decided to do 4e. Rather than argue with him, because he was just starting out and wanted an easier system to do it with, I went along with the 4e with the idea in my mind that I'd beg for Pathfinder later on.

I'm wandering around the (admittedly tiny) shelf of a gaming store I found through a Google search (I'd just moved recently so I didn't know anything in the area). The older gentleman running the store saw me doing this and came over to ask if I needed help. I told him I was hoping to find some used 4e books.

And fast forward to a half hour later of me uncomfortably acting like he's making the most amazing observations and criticisms about how 4e is shit (yeah, it is in a lot of ways) and how if I'm new I should try Pathfinder (I'm not new, thanks, and I told you so several times, but you're too busy raging about 4e), and giving me a run-down of how shitty and corporate the company's gotten since TSR was bought out (yeah, whatever).

I know 4e is a shit system, but even if I WAS a new player, I don't need to hear about it if that's what I -want to buy-. If I came in there saying "I'm not sure what I want", by all means, campaign away (but without all the rage and curse words, thanks). But if I come in there knowing what I want, point me in the direction and keep your opinions to yourself. I'm sorry, but if I walk into a store and tell the shopkeep that I really want oranges, and they proceed to rant at me about how awful orange growers are and that I should buy bananas because they're much better, I'm going to leave and find a place that'll let me buy my oranges without getting in my face.

As far as the game is concerned, I feel like 4e, while being "D&D Lite", is a great way to platform people into "real" D&D (such as Pathfinder or possibly wherever they're going with 5e). It teaches the basics and gets people used to playing while everything they can do is on pre-printed, easy to use cards that don't send people rummaging through their stack of books to figure out what spell to cast next. That's what purpose it's serving in the game I'm in now, where nearly everyone is brand spanking new to gaming and still get confused over simple things, but once we've been playing this for a year and a half and everyone's getting used to what shape of die is what side, THEN we can introduce fun, more in-depth systems.

And honestly, if the OP's friend is talking to a new player and telling them to BUY Pathfinder core books, guh.

And I do agree it's a little strange that the OP is getting hurt about him talking to customers about how much 4e sucks, but it might have something to do with the fact that they start off talking about how he says that to THEM, and then tosses in the customers. It might be a case of "he complains to me and belittles my choices constantly and now he's talking to a customer with the same arguments and it brings back those hurt feelings tangentially in me". I dunno, I can't really get behind that one, it's kinda weird. Sorry, OP.