Bizarre. I've met some very socially awkward clerks at my FLGS but nothing like that.

Quote from: jeff37923;965762Believe it or not, if it is just over a game, I tend to just walk away and go do my own thing like an adult.

The only time Real Life 4rons became even remotely important beyond annoyances was at my FLGS. They were having a 50% off sale on all their 3.x stuff, I had just been paid, so I picked out about $200 worth of books (only $100!) and went up to the counter. The slug at the counter, instead of just ringing up my sale, began a tirade about how inferior any game except 4E was and how all other games were just played out of a sense of nostalgia. I tried to just be cool and say that I was there to simply make this purchase, the guy just ignored me and kept insulting my taste in games. So I waited until he had rung everything up and I walked out of the store and away from the sale.

I'm going to assume that he wasn't the owner and just worked there.

At some FLGSs (though maybe remove the 'F' for them) some employees do seem to think that because it's a game store it's not a real job so they don't have to act professionally.  They basically just want to be paid to hang out at a game store and occasionally ring people up.  (Not that the owners aren't at fault for letting them do so.)

Quote from: Voros;965765Bizarre. I've met some very socially awkward clerks at my FLGS but nothing like that.

The guy at my local FLGS pretty much reps the newest version of Dungeons and Dragons while bashing edition that came before, even though he promoted the edition before....very strange. I had not one but two instances at a nearby Half-Price Books store where I was perusing the RPG books isle and while looking through some 4e books the guy standing nearby just started going off on how bad the edition was and that I was better off picking up the few Pathfinder Adventures there. Like I give two fucks about what his opinion is. I said that I played ALL the editions and was looking to finish the collection among the usefulness of some of the 4e books that I didn't already own. Basically there are shit-stains no matter where you go.

For every time when I agree that the stereotype of gamers (or nerds in general) as socially maladjusted arrested development cases should be retired, someone goes and proves it true. :-|
Admittedly, those times when it happens stand out in our memories, so we are cherry picking.

To their credit, neither of the owners of the FLGS's I frequented before my purchasing went online (Don Valentine of Little Tin Soldier and Neil Cauley of Phoenix Games) ever hired anyone that they didn't think would well represent their store. They both knew the value of a good customer experience. I think some of the clerks definitely took the jobs to delay getting 'real adult jobs' or whatever, but they were all capable, competent, and polite.

Quote from: Voros;965765Bizarre. I've met some very socially awkward clerks at my FLGS but nothing like that.

Quote from: Charon's Little Helper;965768I'm going to assume that he wasn't the owner and just worked there.

At some FLGSs (though maybe remove the 'F' for them) some employees do seem to think that because it's a game store it's not a real job so they don't have to act professionally.  They basically just want to be paid to hang out at a game store and occasionally ring people up.  (Not that the owners aren't at fault for letting them do so.)

I know he wasn't the owner, just an employee. However, you'd think that anyone working there would have enough presence of mind to not talk a customer out of a sale.

Quote from: jeff37923;965762Believe it or not, if it is just over a game, I tend to just walk away and go do my own thing like an adult.

The only time Real Life 4rons became even remotely important beyond annoyances was at my FLGS. They were having a 50% off sale on all their 3.x stuff, I had just been paid, so I picked out about $200 worth of books (only $100!) and went up to the counter. The slug at the counter, instead of just ringing up my sale, began a tirade about how inferior any game except 4E was and how all other games were just played out of a sense of nostalgia. I tried to just be cool and say that I was there to simply make this purchase, the guy just ignored me and kept insulting my taste in games. So I waited until he had rung everything up and I walked out of the store and away from the sale.

One of the clerks at a FLGS near where I used to live was like that, except with Pathfinder. "Oh yes, 4e was fun IF YOU LIKED VIDEO GAMES. Buying 5e stuff? It's a great game IF YOU HATE STRATEGY AND DEPTH."

Quote from: fearsomepirate;965786One of the clerks at a FLGS near where I used to live was like that, except with Pathfinder. "Oh yes, 4e was fun IF YOU LIKED VIDEO GAMES. Buying 5e stuff? It's a great game IF YOU HATE STRATEGY AND DEPTH."

Was the clerk part of the Pathfinder Society? I ask because I swear that Organized Play programs breed that kind of behavior.

Quote from: jeff37923;965773I know he wasn't the owner, just an employee. However, you'd think that anyone working there would have enough presence of mind to not talk a customer out of a sale.

I would have got the manager/owner over there and told him this employee just cost him over a hundred bucks in sales because he thought it was more important to tell the customer how stupid his taste in games is, and ask the manager/owner if he thinks I'm the first customer this knucklehead has driven off.

Quote from: CRKrueger;965795I would have got the manager/owner over there and told him this employee just cost him over a hundred bucks in sales because he thought it was more important to tell the customer how stupid his taste in games is, and ask the manager/owner if he thinks I'm the first customer this knucklehead has driven off.

I honestly thought about that, but decided that it would be overkill.

Quote from: Tequila Sunrise;965407The mixed fan reception of 4e has really disillusioned me with the D&D fanbase, and to a lesser extent with people in general.

Quote from: Voros;965436You're mixing up loudmouths on the net with not only the fanbase but 'people in general.'

I've run into negativity toward 4e often enough in real life to think that it's not solely a phenomenon among internet blowhards, and reactionary attitudes toward anything more than glacial change appears often enough in non-gaming life that I think it's more than a unique trend of the D&D fanbase.

Quote from: Batman;965567Of course you're 100% correct. Though one thing was VASTLY different this time around: WotC got the player's input. The year and a half play-testing and surveys and online arguments and forum disagreements over the "right" way to play is largely why so many people got on board with 5e. They knew what they were getting into about 3/4 of the way through. I remember the first couple of play tests with pre-generated characters and BOY was it bad. It took loads of feedback. From what feats were supposed to do to people not wanting feats at all to no "powers" to use Maneuvers from the Tome of battle to more racial powers to exclude everything from CORE that wasn't Tolkien based, etc.

I will note that the 5e playtesting and surveys assumed that the fanbase was already onboard with the goal of rediscovering the feels of D&D. I.e., it by nature weeded out the opinions of fans who the dev team doesn't care about. After the first survey full of "Does this feel like D&D? What about this? Or that?..." I realized 5e would be a waste of money for me, and turned my attention back to 4e. Other skeptical fans kept playtesting and filling out those surveys in an effort to make their opinions known, but with the surveys designed to short-circuit those opinions, 5e was destined to be the back-to-your-mom's-basement compromise edition that it is, regardless of dissenting opinions. Which for those of us with different priorities, made the dev process very disingenuous -- the dev team had already decided on the edition's overall direction, and the result is essentially "Here's the game you wanted" that we don't want at all.

Quote from: Tequila Sunrise;965847I will note that the 5e playtesting and surveys assumed that the fanbase was already onboard with the goal of rediscovering the feels of D&D. I.e., it by nature weeded out the opinions of fans who the dev team doesn't care about. After the first survey full of "Does this feel like D&D? What about this? Or that?..." I realized 5e would be a waste of money for me, and turned my attention back to 4e. Other skeptical fans kept playtesting and filling out those surveys in an effort to make their opinions known, but with the surveys designed to short-circuit those opinions, 5e was destined to be the back-to-your-mom's-basement compromise edition that it is, regardless of dissenting opinions. Which for those of us with different priorities, made the dev process very disingenuous -- the dev team had already decided on the edition's overall direction, and the result is essentially "Here's the game you wanted" that we don't want at all.

I'm going to respectfully disagree, mostly with how the surveys changed the ways in which the game design started to shift. First point of contention was DoaM (otherwise known as "Damage on a Miss") which sparked HUGE arguements, got people banned, and threads closed back when WotC had messageboards. This mechanic lasted a LONG time into the playtest, to the point that I thought it would make it into the published version in some fashion. This mechanic was something "4e" did and people who hated 4e mostly hated this mechanic.

Second part was Alignment and its impact on the game. The first round of playtest that saw the Paladin and Monk forced Lawful on them, because oaths and discipline apparently require a rigid set of laws(?). The fighting over it was crazy. From why it's dumb to talking about the game's past and why it's Good to people bringing up Paizo's Pathfinder as a reason why it should stay, etc. It lasted a for about 1/2 a month before being re-released without the Alignment requirement. Even though the current game has examples of being altruistic and good, it doesn't force it.

Third would probably be non-magical healing. Early on the playtests there wasn't much in the way of healing besides spells and natural rest (pretty much what we saw prior to 4e) and Mearls making some dumb-ass comments about Warlord shouting hands back onto people (as if removing limbs was ever something prevalent in your average D&D game) and while there was so back and forth to allowing some instance of non-magical healing, people were opposed to it, often saying it removes the need for the Cleric class despite it's amazing abilities to fight the Undead. So in the end we didn't get a Warlord but we did get Hit Die healing and later the Purple Dragon Knight with it's ability to heal people AND the Fighter's Second Wind feature.  

I guess the point is that even when the devs started the roll out of the edition through playtests you knew that the direction of the game wasn't something you were going to waste your time on. The hype and all that was plain as day to see in the form of free material. You had the option to argue for or against certain things and there was some give and take in that regard. I wish there was a Damage on a Miss for Reaper-style characters and I'm sure there are people who wish Paladins were required to be Lawful Good by default. Neither side got exactly what they wanted but I think the majority feel it's close enough.

I look at 5e and all I see is 4e-Lite. So much of this particular edition does 4e in a more simplistic way with touches from 3e and a 2e/1e Backdrop. My wizards aren't spamming crossbows because I'm desperately holding onto those 2 spells all day long. My Clerics are healing AND attack in the same turn without min/maxing my character. My Fighter is making multiple attacks and moving through enemies spaces without needing 5 feats. Paladins are smiting enemy golems and Monks are actually working as intended. Maybe it's not the best or my personal favorite but it's alright by my book. I'd play it if someone was running a game, unlike AD&D.

Quote from: Tequila Sunrise;965843I've run into negativity toward 4e often enough in real life to think that it's not solely a phenomenon among internet blowhards, and reactionary attitudes toward anything more than glacial change appears often enough in non-gaming life that I think it's more than a unique trend of the D&D fanbase.

Once a brand is established, you really can't change it too much, or you fail to fulfill basic consumer expectations

Quote from: jeff37923;965792Was the clerk part of the Pathfinder Society? I ask because I swear that Organized Play programs breed that kind of behavior.

Really?  With a few exceptions the ones I've run into were pretty cool.  I mean sure - they tend to prefer Pathfinder - but I can't remember any of them being jerks/pretentious about it.

Quote from: Tequila Sunrise;965847I will note that the 5e playtesting and surveys assumed that the fanbase was already onboard with the goal of rediscovering the feels of D&D. I.e., it by nature weeded out the opinions of fans who the dev team doesn't care about .

That seems like common sense. You can't start design without clear idea of what you want to achieve. You'd use surveying to track how successful you are in achieving that goal but to try and design a game based purely on player feedback would be a fool's errand as the amount of signal to noise and people claiming they want things they don't actually want, etc would produce a trainwreck of a game.