No, you don't understand.

The point is not whether or not to "slay" "sacred cows."

The point is that discourse is being deliberately poisoned when phenomenon X is being called a sacred cow.

Explanation: A sacred cow is by definition an obsolete phenomenon. Simply by engaging in a discussion involving it, you are buying into the definition. All you can do, according to the poisoners, is evolve with them, embrace obsolescence, or fall silent.

What you cannot do, still according to them, is dispute the obsolescence of phenomenon X.

See also "taboo."

Theres a sad inevitability to people getting very angry about very small differences in a new version of D&D. For once, I think the discussions over at the Wizards boards have been better held than those I've seen elsewhere.

Quote from: SettembriniWe might witness the start of a much greater conflict.

Sett,

 Its actually an oputgrowth of the SAME conflict that Pundit and folks on here talk about.  I'm starting to think that Forge/Indie way of thinking has seeped its way into the guys at WotC - and 4th edition may be the result of that.


- Ed C.

Quote from: CabTheres a sad inevitability to people getting very angry about very small differences in a new version of D&D. For once, I think the discussions over at the Wizards boards have been better held than those I've seen elsewhere.

Totally. The rpg.net d20 forums are hysterical. The worst part: it's going to go on like this for the next nine months, breadcrumb by breadcrumb thrown at them by WOTC. How I wish 4E would be out tomorrow.

Quote from: Pierce InverarityExplanation: A sacred cow is by definition an obsolete phenomenon. Simply by engaging in a discussion involving it, you are buying into the definition. All you can do, according to the poisoners, is evolve with them, embrace obsolescence, or fall silent.

An obsolete mechanic is essentially a mechanic which has no particular use, or has a use that conflicts with the overall design of a system and would not hurt the system if it were removed or replaced with another. Technically, that's all mechanics, and leaving some in doesn't always make the system worse.

For example, I'd argue that in D&D 3.5, the way the stats are set as a number from 0 (useless or dead) on up is mostly an obsolete mechanic because you can cut out the Stat -> Modifier and just note the modifier like True20 does. I say 'mostly' because a Stat without a modifier actually has a use in that it can hit '0' which denotes a useless or killing stat without adding a lot of verbage about how if you hit -5 on your modifier, then it becomes useless or killing.

But mostly, just using the modifier is easier.

Of course, this mechanic actually went obsolete rather then starting there because in older editions, the stats had reasonably variable modifiers. Stats are also faintly useful if you insist on rolling, because you generate them anyhow, but for point-buy... ect.

Quote from: MelanPerhaps I care because one of my demons/nightmares is how language can be turned into a weapon, how certain forms of communication can actively dismantle the social environment which makes constructive discourse possible.

Very interesting.

QuoteHere, the entire language is subverted, set up so that you can't offer counterpoints, only insults and apologies.

I can see where you're coming from, and I agree that the format-the internet certainly enables a lot of behaviors through it's anonymous nature, but I'm not so sure we should throw the proverbial baby out with the bath water just yet.

QuoteCould we end it, please?

Forcing anything never works. Remember when you were a kid and you had that toy? The one with the holes? One was square, one was round, one was a triangle right? Well you never could quite for the square peg in the round hole right?

Same thing goes for real life. It never works when you try to force the square peg in the round hole.

As the internet becomes less and less anonymous I think we'll see a few changes. But like anything they're-these changes-not  always driven by what we think is best for everyone.

Quote from: Thanatos02For example, I'd argue that in D&D 3.5, the way the stats are set as a number from 0 (useless or dead) on up is mostly an obsolete mechanic because you can cut out the Stat -> Modifier and just note the modifier like True20 does.

This is one element of D&D that only hangs on out of tradition, and it's a likely candidate for ditching. Some players will probably moan, even though those 13 Wis values mean nothing in game terms.

I don't know if that makes it a sacred cow, but I'm open to any other terms for 'improvements people are afraid to make out of fear of pissing off traditionalists.'

Moo.

Quote from: HaffrungThis is one element of D&D that only hangs on out of tradition, and it's a likely candidate for ditching. Some players will probably moan, even though those 13 Wis values mean nothing in game terms.  

This isn't technically true. There are several Feats in D&D 3.5 that rely on a '13' stat that doesn't give a bonus in a sort of attempt to work with the system. Those Feats actually engage character creation on a number of levels, in theory.

In practice, hardly anyone will stop at a 13 when they can bump it up to a 14 for the +2 Mod. So, the question isn't always, "Is it used/does it have a meaning" but rather, "Does the meaning it has make the game better in some way?"

Stats instead of modifiers is actually a pretty benign legacy rule, since it doesn't really do anything bad, and removing it hardly does anything at all, anyhow. But it does serve as an ok example of what I mean when I say, "Sacred Cow".

Quote from: Kyle AaronMoo.

 Stop making me laugh!!

Damn You!!

Just to make myself absolutely clear, I am not really talking about 4th edition - it was an inevitability, and I don't really mind, since I have my own little area of gaming that will live as long as I and my friends do. Neither do I mind the flames (hey, I occasionally enjoy them). It is specifically a certain line of arguments, and a certain form of poisonous communication I despise. Settembrini gets it, and I will quote him:

QuoteYou know, i don´t have problems with change, and I´m sure Melan neither does.
But the capsize in argumentation happening at ENworld is concerning me.

They are brandishing an attitude of ultra cool Burger-making without even knowing which part of the herd is actually going to be culled.

Thusly, they show that they will accept anything, even worse, that they don´t have principles apart from trying to be hip.

This is precisely what I was talking about. That these people show an almost burning contempt for a system they idolised and vigorously defended a few weeks ago, and which they are probably still playing. It is clear that they don't want D&D, they want something else. That's for the first half of my problem. Here's the second, in the words of Pierce Inverarity:

QuoteNo, you don't understand.

The point is not whether or not to "slay" "sacred cows."

The point is that discourse is being deliberately poisoned when phenomenon X is being called a sacred cow.

Explanation: A sacred cow is by definition an obsolete phenomenon. Simply by engaging in a discussion involving it, you are buying into the definition. All you can do, according to the poisoners, is evolve with them, embrace obsolescence, or fall silent.

Yup. If you want to debate with these people, debating their positions wouldn't work, because their language, the phraseology and the underlying assumptions are stacked against you. You would either have to dismantle this language and create one which could be a common ground (and you would have to do it in every thread, again and again), or speak on your own terms - in which case there is no meaningful discourse, only pointless yakking and snarking.

Well, of course, this is just talk about an RPG system, and nothing as serious as, say, poisoning the political expression of an entire country (which had happened to mine). It is still very unpleasant, though - upleasant on entirely different levels than your regular flamefest. For me, it makes visiting message boards useless. I don't want to talk by other people, I want to talk to other people. Even if I don't like them.

Yeah, it's frightening to see reason-proof heads. But I think that this is less politics and more a love affair gone sour. More specificaly, it reminds me of a love/hate relationship. I could totaly see those guys getting drunk and leaving alternating love hate voicemails on D&D3.x's home phone. Stuff like:

Quote"Don't go! I love yoo!" "I'm gonna kill your sacred cow!" "Why won't you pick up the phone? What about all the good times we had together? What about the thousands of dollars I spent on you and you won't even answer a phone call?!" "You know when I said Vancian magic doesn't make you look fat? WELL I LIED! "Darling, just pick up the phone. You're perfect just as you are, I'll always keep using your suppliments -- even the BoVD isn't all bad. "You're pathetic! No one loves you but me! I swear if you go to 4th edition NO ONE WILL LOVE YOO!!"