This is related to the JoeTheLawyer thread, but not really about what he said, or about his getting banned. It's about something much broader.

I'm tired of hearing rants about "edition warriors" and how it's "poisoning the hobby" or "ruining people's fun". It's BS. There's a lot less "edition warring" going on than people would like to believe.

It appears that, to some people, "edition warring" is defined as "negative comments about a game". Now, I've seen negative comments about a game before, so I know that it actually happens, probably quite a lot. Sometimes, it's someone making a snarky aside, like "I used to play AD&D, but now I've matured". Sometimes, it's an actual list of elements a person dislikes about Edition X, perhaps even long enough to be a rant. Occasionally, people even complain about "edition warriors" when someone just says "I don't like X, I prefer Y", as if disliking something is some sort of attack.

But when people make snarky comments or actual rants about my favorite game, I either snark back, or make a reasonable reply while ignoring the meaningless opinions, or ignore the negative post completely, because it doesn't really matter if someone talks smack about my game. So what? It's just words. It doesn't hurt me or my game if someone says something negative about it, nor does it make the game better if I respond. Whether or not I respond is based entirely on whether I think the conversation will be (a) entertaining, or (b) productive.

An "edition warrior", to me, is someone who repeatedly goes out of his way to disrupt discussion about a game. And that still doesn't affect the game, just the forum, blog or discussion. There are very few true "edition warriors".

But there's a hell of a lot of people ranting about edition warriors. These are the people who truly disrupt useful conversation, because they turn any discussion into a discussion about edition warriors.

And what gets me is: are people really so overly sensitive that they completely break down whenever they hear something they don't agree with? Can't you just ignore a negative comment or make a quick snarky response and then MOVE ON? Do we really need to start every thread with "TRIGGER WARNING: Criticism of [YOUR FAVORITE GAME]"?

Ha. You're just too wishy-washy to admit that BFRPG is the best in-print version of D&D.

Lately I've been taking talysman's advice and just putting the worst of the "edition warriors" on my ignore list. He's right, there's no reason I should listen to them. By extension, since he's advocating for their ridiculous antics, I have no reason to listen to talysman, either....

I particularly dislike the people who are like YOU MONSTER WHY YOU SAY BAD THING ABOUT HEALING SURGES and then go off to take a dump on fighters or feats or whatever. Often 'Edition Warfare' seems to just mean "picking on an edition I like".

Heck, I don't like D&D.  Haven't for decades.  So many reasons why.

But there are obviously a great many RPGers who disagree with me, and a bunch of people who don't like the game *I* play.

IMHO, "edition warring" is stupid: it makes as much sense as warring over whether Baroque music is better than Renaissance music, or whether hockey is superior to soccer, or whether Fords are better than Chevys.  We have preferences.  Preferences are good.  They just don't come with the prerequisite that anyone who doesn't share our preference is making a personal attack on us by that fact alone, and they must be opposed unto death.

Quote from: danbuter;728300ha. You're just too wishy-washy to admit that bfrpg is the best in-print version of d&d.

your love of bfrpg is harming my fun!

Pointing out your likes and dislikes isn't edition warring. Telling people that their likes and dislikes are wrong is edition warring - anyone who uses the terms 'broken' 'grognard' '4tard' '3urries' 'objectively better design' should be looked at funny, and in extremis given a wedgie.

Quote from: One Horse Town;728335Pointing out your likes and dislikes isn't edition warring. Telling people that their likes and dislikes are wrong is edition warring - anyone who uses the terms 'broken' 'grognard' '4tard' '3urries' 'objectively better design' should be looked at funny, and in extremis given a wedgie.

Agreed. But I extend this to just games in general. I extend it to the whole "storygame/trad" argument and all that jazz.

Games are just games. Enjoy the ones you enjoy, you don't have to enjoy the ones I enjoy, but no one should be telling anyone else why they are wrong for enjoying things.

If somebody says or thinks their game is objectively better, you say you ignore the comment.

I ignore them, and encourage everybody else to do so, because that one crazy belief is evidence that the entire tree of everything they think is crazy. If someone holds irrational beliefs, they can't be trusted when they make recommendations or float ideas or invent stuff that's supposed to work in a game.

It's like if someone on the corner goes "I'm Jesus and I the sky is made of pickled love!!!!" while wearing a tinfoil hat, I am not going to ask them for directions. That person is nuts.

It's not that I'm offended, it's that they've proven themself to be one of the people who is never going to be useful. So, yeah, edition warring hurt the conversation by allowing people without brains to be a part of it. It slows down progress.

I figure anyone who gets bent out of whack by something posted on a message board is ... needing more real life interaction and spending too much time on the internet.  

The anti-edition war brigage is at their funniest when they so often are OK with saying "4e is like WoW" while being against "4e is WoW".  In other words, that person is OK with a simile, but unglued by a metaphor.

Quote from: Emperor Norton;728344Agreed. But I extend this to just games in general. I extend it to the whole "storygame/trad" argument and all that jazz.

Games are just games. Enjoy the ones you enjoy, you don't have to enjoy the ones I enjoy, but no one should be telling anyone else why they are wrong for enjoying things.

Agreed, Edwards has a lot to answer for.

Quote from: One Horse Town;728350Agreed, Edwards has a lot to answer for.

Yeah, no question of that. There is a lot of stupid "our games are better" stuff on every side.

For the record, it's 4on, not 4tard.

Quote from: One Horse Town;728350Agreed, Edwards has a lot to answer for.

Only to the degree that you give him power by rising to the bait.

For my part, there's always the point where it's ten times more productive and ten times less ulcer-provoking to shrug, say "What an asshole" and move on, than to froth at the mouth and call anathema upon all your enemies' works.

Quote from: danbuter;728353For the record, it's 4on, not 4tard.

Indeed. No mixing 4e and 3e!