Quote from: mhensley;456290Do you think Chevy sites ban threads mentioning Fords?  Would a Steelers board ban talk about the Bears?  The whole thing is silly and childish. It only serves to chase away people like me who do play all the editions.

Chase away?!  Chase away?!  Away from what?  There are plenty of sites for people who wanna live under the big tent.  So is this your thesis?  That you should just be able to go into a site with a specific focus and demand to have a space to talk about whatever you want to discuss, owners operators and everyone else there be damned?  When you start paying my server fees, then we'll talk.  Actually, no we won't.  When you buy thedelversdungeon.com or knights-n-knaves.com or citadelofchaos.net or wherever you fear your right to shit up the place is being trampled, and start paying server fees, you've got a point.

The only person here being silly and childish is you.  You no more get to insist that any and all forums should be open to whatever you want to discuss than I get to hold a Wiccan ceremony in the Vatican cathedral.

If you don't get why "That is outside the scope of our forum, please don't discuss that here, there are plenty of other forums for it." is entirely within the rights of the forum owner and users, I feel sorry for you because you clearly have some comprehension issues going on.  That or cognitive dissonance.  But whatever; you say you left DF mostly when the EW forum went away so I'm thinking you're just trolling.

Sacrificial Lamb: First mate, we might disagree, even vehemently, about some stuff like this, but I always considered you an OK dude, and I'm fine with us having an argument about this. I don't think you're a douche.

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;456266Guess what? The "uber-grogs" are pandering anyway by using styles of graphic design straight out of 1979, but the problem here is that they're pandering to a small subset of the AD&D audience (only themselves), and that is a mistake. If they keep that up, they'll doom themselves to obscurity and hopeless mediocrity.

(1) That's not a mistake if that's what they actually like, (2) Let them doom themselves to mediocrity, then. The thing is, I don't think they doom themselves at all. They just like something very precise, which goes with a whole bunch of expectations in terms of format, aesthetics, art and other wise, and they're content with their choice. They're not willing to "grow the audience" just because. They believe the game is worth preserving in its pre-UA form, more or less, and that's a wish I actually share.

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;456266And sorry...about growing the system, I totally disagree. AD&D should be treated as a living, breathing game...and not as a cold, dusty museum piece....never to be tampered with, for fear of incurring the wrath of "ye Holy Gygax". And I'm not talking about some "planned obsolesence" bullshit. I'm talking about adding cool stuff that has practical applications in a person's campaign.

It's not about "Holy Gygax". If it were, all of them would be using Unearthed Arcana, running Cyborg Commando and praise Lejendary Adventure, which is not the case. That's a piece of bullshit shortcut that isn't nearly as true as most people think it is.

It's about a precise incarnation of the game they love.

And indeed, I completely disagree with you. The whole "living, breathing system" marketing bullshit was used on AD&D before, and that just led to crap. Nowhere is it written in the stars that role playing games have to be expanded and twisted and modified to the core over and over again. Just like you have classics of board games, you can have classics of role-playing, and AD&D is one of them. There's no sense in changing a game that fundamentally achieves what these people want. Either people share the love they've got for the game, or they don't. But changing the game for the sake of attracting people to the game is a no-no, a self-defeating statement. It's lame, idiotic pseudo-marketing bullshit, and we can do without it. If that means the game dies, so be it, though I obviously believe you are completely wrong on that issue.

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;456266Who's stopping you from liking what you like? I want you to focus on the stuff that you enjoy.  The thing is....life did go on in AD&Dland after Unearthed Arcana came out, though the uber-grogs loathe to admit it. And if they keep going apeshit about other people's fun, then the rest of gamerdom will happily go on without them.

And who's stopping you from embracing UA and publishing your own stuff expanding on the system? No one! Go ahead, mate: I'm sure you'll find people who'll like you doing this! I get that the people that pissed you off in the past participated in the huge flamewars you remember and hurt your feelings, but this time is over now. Axe Mental pisses you off? Just tell him to fuck off, for God's sakes (and yeah, that happens on K&K too!).

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;456266Correction. None of it matters....to you. Go to a place like K&K, and read the threads over the past several years. You'll see tons of discussions by the uber-grogs about growing the 1e audience, where they get positively spaztastic about it. I'm not making this shit up. And what you're suggesting doesn't really work on a large scale any more, at least not by itself. The AD&D audience is shrinking, not growing....and the grogs have only themselves to blame.

My argument isn't that this stuff doesn't matter to me (I do care about preserving the game and playing it and sharing it with others). It's that all we're talking about here, in the end, means jack shit as far as attracting new gamers to an AD&D audience goes.

Since the start of the hobby, new players have been introduced to gaming by gamers. They tried the game and happened to like it. Remember how you were introduced to RPGs: I'm willing to bet that an OVERWHELMING number of people have been introduced by someone else who already was gaming. This is how you grow the hobby: you invite people, newbies, to play with you. Some people like the game, others don't.

If you want to talk about a massive problem in the way the hobby, AD&D and otherwise, shrinks nowadays, try considering the incestuous nature of the hobby, first and foremost. Gamers play with gamers, socialize with gamers, hang out with gamers. <-- THAT is the problem right here.

Want to grow the AD&D hobby? Invite newbies to play the game. Organize games in stores and city fairs and youth associations and the like. Introduce people to the joy of the game. That's IT.

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;456266I feel compelled to mention something here, Benny. You're not really an edition purist or "one-wayist", or whatever. The guys I'm talking about are. Or at least they were, as they're not quite as virulent as they used to be...for which I'm thankful. I used to avoid getting into arguments with them to prevent a giant clusterfuck. Now...I don't know. Maybe it just doesn't matter any more, or maybe it never really did.

You're right, I enjoy a lot of different games and play styles. At the same time, I enjoy pre-UA AD&D and share the goals of the guys you are talking about. I might not agree with everything Axe Mental says (God knows I don't), or TDD here says for that matter (Hey Bill, want to have another round at our discussion of similarities between 3rd ed and 1st ed? That could be fun LOL), but at the same time I share most of these people's feelings regarding the AD&D game.

I honestly think you were hurt by the shit flinging that occurred years ago. It permeates your posts. I can feel it. I'm not sure whether that'd unfold differently today. I guess something did change though. We just had a thread on K&K about best gaming books and the like, and I listed 3.0 D&D and Vampire the Masquerade, amongst others, on my games list. Nobody made a single remark about it. It's perfectly cool with them, so long as I'm not rubbing my dick in their faces, if you see what I mean.

Quote from: Benoist;456307Sacrificial Lamb: First mate, we might disagree, even vehemently, about some stuff like this, but I always considered you an OK dude, and I'm fine with us having an argument about this. I don't think you're a douche.

Thanks....I think.

Quote from: Benoist(1) That's not a mistake if that's what they actually like, (2) Let them doom themselves to mediocrity, then. The thing is, I don't think they doom themselves at all. They just like something very precise, which goes with a whole bunch of expectations in terms of format, aesthetics, art and other wise, and they're content with their choice. They're not willing to "grow the audience" just because. They believe the game is worth preserving in its pre-UA form, more or less, and that's a wish I actually share.

I only say that it's a mistake because these guys have expressed strong desires to grow the AD&D audience on multiple occasions, and their methods just aren't working. But you're right; they should create the products that they want....though I hold to my belief that adding more, um..."creative" stuff won't really interfere with the original game.

Quote from: BenoistIt's not about "Holy Gygax". If it were, all of them would be using Unearthed Arcana, running Cyborg Commando and praise Lejendary Adventure, which is not the case. That's a piece of bullshit shortcut that isn't nearly as true as most people think it is.

It's about a precise incarnation of the game they love.

I should have been more precise. What I meant is Gygaxian versions of D&D, especially 1e.

Quote from: BenoistAnd indeed, I completely disagree with you. The whole "living, breathing system" marketing bullshit was used on AD&D before, and that just led to crap. Nowhere is it written in the stars that role playing games have to be expanded and twisted and modified to the core over and over again. Just like you have classics of board games, you can have classics of role-playing, and AD&D is one of them. There's no sense in changing a game that fundamentally achieves what these people want. Either people share the love they've got for the game, or they don't. But changing the game for the sake of attracting people to the game is a no-no, a self-defeating statement. It's lame, idiotic pseudo-marketing bullshit, and we can do without it. If that means the game dies, so be it, though I obviously believe you are completely wrong on that issue.

It led to crap, but it also led to brilliance. Sometimes we have to take chances if we want to create something wonderful. And they don't have to change the core material, but rather I lament that they don't create more exciting and creative supplementary material. Just so we're clear here......I reject the "planned obsolescence model", and I think they made too many changes in the game mechanics of OSRIC, solely to change the game into what they wanted, or what they thought was more "Gygaxian".

Quote from: BenoistAnd who's stopping you from embracing UA and publishing your own stuff expanding on the system? No one! Go ahead, mate: I'm sure you'll find people who'll like you doing this! I get that the people that pissed you off in the past participated in the huge flamewars you remember and hurt your feelings, but this time is over now. Axe Mental pisses you off? Just tell him to fuck off, for God's sakes (and yeah, that happens on K&K too!).

Nobody, I guess. Maybe I should publish something..? I create 1e material for fun, but have never thrown my publishing hat into the ring.

You're right about that time being over, which is why I've recently returned to AD&D. Looking back...the situation was quite ridiculous. I was immature, because I let people from the Internet poison my love for a game. Can you imagine that? But I guess that's ancient history now...

Quote from: BenoistMy argument isn't that this stuff doesn't matter to me (I do care about preserving the game and playing it and sharing it with others). It's that all we're talking about here, in the end, means jack shit as far as attracting new gamers to an AD&D audience goes.

Since the start of the hobby, new players have been introduced to gaming by gamers. They tried the game and happened to like it. Remember how you were introduced to RPGs: I'm willing to bet that an OVERWHELMING number of people have been introduced by someone else who already was gaming. This is how you grow the hobby: you invite people, newbies, to play with you. Some people like the game, others don't.

If you want to talk about a massive problem in the way the hobby, AD&D and otherwise, shrinks nowadays, try considering the incestuous nature of the hobby, first and foremost. Gamers play with gamers, socialize with gamers, hang out with gamers. <-- THAT is the problem right here.

Want to grow the AD&D hobby? Invite newbies to play the game. Organize games in stores and city fairs and youth associations and the like. Introduce people to the joy of the game. That's IT.

I think the way I'd grow the hobby would be to create a game strongly inspired by AD&D, though not necessarily a clone. I don't know...

Quote from: BenoistYou're right, I enjoy a lot of different games and play styles. At the same time, I enjoy pre-UA AD&D and share the goals of the guys you are talking about. I might not agree with everything Axe Mental says (God knows I don't), or TDD here says for that matter (Hey Bill, want to have another round at our discussion of similarities between 3rd ed and 1st ed? That could be fun LOL), but at the same time I share most of these people's feelings regarding the AD&D game.

I honestly think you were hurt by the shit flinging that occurred years ago. It permeates your posts. I can feel it. I'm not sure whether that'd unfold differently today. I guess something did change though. We just had a thread on K&K about best gaming books and the like, and I listed 3.0 D&D and Vampire the Masquerade, amongst others, on my games list. Nobody made a single remark about it. It's perfectly cool with them, so long as I'm not rubbing my dick in their faces, if you see what I mean.

I won't lie. I think I actually was hurt by it....because if I wasn't, then I wouldn't have dropped my 1e books in disgust in response to all those Internet flamefests, right? My thoughts were:

"If they're gonna treat me like a retard for liking both 1e and 3e, then maybe I'll just stick with 3e."

Hearing terms like "3tard" and "tetsnbn", and other such crap flung around all the time gave me such a headache, and I didn't have the impulse control back then to look away from the ridiculous Internet train wreck that it was.

In any case, dungeondelver brought up the edition wars....so I wanted him to know the effect they had on me. I've mostly gotten over it, and the grog community is more mellow now anyway, so it's cool. But looking back, I guess all that stuff left its mark on me. I stopped playing AD&D for many years because of it, and that's just sad.

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;456326Thanks....I think.

It's intended as a compliment.

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;456326I only say that it's a mistake because these guys have expressed strong desires to grow the AD&D audience on multiple occasions, and their methods just aren't working. But you're right; they should create the products that they want....though I hold to my belief that adding more, um..."creative" stuff won't really interfere with the original game.

In my mind you can have a creative yet traditional approach to the game, by which I mean you don't have to modify or alter the premise of the game to be able to add to it in original ways. An example of this is the "supplement" approach to the original 1974 game. Stuff like Greyhawk and Blackmoor, or later with Majestic Wilderlands. You can do the same thing with AD&D in my mind. None of this would imply an UA approach in the "there's the game pre UA, and the game post UA" sense. In other words, it's all about the actual manner in which it is done, in my mind.

Take a game like Astonishing Swordsmen & Sorcerers of Hyperborea. It's not out yet, but what it is is basically a strongly tweaked AD&D First Ed, with different ways to handle classes, races and ethnicities, a specific setting, task resolution, followers and a whole bunch of stuff. All stuff which Ghul (Jeffrey Talanian, the author) talked about on Dragonsfoot. It's a game that is clearly apart from First Ed, yet I regard it as very traditional in nature.

Another example, which has actually just been praised by P&P/Stuart Marshall, OSRIC's main editor, is Stars Without Number, which he called basically "Traveller with Labyrinth Lord rules." I might nitpick with the characterization, but the basic idea is: these guys do welcome innovation and variants and originality and all these things. But at the same time, OSRIC's purpose is not to be some kind of pastiche relaunch of AD&D with tons of supplements and shit. It's to be a restatement of the traditional first ed game published using the OGL which itself enables OGL publication of first edition game materials. That's the point of OSRIC.
 

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;456326I should have been more precise. What I meant is Gygaxian versions of D&D, especially 1e.

Some people like those, however. I acknowledge that there's been flamewars and a lot of bad blood going on in the past, but at the same time, you can't stop people from liking what they like. In that case, the K&K folks specifically like these incarnations of the game. There's no sense in trying to change that. Don't you agree?

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;456326It led to crap, but it also led to brilliance. Sometimes we have to take chances if we want to create something wonderful. And they don't have to change the core material, but rather I lament that they don't create more exciting and creative supplementary material. Just so we're clear here......I reject the "planned obsolescence model", and I think they made too many changes in the game mechanics of OSRIC, solely to change the game into what they wanted, or what they thought was more "Gygaxian".

There's no "planned obsolescence" going on with OSRIC. It's just that the traditional "Gygaxian" game they like is what it is, and there's no sense to change it whatsoever, since the point is to make it available in an OGL format to then publish what you want with it. There are actually guys out there using OSRIC to publish their own versions of Unearthed Arcana and the like. The K&K folks might not have any interest in these sorts of products, but no one there is forbidding anyone from publishing them, quite the contrary, actually.

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;456326Nobody, I guess. Maybe I should publish something..? I create 1e material for fun, but have never thrown my publishing hat into the ring.

Well. Here's the thing. To me there's only one question to answer in this regard: "Do I want to share my stuff with other people so they might have fun playing with it?" That's it. That's the one question to answer for yourself. If the answer's "Yes", then by God, don't care for the assholes who are bound to puke on your stuff as soon as it hits the intarwebz. Think about the people who WILL like your stuff, and do it. That's it.

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;456326You're right about that time being over, which is why I've recently returned to AD&D. Looking back...the situation was quite ridiculous. I was immature, because I let people from the Internet poison my love for a game. Can you imagine that? But I guess that's ancient history now...

I still got all the links to the C&C/OSRIC flamewars. Holy shit that went WAY over the top at times. Another example would be the shitstorm around Carcosa. There are tons of examples where I'd say things were said that should not have been said. But at the same time, I think we need to be able to get over that. We're not just what we write on forums. We do change and evolve and are more complex individuals that a bunch of nerdrage posts would suggest, each and everyone of us. So ... I'm not saying it's easy to step away and breathe, God knows I would need some of that sometimes with some of the assholes stalking me, but yeah. It's the internet, mate. We need to take a step back with that shit.

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;456326I think the way I'd grow the hobby would be to create a game strongly inspired by AD&D, though not necessarily a clone. I don't know...

Ah man. Check Astonishing Swordsmen and Sorcerers of Hyperborea when it comes out. You are going to like this.

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;456326I won't lie. I think I actually was hurt by it....because if I wasn't, then I wouldn't have dropped my 1e books in disgust in response to all those Internet flamefests, right? My thoughts were:

"If they're gonna treat me like a retard for liking both 1e and 3e, then maybe I'll just stick with 3e."

Hearing terms like "3tard" and "tetsnbn", and other such crap flung around all the time gave me such a headache, and I didn't have the impulse control back then to look away from the ridiculous Internet train wreck that it was.

I went through that in my own way with the 3e culture, and then later with the 4e culture. And now, I'm going through it because I'm looked upon as an "uber-grog extremist" by yet some other people. But you know what? Whatever. Dicks are going to be dicks. Let's just move on and talk about what we like. Share the love. People want to poo-pooh my love of pre-UA 1e? Fuck them. People want to poo-pooh your love of 3rd ed? Fuck them!

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;456326In any case, dungeondelver brought up the edition wars....so I wanted him to know the effect they had on me. I've mostly gotten over it, and the grog community is more mellow now anyway, so it's cool. But looking back, I guess all that stuff left its mark on me. I stopped playing AD&D for many years because of it, and that's just sad.

I think it's cool we're talking about it. I see a parallel that's actually constructive between our viewpoints. Don't you?

Quote from: BenI think it's cool we're talking about it. I see a parallel that's actually constructive between our viewpoints. Don't you?

Yes.  I think so as well.

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;456326Nobody, I guess. Maybe I should publish something..? I create 1e material for fun, but have never thrown my publishing hat into the ring.

I think Aos is still working on organizing some stuff, so my schedule is pretty open right now.  What did you have in mind?

Quote from: Benoist;456343I think it's cool we're talking about it. I see a parallel that's actually constructive between our viewpoints. Don't you?

Yeah, I do.

Awesome.

Back when I engaged in some of the 'edition wars' at RPG.net and Enworld (from 2004 until around 2007), I found them helpful in two respects:

(a) They helped clarify exactly what I liked and disliked in different editions of A/D&D (and in closely related games like C&C).

(b) They informed me that there were at least a few others out there in the greater RPG community who shared my tastes.

Both (a) and (b) were helpful.

But really, 90% of the debates in which I participated were a waste of time.

Quote from: Akrasia;456387Back when I engaged in some of the 'edition wars' at RPG.net and Enworld (from 2004 until around 2007), I found them helpful in two respects:

(a) They helped clarify exactly what I liked and disliked in different editions of A/D&D (and in closely related games like C&C).

(b) They informed me that there were at least a few others out there in the greater RPG community who shared my tastes.

Both (a) and (b) were helpful.

But really, 90% of the debates in which I participated were a waste of time.

Much wisdom here.

Quote from: StormBringer;456375I think Aos is still working on organizing some stuff, so my schedule is pretty open right now.  What did you have in mind?

Tons of stuff, but I'm not sure if this is the thread for it.

One of the projects I'm thinking about would be a fantasy game inspired by AD&D and Warhammer. I'd publish it as a self-contained game in a boxed set....with random encounter tables, new monsters, spells, maps, and whatnot. I'd include dice, possibly a critical hit deck, and certainly character sheets.

I'm also interested in creating a more streamlined 3e-type game as well.

There are other projects I'm interested in, but....yeah. My mind's been rolling around a bit.

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;456399Tons of stuff, but I'm not sure if this is the thread for it.

Well, I do know a place where this kind of thing is encouraged...  

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;455847I don't know what I get out of the edition wars, honestly. They're inevitably a train wreck, and yet I find them difficult to avoid reading. I'll be honest though. You and others like you (Axemental, for example) irritated me so monumentally over the years with your foaming-at-the-mouth pro-Gygaxian, anti-3e zealotry..."back in the day", that it was enough to almost completely drive me away from AD&D for eight years. I'd open my 1e DMG, and then quickly close it again, because I'd be thinking of some asshat on the Internet, and so my joy for the game would be quickly poisoned. As a result, my gaming group quit AD&D for years, and only started playing it again recently...

I've "evolved" a little bit, in that I try not to let people on the Internet poison my love of a game now. That still doesn't change the fact that when I'm a fan of a game, I want to be part of that game's community, yet much of the 1e community makes that very difficult. I'd visit sites like Dragonsfoot, Knights 'n Knaves, and whatnot....and would loathe the echo chambers that preside there. It's frustrating. I'm still a 1e fan, so people from those sites speak a language I understand, but I hate narrow-minded, suffocating zealotry masquerading as "moral authority" in the hobby of Dungeons & Dragons. That shit gets old and tired.

The good news is that you aren't quite as bad as you used to be, and neither are the other grogs. The Gygaxian asshattery has toned down over the past few years. Maybe middle age has softened you guys out a bit; I don't know...but I'm almost thankful for 4e, because it means the uber-grognards are less likely to get uber-cranky about 2e and 3e.

P.S. For the record, I'm a fan of 1e...but I often feel uncomfortable with the narrow-minded overzealousness that's prevalent in the 1e online community, even though I often visit 1e websites...

Oh, and 2e rocks....so suck it.

Took the words right out of my mouth. The difference is that at heart, I'm pretty Old School is my gaming tastes. I didn't care for many of the changes in 2E -let alone 3E or 4E- and prefer the old game. I was given a complete set of 3E books as a gift from my brother-in-law when it came out (he worked at Hasbro back then) and I've opened them ONCE. I have no use for them whatsoever. The only reason they still have a place on my shelf is because they were a gift and it would be kinda tacky for me to get rid of them.

Here's the rub: As little as I have any kind of use for my 3E stuff, I have far less use for self-appointed commissars of All Things Gygax, and BTB Avengers. Yes, I'm referring to the grognards -AKA the Teabaggers of Gaming. People who try to present themselves as more catholic than the pope -er, more Gygaxian than Gygax himself. When they bitch about a feature in 2E, 3E or even UA, it's actually hilarious to point out the precedent set in 1E for it (for example, THAC0 -the mere mention of which will cause many a grogtard to shit his pants in impotent rage). It's like pointing out to a misogynist Taliban fundie that there were women soldiers in the prophet Mohammed's armies.

For all their bluster about how they're content to engage in circlejerks on their own sites, they sure seem hell bent on trying to push their agenda on other, more popular sites -even to the point of telling other posters that they shouldn't be posting there.  

So yes I do get something out of pissing matches between fanwhores of different editions: a chance to laugh at the stupidity of others.

Quote from: Phillip;455985What do you get out of complaining about "edition war"?

If you don't like it, then you can just stay out of it.

I don't see where people get off trying to dictate to other people that lies have to get a blank check, which is what the "high-minded" baloney in practice comes down to.

"Opinions differ as to whether the world is flat or round."

Quote from: Sacrificial Lamb;456220Dragonsfoot is the home of 1e on the net (for better or for worse), and is also very much an "old school" forum. Only a handful of "uber-grogs" on the Internet think otherwise, and they're all inevitably members of the same crew, most of whom frequent your site, K&K, and a handful of other such smaller sites. Just because you, Axemental, Gene Weigel,

The same Gene Weigel who tried to pass himself off as a TSR employee from back in the 1980s -while arguing with Mike Beault, who really was a TSR employee back in the 1980s? That sad and pathetic loser?
:rotfl:

Money quote from Breault, after Weigel was exposed as the demented bullshitter he is:

QuoteI assume the lost poster is Gene [Weigel]. In what ways am I his polar opposite? I assume you meant that as an insult, but the differences I see are that I can write a coherent English sentence, that I was actually there and don't just pretend to have been, and that I don't scatter ill-informed delusions of vast conspiracies throughout my posts.

PWNED! As the kids say nowadays.

Geez, I didn't say anything like what this guy "ELFDART" is saying. Show me the quote where I say I worked for TSR and maybe I'll say I was drunk but it doesn't exist. Period. Bury that line, its weak, plus I don't even care anymore but keep it up and I'll gladly point out that you're really mistaken about that.