Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5998407" data-attributes="member: 6668292"><p>And <em>that's</em> fair to bring up. Obviously, people have different reasons. This muddies the waters.</p><p></p><p>Some people say "I treat HP as meat" and people go "really? You can fall 200 feet and just take it? Odd." And that's fair to say, and people on both sides will say it to that guy.</p><p></p><p>The next guy, answering the same question, will say "I use wound/vitality point system, so this works a lot better for me." And people will say "that's not default" or "here's the problem with that system" or "fair enough."</p><p></p><p>The next guy says "I'm just used to HP." And people will reply to that.</p><p></p><p>Then the next guy says "It's the worst tool for the job, except for every other tool." And people reply to that.</p><p></p><p>Then the guy after that says "HP seems fine in combat, it's mostly skill to reduce damage, with some cuts and bruises along the way. Sure, it breaks down with cliffs, lava, and being chained to a rock when a dragon breathes on you, but those don't come up often, so I'm okay with it." And people reply to that.</p><p></p><p>People, obviously, have answers for that question. You're just not going to get a united answer back. And then the conversation spikes six different directions while people reply to the replies, and some posters drop out, and then people reply to the posters that are left, but remember the answers for all of them, and use the answers that help their argument the most as ammunition.</p><p></p><p>And it's not one-sided here in the least. I'm definitely not saying it is. I'm just saying that the natural questions of "why does X cause dissociated when Y doesn't?" is generally speaking a complex answer that a bunch of people are going to answer in different ways.</p><p></p><p>True, and that's why your follow up question of "why X but not Y?" is such a natural question. And it's probably the right question. It just generally leads to a quagmire if everyone talks to everyone about it at once, and people use the replies that help them the most later on as ammunition. Posters A-F all replied to your (general "your") question, discussion ensues; Posters D-F drop out of the discussion; Posters A-C continue, but people later bring up Posters D-F's reasoning later on; Posters A-C now must reply to that, and people claim "inconsistency" or "this was said earlier" or the like; and in the meantime, A-C all have individual and different reasoning or solutions for the problem.</p><p></p><p>I've seen it happen many times. And I think it's happening again now, in this thread. And it's a hard problem to fix. I think it requires people to keep straight which poster said what, and reply to them based on what they've individually said. And that can be tough to do.</p><p></p><p>You're right, though. Saying "it's dissociated" is only a start; saying "it pulled me out of immersion" is even better; saying why it did is better still; saying why it did when Y didn't is better yet. The more things get expanded and explained, the better. It's just tricky in execution. As always, play what you like <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JamesonCourage, post: 5998407, member: 6668292"] And [I]that's[/I] fair to bring up. Obviously, people have different reasons. This muddies the waters. Some people say "I treat HP as meat" and people go "really? You can fall 200 feet and just take it? Odd." And that's fair to say, and people on both sides will say it to that guy. The next guy, answering the same question, will say "I use wound/vitality point system, so this works a lot better for me." And people will say "that's not default" or "here's the problem with that system" or "fair enough." The next guy says "I'm just used to HP." And people will reply to that. Then the next guy says "It's the worst tool for the job, except for every other tool." And people reply to that. Then the guy after that says "HP seems fine in combat, it's mostly skill to reduce damage, with some cuts and bruises along the way. Sure, it breaks down with cliffs, lava, and being chained to a rock when a dragon breathes on you, but those don't come up often, so I'm okay with it." And people reply to that. People, obviously, have answers for that question. You're just not going to get a united answer back. And then the conversation spikes six different directions while people reply to the replies, and some posters drop out, and then people reply to the posters that are left, but remember the answers for all of them, and use the answers that help their argument the most as ammunition. And it's not one-sided here in the least. I'm definitely not saying it is. I'm just saying that the natural questions of "why does X cause dissociated when Y doesn't?" is generally speaking a complex answer that a bunch of people are going to answer in different ways. True, and that's why your follow up question of "why X but not Y?" is such a natural question. And it's probably the right question. It just generally leads to a quagmire if everyone talks to everyone about it at once, and people use the replies that help them the most later on as ammunition. Posters A-F all replied to your (general "your") question, discussion ensues; Posters D-F drop out of the discussion; Posters A-C continue, but people later bring up Posters D-F's reasoning later on; Posters A-C now must reply to that, and people claim "inconsistency" or "this was said earlier" or the like; and in the meantime, A-C all have individual and different reasoning or solutions for the problem. I've seen it happen many times. And I think it's happening again now, in this thread. And it's a hard problem to fix. I think it requires people to keep straight which poster said what, and reply to them based on what they've individually said. And that can be tough to do. You're right, though. Saying "it's dissociated" is only a start; saying "it pulled me out of immersion" is even better; saying why it did is better still; saying why it did when Y didn't is better yet. The more things get expanded and explained, the better. It's just tricky in execution. As always, play what you like :) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
With Respect to the Door and Expectations....The REAL Reason 5e Can't Unite the Base
Top