D&D 5E Does anyone else feel like the action economy and the way actions work in general in 5e both just suck?

[TheSword]

lmaro's point would have been a good one had you made one, instead all he did is jump in late and not...

Your extremely long attempt to disprove why the many things I mentioned don’t work for you, doesn’t change the fact these additions exist and are popular with many people.

If the basic rules allow opportunities to expand existing systems for instance the detailed tool proficiency bolt on that changes the way tools interact with skill proficiencies - then that is a modular add on.

It was Matt Coleville that wrote an extremely popular system for strongholds, followers and mass combat not Matt Mercer.

Your opinion that you don’t like something, while relevant to your experience doesn’t stop the system being modular.

 

[tetrasodium]

Your extremely long attempt to disprove why the many things I mentioned don’t work for you, doesn’t change the fact these additions exist and are popular with many people.

If the basic rules allow opportunities to expand existing systems for instance the detailed tool proficiency bolt on that changes the way tools interact with skill proficiencies - then that is a modular add on.

It was Matt Coleville that wrote an extremely popular system for strongholds, followers and mass combat not Matt Mercer.

Your opinion that you don’t like something, while relevant to your experience doesn’t stop the system being modular.

you've not shown any modularity The ability to add new things that work within the existing completely unchanged framework is not modular

 

[TheSword]

you've not shown any modularity The ability to add new things that work within the existing completely unchanged framework is not modular

Yes I have and yes it is. Having a core system that additional individual systems can be bolted on to is modular.

I’m not going to argue semantics based on your opinion. But mere note that some people - of which I am one - disagree with you.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

People in first world countries have never had more leisure time nor the money to be able to indulge in it.

First of all, i didnt specify first world countries.
Second of all, first world country or not you couldn't be more wrong. Your notion is the opinion most people have though.
Thirdly i think the truth of how leisure time now versus long ago compared quantitatively will surprise you.
Fourthly, im going to drop this particular topic now (modern schedules, that is).

 

[Son of the Serpent]

Yes I have and yes it is. Having a core system that additional individual systems can be bolted on to is modular.

I’m not going to argue semantics based on your opinion. But mere note that some people - of which I am one - disagree with you.

@tetrasodium is right. The existing framework is what must display these qualities for "modular" to apply. You have this completely inside out.

 

[tetrasodium]

Yes I have and yes it is. Having a core system that additional individual systems can be bolted on to is modular.

I’m not going to argue semantics based on your opinion. But mere note that some people - of which I am one - disagree with you.

You've just admitted your position is nothing but meaningless empty words. I gave you a number of specific problems with your assertions & you resort to argument by assertion rather than attempting to address any of them.

 

[Maxperson]

Yes I have and yes it is. Having a core system that additional individual systems can be bolted on to is modular.

Which is an utterly useless definition for modular. Every RPG is modular by that definition.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

On a side note. I DESPISE the line "im not going to argue semantics".

ALWAYS argue the semantics.

I regard anyone who says this line to be arguing in bad faith by default. It may not be the case for you @TheSword , but i just highly recommend never uttering that line.

 

[Oofta]

You've just admitted your position is nothing but meaningless empty words. I gave you a number of specific problems with your assertions & you resort to argument by assertion rather than attempting to address any of them.

Well you will never accept any answer other than "yes, you are 100% correct".

It's the most popular version of D&D ever. It obviously works for a whole heck of a lot of people. It's too bad if it doesn't work for you, but you can't always get what you want.

 

[tetrasodium]

Well you will never accept any answer other than "yes, you are 100% correct".

It's the most popular version of D&D ever. It obviously works for a whole heck of a lot of people. It's too bad if it doesn't work for you, but you can't always get what you want.

Were you trying to make a point? It does not matter if it works for lots of people in relation to thesword's point about 5e being modular because like every tv series or movie with multiple episodes movies seasons or spinoffs it can be added to. Star wars, star trek, & nightmare on elmstreet are modular by his absurd definition. When specific problems with his assertion were raised by myself & othes he refused to address them.

I'd be thrilled with a discussion attempting to address them rather than one with someone saying what amounts to "he made a claim go prove it yourself" & "supporting my argument is beneath me". Given that even you didn't pick up the baton trying to address the specific points raised despite your protest... I think it's fair to say that we both agree they are just nonsense.