Unpopular opinions go here

[nevin]

I'm fine with rarely, but not never.

Seriously, why is everything in these conversations all or nothing?

because people wish the world was black and white and easy to understand.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I don't assume people have ulterior motives to the questions they're asking, and in fact actually want to know the answers. Which is why there have to actually be answers.

I think "ulterior" puts a negative semantic loading on this I did not mean. People may occasionally just be curious, but when you have an extended stream of questions, its usually going somewhere, and you might as well get there.

 

[nevin]

if there was more significance placed on languages for communication, what specific groups/purposes would have their own dedicated tongues?

Adventurer's Common: replaces existing common but without the implications that every civilian or city-folk will speak it, but would be the language for 'core NPC' types like tavern owners and city guards that are expected to deal with travellers.
Barter: the merchant's language, used by and for all major trade purposes.
Hightongue: language of high society and nobles.
Ancient: mostly found in dungeons or similar locations, exists more for a doylist reason of hints and puzzles.
High Arcane: used to discuss things of a magical nature, the language of science for wizards basically.
Scripture: used as the common touchstone language for churches and similar religiously associated individuals.

Thieves Cant, Druidic and all the other existing species specific languages remain.

returning to a concept i mentioned earlier in the thread, using specific languages for their intended purposes would typically grant bonuses to checks made with the people with whom you are interacting, any given city or settlement would usually have 1-2 dominant species languages that the occupants speak but people in specific positions should also have the associated language, so say you've reached an elf city but no-one speaks elvish, you're still going to be able to get a room for the night because the innkeeper will speak Adventurer's common, and you've got a paladin who knows Scripture so you can talk to the people at the church...

so why have a High Arcane instead of making someone make a spellcraft check to see if they understand the concepts in the writing?

An entire new language for just understanding magic seems depressingly complicated.

 

[Thomas Shey]

I'm fine with rarely, but not never.

Seriously, why is everything in these conversations all or nothing?

When assessing the amount of worth a mechanic or process has in a game, this is no different than any other sort of resource assessment: is it going to matter enough to be worth the space and effort? If that wasn't an issue, every rulebook ever would be 1200 pages to be sure to cover the ground.

 

[Reynard]

Constitution (and all alternate namings thereof) is a pointless stat that should never have been in the game.

Huh. Constitution is the only one of the six that can actually sort of be mapped to something that exists in the real world, IMO. People do in fact have different degrees of physical resilience to disease, etc.

Strength and Dex are both too broad to be useful and should just be combined into "Prowess" given what they actually impact in play.
Intelligence isn't a thing, at least the way the game defines it.
Wisdom and Charisma are all over the map and need to be merged, mixed, and separated into something like Willpower, Guile and Perception.

 

[CreamCloud0]

so why have a High Arcane instead of making someone make a spellcraft check to see if they understand the concepts in the writing?

An entire new language for just understanding magic seems depressingly complicated.

it's not for understanding magic, its for communicating about it in Official Capacities, usually with other wizards, everybody can use the Arcana skill but that doesn't mean everybody understands a language, so it serves the same purpose as any other language, some things you can't even attempt to understand if you don't first understand the language they're written in, your ranger might have expertise in nature but they're not going to be reading that book on dragons if they don't read draconic, or at least, they're going to be attempting to read it at an incredible disadvantage.

edit: if i hand you a science book in a language you can't read and say 'don't worry, with a high enough science skill you'll understand all of this' that doesn't mean it's not going to be infinitely easier process if i hand you the same book written in a language you do understand.

 

[Aldarc]

Huh. Constitution is the only one of the six that can actually sort of be mapped to something that exists in the real world, IMO. People do in fact have different degrees of physical resilience to disease, etc.

Strength and Dex are both too broad to be useful and should just be combined into "Prowess" given what they actually impact in play.
Intelligence isn't a thing, at least the way the game defines it.
Wisdom and Charisma are all over the map and need to be merged, mixed, and separated into something like Willpower, Guile and Perception.

I have heard nearly every rationalization for each of D&D’s stats, and I do not agree with those as a given or apparent as some people believe them to be. You are wasting your breath.

One of my biggest problems with Constitution is that it’s entirely passive and gives players little insight into how their characters actively interact with the world around them.

 

[Shardstone]

That's a perfectly valid way to play D&D. Why are you badwrongfunning?

Imquoting Micah back at him. He says stuff like this all the time

 

[Reynard]

Because everything in the game rules is an abstraction, I think it is important to understand what we are trying to model in play at a specific moment and make a ruling at that time what abilities, proficiencies or other elements impact the potential outcomes. That is the benefit of a somewhat looser system relying more on "rulings than rules." It can, of course, be less satisfying for some players than a more detailed, specific design, but those detailed and specific designs tend toward limiting due to that specificity. In the end, if I have to choose, I would prefer to have a more open to interpretation system that I, as GM, can adjudicate easily than one that requires us to scour rules for just the right thing.

 

[Reynard]

I have heard nearly every rationalization for each of D&D’s stats, and I do not agree with those as a given or apparent as some people believe them to be. You are wasting your breath.

Okay. Well, you are welcome to ignore my thoughts on the matter. Scrolling on by takes less "breath" than pointing out how you don't care.

One of my biggest problems with Constitution is that it’s entirely passive and gives players little insight into how their characters actively interact with the world around them.

I don't see why this is a problem. AC and HP are passive as well.