Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
101 roleplaying descriptions justifying martial dailies
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="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 4817722" data-attributes="member: 2067"><p>My, my, aren't we the judgmental type. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /> </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm pretty sure that someone's feelings aren't something that can be argued against.</p><p></p><p>"Your feelings are wrong! Change the way you feel!": the argument doesn't work, no matter how much evidence you have that their feelings are wrong, because it's not on a logical level.</p><p></p><p>Barbarian rages in 3e were a different beast than martial dailies in 4e, so drawing that comparison is false and misleading to begin with.</p><p></p><p>But even if they were the same thing, 4e's martial dailies and encounter powers obviously ramp up the unreality of the situation. If the barbarian rages were limited enough in scope that you could mostly ignore it, 4e's martial powers are certainly <strong>not</strong> so limited.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Don't put the cart before the horse, there. The point of the game is to give me appealing mechanics that I can play with. It is 100% the fault of the game if it doesn't give me that: presumably, they could have done things differently, and they didn't, and a D&D message board is exactly the place to discuss the things you don't like about D&D that you want to be done differently in the future. I am the customer, here: D&D is competing for my money and free time, and it is failing to achieve it. It's not my fault if it fails. It doesn't want to fail. It wants my money, it wants my time. It needs to be receptive to the way that I think...I can't be wrong, because it's supposed to serve me. Discussing why it fails to achieve it is completely within the scope of the conversation here. With some positions, perhaps D&D won't ever realistically be able to achieve popularity with me, but in this specific case, 4e is obviously trying something new, and they need to see if it works or not. Threads talking about why it doesn't work for some people are entirely useful, because then we get a sense of what can make the D&D game better for delivering fun to more people. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, that's part of the idea for this thread, isn't it? "How can I try and think about things in a new way that helps me enjoy what it is?" is basically the question in the thread title. People aren't categorical and immutable, so they can change (or they can change the game) enough to make it worth playing, if they want to.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, you've got a lot of debatable assumptions worked into your position, there.</p><p></p><p>Specifically, the point of the game's intricate balance needs to be called out as a thing that doesn't have to exist: they could have balanced the game with martial powers that were "always on," but they chose not to. That's a choice that can certainly be debated by fans of the game. </p><p></p><p>Second, you seem to think that they want other people to share the view, but from what I've seen in this thread, most of them just want others to accept that they have a problem, and maybe propose ways to fix it. They don't want to change the way you think, they want the game to match more how they think.</p><p></p><p>Third, the conversation is entirely topical for the boards, so "Move Along" just seems to be a way to shut down a conversation that you're not a fan of. If you're not a fan of people talking about how 4e encounter and daily powers don't meet their sense of verisimilitude, and so make the game less fun for them, just don't come to the thread. Certainly "You're feelings are wrong and you should shut up!" is not very constructive for helping anyone.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>4e's various changes certainly speak against that. The game goes through editions, and 4e certainly took a lot of things that people didn't like about 3e and changed them. 5e will take things that people don't like about 4e and will change them, too. Furthermore, people designing supplements for 4e might find a way to change the game to something more appealing.</p><p></p><p>The game <strong>does</strong> change because I don't like it. The game has changed before because people don't like it, and it will continue to change because people will never be totally satisfied with it. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>It's not about liking or not liking an entire edition. This thread wasn't started with "Come here and tell me how much you love 4e!" in mind. There was a specific problem to address -- a specific problem that didn't need to occur, and that can potentially be fixed for those who have the problem. </p><p></p><p>Is it difficult for you to be OK with people who have problems with 4e? If so, then I'd advocate ignoring the threads about 4e problems, rather than entering them just to tell people that they're wrong and need to shut up.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="I'm A Banana, post: 4817722, member: 2067"] My, my, aren't we the judgmental type. ;) I'm pretty sure that someone's feelings aren't something that can be argued against. "Your feelings are wrong! Change the way you feel!": the argument doesn't work, no matter how much evidence you have that their feelings are wrong, because it's not on a logical level. Barbarian rages in 3e were a different beast than martial dailies in 4e, so drawing that comparison is false and misleading to begin with. But even if they were the same thing, 4e's martial dailies and encounter powers obviously ramp up the unreality of the situation. If the barbarian rages were limited enough in scope that you could mostly ignore it, 4e's martial powers are certainly [B]not[/B] so limited. Don't put the cart before the horse, there. The point of the game is to give me appealing mechanics that I can play with. It is 100% the fault of the game if it doesn't give me that: presumably, they could have done things differently, and they didn't, and a D&D message board is exactly the place to discuss the things you don't like about D&D that you want to be done differently in the future. I am the customer, here: D&D is competing for my money and free time, and it is failing to achieve it. It's not my fault if it fails. It doesn't want to fail. It wants my money, it wants my time. It needs to be receptive to the way that I think...I can't be wrong, because it's supposed to serve me. Discussing why it fails to achieve it is completely within the scope of the conversation here. With some positions, perhaps D&D won't ever realistically be able to achieve popularity with me, but in this specific case, 4e is obviously trying something new, and they need to see if it works or not. Threads talking about why it doesn't work for some people are entirely useful, because then we get a sense of what can make the D&D game better for delivering fun to more people. Well, that's part of the idea for this thread, isn't it? "How can I try and think about things in a new way that helps me enjoy what it is?" is basically the question in the thread title. People aren't categorical and immutable, so they can change (or they can change the game) enough to make it worth playing, if they want to. Well, you've got a lot of debatable assumptions worked into your position, there. Specifically, the point of the game's intricate balance needs to be called out as a thing that doesn't have to exist: they could have balanced the game with martial powers that were "always on," but they chose not to. That's a choice that can certainly be debated by fans of the game. Second, you seem to think that they want other people to share the view, but from what I've seen in this thread, most of them just want others to accept that they have a problem, and maybe propose ways to fix it. They don't want to change the way you think, they want the game to match more how they think. Third, the conversation is entirely topical for the boards, so "Move Along" just seems to be a way to shut down a conversation that you're not a fan of. If you're not a fan of people talking about how 4e encounter and daily powers don't meet their sense of verisimilitude, and so make the game less fun for them, just don't come to the thread. Certainly "You're feelings are wrong and you should shut up!" is not very constructive for helping anyone. 4e's various changes certainly speak against that. The game goes through editions, and 4e certainly took a lot of things that people didn't like about 3e and changed them. 5e will take things that people don't like about 4e and will change them, too. Furthermore, people designing supplements for 4e might find a way to change the game to something more appealing. The game [b]does[/b] change because I don't like it. The game has changed before because people don't like it, and it will continue to change because people will never be totally satisfied with it. It's not about liking or not liking an entire edition. This thread wasn't started with "Come here and tell me how much you love 4e!" in mind. There was a specific problem to address -- a specific problem that didn't need to occur, and that can potentially be fixed for those who have the problem. Is it difficult for you to be OK with people who have problems with 4e? If so, then I'd advocate ignoring the threads about 4e problems, rather than entering them just to tell people that they're wrong and need to shut up. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
101 roleplaying descriptions justifying martial dailies
Top