Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Vocenoctum" data-source="post: 4550390" data-attributes="member: 2477">My problem with the 4e &quot;debates&quot;;1) people saying &quot;that's not a valid criticism&quot; when it's a public message board and someone is just venting. If it's not important, then just skip the message and let it die. Attacking the arguement and going multiple pages to &quot;win&quot; the semantic debate doesn't prove anything, you don't get to set the rules for a discussion.2) Like politics (which I'm not discussing!), you've made up your mind, you're not convincing the other guy. The other guy, he's made up his mind and you're not convincing him. Use the three response rule, if you're repeating yourself for the third time, it's just not worth repeating anymore.3) &quot;Imagination Rules!&quot;. You don't like how 4e uses minions or whatever, then you need to use your imagination to paint the picture... like somehow all other editions, you couldn't use your imagination. Like it's unique now that suddenly you can and should fill in gaps to fit the scene. Somehow, suddenly, 4e is liberated from rules by Scene, but all previous editions the DM and players were bound by granite rules of conduct.4) Fanaticism, which couples into 3, really. This is where you use your imagination to fill in gaps and then present your solution as if the other person should have known. &quot;There is no grapple&quot; &quot;well, if you use this roll here and that roll there, it's the same as grapple, so that's not a valid complaint!&quot; (off the cuff example, not saying that happened.)5) Of course, that leads to the &quot;Prove Your Opinion&quot; mentality. I can't prove that the grapple quote is 100% accurate with links, so it's not a valid quote...&nbsp; again, what debate folks are trying to win.. I don't know anymore.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Vocenoctum, post: 4550390, member: 2477"] My problem with the 4e "debates"; 1) people saying "that's not a valid criticism" when it's a public message board and someone is just venting. If it's not important, then just skip the message and let it die. Attacking the arguement and going multiple pages to "win" the semantic debate doesn't prove anything, you don't get to set the rules for a discussion. 2) Like politics (which I'm not discussing!), you've made up your mind, you're not convincing the other guy. The other guy, he's made up his mind and you're not convincing him. Use the three response rule, if you're repeating yourself for the third time, it's just not worth repeating anymore. 3) "Imagination Rules!". You don't like how 4e uses minions or whatever, then you need to use your imagination to paint the picture... like somehow all other editions, you couldn't use your imagination. Like it's unique now that suddenly you can and should fill in gaps to fit the scene. Somehow, suddenly, 4e is liberated from rules by Scene, but all previous editions the DM and players were bound by granite rules of conduct. 4) Fanaticism, which couples into 3, really. This is where you use your imagination to fill in gaps and then present your solution as if the other person should have known. "There is no grapple" "well, if you use this roll here and that roll there, it's the same as grapple, so that's not a valid complaint!" (off the cuff example, not saying that happened.) 5) Of course, that leads to the "Prove Your Opinion" mentality. I can't prove that the grapple quote is 100% accurate with links, so it's not a valid quote... again, what debate folks are trying to win.. I don't know anymore. [/QUOTE]

Verification