Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="FireLance" data-source="post: 4550835" data-attributes="member: 3424">I personally don't have a problem with criticism. What I do have problems with are the following:1. Spreading of misinformation. For example, claiming that encounter abilities refresh at the start of an encounter or after five minutes have elapsed even if you do not rest, when it is stated in the rules that encounter abilities are regained after a short five-minute rest.

2. Wilful misinterpretation. For example, claiming that a warlord's inspiring word must be narrated as causing the actual healing of visible wounds, instead of restoring the intangible aspects of hit points or allowing a character to fight on despite his wounds.

3. Overstated or unsupported arguments. These usually take the form of &quot;4e introduced this; we never had this in previous editions&quot;, when the actuality is more along the lines of &quot;4e does this to a greater or more obvious extent; it was not so prevalent or obvious in earlier editions&quot;. For example, encounter abilities, speed of non-magical healing, effects that reduce hit points without dealing physical injuries, etc.Discuss, argue, and state your opinion all you want, just don't engage in badwrongcriticism.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="FireLance, post: 4550835, member: 3424"] I personally don't have a problem with criticism. What I do have problems with are the following: [INDENT][B]1. Spreading of misinformation.[/B] For example, claiming that encounter abilities refresh at the start of an encounter or after five minutes have elapsed even if you do not rest, when it is stated in the rules that encounter abilities are regained after a short five-minute rest. [B]2. Wilful misinterpretation.[/B] For example, claiming that a warlord's [I]inspiring word[/I] must be narrated as causing the actual healing of visible wounds, instead of restoring the intangible aspects of hit points or allowing a character to fight on despite his wounds. [B]3. Overstated or unsupported arguments.[/B] These usually take the form of "4e introduced this; we never had this in previous editions", when the actuality is more along the lines of "4e does this to a greater or more obvious extent; it was not so prevalent or obvious in earlier editions". For example, encounter abilities, speed of non-magical healing, effects that reduce hit points without dealing physical injuries, etc.[/INDENT]Discuss, argue, and state your opinion all you want, just don't engage in badwrongcriticism. [/QUOTE]

Verification