D&D 4E Are powers samey?

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[doctorbadwolf]

No, it isn't.

The basic underpinning of my argument is my complete, total, and utter bafflement that other individuals do not seem to understand the difference between objective and subjective, which I thought was fairly clear and never assumed to be particularly controversial.

I honestly do not understand why you keep posting examples of subjective opinions about cars, music, and D&D and saying that they are objective? It's really weird? Maybe I'm the one going crazy.

Whether a car is well made is literally objective. I'm sorry. With much respect, you are wrong. A car is objectively well or poorly made. There are dozens of objective measures, especially when you get into the requirements and goals of a category of car, like luxury sedan, or off-road vehicle, etc.
The quality of a car can be objectively measured. Whether one likes a car has nothing to do with it.
If samey has any rational definition, it's gotta have something to do with actual similarity. Actual similarity can be measured and observed objectively.
Music has qualities that involve skill and successful application of musical principles. These can be objectively measured. You can dislike Kendrick Lamar without thinking Kendrick Lamar is bad at making rap songs/albums, because there are recognized qualities and objective measures of skill that can be applied to the question.
There are technically excellent compositions that aren't all that fun for most people to listen to, like a lot of Dragonforce songs. Anyone who calls their guitar work bad is ignorant of the guitar. Full stop.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Good. We agree. Subjective is something that cannot be measured ONLY through referring to outside measurements. Facts.



That's subjective.



That's subjective.



.... and that's subjective.



Let's borrow this common usage-

An objective point of view is one independent of the observer, and which is therefore measurable or verifiable by standards that do not vary from observer to observer. Conversely, a subjective point of view is one that depends on something innate and unique to the observer, not verifiable by any outside standard.

Now, let's use the common example-
A breaks a leg.
A is in pain.

Both of these are "facts." But only "breaking a leg" is objective; by definition, the amount of pain A is in, or even if A is feeling pain, is subjective.

Now, let's look at your examples.
What are you using, that is independent of the observer, and therefore is measurable and quantifiable, to verify the following, such that you know that no two people can disagree on it, even if (for example) they have different expectations, learning, or cultural backgrounds?

1. How good Freebird is as a southern rock song.
2. {Freebird is meant} to be fun to sing along to and do weird country dances to.
3. {Freebird is} well composed.
4. {Freebird is} effective ... at garnering the love of it's target audience.

What is the measurable standard you are using for that? How are you quantifying the ability of Freebird to "garner the love of a target audience."

These are not objective statements. That doesn't mean they aren't true; if you break you leg, you will feel pain. But the quality of pain is subjective.




No, it's not an objectively well-made car. Because that is a subjective statement.

What is the objective measure you are using? You can say, for example, the following:
A. It has a leather interior.
B. It has a below-average resale value.
C. It has more repair problems on an annual basis than similar cars of its class.

Those are statements that are objective. But "well-made car" isn't.



No, you wouldn't. You would be making a subjective statement. You might still be wrong, but it's not objectively wrong.


This is the weirdest conversation ever. Admittedly, it's subjectively weird, since I don't have an external referent for weirdness.

That isn't how anyone uses those words in a casual conversation.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[Garthanos]

So what you're saying is that in your opinion they're much the same.

They have differences which do not fully adjust the functional role capability but actually - that is ok the builds in 4e did not change role fully either and to me 5e archetypes atleast are not doing more than a dabble in another class. It took an actual class change to accomplish it and 4e gave us 4 martial instead of 2.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Um, okay. So, in all of your casual conversations you normally get into arguments where you continually make qualitative statements and say that they objectively true*, and then when someone is all like, "Wait a second, that isn't what objective means," you than say, "HA! But this a casual conversation, so objective means what I want it to!"

But are you using subjective and objective in casual conversation all the time? Outside of rhetoric (logic and philosophy) and a writing class, this has come up in my life approximately ZERO times before this weird conversation that always happens around 4e.

*Again, if the statements you made were objectively true, then there would be an unimpeachable third-party that everyone could refer to that would allow us to test the truth-value of the proposition.

Saying a car is "well-made" will get you into arguments in any car forum you go into. Well-made compared to what? With what standards?

And again, you can keep saying that people (like the guitar example above, or my friends who won't eat Indian food) might be ignorant of something, but that just means it is SUBJECTIVE. Because it depends on personal knowledge, not on an external and agreed-upon referent,

Yeah, whether something is objective or subjective is a pretty common part of discussions, both those Im in and those I observe.

In a normal conversation, subjective means based on feelings and biases, not on facts or measurable factors. Liking something is subjective, whether it's well made isn't.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

So what you're saying is that in your opinion they're much the same. I disagree. Now flip that around to 4E powers and we can agree that all of this is all just personal opinion and a meaningless discussion.

Then don't jump into discussions that you find meaningless. Seems pretty simple, as a solution to your apparent annoyance with how meaningless the discussion supposedly is.

 

[Oofta]

They have differences which do not fully adjust the functional role capability but actually - that is ok the builds in 4e did not change role fully either and to me 5e archetypes atleast are not doing more than a dabble in another class. It took an actual class change to accomplish it and 4e gave us 4 martial instead of 2.

I have no idea what you're saying any more or why it matters. But this is a really pointless argument anyway so have a good one.

 

[Oofta]

Then don't jump into discussions that you find meaningless. Seems pretty simple, as a solution to your apparent annoyance with how meaningless the discussion supposedly is.

Thanks for letting me know how I can waste my time. Appreciate it.