D&D 4E Are powers samey?

[Maxperson]

Since you clearly refuse, I'll help you.

fab·ri·ca·tion

1. the action or process of manufacturing or inventing something.

2. an invention; a lie.

I wasn't making anything, so the first definition is out. Oh, look!

 

[Eric V]

Umm, I can only go by what you are writing. You claim that powers that are the same aren't "samey". Why not? The only reason I can think of, since you haven't actually provided any other than to simply state that things are the same aren't samey erm) is that because the way the powers are presented.

I'm really struggling to think of another reason why you wouldn't find the fact that every single spell in 5e appears on multiple caster lists not samey.

That's a tough one; I know one of the reasons my players stopped 5e was because of this fact.

Having said that, while I can't read his posts, maybe it's the idea that things should be either the same or very different. Like, if it's only a minor difference, then it's not different enough, and so not worthwhile.

I don't know, just spitballing.

 

[Maxperson]

Do you realize that you are asking a wild goose chase question?

How so? If you saw someone do that, then it should be easy to state who. If you didn't, then you are making a baseless assertion. I personally haven't seen anyone in this thread make the assertion that samey is anything other than an opinion.

 

[Eric V]

Since you clearly refuse, I'll help you.

fab·ri·ca·tion

1. the action or process of manufacturing or inventing something.

2. an invention; a lie.

I wasn't making anything, so the first definition is out. Oh, look!

The eyeroll was for the notion that people were fabricating things instead of just noticing things.

Since this is the level of contribution you can give, it may be time to use the tools available here.

 

[Maxperson]

The eyeroll was for the notion that people were fabricating things instead of just noticing things.

Since this is the level of contribution you can give, it may be time to use the tools available here.

Yes please. He said flat out that I was fabricating. Not noticing.

 

[Imaro]

Umm, I can only go by what you are writing. You claim that powers that are the same aren't "samey". Why not? The only reason I can think of, since you haven't actually provided any other than to simply state that things are the same aren't samey erm) is that because the way the powers are presented.

So... because I find a smaller piece (A single ability in 5e i.e. extra attack) can't be classified as samey due to the fact that comparing the sameness of something to itself makes no sense because it's a singular thing (This is like stating Imaro is samey to Imaro... what??)... Means that I in turn don't find the fact that numerous classes using said thing, or the game as a whole using said thing is also not samey. It makes no logical sense to compare something to itself and claim it's samey and I believe you realize that which is why instead of addressing the argument made at the power/ability level you keep speaking to classes or the entire game.

I have stated neither of those things but have instead chosen to discuss what the actual thread is about... powers, not classes, not 5e, not the games (4e or 5e) as a whole. The fact that you've constructed an argument for me around the things I'vs purposefully avoided discussion of when I've clearly told you what I am discussing and what I am not discussing leads me now to believe you are being purposefully disingenuous.

I'm really struggling to think of another reason why you wouldn't find the fact that every single spell in 5e appears on multiple caster lists not samey.

Where did I state this. Where are you getting this position you are arguing from? These are the questions I really wish you'd ask yourself before posting what you think is my position on things I am choosing not to discuss because they aren't really what the thread is about.

 

[Maxperson]

Where did I state this. Where are you getting this position you are arguing from? These are the questions I really wish you'd ask yourself before posting what you think is my position on things I am choosing not to discuss because they aren't really what the thread is about.

He and Eric seem to think that you and I are somehow attacking 4e with our personal opinions. That has blinded them to what we are really saying and what our position really is. As a result they are both fabricating(first definition:creation) positions for us that don't exist.

 

[Hussar]

Since you clearly refuse, I'll help you.

fab·ri·ca·tion

1. the action or process of manufacturing or inventing something.

2. an invention; a lie.

I wasn't making anything, so the first definition is out. Oh, look!

YOU are the one who stated that an opinion does not need to prove an opinion. You stated this. I quoted your statement of this.

So, are you rolling that back? Because an opinion that is not backed by facts is, indeed, simply a fabrication - something invented or manufactured.

 

[Maxperson]

YOU are the one who stated that an opinion does not need to prove an opinion. You stated this. I quoted your statement of this.

It doesn't. If I say, "I like steak.", you should just accept that instead of calling me a liar. Opinions don't need to be proven.

Now, if I instead said, "Steak is in fact the best food on the planet.", you would be justified in asking me to prove what I just claimed to be a fact. Claims of fact need to be proven, not opinions.

 

[Imaro]

That's a tough one; I know one of the reasons my players stopped 5e was because of this fact.

Having said that, while I can't read his posts, maybe it's the idea that things should be either the same or very different. Like, if it's only a minor difference, then it's not different enough, and so not worthwhile.

I don't know, just spitballing.

I'm assuming you have me on ignore since I can see your posts and don't have anyone on ignore... but since you are addressing my post indirectly I'll go ahead and reply

This is part of the point I am trying to get to but I keep getting sidetracked by assertions about arguments I haven't made. Extra Attack is one ability... even if it's used across multiple classes it is a single ability and I'm not going to compare it to itself I know what it does and even if both the Fighter and Paladin are using it I'm still viewing it as a single ability that is shared not two different abilities that are similar.

However when I see Twin Strike vs. Dual Strike used with a melee weapon on a single target... they are supposed to be totally different powers and yet in this instance do the exact same thing. And yes there are differences (twin strike can be used ranged & dual strike can be used on another opponent if one is nearby) but those are minor differences that won't always come into play... so for a vast amount of play they will appear exactly the same in their usage even though the players are calling out totally different names for these powers.