Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*Dungeons & Dragons
cancelled 5e announcement at Gencon??? Anyone know anything about this?
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="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 5661896" data-attributes="member: 6668292"><p>I was trying to highlight your actual claim. Let's look at your whole quote, if you'd like (I'm going to highlight the claims made):You've made the following claims:</p><p></p><p>I asked for you to show me where this happened. You claimed that Imaro and "others" (so I'm assuming two or more other posters) have made this claim in this very thread. I asked for you to show me where that was stated.</p><p></p><p>I didn't ask for this, but I don't remember Imaro and two or more other posters making this claim, either.</p><p><u></u></p><p><u>Again, I don't remember this claim being made by Imaro and two or more other posters at the time of your post (18th August 2011, 06:01 PM).</u></p><p><u></u></p><p><u>This has definitely been claimed in this thread several times. I can find those, and I don't dispute this claim. Can you please show me where Imaro and "others" have claimed "that there is no problem with the mechanics" prior to your post that I originally replied to?</u></p><p><u></u></p><p><u></u></p><p><u>As I've given your original post in full context, I don't see playstyle being mentioned, much less highlighted. </u></p><p><u></u></p><p><u>Thanks <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite2" alt=";)" title="Wink ;)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=";)" /></u></p><p><u></u></p><p><u>I've highlighted a claim you've made, and asked you to back up where people have made that claim in this thread (Imaro and any two other posters) prior to your post on 18th August 2011, 06:01 PM. I haven't tried to take your post out of context. The claim made did not mention playstyle in the least, and it seems like you're saying "see? Some people say that a different playstyle means there is no problem" somehow proves your point. To me, saying that proves that they acknowledge that some people have a problem, but they're just stating that they do not. It does not prove that they've claimed "that there is no problem with the mechanics." It just proves that they've claimed that they have not experienced a problem with the mechanics.</u></p><p><u></u></p><p><u>Maybe I'm missing something, but the post you linked to isn't your "previous post". It's the first post of yours I responded to.</u></p><p><u></u></p><p> <u></u></p><p><u>While I have my own thoughts on this, I'd still like to see those links to those posts that you claimed Imaro and others have made in this thread. I've yet to comment on this, but your post that I originally replied to specifically said that Imaro and other posters have claimed "that there is no problem with the mechanics." I'd like to see where they've said as much. I really don't feel like pointing out your quote (and now in it's entirety) is taking it out of context. Your post shows no indication that playstyle is a factor.</u></p><p><u></u></p><p><u>In your post immediately before the post of yours I quoted, you mentioned playstyle to Mournblade94. Here's that quote in its entirety (I'm going to highlight the area where you mention playstyle):</u></p><p><u>Keep in mind, that even in this quote, you claimed the following:</u></p><p><u>You've made the claim here that people have "vehemently denied that the issue EXISTS at all, other than for some people" which, if that means that "according to some people, this issue exists for some people and not for others," I find that very reasonable. Especially since the poster you replied to, Mournblade94, said the following in the post your replied to:</u></p><p><u></u></p><p><u>Mournblade is specifically claiming that "many groups" did not experience any sort of disparity as a big deal. He's not claiming that there was no issue for anyone, and neither is Imaro. So, when you go on to say:</u></p><p><u></u></p><p><u>... then it is in an entirely different context than what you said to Mournblade94. When you were talking to Mournblade94, you claimed that "people have vehemently denied that the issue EXISTS at all, other than for some people" which is essentially true. However, your argument shifted to saying that others have said "that there is no problem with the mechanics" which I could not find proof of. I might have missed it (it's a long thread), but the context is plain.</u></p><p><u></u></p><p><u>Now, I can trace this back even further. I replied to you, after you replied to Imaro. Previous to that post, you had replied to Mournblade94, who had replied to you. Your post had been in reply to TheAuldGrump, and you said the following:</u></p><p><u></u></p><p><u>This, I find odd, considering he had said this in the post your replied to:</u></p><p><u></u></p><p><u>In the very quote you replied to, <em><u>the poster wasn't claiming no problems occurred</u></em>. He goes on to say he's witnessed the "fifteen minute adventuring day" personally, once. Direct acknowledgement of the problem some people have with the game. And yet, you still reply to it and tell him:</u></p><p><u></u></p><p><u>That doesn't follow. I don't know where you're drawing this from, nor do I know where you're drawing "Throughout this thread you and others have been stating that there is no problem with the mechanics" from. You've mentioned playstyle in only one of the posts I've quoted, and it was sandwiched between these two quotes.</u></p><p><u></u></p><p><u>If your whole point all along has been "people have claimed that some people haven't run across the problem because of their playstyle" then I agree. I don't feel you presented it that way, but so be it. If that's what you're saying, I'll take your word for it. Or, if you just want me to drop it, I will. I'm only commenting on it still because of the replies. I probably should drop it anyways (this discussion isn't productive to either side). On that note, you can respond freely if you'd like. I'll let you have the last word on this, and instead try to contribute to this thread if I feel motivated to post in it again (most of it is much more interesting than my posts are, as they're much more productive).</u></p><p><u></u></p><p><u>As always, play what you like <img src="" class="smilie smilie--sprite smilie--sprite1" alt=":)" title="Smile :)" loading="lazy" data-shortname=":)" /></u></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="JamesonCourage, post: 5661896, member: 6668292"] I was trying to highlight your actual claim. Let's look at your whole quote, if you'd like (I'm going to highlight the claims made):You've made the following claims: I asked for you to show me where this happened. You claimed that Imaro and "others" (so I'm assuming two or more other posters) have made this claim in this very thread. I asked for you to show me where that was stated. I didn't ask for this, but I don't remember Imaro and two or more other posters making this claim, either. [u] Again, I don't remember this claim being made by Imaro and two or more other posters at the time of your post (18th August 2011, 06:01 PM). This has definitely been claimed in this thread several times. I can find those, and I don't dispute this claim. Can you please show me where Imaro and "others" have claimed "that there is no problem with the mechanics" prior to your post that I originally replied to? As I've given your original post in full context, I don't see playstyle being mentioned, much less highlighted. Thanks ;) I've highlighted a claim you've made, and asked you to back up where people have made that claim in this thread (Imaro and any two other posters) prior to your post on 18th August 2011, 06:01 PM. I haven't tried to take your post out of context. The claim made did not mention playstyle in the least, and it seems like you're saying "see? Some people say that a different playstyle means there is no problem" somehow proves your point. To me, saying that proves that they acknowledge that some people have a problem, but they're just stating that they do not. It does not prove that they've claimed "that there is no problem with the mechanics." It just proves that they've claimed that they have not experienced a problem with the mechanics. Maybe I'm missing something, but the post you linked to isn't your "previous post". It's the first post of yours I responded to. While I have my own thoughts on this, I'd still like to see those links to those posts that you claimed Imaro and others have made in this thread. I've yet to comment on this, but your post that I originally replied to specifically said that Imaro and other posters have claimed "that there is no problem with the mechanics." I'd like to see where they've said as much. I really don't feel like pointing out your quote (and now in it's entirety) is taking it out of context. Your post shows no indication that playstyle is a factor. In your post immediately before the post of yours I quoted, you mentioned playstyle to Mournblade94. Here's that quote in its entirety (I'm going to highlight the area where you mention playstyle): Keep in mind, that even in this quote, you claimed the following: You've made the claim here that people have "vehemently denied that the issue EXISTS at all, other than for some people" which, if that means that "according to some people, this issue exists for some people and not for others," I find that very reasonable. Especially since the poster you replied to, Mournblade94, said the following in the post your replied to: Mournblade is specifically claiming that "many groups" did not experience any sort of disparity as a big deal. He's not claiming that there was no issue for anyone, and neither is Imaro. So, when you go on to say: ... then it is in an entirely different context than what you said to Mournblade94. When you were talking to Mournblade94, you claimed that "people have vehemently denied that the issue EXISTS at all, other than for some people" which is essentially true. However, your argument shifted to saying that others have said "that there is no problem with the mechanics" which I could not find proof of. I might have missed it (it's a long thread), but the context is plain. Now, I can trace this back even further. I replied to you, after you replied to Imaro. Previous to that post, you had replied to Mournblade94, who had replied to you. Your post had been in reply to TheAuldGrump, and you said the following: This, I find odd, considering he had said this in the post your replied to: In the very quote you replied to, [I][U]the poster wasn't claiming no problems occurred[/U][/I]. He goes on to say he's witnessed the "fifteen minute adventuring day" personally, once. Direct acknowledgement of the problem some people have with the game. And yet, you still reply to it and tell him: That doesn't follow. I don't know where you're drawing this from, nor do I know where you're drawing "Throughout this thread you and others have been stating that there is no problem with the mechanics" from. You've mentioned playstyle in only one of the posts I've quoted, and it was sandwiched between these two quotes. If your whole point all along has been "people have claimed that some people haven't run across the problem because of their playstyle" then I agree. I don't feel you presented it that way, but so be it. If that's what you're saying, I'll take your word for it. Or, if you just want me to drop it, I will. I'm only commenting on it still because of the replies. I probably should drop it anyways (this discussion isn't productive to either side). On that note, you can respond freely if you'd like. I'll let you have the last word on this, and instead try to contribute to this thread if I feel motivated to post in it again (most of it is much more interesting than my posts are, as they're much more productive). As always, play what you like :)[/u] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
cancelled 5e announcement at Gencon??? Anyone know anything about this?
Top