Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9443169" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Yes. That's why I called it out as flippant. It isn't a litmus test. Litmus reliably identifies acid from base objectively. This does nothing of the sort. It doesn't even indicate the kinds of things you're wanting it to indicate, and your alleged batting average is not, even remotely, an actual assay of whether things are or are not any particular thing. For claiming you aren't going about this in any objective way, you're quite keen to add the impression of objectivity when it's useful to you.Maybe it would be more useful to, I dunno, actually read through a book? Read other things the designers have said about it? I know D&D makes this extremely difficult, given WotC has legit actively erased most of the history of 5.0 and its playtest stuff. (I still remember the rather inconvenient poll that showed that Druids weren't as popular as Warlords, for example, one of the very last times the 5e designers ever gave anything more than lip service to the Warlord class.)A litmus test is supposed to be objective and clear-cut--e.g. political litmus tests are things like asking for a particular judge candidate's stance on politically volatile topics. (I won't specifically mention any here because they're obviously controversial things, but I'm sure you can think of a recent high-profile SCOTUS case that affected half the population of the US as an example of a relevant hot-button topic prone to litmus testing by folks of various political affiliations.) Yours is vague, flippant, and easily unrepresentative. Whether you intend it to be vague, flippant, or unrepresentative is not really relevant to what it actually achieves.I prefer to judge things based on trying to genuinely understand them, rather than dismissing a pretty massive effort from tiny and usually unrepresentative data. Hence why I like to do things like run statistical analyses, inquire about underlying design goals (both whether they have been successfully implemented, and whether they were even wisely-chosen to begin with). This is part of why, even though I was pretty upset with how things went with 5e, even though I had spoken stridently against various choices during the playtest, even though I had actually played a test game (which ended up being essentially identical to how 5.0 played on release), I still genuinely tried to give 5e a shot. Several, in fact. I was burned enough times that I generally avoid it (except for genuinely kind invitations, like what Hussar gave me, hence why I remain at his virtual table.)</blockquote>

Verification