Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 8524111" data-attributes="member: 6704184">What edition war? I don’t even know what to say to this.&nbsp; I said;“Wait, we do? How? From what source? Did Crawford or Perkins or someone go on twitter while I was napping today and announce that the optional variants in Tasha's will be in the anniversary PHB, and won't be optional anymore?&nbsp;-this is quite serious. I don’t even believe the above is likely, much less certain, but either way we absolutely do not know what will be in the anniversary phb-Come on. We literally don't &quot;know&quot; that the PHB will even be revised beyond the normal errata revisions in successive printings. We are all basically assuming it will be, but we absolutely inarguably do not know it.”&nbsp;-do you imagine the “we” here to somehow exclude myself? We don’t know what will be in future books. You are talking about guesses as if they are certain knowledge. If you want to see it that way go ahead. This is exactly the strategy they have been working with for the entirety of 5e. No more new editions, just D&amp;D. Okay there seems to be a misunderstanding about what logic is and what it does. You can form an argument of “perfect logic” all you want, it doesn’t make your premises or conclusion correct. It just makes them reasonable. If they make statements that contradict statements they’ve already made about these books and how Crawford in particular doesn’t ever want a new player to pick up a phb and then play a game and feel like their phb based character isn’t valid, I will worry about them heavily changing the PHB. (It still won’t likely be reasonable to call it a new edition, but whatever)Oh no. This is about discussions, not even the game as played at the table!?&nbsp; &nbsp;Im out. I do not care. What matters is the actual game.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 8524111, member: 6704184"] What edition war? I don’t even know what to say to this. I said; “Wait, we do? How? From what source? Did Crawford or Perkins or someone go on twitter while I was napping today and announce that the optional variants in Tasha's will be in the anniversary PHB, and won't be optional anymore? [I]-this is quite serious. I don’t even believe the above is likely, much less certain, but either way we absolutely do not know what will be in the anniversary phb-[/I] Come on. We literally don't "know" that the PHB will even be revised beyond the normal errata revisions in successive printings. [B]We are all basically assuming[/B] it will be, but we absolutely inarguably do not know it.” [I]-do you imagine the “we” here to somehow exclude myself? We don’t know what will be in future books. You are talking about guesses as if they are certain knowledge. [/I] If you want to see it that way go ahead. This is exactly the strategy they have been working with for the entirety of 5e. No more new editions, just D&D. Okay there seems to be a misunderstanding about what logic is and what it does. You can form an argument of “perfect logic” all you want, it doesn’t make your premises or conclusion correct. It just makes them reasonable. If they make statements that contradict statements they’ve already made about these books and how Crawford in particular doesn’t ever want a new player to pick up a phb and then play a game and feel like their phb based character isn’t valid, I will worry about them heavily changing the PHB. (It still won’t likely be reasonable to call it a new edition, but whatever) Oh no. This is about discussions, not even the game as played at the table!? Im out. I do not care. What matters is the actual game. [/QUOTE]

Verification