D&D 5E Does anyone else feel like the action economy and the way actions work in general in 5e both just suck?

Can you show evidence of that?

The Gm to player ratio in the hobby is common knowledge.

Google is your friend.

Any internet search on RPG group finder/meetups will show the ratio of people looking to play vs the exponentially lower number of people willing to run games. This is also self-evident to anyone who has attended a Con

I'm not going to hold your hand.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

The whole reason people are arguing with you is because you're defining a general idea that we intuitively know is likely the case in terms that others object to. That is the sum of why people are objecting to your post.

If a few people object to my terms?

Like water off a ducks back...
 

If a few people object to my terms?

Like water off a ducks back...
I'm not disagreeing with what you said, I'm just trying to point out that the way in which you engaged the other posters made your point unclear in the context of what you were trying to say. Defining words made it worse, because you may have obfuscated your meaning to them, and worse, you condescended.
 


1st person: Every good DM can find a game.

2nd person: No, there are real life problems that can result in a good DM not finding games.

1st person: We live in a 1st world country, so there is no way work can get in the way of a good DM finding a game.

3rd person: Not everyone here lives in a 1st world country.

1st person: I cannot be bothered to consider exeptions to my statemens, because I looked in to the dictionary and that gives my arguments a pass for being imprecise.
Actually @Bolares , 1st person's argument doesnt even apply to the first world under even the amallest bit of scrutiny.

Dmv, car wreck, got fired, got sick, low on money, big business project, college work load, kids, legal cases, home repairs, bill runs (when you cant mail them or do them online for some reason), moving to another home, family visiting, and an endless list more because i had to stop somewhere.

Most of these things havent gotten in my way but a couple assuredly have gotten in most people's way in a first world nation.

Im sure you can all think of times when first world crap NECESSARILY got in your way and there was nothing that could be done.

The idea that first world people dont have entanglements that cant just be pushed aside is asinine and most would recognize it as such.

He was clearly talking out of his posterior is all that i will say.
 


You ability to reply to my posts shows otherwise.
that is bs.

He could for all intents and purposes be quite incapable of making himself available to play d&d right when posting. You've never had a temporary lull in a job where you pulled your phone out and browsed the web then made a post? Really? And thats just one of several examples specific to the person posting that invalidates you idea that his posting is cintrary to anything he said.

In addition lets expand the circle of extrapolation a little wider to other hypothetical people aside from the poster. If hes available it doesnt mean a aingle thing by default because enough OTHER people have to be available AT THE SAME TIME with knowledge of availability in advance before they can meet.

You are so so so wrong.
 

That last post i made is very near and dear to my heart btw. I have had so many friends that i really REALLY wanted (and several other mutual friends wanted too) to be able to play in excess of a DECADE but life defies their attempts to play.

My rp circle has nearly 30 members most of which know eachother at least a bit with a solid nearly 20 person reliable core. 8 are dms.

If WE know people who cant get a break to play with the number of campaigns we have usually available for a plug no matter how we try to shift our schedule then i find claims that anyone can play if they just put in the work (and if they cant it's their fault) very inconsiderate or at least ignorant.

Some of these people are family members of those who play. AND IT STILL doesnt work.
 


I'm not disagreeing with what you said, I'm just trying to point out that the way in which you engaged the other posters made your point unclear in the context of what you were trying to say. Defining words made it worse, because you may have obfuscated your meaning to them, and worse, you condescended.

By their own admission what I made was a general statement.

Reasonable people know when they read or hear a general statement that of course there are exceptions. And they don't feel the need to nitpick every single one to death.

But evidently some feel the need to "prove" a general statement wrong by the tired old "gotcha!" tactic of: but what about this, what about that, see, see, your so wrong!

They were arguing in bad faith. And got treated accordingly.
 

Remove ads

Top