Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf 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 Nest
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*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!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
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, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Expertise justification?
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="KarinsDad" data-source="post: 4824470" data-attributes="member: 2011"><p>If it looks like a horse, smells like a horse, and sounds like a horse, I'm not going to assume it's a rhinoceros just because they tell me that it is a rhinoceros. Duh!</p><p></p><p>This is called a spin. It's no different than your "don't want it forced on them" statement. There was no indication of that from the quoted text, you just claimed that this is what they said based on what you wanted it to be.</p><p></p><p>In their case, it's a marketing spin. It's what every company does when they make a mistake and creating a feat tax for both to hit and NADs is thought by many people on the boards to be a mistake. Companies put the best possible face on mistakes. Why would WotC be any different? They wouldn't.</p><p></p><p>I think they put what they thought was a low intrusive with respect to new rules fix into the system, the community found it to be highly intrusive, and it backfired on them. I don't think there was any grandiose plan ahead of time to replace solution #1 with solution #2 based on how well solution #1 was used by the gaming community. That is so farfetched and hence the reason I think they are spinning now. Opps, we gotta say something now. You want to believe that drivel at face value, go ahead.</p><p></p><p>I'm not going to convince you, so I won't try any further and unless you have some real meat and potatoes about the rules themselves to discuss, I won't discuss this anymore. But, it was important to write the actual text as opposed to your interpretation of it.</p><p></p><p>To me, the important part of the message is that "Yes indeed folks, Expertise is an attempt at a fix for higher levels", just like many of us have claimed since PHB II came out. Whether they are trying to fix the sweet spot, or trying to fix grindiness, or trying to fix something else is debatable because the only thing they said they were fixing was the speed of combat at Paragon and higher levels. Does speed mean number of rounds of combat? Does speed mean how much time each round takes? Or something else? They didn't explicitly say.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="KarinsDad, post: 4824470, member: 2011"] If it looks like a horse, smells like a horse, and sounds like a horse, I'm not going to assume it's a rhinoceros just because they tell me that it is a rhinoceros. Duh! This is called a spin. It's no different than your "don't want it forced on them" statement. There was no indication of that from the quoted text, you just claimed that this is what they said based on what you wanted it to be. In their case, it's a marketing spin. It's what every company does when they make a mistake and creating a feat tax for both to hit and NADs is thought by many people on the boards to be a mistake. Companies put the best possible face on mistakes. Why would WotC be any different? They wouldn't. I think they put what they thought was a low intrusive with respect to new rules fix into the system, the community found it to be highly intrusive, and it backfired on them. I don't think there was any grandiose plan ahead of time to replace solution #1 with solution #2 based on how well solution #1 was used by the gaming community. That is so farfetched and hence the reason I think they are spinning now. Opps, we gotta say something now. You want to believe that drivel at face value, go ahead. I'm not going to convince you, so I won't try any further and unless you have some real meat and potatoes about the rules themselves to discuss, I won't discuss this anymore. But, it was important to write the actual text as opposed to your interpretation of it. To me, the important part of the message is that "Yes indeed folks, Expertise is an attempt at a fix for higher levels", just like many of us have claimed since PHB II came out. Whether they are trying to fix the sweet spot, or trying to fix grindiness, or trying to fix something else is debatable because the only thing they said they were fixing was the speed of combat at Paragon and higher levels. Does speed mean number of rounds of combat? Does speed mean how much time each round takes? Or something else? They didn't explicitly say. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Expertise justification?
Top