Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jdrakeh" data-source="post: 2793580" data-attributes="member: 13892">It is when you haven't supportedyour claims, Dave. If you hadn't jumped into this thread by explaining that D&D sucks for a failure to support player options (which it does) and tactical roleplay (which it does), we wouldn't even be having this discussion... but I'll humor you against my better judgement. Now that I'm done humoring you, I'm going to piss you off. Citing text from Burning Wheel does not support your assertions that D&D has no mechanical support for player goals, no support for tactical gaming, or for roleplay. That whole 'walk the walk' bit was comedy gold, considering that you haven't. I've now cited actual game mechanics to support my defense of D&D, which is far more that you've done to support your condemnation of it. I'm going to go ahead and lay it all out, because apparently you have the impression that you've clevery snuck in under the radar. You're a troll, Dave. A troll with an agenda (i.e., bash D&D while praising Burning Wheel), but a troll none the less. You've made a lot of flatly untrue statements about D&D - first it was no support for player goals and when you got nailed to the wall for making that statement, you tried to retcon your argument by suggesting that you'd really been talking about character goals the whole time. Riiiiight.You then asserted that nobody played D&D for tactical reasons. When several people pointed out that this was, in fact, not the case - you again back-peddled to change 'nobody' to 'very few' and continued to insist that it didn't mattter anyhow, as tactical play wasn't a valid player goal. A wonderfully pointed subjective value judgement. And then it became that D&D doesn't support tactical play. And when you were called on this, it became that those people playing D&D for tactics should just go play wargames instead and D&D doesn't provide rules for roleplay - because doubling up subjective and derogatory value judgements will magically make them right!  I see a 'D&D isn't real roleplaying!' on the horizion... its rays are already showering the forum in their warm glow. And I'm not asking you to - I'm asking you to support the allegations that you've leveled against D&D throughout this thread. Apparently you feel that you're above having to explain yourself - or are you avoiding doing so because you can't, Dave? Personally, my money is on the latter given the effort that you've exerted to avoid doing so. While I'm thinking about it, thanks for the laugh! I found it humorous that you feel it's fine and dandy to issue baseless criticism of D&D, but you've got your panties in a twist over somebody not citing specific page numbers when rebutting that baseless criticism. That's a rather biased double standard, Dave. It sounds a bit like Troll Logic, Dave. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> I'm not at all confused. You've been doing a lot of back-pedalling and strawman construction, but I'm no stranger to either 'argument' technique and have been able to follow you quite well. I've said my piece and refuted your (still) baseless claims with a citation from the SRD. I suppose you'll counter with another strawman or backpedal once again in an attempt to make it look as though I've misunderstood you, but the fact is, I'm dead on point.</blockquote>

Verification