Heavy Artillery: Psion vs. Wizard

[Plane Sailing]

Hi all,

Please avoid the temptation to disparage any individuals. Robust dissection of ideas and stuff is fine, but nobody wins if a thread starts to descend into personal 'attacks' or denegration of an individual, as we all know.

Thanks,

Plane Sailing
(moderator)

 

[Nail]

Keep it civil, folks. Please.

 

[Thanee]

Indeed.

BTW, luckily I am not easily offended, not even by someone who says basically, that I would willingly post false information to prevent others from having fun, which certainly is not true.

In fact, I try to make objective statements, looking at things from different perspectives and even take the time to make up examples to underline my arguments, which you do not have to agree with, but at least trying to understand them isn't too much asked for, or is it?

Also replying for the sole reason to "not leave a point unanswered" (which implies there is no interest in argueing the point itself) isn't exactly nice, either, as is quoting an entire post which contains multiple arguments and just writing "no" (basically) under it with no explanation given.

Just for your information.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Allanon]

Hi all,

Please avoid the temptation to disparage any individuals. Robust dissection of ideas and stuff is fine, but nobody wins if a thread starts to descend into personal 'attacks' or denegration of an individual, as we all know.

Thanks,

Plane Sailing
(moderator)

Whoops, my bad. I'll just slink away to another topic and let everyone fight this one out, I've made my point in previous posts and let's just forget the last two for which I apologize.

 

[Allanon]

Indeed.

BTW, luckily I am not easily offended, not even by someone who says basically, that I would willingly post false information to prevent others from having fun, which certainly is not true.

In fact, I try to make objective statements, looking at things from different perspectives and even take the time to make up examples to underline my arguments, which you do not have to agree with, but at least trying to understand them isn't too much asked for, or is it?

Also replying for the sole reason to "not leave a point unanswered" (which implies there is no interest in argueing the point itself) isn't exactly nice, either, as is quoting an entire post which contains multiple arguments and just writing "no" (basically) under it with no explanation given.

Just for your information.

Bye
Thanee

No but what you are doing is trying to 'win' this argument, like it's a game. Most of your posts center arround the fact that other people examples are worthless compared to yours and saying it in such a fashion as to make it look like it's the most stupid thing there is. I'm not saying that you do not have (semi)-valid points but disregarding other peoples valid point or counterpoints because of them without really addressing them does not help this discussion nor does it add weight to your statements.

Your demeaning attitude to other people reactions to your posts is what's so incredibly grating, add to that the fact that you're trying to pass yourself off as the victim only makes matters worse. One thing you should do wel to remember is that a smilie does not excuse a demeaning reply, see the quote below for example. There are numerous examples like this one riddles throughout your posts in this topic.

<snip>BTW, this is something I actually think is a proper argument (unlike Psion's silly (sorry ) damage dice example), which - just to mention this again<snip>

P.S. Darn got sucked in again. Oke then this will be my last post in this topic

 

[Psion]

BTW, luckily I am not easily offended, not even by someone who says basically, that I would willingly post false information to prevent others from having fun, which certainly is not true.

Oh, I don't beleive you THINK you are willingly posting information you beleive to be false.

I do beleive, nonetheless, that the conclusions you draw are false, and you could only come to them by ignoring points that contradict your stance.

I, OTOH, have not ignored your point buy took them into consideration in my argument. And what did you do with the resulting argument? Dismissed it out of hand.

So long as an objective onlooker can see that, I am content.

In fact, I try to make objective statements

You mean such objective and sterling analyses as my example is "silly"?

Also replying for the sole reason to "not leave a point unanswered" (which implies there is no interest in argueing the point itself)

It does? No it does not. Quite the contrary. It implies that I give an objective onlooker reason to doubt every one of your points by underscoring points that your analyses miss.

If that's not nice, I wonder why you are here.

isn't exactly nice, either, as is quoting an entire post which contains multiple arguments and just writing "no" (basically) under it with no explanation given.

Well, Thanee, once it gets to the point of repeating points that you have simply ignored in your reply, doing a point-by-point rebuttal to a post full of points that have already been answered is not exactly productive. Having lived through usenet, I personally prefer to avoid that kind of frustration, and would understand why someone else could do the same.

 

[Psion]

What a slap in the face for all the poor people, who you declare are not mature enough to make up their own opinion, so they need you to make up an opinion for them.

Oy. Again, please stop trying to put words in my mouth.

Picking apart your numbers to see why they don't reflect reality is something that I don't expect the average poster to do. I hardly consider giving them a factual analysis of what I see you are missing as insulting to the onlooker.

I remember talking to one of my former players who took some CoC d20 basher's emotive and baseless acusations that CoC d20 is just "hack-and-slash Cthuhlu mythos" at face value. Well meaning and smart people often take ill-founded comments they don't have time to investigate at face value.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Not to mention, we have many people who harbor a bias against psionics from previous editions (including 3.0) and who might like the 3.5 version if they picked it up a read it, but have not yet done so. If they see people flaming the 3.5 rules, they're likely to throw up their hands and give up on psionics, even though they may have approved of the ruleset if they actually went about reading it.

It's not that Psion thinks Thanee is going to warp their impressionable minds, it's that he's worried about 3.5 psionics developing an undeserved bad rap, precisely because it must live down the bad rap that previous editions had, and people are likely to be suspicious.

The issue Psion has seems to be that Thanee is going to scare off people who might pick up and read the rules before they do so, not after they do so. After, we can assume they've considered it and are intelligent enough to decide what's best for their campaign.

 

[Thanee]

I, OTOH, have not ignored your point buy took them into consideration in my argument. And what did you do with the resulting argument? Dismissed it out of hand.

Well, I havn't actually seen many arguments yet. The example, which I refered to as "silly" is one thing, but that is mostly since you have repeatedly ignored the argument I made as to why I think this example has no meaning for the comparison.

And I can say it again, you cannot give the sorcerer free scaling in a comparison and then compare to the psion, who has been removed of all the free stuff they get. This is a comparison on different levels, taking into account the biggest advantage of one side and basically no advantage of the other side.

Well, Thanee, once it gets to the point of repeating points that you have simply ignored in your reply, ...

What did I ignore then?

That I neglected the cost of augmentation in my comparison, as you mentioned? Has been answered. I have included the maximum possible cost. Worst case for the psion.

What else?

You repeatedly said, I'd neglect "something" there, but what this "something" is, you fail to name (or I have somehow actually missed it, which is certainly also a possibility ).

You accuse me of "stacking the deck", but you don't say how.

You mentioned "factual analysis" up there... can you give me some post numbers, where you put up that "factual analysis"?

Your opinion is not a fact, as much as you might like it to be, likewise, my opinion is not a fact, of course, this goes both ways. But I have stated facts, where I base my opinion on. You just repeatedly mention the cost of augmentation to be worth pretty much everything psions get over sorcerers (which is a damn whole lot) with no facts (which I am aware of) to back this up.

So, if you be so kind and go back and point me to the parts I have missed in your opinion, I'll gladly go back and re-consider them.

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

No but what you are doing is trying to 'win' this argument, like it's a game.

Uhm... actually, no.

I am convinced of my opinion, that's all.

And I am still of the opinion, that I am pretty much the only person here, who tries to look at the whole picture and not just a fraction thereof.

Whenever I am presented a convincing proof, that my argument is false, I give in, always, happened a few times in the past. I'm not a bad loser at all, if that's what you read into my posts, if you knew me better, you'd certainly know that this is true.

...but disregarding other peoples valid point or counterpoints because of them without really addressing them does not help this discussion nor does it add weight to your statements.

I actually try to answer them the first time they come up, but when they simply get repeated as an answer, I just point to the above.

If you can show me, where I have done this, as you say, please, I'll gladly see, if I have actually missed something.

Bye
Thanee