Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5534384" data-attributes="member: 18280">But, part of that is true as a point of fact.&nbsp; IF you wanted to play 3e in a certain way, THEN you wouldn't experience those problems.&nbsp; BUT, since the IF is invalid, so is the concluding THEN.&nbsp; BECAUSE you don't want to play D&amp;D &quot;this way&quot;, you continue to experience the problem.&nbsp; You do&nbsp; not want to play D&amp;D &quot;this way&quot;, presumably, because you would then experience another (and, IMHO, more serious) problem:&nbsp; Playing a game that you are not enjoying, or are enjoying less than a game tailored better to your needs.Luckily for you, there are several versions of &quot;D&amp;D&quot;, one of which might just be right for you!The objection I would have is to the statement, &quot;If your DM was any good you wouldn't have that problem.&quot;&nbsp; If one said, instead, &quot;If your DM was a good match for the ruleset, you wouldn't have that problem&quot; my objection would vanish.&nbsp; This is because the second statement is qualified as &quot;good&quot; within a particularly narrow subset of all &quot;goodness&quot;.And, of course, in this case &quot;wrong&quot; would simply be &quot;In a manner that doesn't cater to the strengths of the ruleset or shore up its weaknesses&quot;.&nbsp; You could also define it as &quot;In a manner that exacerbates problems with the ruleset&quot; or &quot;In a manner that produces an inferior, or unfun, result.&quot;As an easy example of this principle in action, I had until recently a very negative view of skill challenges.&nbsp; My viewpoint was wrong -- I was looking at skill challenges in a manner that exacerbated problems with them and produced an inferior, unfun, result.&nbsp; But that is not the only possible viewpoint, and I accept that, when another viewpoint produces a superior result to my own, my viewpoint must be wrong.(I don't think that the official materials I've read incorporate, or point to, anything other than that wrong viewpoint, but I may be wrong in that as well.)Even after I adopted a better viewpoint of skill challenges, I still think that, for me, the tradeoff in using skill challenges outweighs the benefits of the mechanics.&nbsp; What does that tell me?&nbsp; Along with many other indicators, it tells me that I am wrong for 4e, and that 4e is wrong for me.&nbsp; If I am wise, it also tells me that I might one day become aware of an even more superior viewpoint, wherein the benefits 4e offers do outweigh the costs.&nbsp; I may well prove to be wrong that 4e is wrong for me!And there's nothing wrong with that.&nbsp; Our viewpoints should evolve as our experiences do.....lest we stagnate.IMHO.&nbsp; YMMV.RC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 5534384, member: 18280"] But, [i][b]part of[/b][/i][b][/b] that is true as a point of fact. IF you wanted to play 3e in a certain way, THEN you wouldn't experience those problems. BUT, since the IF is invalid, so is the concluding THEN. BECAUSE you don't want to play D&D "this way", you continue to experience the problem. You do not want to play D&D "this way", presumably, because you would then experience another (and, IMHO, more serious) problem: Playing a game that you are not enjoying, or are enjoying less than a game tailored better to your needs. Luckily for you, there are several versions of "D&D", one of which might just be right for you! The objection I would have is to the statement, "If your DM was any good you wouldn't have that problem." If one said, instead, "If your DM was a good match for the ruleset, you wouldn't have that problem" my objection would vanish. This is because the second statement is qualified as "good" within a particularly narrow subset of all "goodness". And, of course, in this case "wrong" would simply be "In a manner that doesn't cater to the strengths of the ruleset or shore up its weaknesses". You could also define it as "In a manner that exacerbates problems with the ruleset" or "In a manner that produces an inferior, or unfun, result." As an easy example of this principle in action, I had until recently a very negative view of skill challenges. My viewpoint was wrong -- I was looking at skill challenges in a manner that exacerbated problems with them and produced an inferior, unfun, result. But that is not the only possible viewpoint, and I accept that, when another viewpoint produces a superior result to my own, my viewpoint must be wrong. (I don't think that the official materials I've read incorporate, or point to, anything other than that wrong viewpoint, but I may be wrong in that as well.) Even after I adopted a better viewpoint of skill challenges, I still think that, for me, the tradeoff in using skill challenges outweighs the benefits of the mechanics. What does that tell me? Along with many other indicators, it tells me that I am wrong for 4e, and that 4e is wrong for me. If I am wise, it also tells me that I might one day become aware of an even more superior viewpoint, wherein the benefits 4e offers do outweigh the costs. I may well prove to be [B][I]wrong[/I][/B] that 4e is wrong for me! And there's nothing wrong with that. Our viewpoints should evolve as our experiences do.....lest we stagnate. IMHO. YMMV. RC [/QUOTE]

Verification