D&D 5E (2014) it appears to be very easy to break the game

[Tequila Sunrise]

Furthermore, I simply cannot see the math in a role playing game anywhere near as big a red flag as the engineering on an airplane. That sounds to me more like an exercise in hyperbole. Nobody's going to die if the RPG math isn't perfect. There won't be tons of machinery falling out of the air.

But, that wasn't present in this case. Instead, analogy was used the way it usually is used around here, to exaggerate something to the extreme, to make it seem like the people differing with you are themselves more extreme.

Please don't read into my motives. An analogy was a simple way to illustrate why a dev comment turned me off to 5e, not to paint anyone as an extremist. Because for me, it's not about extremes; I don't need people falling from a burning plane to know that I'd rather have a game with good story and good math.

I want to have my cake, and eat it too.

 

[Mistwell]

Please don't read into my motives. An analogy was a simple way to illustrate why a dev comment turned me off to 5e, not to paint anyone as an extremist. Because for me, it's not about extremes; I don't need people falling from a burning plane to know that I'd rather have a game with good story and good math.

I want to have my cake, and eat it too.

I am not reading into your motives, since you stated them. That's how analogies work. You compare something to, in your own words, "people falling from a burning plane", there is no guesswork needed to say "this guy is trying to exaggerate the ramifications to the extreme". If you didn't want people reading it that way, then perhaps an analogy that doesn't naturally imply that would be in order.

 

[The Human Target]

Seriously, some if you guys need to take a month off and relax.

 

[Tequila Sunrise]

Seriously, some if you guys need to take a month off and relax.

QFT!

I am not reading into your motives, since you stated them. That's how analogies work. You compare something to, in your own words, "people falling from a burning plane", there is no guesswork needed to say "this guy is trying to exaggerate the ramifications to the extreme". If you didn't want people reading it that way, then perhaps an analogy that doesn't naturally imply that would be in order.

Mistwell, you generally seem to be more calm and reasonable than this, so I'm going to chalk this up to the ambient vitriol of the current edition war. Silly me, thinking I could have a civil discussion on a 5e thread.

 

[Mistwell]

QFT!

I think he means you dude. You should ask him.

Mistwell, you generally seem to be more calm and reasonable than this, so I'm going to chalk this up to the ambient vitriol of the current edition war. Silly me, thinking I could have a civil discussion on a 5e thread.

Wow, the personal attack? That's how you want to talk about civil discussions, by saying I am being unreasonable and uncivil to you?

You compare something in D&D (anything) to "people falling from a burning plane", and people are going to look at you odd. Nobody put those words in your mouth, nobody read anything falsely into what you said, you're the guy who went deep into a drastic place to make a point. Doctor, heal thyself, I am just responding to the weird stuff you were saying.

I'm not warring about anything. Exactly what edition do you think it is I favor or disfavor? You make a bizarre analogy, multiple people called you on it, and rather than just owning up to the over-the-top nature of your exaggeration you're doubling down and telling others they are being unreasonable uncivil edition warriors for calling you on it.

Why don't you take a moment and consider the possibility it's you who did something untoward here?

 

[pemerton]

An analogy was a simple way to illustrate why a dev comment turned me off to 5e, not to paint anyone as an extremist. Because for me, it's not about extremes; I don't need people falling from a burning plane to know that I'd rather have a game with good story and good math.

I understood your analogy, and agree with it.

If a game is going to rely heavily on mathematical techniques for its mechanics - which D&Dnext does - then I absolutely want the developers to be thinking hard about that maths. Otherwise they're just passing the buck to me! If they look after the maths, then I can ignore it - relying on their work - during play.

I also don't see, in such a game, how "good story" can be divorced from "the maths" - unless you are just ignoring the mechanics in your resolution, in which case what are the mechanics for?

 

[Olaf the Stout]

Personally I'm not going to worry about the 5E rules until I have the actual books in my hand to try for myself. The playtest was a playtest and should be treated as such.

 

[The Human Target]

QFT!

For the record, I wasn't referring to you needing a break.

 

[Mistwell]

For the record, I wasn't referring to you needing a break.

Fair nuff!

 

[The Human Target]

No problem.

I just think everyone's getting a bit sensitive or hot under the collar lately.