NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 7667125" data-attributes="member: 6790260">Push-polling to "prove" that the choices you're making are actually the ones you "should" be making? I dunno. I agree, though, that they didn't really have much reason to intentionally do that. Which is why I think their polls--which definitely had the form of push-polling at times--were simply designed by people not trained in statistics and data gathering. The questions were often loaded, or targeted in such a way that they constrained the possible answers you could give. If you yourself admit that they "weren't looking to pick up your opinions," despite considering yourself part of the sample, then that's enough evidence right there to say that their surveys were badly designed. Whether by accident or intent, they were filtering out some of the sample space purely through the design of the questions.Hmm. I can't recall a time where I had to figure out a situation that was one or the other. Not saying this isn't true, but rather that the situation is substantially more common in 5e.That is: there are numerous features in 5e that talk about "when you attack" or "as part of your attack" or whatever. One simple example being the Battlmeaster's maneuver riders. When are you allowed to tack a maneuver on? There are (at least) three valid options:1. Each time you perform an attack roll, you may expend expertise dice to add a maneuver to that specific roll.2. Each time you take the Attack Action, you may expend expertise dice to add a maneuver to that entire action.3. Each time you take the Attack Action, you may expend expertise dice to add a maneuver to one attack roll within that action.Unfortunately, and I do think this is a difference from 4e, there is NO terminology that refers purely to "attack rolls" (or some equivalent term) within "an Attack Action." The two--"taking the Attack Action" and "making an attack roll"--are treated as natural-language synonyms, but they have very different mechanical meaning. Some interpretations seem fine in isolation, but may neuter other classes or grossly overpower them (a Battlemaster spending three dice on three attack rolls within a single Attack Action? Jeez.) Doubly unfortunately, the rules don't even uniformly use the phrase "Attack Action," nor are they consistent about whether it is "taking the Attack Action" or "using your action to Attack" or just straight up "attacking." I've heard it argued that you're not supposed to think of An Action as something you Have, but rather that, on your turn, you may "take an action" which must be selected from a particular list--but again, the terminology is inconsistent and neither interpretation is free of difficulties. And this is with one of the most fundamental, frequently-used elements of the game--just making a "basic attack" (in 4e terms)!I'm not even really interested in "perfect" precision. I just want rules that make sense, and do not admit two or three or more interpretations that are both mutually exclusive and difficult to see whether they will be overpowering, underpowering, or just right.</blockquote>

Verification