Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Marking via Dragon's breath
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Runestar" data-source="post: 4379591" data-attributes="member: 72317"><p>I don't mean that you use the "it is ultimately just a houserule, however well you articulate your point" card to dismiss any arguments contrary to your initial stand. </p><p></p><p>How would you handle people who post seemingly for the sake of being contrary? Lets say I ask if my cleric could use sunburst every 5 minutes as a reusable, albeit gradual means of healing my party. I recall one of the replies being that it couldn't be done, since you would not be able to cast it if there were no enemies. Which is not supported by the 4e rules whatsoever. His intention is clear "I don't like it. So I am just going to cook up some inane reason why it wouldn't work, even if the rationale behind it is incorrect!". </p><p></p><p>What is wrong if I simply were to reply with "Hmm... going by the existing rules, it appears that this would indeed work. However, I am not sure if allowing it as is may be a good idea, as it may potentially unbalance the game if 'insert rationale here'. Thus...." instead? I have no qualms about recognizing apparent flaws in the system, as well as proposing fixes I deem appropriate (and acknowledging them as such). </p><p></p><p>At least, I see no shame in admitting that my reply is a houserule, rather than insisting that it is "the way the rules were meant to be", with "common sense and intent" as my only defense.</p><p></p><p>I admit that this is a far cry from the posting culture I am typically accustomed to back at gleemax, where the threads/topics there are more rules-oriented, and replies tend to more black-and-white (in that the replies are usually yes or no). It would appear that I have much to learn in terms of how I approach sensitive issues such as this.</p><p></p><p>Still, thanks for being so patient with me.<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=":)" /></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Runestar, post: 4379591, member: 72317"] I don't mean that you use the "it is ultimately just a houserule, however well you articulate your point" card to dismiss any arguments contrary to your initial stand. How would you handle people who post seemingly for the sake of being contrary? Lets say I ask if my cleric could use sunburst every 5 minutes as a reusable, albeit gradual means of healing my party. I recall one of the replies being that it couldn't be done, since you would not be able to cast it if there were no enemies. Which is not supported by the 4e rules whatsoever. His intention is clear "I don't like it. So I am just going to cook up some inane reason why it wouldn't work, even if the rationale behind it is incorrect!". What is wrong if I simply were to reply with "Hmm... going by the existing rules, it appears that this would indeed work. However, I am not sure if allowing it as is may be a good idea, as it may potentially unbalance the game if 'insert rationale here'. Thus...." instead? I have no qualms about recognizing apparent flaws in the system, as well as proposing fixes I deem appropriate (and acknowledging them as such). At least, I see no shame in admitting that my reply is a houserule, rather than insisting that it is "the way the rules were meant to be", with "common sense and intent" as my only defense. I admit that this is a far cry from the posting culture I am typically accustomed to back at gleemax, where the threads/topics there are more rules-oriented, and replies tend to more black-and-white (in that the replies are usually yes or no). It would appear that I have much to learn in terms of how I approach sensitive issues such as this. Still, thanks for being so patient with me.:) [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
Marking via Dragon's breath
Top