Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5321927" data-attributes="member: 18280">This is probably the tiredest of tired canards.&nbsp; Don't you think it is time to retire it?&nbsp; Not just for you, but for all of us?&nbsp; I mean, is there any purpose to it apart from attempting to godwin the thread?If a game is balanced on the assumptions of X, regardless of game, and regardless of X, divergence from X is going to alter the balance.&nbsp; That isn't &quot;onetruewayism&quot; -- it is common sense.&nbsp; It is like saying if a car is designed to run on regular gas, you might experience problems with leaded gas or diesel.&nbsp; Ya think?Gee, I know 4e is balanced around combat encounters and specific formulae for skill challenges, but I don't use said formulae, and resolve everything by skill challenges.&nbsp; I don't use the combat rules at all.&nbsp; Heck, I don't use the rules, or the advice given in the rulebooks.&nbsp; I want to play it with my own playstyle!Yet I am having balance problems.&nbsp; And you dare claim it isn't the fault of the rules?!?!?!&nbsp; Onetruewayism!<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/ponder.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":hmm:" title="Hmmm&nbsp; &nbsp; :hmm:" data-shortname=":hmm:" />Really, when someone points out something common-sensical, like &quot;rules are balanced based on a game's play assumptions&quot;, do you imagine that &quot;onetruewayism&quot; is an autowin?&nbsp; If so, time to go back to plinking away with darts, methinks!&nbsp; <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing&nbsp; &nbsp; :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" />Can we give spurious cries of onetruewayism a rest?&nbsp; Please?RC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 5321927, member: 18280"] This is probably the tiredest of tired canards. Don't you think it is time to retire it? Not just for you, but for all of us? I mean, is there any purpose to it apart from attempting to godwin the thread? If a game is balanced on the assumptions of X, regardless of game, and regardless of X, divergence from X is going to alter the balance. That isn't "onetruewayism" -- it is common sense. It is like saying if a car is designed to run on regular gas, you might experience problems with leaded gas or diesel. Ya think? Gee, I know 4e is balanced around combat encounters and specific formulae for skill challenges, but I don't use said formulae, and resolve everything by skill challenges. I don't use the combat rules at all. Heck, I don't use the rules, or the advice given in the rulebooks. I want to play it with my own playstyle! Yet I am having balance problems. And you dare claim it isn't the fault of the rules?!?!?! [I][B]Onetruewayism![/B][/I] :hmm: Really, when someone points out something common-sensical, like "rules are balanced based on a game's play assumptions", do you imagine that "onetruewayism" is an autowin? If so, time to go back to plinking away with darts, methinks! :lol: Can we give spurious cries of onetruewayism a rest? Please? RC [/QUOTE]

Verification