Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon 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 Next
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
*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!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
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
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The 5e Flaws list, my editorial changes (to correct flaws in the flaws)
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="superstition" data-source="post: 7445737" data-attributes="member: 32866"><p>If a book states: "Elves cannot be taller than 5' 5"" then that works for anyone who is planning to follow the book, as written. It's not subjective. It's a simple fact. The book states X and X is what people must follow if they plan on doing it by the book.</p><p></p><p>Just because people can houserule doesn't mean the rules, as written, shouldn't be good-quality in the first place. One may as well tell people to write their own book if they don't think the book, as written, is good enough. Some solution that is.</p><p></p><p>The better solution is to make sure the writing is good enough in the first place.</p><p></p><p>If a book tosses in a weak caveat like "If you don't like it, as written, then modify it to suit you and your group" that isn't a magic wand that negates poor-quality writing. It's a cop-out. Of course people can change whatever they like, from any book — whether the book gives them permission to or not. That kind of caveat statement is barely relevant.</p><p></p><p>Imagine buying a video game, finding bugs, and having its fans tell you that you are <em>free</em> to reverse engineer the game to figure out how to fix the bugs yourself. Time and effort aren't free, though. A lot of people think that a product should be well-crafted instead of forcing the users to either become inventors or to drop it.</p><p></p><p>This is the old "expert in everything" fallacy. A common tactic people opposed to regulations use is to argue from the point of view that people have infinite time, energy, and intellect they can devote to becoming an expert in everything. You don't need a law preventing you from having mercury contamination in high-fructose corn syrup. Instead, you simply can become an expert in the supply chain of high-fructose corn syrup — so you'll know exactly which products that use it are made with "mercury-grade" ingredients and which aren't. This expertise, of course, requires that you get that information from the companies involved, even though there is no legal requirement to facilitate getting them to give you that information. But, really, you and everyone else can be an expert in this and every other aspect of life.</p><p></p><p>It's a fallacy, just like saying shoddy game design is fine because people can make their own game or mod the game to their liking.</p><p></p><p>Basically, my point to you is that, while I certainly appreciate the vote of confidence, it's not just about me or my group. There are things that are universally-applicable, like writing in a book that elves can't be taller than 5' 5". Some things are just facts, and some of those facts I laid out in my opening post.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="superstition, post: 7445737, member: 32866"] If a book states: "Elves cannot be taller than 5' 5"" then that works for anyone who is planning to follow the book, as written. It's not subjective. It's a simple fact. The book states X and X is what people must follow if they plan on doing it by the book. Just because people can houserule doesn't mean the rules, as written, shouldn't be good-quality in the first place. One may as well tell people to write their own book if they don't think the book, as written, is good enough. Some solution that is. The better solution is to make sure the writing is good enough in the first place. If a book tosses in a weak caveat like "If you don't like it, as written, then modify it to suit you and your group" that isn't a magic wand that negates poor-quality writing. It's a cop-out. Of course people can change whatever they like, from any book — whether the book gives them permission to or not. That kind of caveat statement is barely relevant. Imagine buying a video game, finding bugs, and having its fans tell you that you are [I]free[/I] to reverse engineer the game to figure out how to fix the bugs yourself. Time and effort aren't free, though. A lot of people think that a product should be well-crafted instead of forcing the users to either become inventors or to drop it. This is the old "expert in everything" fallacy. A common tactic people opposed to regulations use is to argue from the point of view that people have infinite time, energy, and intellect they can devote to becoming an expert in everything. You don't need a law preventing you from having mercury contamination in high-fructose corn syrup. Instead, you simply can become an expert in the supply chain of high-fructose corn syrup — so you'll know exactly which products that use it are made with "mercury-grade" ingredients and which aren't. This expertise, of course, requires that you get that information from the companies involved, even though there is no legal requirement to facilitate getting them to give you that information. But, really, you and everyone else can be an expert in this and every other aspect of life. It's a fallacy, just like saying shoddy game design is fine because people can make their own game or mod the game to their liking. Basically, my point to you is that, while I certainly appreciate the vote of confidence, it's not just about me or my group. There are things that are universally-applicable, like writing in a book that elves can't be taller than 5' 5". Some things are just facts, and some of those facts I laid out in my opening post. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The 5e Flaws list, my editorial changes (to correct flaws in the flaws)
Top