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
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!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Crab Bucket Fallacy
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="Tony Vargas" data-source="post: 9134000" data-attributes="member: 996"><p>In reverse order:</p><p></p><p>IDK, I have no problem with that conversation. "This is the setting & campaign I want to run, these options fit it, these others don't. Would you rather play something else, I have quite the backlog? Or one of you could run..." "oh? No? OK...."</p><p></p><p>But, yeah, the point I wasn't making too well, was TSR didn't fix the martial/caster gap - it had balance, of it's own sort from the beginning... magic-users were under-powered and fragile at low levels, wildly OP at high levels, and in-between the grew from contributing to dominating. Overall, the whole MU experience, was arguably balanced.</p><p></p><p>3.0 broke that by making Casters OP all the time.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Insulting eachother, even being impolite, is against the CoC. Being stupid, confused, or lying, is not. <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🤷" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f937.png" title="Person shrugging :person_shrugging:" data-shortname=":person_shrugging:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /></p><p></p><p>And, no, I don't agree that's the implication. There shouldn't be an implication about the people making an argument, the argument should be judged on it's merits. The OP pointed out a potential flaw in reasoning, whether it meets the definition of a fallacy or not, and tried for a catchy label. </p><p></p><p>Anyway, yes, intelligent people can look at the facts of the Martial/Caster Gap (itself, just another catchy label) and reach different conclusions: that it's not a problem, that it's a highly-desireable feature because casters should be superior, that the DM can just compensate for it, or that it should be fixed in a variety of <em>very </em>different mutually-incompatible ways that may well cause issue of their own. </p><p></p><p>But just denying it, like, "no, casters do not get a large number of varied and powerful daily resources" or, "sure, but martials also get a large number of varied and powerful daily resources?" No. Nobody does that.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 9134000, member: 996"] In reverse order: IDK, I have no problem with that conversation. "This is the setting & campaign I want to run, these options fit it, these others don't. Would you rather play something else, I have quite the backlog? Or one of you could run..." "oh? No? OK...." But, yeah, the point I wasn't making too well, was TSR didn't fix the martial/caster gap - it had balance, of it's own sort from the beginning... magic-users were under-powered and fragile at low levels, wildly OP at high levels, and in-between the grew from contributing to dominating. Overall, the whole MU experience, was arguably balanced. 3.0 broke that by making Casters OP all the time. Insulting eachother, even being impolite, is against the CoC. Being stupid, confused, or lying, is not. 🤷 And, no, I don't agree that's the implication. There shouldn't be an implication about the people making an argument, the argument should be judged on it's merits. The OP pointed out a potential flaw in reasoning, whether it meets the definition of a fallacy or not, and tried for a catchy label. Anyway, yes, intelligent people can look at the facts of the Martial/Caster Gap (itself, just another catchy label) and reach different conclusions: that it's not a problem, that it's a highly-desireable feature because casters should be superior, that the DM can just compensate for it, or that it should be fixed in a variety of [I]very [/I]different mutually-incompatible ways that may well cause issue of their own. But just denying it, like, "no, casters do not get a large number of varied and powerful daily resources" or, "sure, but martials also get a large number of varied and powerful daily resources?" No. Nobody does that. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Crab Bucket Fallacy
Top