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
*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="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 9138208" data-attributes="member: 6704184"><p>Nice!</p><p></p><p>I think what you’re missing is that the people you’re arguing with don’t believe that each class needs special features for each pillar. Essentially, from our POV, the response is mostly variations of, “okay, so what?”</p><p></p><p>It is easy to homebrew and 3pp is a huge market. It would be nonsense to claim that 5e isn’t welcoming to 3pp overall just because you local experience is super “RAW and official only”. </p><p></p><p>No, it isn’t. It is vastly worse than just using skills. It’s a last resort. </p><p></p><p>Higher level spells, and spells that will be taken as attacks when you’re done. Okay. Gift of gab is the only one that I can agree with you on, here. </p><p></p><p>Irrelevant. </p><p></p><p>They don’t need to keep up with the wizard in all pillars of play. </p><p></p><p>Well no, it’s a type of design you dont prefer. It also isn’t true. To be true, the fighter would need to have penalties in the social pillar. A class not adding any new features to your character in an important area of the game but doing so in others is just assymetrical design. </p><p></p><p>What</p><p></p><p>No one is mistaking that. </p><p></p><p>Prove how that makes your hypothesis inevitably true. </p><p></p><p>I have never, in almost 40 years of life, been a fan of something popular and not seen the behavior you describe. Literally everything popular gets this treatment. </p><p></p><p>Their DM doesn’t impose reasonable consequences, maybe. Some DMs don’t actually try to make social interaction a challenge at all. </p><p></p><p>I have never had a group that didn’t double up when doing so fits the PC concepts. What’s more, this is a DM guidance issue, not a rules issue. The DM should be challenging the party in such a way that multiple characters need to have social skills. The game needs guidance for the DM to give you more than one PC that needs interaction at the same time, not weird artificially constructed challenges where the bard can just “do social” for the group as everyone else just hangs out. </p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>Or when there are multiple people who need interacting with, or multiple challenges that speak to the “face” characters strengths, or when dealing with NPCs that aren’t going to respond to the bard, etc</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 9138208, member: 6704184"] Nice! I think what you’re missing is that the people you’re arguing with don’t believe that each class needs special features for each pillar. Essentially, from our POV, the response is mostly variations of, “okay, so what?” It is easy to homebrew and 3pp is a huge market. It would be nonsense to claim that 5e isn’t welcoming to 3pp overall just because you local experience is super “RAW and official only”. No, it isn’t. It is vastly worse than just using skills. It’s a last resort. Higher level spells, and spells that will be taken as attacks when you’re done. Okay. Gift of gab is the only one that I can agree with you on, here. Irrelevant. They don’t need to keep up with the wizard in all pillars of play. Well no, it’s a type of design you dont prefer. It also isn’t true. To be true, the fighter would need to have penalties in the social pillar. A class not adding any new features to your character in an important area of the game but doing so in others is just assymetrical design. What No one is mistaking that. Prove how that makes your hypothesis inevitably true. I have never, in almost 40 years of life, been a fan of something popular and not seen the behavior you describe. Literally everything popular gets this treatment. Their DM doesn’t impose reasonable consequences, maybe. Some DMs don’t actually try to make social interaction a challenge at all. I have never had a group that didn’t double up when doing so fits the PC concepts. What’s more, this is a DM guidance issue, not a rules issue. The DM should be challenging the party in such a way that multiple characters need to have social skills. The game needs guidance for the DM to give you more than one PC that needs interaction at the same time, not weird artificially constructed challenges where the bard can just “do social” for the group as everyone else just hangs out. Or when there are multiple people who need interacting with, or multiple challenges that speak to the “face” characters strengths, or when dealing with NPCs that aren’t going to respond to the bard, etc [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Crab Bucket Fallacy
Top