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
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Fighter Extra Feat 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: 7255736" data-attributes="member: 996"><p>'Footrace' was just a shorthand way of saying 'movement where seconds count.' If there's a situation, out of combat, where climbing a cliff in 21 min 47 seconds makes all the difference vs climbing it in 21 min 50 sec, lovely, Action Surge, FTW. </p><p></p><p>Flack. Yes. Less flack than for being out-fightered by a self-buffing CoDzilla in a white room or 'casting spells,' respectively, though. </p><p></p><p>But the sheer amount of flack is little more than the flip side of their most-popular-class status. Both are about the number of folks, be it playing fighters or complaining about fighters (they could even be a lot of the same people!), not to the quality of their actual designs.</p><p></p><p> There's this thing called logic that people who are willing to can apply to determine validity. </p><p></p><p>For instance, the complaint 'all fighters cast spells' is invalid when leveled at 5e: demonstrably, only EKs cast spells via their fighter class abilities. Other fighters might via a feat (if permitted) or background or even item, (Book of Infinite spells made it into 5e, I believe) perhaps, but there are plenty of possible 5e fighters entirely free of spellcasting abilities. </p><p></p><p> Not if their expectations were that it's design would suck. Exceeding expectations is something businesses shoot for, that might still not require good design in a technical sense. Trendy design might do it, for instance. Or traditional design, even were it demonstrably strictly inferior to more current designs in every measurable way, both quantitative & qualitative. Indeed, a traditional design will likely meet expectations, because it was long experience with it that set those expectations.</p><p></p><p> There are many possible measures. Some qualitative, like 'elegance.' Others quantitative, like choice points. Some subjective, like 'fun,' others objective, like 'balance.' Many less easily characterized as entirely one or another - balance, depth, playability, etc, etc...</p><p></p><p>The complexity of the exercise does not render resorting to fallacious reasoning an equally-valid alternative.</p><p></p><p>"10,000 people can't be wrong?" A time-honored advertising slogan. And a time-worn fallacy.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tony Vargas, post: 7255736, member: 996"] 'Footrace' was just a shorthand way of saying 'movement where seconds count.' If there's a situation, out of combat, where climbing a cliff in 21 min 47 seconds makes all the difference vs climbing it in 21 min 50 sec, lovely, Action Surge, FTW. Flack. Yes. Less flack than for being out-fightered by a self-buffing CoDzilla in a white room or 'casting spells,' respectively, though. But the sheer amount of flack is little more than the flip side of their most-popular-class status. Both are about the number of folks, be it playing fighters or complaining about fighters (they could even be a lot of the same people!), not to the quality of their actual designs. There's this thing called logic that people who are willing to can apply to determine validity. For instance, the complaint 'all fighters cast spells' is invalid when leveled at 5e: demonstrably, only EKs cast spells via their fighter class abilities. Other fighters might via a feat (if permitted) or background or even item, (Book of Infinite spells made it into 5e, I believe) perhaps, but there are plenty of possible 5e fighters entirely free of spellcasting abilities. Not if their expectations were that it's design would suck. Exceeding expectations is something businesses shoot for, that might still not require good design in a technical sense. Trendy design might do it, for instance. Or traditional design, even were it demonstrably strictly inferior to more current designs in every measurable way, both quantitative & qualitative. Indeed, a traditional design will likely meet expectations, because it was long experience with it that set those expectations. There are many possible measures. Some qualitative, like 'elegance.' Others quantitative, like choice points. Some subjective, like 'fun,' others objective, like 'balance.' Many less easily characterized as entirely one or another - balance, depth, playability, etc, etc... The complexity of the exercise does not render resorting to fallacious reasoning an equally-valid alternative. "10,000 people can't be wrong?" A time-honored advertising slogan. And a time-worn fallacy. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Fighter Extra Feat Fallacy
Top