Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dualazi" data-source="post: 7072242" data-attributes="member: 6855537">Oh I'm well aware of what it is. I'm also aware that there are people on this board who have extensive experience with D&D (some have played every edition ever released) and many of them have strong analytical skills as well. These are not uninformed popularity contests, and are not driven by white room theorycrafting, as shown by the OP who is dealing with it right now. We have real play examples and well articulated arguments as to why this is the case, which you have not sufficiently address.Oh yeah, and if we're going to be slinging the fallacy accusations around, you yourself have engaged in arguing from fallacy. You mean like I did? I made a huge post going over your examples on a case by case basis, and many of them were either irrelevant, pointless, or the wrong applications of stats/skills.1) yeah, the DM can hypothetically make any system good with enough work. How much work is needed is an indicator of a problem in design, and I addressed this earlier. Just like class imbalance in 3rd edition, "the DM can fix it" is not a defense of poor design.2) Outside of incredibly hackneyed logic or enforced split-second decision making, there's no reason there couldn't be attempts made by all members of the group to recall knowledge about something. If the party is researching in downtime or trying to decipher a mural there's no more reason the group fighter can't attempt it than the wizard could attempt a dangerous jump or compete in a triathlon.3) Spells replacing a given stat do in fact reduce the value of that stat, particularly in situations where spell slot consumption isn't an issue. That...wasn't even the argument I was making. My point was that we can look at AL play to determine how often players might reasonably make Int based checks and what effects that might have on an average game, which would let us see why people might decide other stats are more worthy of investment.</blockquote>

Verification