Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Raven Crowking" data-source="post: 5041626" data-attributes="member: 18280">How so?&nbsp; What quotes, exactly, make you think that?I could say, rather, that you are demonizing 1e.&nbsp; I could example quotes likeOne might wonder why you cannot simply state that you dislike something without trying to prove it to be objectively bad.&nbsp; One might also wonder why the things on your list are supposed to be &quot;crazy nonsensical rubbish&quot;.A bit too onetruewayish for me, I guess.&nbsp; Perhaps you wil explain more clearly?I am seriously contending that your evidence that 4e had more playtesting does not constitute evidence that 4e had more playtesting.&nbsp; Which is what I said.&nbsp; I thought I was clear.Ad HominemSomething that, by the evidenciary standards you asked us to accept re: 4e and 1e, I coud easily claim to be playtested more than both of them put together.&nbsp; But I would not, because (1) such a claim would be false, and (2) the means by which I would thereby be making such a claim would not constitute evidence.&nbsp; It is used merely as an example of how easy it is to mislead on the basis of such a list, either intentionally or not.Glad you found something you like!But liking 4e doesn't (rationally) imply that 1e was not designed for balance.RC</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Raven Crowking, post: 5041626, member: 18280"] How so? What quotes, exactly, make you think that? I could say, rather, that you are demonizing 1e. I could example quotes like One might wonder why you cannot simply state that you dislike something without trying to prove it to be objectively bad. One might also wonder [i][b]why[/b][/i][b][/b] the things on your list are supposed to be "crazy nonsensical rubbish". A bit too onetruewayish for me, I guess. Perhaps you wil explain more clearly? I am seriously contending that your evidence that 4e had more playtesting does not constitute evidence that 4e had more playtesting. Which is what I said. I thought I was clear. Ad Hominem Something that, by the evidenciary standards you asked us to accept re: 4e and 1e, I coud easily claim to be playtested more than both of them put together. But I would not, because (1) such a claim would be false, and (2) the means by which I would thereby be making such a claim would not constitute evidence. It is used merely as an example of how easy it is to mislead on the basis of such a list, either intentionally or not. Glad you found something you like! But liking 4e doesn't (rationally) imply that 1e was not designed for balance. RC [/QUOTE]

Verification