D&D 5E (+)What Ubiquitous DnD Tropes Get It Totally Wrong?

[Ruin Explorer]

You are drawing a different line on when it is acceptable to say a non-human monster is evil than I draw.

You've lost this argument, mate, just stop.

When I quoted book where it says that they are only "Usually CE", that was the end of the argument. You're factually in error. Orcs in 5E are not fixed-CE. Anything else is homebrew/houserules, which is fine, but not "5E".

"The cat's mother"? What does that mean?

It was a little joke - where my mum is from, when you use the word "she" too liberally in a conversation and people either feel it's too informal or don't know who you're referring to, they say "Who is 'she', the cat's mother?".

To be fair, it’s not that far off from my claim that it’s fine for demons to be always CE because they’re extraplanar entities. And I’d be more than happy to extend the benefit of the doubt that this is a misunderstanding of that position rather than a willful misrepresentation of it.

Sure, but it's not a rational argument to say "some people say X" in response to the arguments of someone who isn't even saying that.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I am generally in agreement with you in this discussion, but I don’t think telling people they “know (something) damn well” and in the same breath admonishing them for assigning positions to others that they don’t hold is helpful.

Withholding admonition for bad behavior for fear of someone thinking you’re being mean isn’t useful, with respect.

If dishonest rhetoric is being used, that should be called out.

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Listen, I'm done. @Charlaquin I really did mean to answer your post but I'm just tired of the attacks because I run orcs as described in the monster manual.

You don’t, though. You omit “usually” from the text, then interpret the remaining text as narrowly as possible, run that, and then to be attacked when the incongruence is pointed out.

 

[Charlaquin]

Withholding admonition for bad behavior for fear of someone thinking you’re being mean isn’t useful, with respect.

If dishonest rhetoric is being used, that should be called out.

I just don’t think Oofta is being dishonest, and saying he is is a bad look, and likely to get you on the moderators’ bad side to boot.

EDIT: Just, in general I think trying to tell someone what their own argument is poor form, be that by misrepresenting their position or by telling them what they do or don’t “know damn well.”

 

[doctorbadwolf]

I just don’t think Oofta is being dishonest, and saying he is is a bad look, and likely to get you on the moderators’ bad side to boot.

EDIT: Just, in general I think trying to tell someone what their own argument is poor form, be that by misrepresenting their position or by telling them what they do or don’t “know damn well.”

The two aren’t the same, though.

Eh, doesn’t matter. I see now that oofta has opted out of further discussion. Fair enough.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

I have a pleasant delusion of free will. I still make choices. The choices I will make are predetermined, but I still have the awareness and experience of making them. My will is not free, but I am still making choices according to deterministic laws, which makes me responsible for the outcomes of the choices I make, even if I could not have made different ones.

Choices dont truly exist in a deterministic world. You cant choose something if your brain is deterministic. Not really.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

...You have an interesting definition of “people,” then.

you would be right. I think either we live in an undeterministic world or there is no such thing as an actual person. Yes.

The difference between wet soggy computers and people is authentic non deterministic consciousness.

By this standard im not convinced there are or arent people.

Probably there arent.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

Interesting claim. Why does a phenomenon being deterministic make it not matter?

Self awareness is often pointed to as the advent of consciousness free will and choices. Even it is deterministic. It donates nothing that bucks the pattern. That is why it doesnt matter. Does it affect things? Yes. Sure. But it does not matter in regard to free will and choices. It doesnt have the power to make either truly exist. That is why i say it "doesnt matter". It doesnt matter in that it does not change the state of things in question.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

@Charlaquin an interesting scenario to consider. You could have a nondeterministic existance with a derministic physical locale. That is actually physically possible. But then we get into weird matrixy types of topics.

You, however, CANNOT have a deterministic existance with a nondeterministic locale.

 

[Bohandas]

As noted before, "free will" is a meaningless weasel word