Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="gizmo33" data-source="post: 3764809" data-attributes="member: 30001">It's a public forum.  Welcome aboard and have at it.Because what we know is probably sufficient to outline some general features that the new system will have.  Especially when it's phrased in terms of "we don't want players to have to rest to regain resources".  If the preconditions for the argument are sufficiently expressed, then you can make reasonable hypothetical statements.  Changes in the preconditions don't invalidate the reasoning, they just change it's applicability.  "If my house burns down, I better plan on finding somewhere else to live".  Does it really matter if the house burns down due to electrical problems or a cigarrette?  People's aren't fools for making such plans and then finding the preconditions don't hold.  I don't know how much more simple I can make this, I'll need some help.So history and people's experiences have some bearing on 4E?  Or only when their conclusions agree with your own?  That was my point - I don't understand why there is the double standard - when a point is made that agrees with your opinion it's ok, but when it is at odds with it then *all of the sudden* we don't have sufficient information to have an opinion on the subject.Says anyone who is not well versed in logic.  Assumptions are a basic part of any reasoning process.  You have to be explicit about the premises of your argument to be certain that the conclusions aren't taken out of context.  Ironically, the definition of "assumption" in this common aphorism is also an assumption.Since it's unprovable I think you would be hard pressed to prove that it is unprovable.  Again, the logic of what is legitimate or what isn't in terms of logic should not be based on whether or not the expressed opinion is one you agree with.Not an appropriate saying for a message board whose obvious purpose is for the expression of opinions.Maybe Imaro could clarify, but one of his first posts actually stated IIRC that his experiences with Star Wars SE were fairly consistent with what RC and I were saying.  So your assertion that what I am saying is hyperbolic is just more opinion, which again fails to be on the receiving end of your aphorisms about opinions - again AFAICT because it's an opinion that you agree with."The degree to which the significant timeframe of DnD is encounter based is the degree to which non lethal encounters will be less significant than in previous editions".  I fail to see the hyperbole in statments like this.  Like Merlion, I advise you to be more specific because your assertions don't hold up to any specific examples I can think of but I assume (oooh) that you must be thinking of something specific rather than just pulling this assertion out of thin air.</blockquote>

Verification