Mannahnin
Scion of Murgen (He/Him)
Misused, anyway.
D&D General Why TSR-era D&D Will Always Be D&D
- Thread starter Snarf Zagyg
- Start date
overgeeked
B/X Known World
Incorrectly used.
You should. The first line is: “It's important to note that this fallacy should not be used to dismiss the claims of experts, or scientific consensus.” People who know fallacies don’t use it to discount expertise. People who know jargon but don’t understand the logical fallacy behind it use it incorrectly to refute expertise.
GMforPowergamers
Legend
isn't that a fallacy? someone says no x would ever y so the other comes back with an x doing y so then it's no true x...
used or missused I see it asserted to discount expertise.
Things like second wind and short rest healing HD were there from the beginning.
His name is Guy, but I'm sure there's a few like him out there. : )
So not a lie, or a false claim, but not what most people who heard it expected, I'm sure.
GMforPowergamers
Legend
its funny how people will argue that a missleading truth isn't a lie when they want to argue they didn't mislead...
edit in one of teh monster threads someone asked why people like the concept of fey... and I said this was pretty much my idea of evil fey, tell you the truth but in a way to make you believe a lie.
Oofta
Legend
In addition, we do have battlemaster. It may not be a warlord class, but it did implement several of the features. Multi class or take a feat to get healing word and it's about as close as you're going to get with 5E's structure.
But again, plans change, some possible options get dropped, warlord was simply not popular enough or distinct enough to warrant it's own class. They decided to not have class bloat.
Oofta
Legend
If your going to accuse someone of lying, please provide an actual quote.
GMforPowergamers
Legend
bull... that isn't even a 4e style fighter let alone a warlord and it was mentioned back when I first entered this part of the discussion.
gee almost like when I said 8 years in you still need to kitbash to play one...
citation needed
and I am sure that if they cut your favorite you would not mind at all
why so i can be told it doesn't count, or that it is true form a certain point of view?
I'm not defending the dev team, they made a ton of promises, especially during the Next playtest, that they went back on. I participated in every stage of said playtest, and very little of what I wanted in 5e is present. That just goes to show me that they don't really care about my opinion because I'm not in the majority, which is fine.
And maybe I read too much into their "promises", which is also fine. It still leaves me feeling less than happy about the state of things. But I'm trying to get over my bitterness...after all, as long as people are having fun, that's the important bit, right?
Right?
EzekielRaiden
Hero
That's not "martial healing"--that is, martial characters using their class abilities to heal others--unless, as previously stated, we are using definitions so far watered-down that they begin to resemble certain popular, inexpensive beers.
GMforPowergamers
Legend
you know I think I could get over the developers going a different way then they said if I wasn't constantly put upon to prove what they said word for word could not be interpreted another way...
In the early (very early) stages of 5e, there was a full expectation that the edition would be modular. That there would be a core game and the group could add the elements it wanted as add-ons. Want a more 4e feel - add x. Want a more horror feel - add y. Etc.
Can't remember exactly when this was dropped, but it seemed to be the initial intention and I suspect what that particular tweet was referring to.
If you took everything the developers said they wanted/were trying to do as gospel (from the early stages of the game) you could leave very disappointed!
EzekielRaiden
Hero
Except that, from data WotC actually collected, there were other classes less popular than Warlord. Druid, for example, was actually the least-popular class.
Popularity wasn't the reason, Jack.
GMforPowergamers
Legend
oh now this is interesting almost like the rabid 'cinemasinafaction' and meme nature of the hate on 4e lead the developers to give MORE weight to some classes then others.
EzekielRaiden
Hero
There never was a specific point at which modularity was dropped. They just slowly but surely stopped talking about it. Likewise, martial healing was in until they stopped talking about it. Which...actually happened not super long after the tweet I mentioned. August 2013. Note, @Sacrosanct, that Mearls explicitly refers to it as "the warlord fighter is martial and has healing." It would be disingenuous as hell for him to be referring to Second Wind when saying that.
Sadly, the poll that displayed this data was deleted in one of the (several) purges of WotC's site, so I cannot actually link it now. But it did exist. A lot of people like to pretend that 4e options are liked only by a tiny minority of fans, but the actual evidence over the years suggests otherwise.
Lanefan
Victoria Rules
What I remember is that 5e - during its Next/playtest days anyway - was in theory going to be designed such that it would end up being modular enough that you could a) mix and match the modules so as to play it like any earlier edition and b) fairly seamlessly integrate material (e.g. adventures, characters, etc.) from any earlier edition.
Hence, I had my hopes up that it'd be a short easy step from our 1e-like homebrew to a 1e-like 5e.
So much for that...
Oofta
Legend
So no one else on this thread has ever been on a development of a new project? Sometimes you have ideas, things you'd like to do, even think will be possible. Then you go through iterations of design and prototypes and you can't always deliver exactly what you thought you could. You realize that what you had in mind would lead to a worse product and not suit the actual needs of the users.
This edition had one of the most extensive playtests of any TTRPG ever. It's not perfect because nothing ever is, but it is the best selling TTRPG ever. The devs weren't misleading anyone on purpose. They may have been mistaken, they (particularly Mearls) probably could have phrased things more clearly. But ultimately they analyzed the results of the extensive feedback they received over months and changed their minds. What they weren't doing? They weren't lying because people don't like the direction they took.
In any case, have a good one. This is a pointless argument. Designs change and you can't always get what you want.
This edition had one of the most extensive playtests of any TTRPG ever. It's not perfect because nothing ever is, but it is the best selling TTRPG ever. The devs weren't misleading anyone on purpose. They may have been mistaken, they (particularly Mearls) probably could have phrased things more clearly. But ultimately they analyzed the results of the extensive feedback they received over months and changed their minds. What they weren't doing? They weren't lying because people don't like the direction they took.
In any case, have a good one. This is a pointless argument. Designs change and you can't always get what you want.
Ovinomancer
No flips for you!
An informal logical fallacy (what's being discussed here) is not evidence that the conclusion is incorrect, it's saying that the argument does nothing to assist that conclusion. There aren't exceptions to this -- if it's an informal logical fallacy, it doesn't support the conclusion sought. It also doesn't disprove it.
Formal logical fallacies, on the other hand, are far more rare, much more narrow, and show the falsity of the conclusion in the argument. You usually only see this in very formal structures, like logical proofs, but they turn up from time to time.
Similar Threads
