D&D General Why TSR-era D&D Will Always Be D&D

[Mannahnin]

it is USED to discount expertise

Misused, anyway.

 

[overgeeked]

I;m not clicking that.

it is USED to discount expertise

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]

Misused, anyway.

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.

 

[Sacrosanct]

And no, they didn't decide those things early on--or else they did so and never told anyone. As an example, Mearls explicitly tweeted that there WOULD be martial healing in 5e, and if players didn't like that, they could simply choose not to play those options (or, if DM, choose not to allow those options). And y'know what came of it? Diddly-squat.

Things like second wind and short rest healing HD were there from the beginning.

 

[James Gasik]

if his name is larry I know him too

His name is Guy, but I'm sure there's a few like him out there. : )

 

[James Gasik]

Things like second wind and short rest healing HD were there from the beginning.

So not a lie, or a false claim, but not what most people who heard it expected, I'm sure.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

So not a lie, or a false claim, but not what most people who heard it expected, I'm sure.

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]

So not a lie, or a false claim, but not what most people who heard it expected, I'm sure.

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]

its funny how people will argue that a missleading truth isn't a lie when they want to argue they didn't mislead...

If your going to accuse someone of lying, please provide an actual quote.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

In addition, we do have battlemaster.

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.

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.

gee almost like when I said 8 years in you still need to kitbash to play one...

But again, plans change, some possible options get dropped, warlord was simply not popular enough or distinct enough to warrant it's own class.

citation needed

They decided to not have class bloat.

and I am sure that if they cut your favorite you would not mind at all

If your going to accuse someone of lying, please provide an actual quote.

why so i can be told it doesn't count, or that it is true form a certain point of view?