Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 9162405" data-attributes="member: 6704184">Show evidence. <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🤷‍♂️" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f937-2642.png" title="Man shrugging    :man_shrugging:" data-shortname=":man_shrugging:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" />The encounter assumptions are mostly fine, the problem is poor guidance, and the fact that many classes have no use for a type of recovery mechanic that other classes fully rely on to function. Like give wizards 20% fewer spell slots but get back more slots with Arcane Recovery, and make its subclasses use short rests to recharge subclass mechanics, and the wizard stops arguing when the Warlock wants to short rest. That isn’t an issue of encounter assumptions or design, it’s just failing to realize how much a group will ignore what a single PC needs to be effective if that PC is basically the only one that needs it. Absolutely. If only the rest of your post didn’t act like everyone who disagrees with you has made every type of argument of anyone who disagrees with you, instead of understanding individuals as individuals. Not so much, though. A lot of arguments only make sense without anything but a small subset of mathematical inputs taken into account. Those arguments get shut down because they just aren’t compelling. Even then they are often engaged with at face value first, until the person making them insists that they prove soemthing they certainly do not prove. Most of us respond to real data with an open mind, or are the ones presenting it. Anecdotes aren’t data, however, and when your experience is directly the opposite of my experience, I’m not going to just nod along while you act like your experience proves anything about the game. It proves that your experience exists, and that is all it proves. Just the same as mine. Well no, but I do often see folks get mad as if (general) you’re being “dismissed” and shut down when people disagree with your conclusions, and point out that you are treating subjective conclusions as if they are obvious and objective Truth, while also acting like it’s a contradiction and a gotcha moment when I say something very different from what [USER=6801845]@Oofta[/USER] or [USER=6780330]@Parmandur[/USER] has been saying, as if we are the same person. Both of them I frequently argue with about the game, in different contexts, and yet I often find that someone tries to hold me accountable for their statements when I say something that isn’t exactly compatible with them, just because we are sort of generally on the same “side” of an argument. That is not at all what you’re trying to characterize folks as, here.</blockquote>

Verification