What is the Stormwind Fallacy?It is something that got blown way out of proportion from a WotC forum user. Myself and some of the other forum goers were having a debate about various aspects of role playing and I mentioned how, IME, older players were more often concerned with role playing first, mechanics second, and younger players the other way around.
The WotC forum poster took umbrage with that, created a nifty new fallacy, and named it after himself.
For the past 9 years now its been used as a paper shield anytime anyone says anything remotely related to preferring role playing over optimization.
Yeah, that's pretty much my problem with it.
I sum it up as "Yes, you can roleplay any heavily optimized character concept well. You cannot heavily optimize any character concept you come up with for roleplay reasons. Therefore, the higher power level is required for a game, the less concepts are viable."
If you have to keep up with the guy who built a twinked out wizard, there are a lot of concepts which might appeal to the roleplay side, that just aren't going to cut the mustard. No matter how well the guy with the wizard roleplays his character. And I'm not just referring to deliberately broken low Str/Con 2H fighters or the other usual strawmen. At some point you have to start sacrificing your concept for power if you want to contribute. If everyone's down around the baseline, there's a lot more open to you.
The heavy optimizer crowd doesn't usually see that, because they mostly start with the mechanical concept first, so they'll always have the good build to work with and can wrap roleplay fluff around it as needed.
That's a system problem not a player problem.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I thought it was a drinking game. Every time I see it (and you'll see it a lot in many threads), I feel sorry for anyone drinking if they see Stormwind, fallacy, strawman, and a few other terms. I honestly think that arguments would be shorter and threads quieter if you couldn't use those terms. They make up about half of some poster's vocabulary and arguments. :)
Edit: Yes I've said it before. Sorry, a thread entirely about fallacies brought it back to mind. I'm wondering if I am seeing things when sentences read Blah blah fallacy blah fallacy blah. ;)
I think arguments would be shorter and threads quieter if people couldn't construct strawmen or commit the stormwind fallacy.
I think arguments would be shorter and threads quieter if people couldn't construct strawmen or commit the stormwind fallacy.I thought it was a drinking game. Every time I see it (and you'll see it a lot in many threads), I feel sorry for anyone drinking if they see Stormwind, fallacy, strawman, and a few other terms. I honestly think that arguments would be shorter and threads quieter if you couldn't use those terms. They make up about half of some poster's vocabulary and arguments. :)
Edit: Yes I've said it before. Sorry, a thread entirely about fallacies brought it back to mind. I'm wondering if I am seeing things when sentences read Blah blah fallacy blah fallacy blah. ;)
That is also possible. Of course, we could all just write up our thoughts on our profiles and that could save time.
But really, a great deal of the arguments are a rehash each week by the same people saying the same thing to each other until they cannot stand each other, the thread gets locked, and then we repeat.
For instance, if you say that you have used house rules to fix what some find problematic, you'll be told that you have done it wrong and that it doesn't fix the problem and how can you be so stupid as to think that it fixes the problem because it doesn't fix it for anyone else and why can't the devs fix it? Follow that with nuh uh, uh huh for a page or two, Chris comes by and slaps people around and tells everyone to cool it, a few quiet posts are made, things repeat for a few pages, thread lock. Next week, we do it again!
...but then after the GMPC debacle, I think that might be most of the boards. I'm getting a little jaded; it's probably why I'm participating so much less around here lately.If I'm being honest, it is the reason I don't bother actually making arguments with anyone around here anymore. Reasoned arguments don't actually accomplish anymore than sarcastic quips do, so why waste energy reading and writing posts?
The two of you have definitely changed my opinions on things before. And remember, when it comes to forums in general, there's typically ten times more lurkers reading the threads and never posting than those who actually post.
When you make a reasoned argument for something, it's for those individuals that you should make the argument for. You may not change the opinion of the person with whom you're arguing, but you may change someone's. And heck, even if you don't change anyone's opinion, at least someone may learn something. :)
For instance, if you say that you have used house rules to fix what some find problematic, you'll be told that you have done it wrong and that it doesn't fix the problem and how can you be so stupid as to think that it fixes the problem because it doesn't fix it for anyone else and why can't the devs fix it?
Wrong. And this is why the arguments repeat. Because some people don't get what is being argued against it.
It's not that houserules don't fix the problem.
It's that claiming that houserules fix the problem, therefore there is no problem, is blatantly false.
Obviously there IS a problem. Or you wouldn't need a houserule for it.
But yeah, I am of the opinion that I shouldn't be required to do the devs' job for them. So sue me.
For instance, if you say that you have used house rules to fix what some find problematic, you'll be told that you have done it wrong and that it doesn't fix the problem and how can you be so stupid as to think that it fixes the problem because it doesn't fix it for anyone else and why can't the devs fix it?
Wrong. And this is why the arguments repeat. Because some people don't get what is being argued against it.
It's not that houserules don't fix the problem.
It's that claiming that houserules fix the problem, therefore there is no problem, is blatantly false.
Obviously there IS a problem. Or you wouldn't need a houserule for it.
But yeah, I am of the opinion that I shouldn't be required to do the devs' job for them. So sue me.
Heh. And that's where I disagree. Because it fixes the problem -- for whomever is using that fix. It doesn't fix the problem for everyone else, true; is that what it was supposed to do tho?
I'm more inclined to light a candle instead of cursing the darkness. Would it be nice if the devs drop new products and fix the old? Sure. It'd be nice if I won the lottery too, but neither are very likely.
The arguments repeat because one side is happy with the game or willing to repair it for their own game, and another side would prefer that the book they bought was pretty fixed (for a given value of that) when they buy it.
There are a few other sides, like those that want to get a rise out of people and those that wandered in and are confused, but generally people aren't agreeing because they fundamentally don't agree. They want separate things.
Obviously there IS a problem. Or you wouldn't need a houserule for it.
well, not necessarily. Some people houserule as they dont understand the rules. Some as they want to add in different flavor. Some as they want more realism. etc.
well, not necessarily. Some people houserule as they dont understand the rules. Some as they want to add in different flavor. Some as they want more realism. etc.
Obviously there IS a problem. Or you wouldn't need a houserule for it.
Right, but that's different things.
If someone says "There is no problem with X because I houseruled it", then yeah...there was a problem to begin with (or at least, a problem for that person in particular).
I have an irrational hatred of MLP in any form. It admit it's irrational. Entirely so. I have no wish to change it. It makes my blood boil in a distinctly uncomfortable and bad way. It makes me froth around the mouth. It makes me go on lengthy tirades ... and with that, I mean I could rant about my utter loathing of the concept for hours, while going increasingly bugeyed and my voice goes hoa ...
I'm not going there. That's like serving the MLP-brigade my head on a silver platter.
I gnash my teeth when confronted by it, to the point of getting a headache. It gives me irritable bowel syndrome if I have to stomach it. It gives me nightmares overrun by legions of squeaky-voiced, badly animated ponies! I wake up drenched in cold sweat, fighting back the armies of magical friendship while I try to disentangle myself from the smothering duvet of fluffy ponydom.
It's traumatized me ... to the point of wanting to claw my eyeballs out and puncturing my eardrums so I never have to listen to those awful squeaky voices again ever!
And my players are teasing me mercilessly with it, the low-down rotten gits.
I hate them. Just a little bit.
Not the ponies. I hate them a lot.
I'm sorry you've had such a bad experience.
Wait, bad animation?! You must have been thinking generation 3 *shudder* even my brony self shudders at that stuff.
...but then after the GMPC debacle, I think that might be most of the boards. I'm getting a little jaded; it's probably why I'm participating so much less around here lately.If I'm being honest, it is the reason I don't bother actually making arguments with anyone around here anymore. Reasoned arguments don't actually accomplish anymore than sarcastic quips do, so why waste energy reading and writing posts?The two of you have definitely changed my opinions on things before. And remember, when it comes to forums in general, there's typically ten times more lurkers reading the threads and never posting than those who actually post.
When you make a reasoned argument for something, it's for those individuals that you should make the argument for. You may not change the opinion of the person with whom you're arguing, but you may change someone's. And heck, even if you don't change anyone's opinion, at least someone may learn something. :)
I know that's true, but it doesn't actually shut up the stupid person I want to shut up with their stupidity already, and while I'm glad to enlighten those willing to receive it, it really annoys the crap out of me when someone looks at a well formed argument and responds with a rephrasing of their original statement that I just pointed out the flaws of and dissected every single argument of without presenting any actual new information.
Although it's been a while since I've done that, what with the jaded cynicism and the like that I mentioned earlier.
Oh well, pearls and swine, and all that.
The overwhelming majority of house rules I've seen posted in that subforum don't actually solve any problems. Many just overcomplicate things under the guise of adding realism or "fixing" a problem. I'd say a good portion of houseruling comes from folks who just want to say they came up with something.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Eh, the house rules bit was one of a thousand examples of the ongoing arguments. In the end, there is a lot of yelling the same things back and forth and some popcorn eating. It makes for good reading while I eat breakfast, but it's a lot of you aren't listening to me and fallacy this and that. It's easy to say someone is committing a fallacy and harder to correct the problem or find a solution -- outside of waiting on the devs that is.
I'm more inclined to light a candle instead of cursing the darkness.
OK, you go to the store and buy some plain white candles for when the power goes out.
When you need them you open the box and of the ten candles you have the following:
One candle crumpled completely into wax dust.
One candle doesn't have a wick in it.
One candle is red.
One candle is half as long as the others.
Six candles seem OK.
You go onto the forum of the candle company and leave a concise complaint detailing the condition of candles you bought.
Candle Company Fanyboys pop into the thread:
I like red candles!
I used the short candle in my box and it worked just fine!
I just took the wick from the crumpled candle and stuffed it in the one that didn't have a wick. I dont see what your problem is.
You just have to take the bits of wax left in the box and dump them into your candle forge at home! Then its totally fine.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't mind optimizers all that much, what I mind is when optimizers think you have to optimize to be effective. I particularly hate when they get angry at me because I don't want to be optimized like them.
I'm more inclined to light a candle instead of cursing the darkness.OK, you go to the store and buy some plain white candles for when the power goes out.
When you need them you open the box and of the ten candles you have the following:
One candle crumpled completely into wax dust.
One candle doesn't have a wick in it.
One candle is red.
One candle is half as long as the others.
Six candles seem OK.
You go onto the forum of the candle company and leave a concise complaint detailing the condition of candles you bought.
Candle Company Fanyboys pop into the thread:
I like red candles!
I used the short candle in my box and it worked just fine!
I just took the wick from the crumpled candle and stuffed it in the one that didn't have a wick. I dont see what your problem is.
You just have to take the bits of wax left in the box and dump them into your candle forge at home! Then its totally fine.
As opposed to the I Don't Even Use Candles Brigade? Come on now.
In any case, I check my candles before the power goes out. If you aren't always prepared, you're never prepared (TM Equip2Endure).
I work on fixing any problems or issues I run across that I don't care for in the game when I run across them, which may or may not be the same issues other people have. If the game company (whichever game it happens to be) issue a fix, great! Sometimes (FASA/Catalyst I am looking at you) I don't care for their solution and use my own.
Other people don't want to do that, and that's their prerogative. It doesn't make the solution any more valid for me or if another person uses it.
It isn't a matter of believing the company can't do any wrong. It's more of not waiting for them to catch up to where I am. That may be from playing in the old days when it took the pony express weeks to send a snail letter to the Dragon magazine that might or might not get answered. Players want an answer nowish.
I think people have odd perspectives and that leaves them with problems in places that others don't have problems.
Also, I think some people falsely believe that everything should work equally well in all cases.
One example I've seen,
One person said that toughness isn't a worthwile feat. Another said it was a situational feat that is good for a wizard on a lvl 1 single shot game.
Two different views on the same thing, one sees a problem, the other doesn't. I'm pretty sure that one person trying to fix it would cause a problem for the other.
So I say, however much I get shunned for it, to leave the devs and homebrewers alone and homebrew for your own table to fit your own tastes and perspectives.
Hey there, you seem to be in a bit of distress. You should do something about that.
I honestly don't mind MLP. I don't love it, but I also don't mind it. I do mind Pinkie Pie. A lot. She's super annoying, and I don't see how anyone can stand her.
I'm not falling for that one again. You guys have made me click random links to pony-related things for the last time. THE LAST TIME, I SAY!
*Foams and fumes*
You're evil. Downright evil!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Confession: I don't understand what's happening in the FaWTL threads.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It says on the box that all the candles aren't white and they're not all the same length. The idea is for you to use the candles that suit you, discard the rest and perhaps bring some other candles you've got from elsewhere.
The problem is not with the candle company (nor with the disgruntled consumer). The problem is one of mismatched expectations.
Hey there, you seem to be in a bit of distress. You should do something about that.
I honestly don't mind MLP. I don't love it, but I also don't mind it. I do mind Pinkie Pie. A lot. She's super annoying, and I don't see how anyone can stand her.
I'm not falling for that one again. You guys have made me click random links to pony-related things for the last time. THE LAST TIME, I SAY!
*Foams and fumes*
You're evil. Downright evil!
Hey, not all of us. I agree that it was rather unkind. Not all of us do stupid stuff like that.
It says on the box that all the candles aren't white and they're not all the same length. The idea is for you to use the candles that suit you, discard the rest and perhaps bring some other candles you've got from elsewhere.The problem is not with the candle company (nor with the disgruntled consumer). The problem is one of mismatched expectations.
In which case the fault lies squarely on the shoulders of the party in receipt of funds.
|
Often at best they see the other person's point, abandon the thread and then look for another thread to debate in.Well, I try to give people feedback, but I have this deathly allergy to admitting I'm wrong, so it is difficult.
I was wrong once, in my early teens. I didn't like it, so I resolved never to be wrong again.
In which case the fault lies squarely on the shoulders of the party in receipt of funds.It says on the box that all the candles aren't white and they're not all the same length. The idea is for you to use the candles that suit you, discard the rest and perhaps bring some other candles you've got from elsewhere.The problem is not with the candle company (nor with the disgruntled consumer). The problem is one of mismatched expectations.
Not if it's clearly advertised as "assorted candles" and the customer complains that they're not all identical.
I agree that the onus is on the manufacturer to make clear what the product is. I just don't think it's their fault if someone ignores the packaging.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey, not all of us. I agree that it was rather unkind. Not all of us do stupid stuff like that.Hey there, you seem to be in a bit of distress. You should do something about that.
I honestly don't mind MLP. I don't love it, but I also don't mind it. I do mind Pinkie Pie. A lot. She's super annoying, and I don't see how anyone can stand her.
I'm not falling for that one again. You guys have made me click random links to pony-related things for the last time. THE LAST TIME, I SAY!
*Foams and fumes*
You're evil. Downright evil!
Well, for the record, Thymus Vulgaris is one of my RL players. She's one of those evil creatures tormenting me on a regular basis with pony-related nonsense. She's not the worst of them, but she's certainly involved.
It's a pink pony conspiracy. It's a flagrant and deliberate attempt at driving me stark, raving mad (except I'm already there so it's doomed to fail). It's designed to make my life miserable with squeaky voices and horrible animation.
ARGHH ... It's a ponyspiracy, and I'm suffering under it!
...but then after the GMPC debacle, I think that might be most of the boards. I'm getting a little jaded; it's probably why I'm participating so much less around here lately.If I'm being honest, it is the reason I don't bother actually making arguments with anyone around here anymore. Reasoned arguments don't actually accomplish anymore than sarcastic quips do, so why waste energy reading and writing posts?The two of you have definitely changed my opinions on things before. And remember, when it comes to forums in general, there's typically ten times more lurkers reading the threads and never posting than those who actually post.
When you make a reasoned argument for something, it's for those individuals that you should make the argument for. You may not change the opinion of the person with whom you're arguing, but you may change someone's. And heck, even if you don't change anyone's opinion, at least someone may learn something. :)
I know that's true, but it doesn't actually shut up the stupid person I want to shut up with their stupidity already, and while I'm glad to enlighten those willing to receive it, it really annoys the crap out of me when someone looks at a well formed argument and responds with a rephrasing of their original statement that I just pointed out the flaws of and dissected every single argument of without presenting any actual new information.
Although it's been a while since I've done that, what with the jaded cynicism and the like that I mentioned earlier.
Oh well, pearls and swine, and all that.
You're totally and Objectively wrong.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey look! Yet another iteration of the "house rules fix problems"/"no they don't, you're wrong" argument. I'll admit, this is the first time I've seen innocent candles dragged into it though.
I admit it, I still like to drop advice bombs here or there, mostly in the Adventure Path section, which between that and off topic and threads with a light hearted or amusing title (like this one, or any started by Dungeonmastercal:-D) is as far as I like to venture around here :-)
I will admit I don't get why the advice and other sections like house rules gets so angry, opinionated, and even vindictive, I have no problem admitting when I'm wrong:-)
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
but I have seen broken classes on the weak end, like the rogue. Every single one of my players who has played one ended up hating how useless their character was for the majority of the game (we play APs). In the Iron Gods game I'm running right now, our rogue player ditched his character at 5th level so he could play something that actually contributed to the party. He had such high hopes for his character, and he was very disappointed with how it worked out. Nearly useless, always going unconscious, barely do enough damage, couldn't find traps, and more.Couldnt find traps? Then he built his character wrong. Sure, early rogues had issues with DPR and staying up, but they could find traps better than any, even after they allowed Trapfinding to other builds. Unless you had Perception as a Class skill, enuf skP to max it, Trapfinding and the ability to get the talent "Trap Spotter " then you couldnt equal a rogue for trapfinding. Mind you, yes, many AP's simply do not feature the kind of devious Gygaxian traps from earlier editions. In many you could just take the damage and heal, with hardly a slow down. (Try that in ToH!). This is the fault of the AP, not of the class.
And I also blame the devs there in not telling us upfront on a AP that a specialized trapfinder wasnt required. This was expected int he past, so to see it almost never really important was a paradigm shift.
So yeah, it's true- a bog standard Rogue from the Core RB was inferior in everything BUT finding traps. Still, if he couldnt do that- that's his fault, not the class.
Why doesn't it surprise me that you are the one who leaps to the defence of the thief...er, I mean...rogue? : )
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I've been playing martials since...'78 ish? I always felt a bit guilty for hogging the glory because I was so effective compared to the others. I never ran out of 'sword'. : )
It wasn't until I first arrived on this forum that I discovered that I'd been wrong the whole time and that I'd been completely useless all along.
The Stormwind Fallacy is something I encountered without ever knowing it had a name. I spend a lot of time making my characters, and my thoughts go back and forth between crunch and fluff, with the crunch I choose informing the fluff, and then that fluff informing my choice of crunch, backwards and forwards for a couple of weeks until I'm happy. I end up with characters that are optimised AND with plenty of story...at least compared to the guy who's character is called 'Dwarf number seven' (true story!) and the other guy who spent all his time 'roleplaying' a personality (so well that I can't remember much except how annoying it was) but who had absolutely no idea what his own character could do mechanics-wise, even after playing the same one for three years!
Anyway, at one point I was playing in one group where the DM told a story and hated the fact that there were any mechanics at all, and used DM fiat to make our abilities just not work if it went against what he thought should happen, and I was playing in another group that said, 'Sod all this talking with NPCs, when can we get to the good stuff? Y'know, fights!
I was the same kind of player (both optimised and story-focused) in both games, but one group thought I wasn't roleplaying properly if I had a character that worked so effectively in mechanical terms, while the other group thought my role-playing efforts were completely pointless and just wasted good fighting time!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
lol, I tend to create concepts then try to fit the system to my concept as close as possible (hence my utter hatred of classes). But I tend to think of it as having a spectrum to character creation.
Spectrum of free concept vs lego build. The idea here is those on the free concept side are like me, crafting a concept then trying to fit it into the system, though using the limits of the setting, so no wizards unless magic exists. Then the other side are those who treat the system options as lego blocks, whether it be pure mechanical or also considering the fluff attached to those choices.
The 3.x DMG encouraged GMs to adapt classes to Free concept players (though it didn't really give a name to it), even gave an example about a paladin player that wanted to trade the mount for something else, and how to allow that. Lego builders tend to not like that and when they GM they tend to not work with free concept players instead enforcing players using only options when the book says to make a choice. I think PF's archtypes was a good compromise on this front, though sad that it should of been needed i the first place.
The various playstyles spectrums also affect this of course.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I like roleplaying, but if there's no combat at all, I feel like a nine year old running around playing pretend. I can join an improv troop if all I wanted to do was pretend.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bro! I could totally go for some Improv!.... dude!... and some Fajitas!!... f*+&ing A man!!
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I thinks its just semantics, word use and all that stuff. For me, the game has no "problems" it just doesn't play the way I want it to play, so I use house rules to shape the game my way, not fix problems.
See, I find something not working the way I want it to to be a 'problem' by the common definition.
I admit it, I still like to drop advice bombs here or there, mostly in the Adventure Path section, which between that and off topic and threads with a light hearted or amusing title (like this one, or any started by Dungeonmastercal:-D) is as far as I like to venture around here :-)
Wow! Thanks, man!
Bro! I could totally go for some Improv!.... dude!... and some Fajitas!!... f#%%ing A man!!
Damn. Now I want fajitas. Right now. For breakfast.
|
I was wrong once, in my early teens. I didn't like it, so I resolved never to be wrong again.Often at best they see the other person's point, abandon the thread and then look for another thread to debate in.Well, I try to give people feedback, but I have this deathly allergy to admitting I'm wrong, so it is difficult.
Crazy as it sounds, I may know somebody like that. He's absloute top of the class in university with an average of like 99.5 in all test. He's the kind of person who'll file an appeal for a 97 if he thought he deserves those three points.
There's an urban legend around him that we students tell. It is said that he once made a small calculation error in math class in elementary school and got an 85. That day he resolved never to make mistakes like that again.
And he never did.
I shun the guy in my group who shows up AFTER the pizza has been delivered and paid for and then eats some of it.
I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken.I was wrong once, in my early teens. I didn't like it, so I resolved never to be wrong again.Often at best they see the other person's point, abandon the thread and then look for another thread to debate in.Well, I try to give people feedback, but I have this deathly allergy to admitting I'm wrong, so it is difficult.
Ditto.
Taco Bell is a haven for cheap food at odd hours of the night.
There is no Taco Bell in Finland.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What a cold and sad thing.
I confess that I do not understand. If things are not made to specifically satisfy me, then how do you explain Taco Bell...?
I explain it as garbage not fit for dogs purchased by people too cheap to get Moe's, Tijuana Flats, or Qdoba.
There is no Taco Bell in Finland.
You're not missing out. Imagine if McDonald's sold Mexican food. It's like Chipoltle only cheaper. The cheese burns instead of melting. The "beef" has been so filled with artificial crap they were sued for mislabeling. Every person I know who ever worked in one across multiple cities has said they practice the 5-second rule.
It's also delicious and cheap as hell, so people with no self respect will buy and eat it and probably get pissed at me for pointing out all of these things, because f*** what it does to your insides if it tastes good, right?