There is a reason add-ons are commonly required (by the leader) for pvp, raiding, and M+. I’m sure it has more to do with insurance and emotions, but that doesn’t make it any less true.
no, it’s good. level the playing field. close the barrier of entry.
As a CE raid leader, I don’t give a rat’s patoot what addons people are using, as long as they get the job done.
1 Like
tbh i just dont trust blizzard to make functioning addon’s that work half as good as the player made ones
4 Likes
those two things aren’t even similar tho. this is like saying you hate waffles when there was no waffles to be discussed.
1 Like
That directly contradicts the fallacy of ad hominem. The fact is wrong because of who presented it, not because of the evidence itself. The building is NOT on fire because the janitor who says so is not as qualified as the fire marshals.
From my understanding ethos is only used as a boost to an argument not a criticism of it
Not necessarily. Ethos is one of the three modes of persuasion in classical rhetoric: Logos, pathos, ethos. A weakness in any category can render an argument unpersuasive. Ethos is essentially the credibility the speaker has with the audience. We’re only on this tangent because Tiffany brought up Aristotle’s theory of rhetoric to defend chatGPT, which is pretty funny if you have actually read Aristotle.
If the speaker lacks credibility, their argument may be suspect. For example, in a discussion of mythic raiding and addons, the credibility of a player who fanatically opposes addon use on a fight like ovinax but has themselves only completed LFR lacks credibility as they do not have any experience of what it actually takes to complete a fight like mythic ovinax. Their argument can be dismissed as uninformed and therefore unpersuasive solely on the basis that they are not a credible authority on the subject of mythic raiding. This is just an example. Or a player who has never done m+ opposing addon use in TGP level keys. They literally do not know what they are talking about, which is enough to undermine their argument.
1 Like
Weird. I use em dashes all the time and have never even glanced at Chatgpt. People are going to think I’m using AI to write my comments and posts now? Oy.
kennie when are you gonna play furry battlefield with me
1 Like
You have my attention. 
3 Likes
wild assault
1 Like
Oh, right, battlefield is a shooter. Maybe after the shuffle hyperfixation fades again. 
2 Likes
you goober
1 Like
Aaaaaaaaaaaa I forget about other games alright
2 Likes
3 Likes
If they committed to Classic+ (Not Season of Discovery aka Retail-) & tacked on modern classes without bringing over modern class design (DKs, DHs, etc.) I happily would. At core, Classic is simply a better game. But you can only meander around Classic for so long before you want new content in the style of Classic.
Every fire marshal worth a damn would know that a fire is most likely to start in a kitchen or electrical area and a janitor would not be ignored. Positional arrogance would not rule the day over common sense lest they all secretly want to burn. 
To make it simple, let’s ignore other expansions, and apparently you have not done any of the last 4 bosses in mythic nerubar palace. It is not about player skill, it is the design. You do need outside resources.
Well, anyway you can always do lfr in your case.
1 Like
You are falling for the trap, undermining the speaker of an argument doesn’t invalidate the argument, it just invalidates the speaker