Infiniti2000 said:
I don't mean to get on your case about this, GuardianLurker, but I really disagree with you. I for one don't care which alignment wins overall nor do I plan to make little marks in my books to modify individual creature's challenge ratings by one or two.
Never said you had to. On a tactical level I think Gansk has done a very good job of supporting both our viewpoints, which is one reason why I reacted so strongly to the strategic mismatch.
The only thing that interests me here are how the battles themselves are carried out. I'm doing my best to make them interesting and fun to read, and ugulu's combats are a blast as well. I've tried to convince friends of mine to read these threads and their reaction probably explains the low interest we are having here (we barely have enough to cover the alignments, with Gansk still tackling the whole N). They don't want to read the combats like they were chess matches, but interesting battles and lots of description.
Eh. I find I quickly run out of ways to accurately convey the correct tactical information, though I've certainly tried (and continue to do so). In general, and this is true for me in tabletop play as well, I find I can only get the level of detail you're describing after the round is over. Personally, I've always found the RP opportunities in combat to be rather limited. Which is one of the reasons why I pushed so hard for the Clubhouse - I was hoping there'd be a lot more IC play in there, especially IC play that wasn't directly related to the running of the game.
I think having the ulterior motive of an analytical evaluation of the monsters and determining valid metrics for comparisons of the challenge ratings is fine. The primary purpose, however, as with D&D, should be to have fun and make it enjoyable for readers.
As is rather obvious, I invert those, but I don't have a problem with your stance - they're not mutually incompatible. It sounds like you're shooting for something closer to the story-hour model; I know lots of people enjoy them, but I've never really understood the draw myself. As for readership draw, I came here from Monte's boards, even though I've been on ENWorld for a long time. Another comparison would be fight clubs, and I have no idea how this compares to those.
So, when you say that the entirety of the low-level combats are meaningless, I not only disagree (okay, some of them are, but not all), but I also feel offended that you think our efforts are wasted.
I didn't particularly enjoy that feeling either; it's one of the reasons I jumped so high and came down so hard. As for being wasted effort, it all depends on how you approach the issue - from a pure roleplaying aspect, it's absolutely immaterial what the trophy is or how its awarded. It's the journey, not the destination, that matters. Unhappily for me, I'm unable to approach this situation from a pure RP perspective. That doesn't mean I don't appreciate that you might be able to.
So, please, I urge you to reconsider your attitude on the overall exercise and I hope that the lurkers read this and remain interested and hopefully encourage themselves and others to participate.
Hey, I haven't stopped, or given up, yet. I'm still enjoying the process. Despite being at -6... bleh.
As for the lurkers - I hope more of them will de-lurk in the clubhouse and make it a happening place, it's intended to support and encourage a complete side ecology. After all, how many places will give you the opportunity to hear Tiamat singing 5-part drunken filk, or watch Bahamut place side bets with the arch-modron Primus? Those haven't happened yet, but I tried to create a place where they could - a place similar to the Restaurant at the End of the Universe, Callahan's Crosstime Saloon, and the Draco Tavern, all rolled up into one, D&D style. A place where people can post and participate in the Battle of All Alignments without having to make any comittment at all.
So c'mon on in folks. Despite all my yappin', it's still fun, and it'll be more fun the more of us there are.
