JamesonCourage
Adventurer
Just because it's been around for a long time, it doesn't mean it'll be wanted in the game. This is true of pretty much any approach to gaming.
That is, yes, it's a way to participate (and roleplay) in an RPG. To people that like as much immersion as possible, this method often hurts their experience. To people less bound to that style (which is just a Fun issue), this method can help move their game along in interesting ways.
This leads me back to... okay? Yes, that is another style of how to play the game. I'm missing why "there are other ways to play the game" needs to be established, since I imagine that everyone who is willing to reasonably discuss things already knows this (and those that aren't willing to reasonably discuss things have no hope of being convinced that there are other styles).
I get the "it" just fine, but I'm still missing the "why" of why "it" needs to be expressed. That switching between stances works for some people, and doesn't for others. Excessive (subjective as that is) metagame mechanics don't work for some people, but do for others (who don't consider it excessive). And on and on we could go (with the "dissociated" debate just being a facet of this). There are different ways to play the game; is that the point? Who does this need to be made to?
Perhaps this is why there's such a huge disagreement over hit points represent, or what they should represent, or how they should be altered (my HP/THP divide, or others using W/VP, etc.). It's not like everyone is "hit points are fine" or agree with your definition of hit points; we've all seen the hit point threads.
Oh, is your objection that this style of play is more strict than other styles?
Initiative is how fast I react in relation to others; it's an abstraction, and my character can certainly observe some people reacting faster than others. I'd say that a lot of the "dissociation" complaints are often confused for abstraction, from my perspective. They're different things (even if I don't prefer to use the term "dissociated").
I tend to agree with this assessment (though you'd have a ton of people quibble with your assessment of what a critical hit represents, just like your assessment of hit points).
I agree with bill91. If he's interested in that style of immersion, then he shouldn't be playing a character whose capabilities line up with what he wants. This problem (for those who see it as such) is entirely avoidable. If it's not a problem (not having those goals align), then let him attempt to jump on the chandelier, no questions asked.
I can't make any judgments on about the average DM playing with the average player playing the average character. I can say that what you're describing as "almost never 'in character'" is completely a social contract issue, and it doesn't permeate my game night. So, this "almost never" might be true for you, but it's not for me (and I doubt either of us can speak for groups at large).
... for some characters, as was pointed out a bit back.
... for some players. Not for most of mine, unless it's in-character for them to act that way.
I disagree with this characterization of what the "box" is, and that acting outside of it is universally encouraged. You're describing more social contract agreements. Acting outside the "box" might mean acting outside of realistic expectations (but not outside character expectations, or genre expectations, etc.). I get that your group (and many others, undoubtedly) work differently, but I'm not sure where the generalizations are coming from.
I'd like to point out that stunts can be explicitly defined within the rules.
Depends on the character/RPG. My RPG is able to handle immense abuse when it comes to making a character work. So (unfortunately), stair-surfing is definitely doable for my RPG. On the other hand, my players talk about different things that "stunts" that they pulled off, though some "stunt" stuff is still talked about. There's a lot of different things to talk about, from politically maneuvering (by the seat of their pants) to take over three cities as warlords, or crashing one sailing ship into another, to combo-attacking Vecna's avatar with their "signature" moves (Sorcerer using Dimension Door to move himself and the Cleric to the avatar, Cleric of Pelor using Heal on the Lich, and the Fighter charging the avatar with a sword [a Sunblade] to finish it off).We want people to try crazy stuff because that's what gaming stories are made of. No one remembers that hit for 6 points of damage. They do remember when you surfed down the stairs on a shield and plonked two orcs while doing so.(granted, that particular example was pretty much in character for Leggylass, who had be established as a pretty acrobatic combatant previously. But, without some sort of AEDU framework? Good luck playing that character)
There's a lot of things that get talked about in other ways, too, though they were less exciting and more... involved? Blake finding his wife again; Brock (the Cleric of Pelor) dealing with his son (a Cleric of Nerull) and finally converting him; Nicholas dealing with his brother on their many interactions (and the kinda tragic ending to it); Liteer finishing his training from his mentor, and looking back on what he'd accomplished; Gargek getting killed, and his (NPC) apprentice taking it very hard, but making him much more devoted to his studies; etc.
Your group likes stunts, and does them as much as possible. I imagine Balesir might play similarly. It's just not universal, though. As always, play what you like
