Recent content by Fenris-77

Nope, sorry. Other games, like Monster of the Week (just as one example) handle party splitting just fine. Nothing changes and the system chugs on. It's not a GM skill issue. I can move the spotlight around just fine thanks, it's neither a complicated nor rare skill. The problem in this case...

And in this case you are factually incorrect. Most OSR games are very upfront about the function of encounter rolls. That function is only peripherally diegetic (at best). I don't give a good goddamn how many times you repeat the same biased and incorrect things btw, but if your throat is...

Oh no, no you don't. You don't get to say it's diegetic enough here but not in the case of metacurrency where the only difference is that your opinion of the underlying mechanic is different. Sorry man, you need to pick a stance and stick with it. Encounter rolls are, not to put too fine a point...

That isn't even remotely what those mechanics are actually doing. You know it and I know it. We are gentlemen and lies do not become us. So, Princess Bride quotes aside, this is still some shaky analysis. The design of encounter rolls has nothing to do with diegetic anything. It has to do with...

You also said you have no experience with encounter rolls or OSR games, which is what I was specifically talking about. That would suggest that you don't have anything to say about those mechanics. And those points are in complete contradiction, that's we are having this little contretemps...

My man, you are busy criticizing rules and mechanics you have no experience with. You don't get to play the badly designed card here. I'll also point out that your rules as setting truth position is precisely the opposite of your newly stated intolerance for badly design rules position. Rather...

This all begs the question as to why you're making declarative statements about systems and playstyles you have no experience with.

Yeah, I don't even think we're speaking the same language. You seem to think that the author's intent, or even oversights and mistakes are somehow more important that common sense in-setting tactics. I don't care a pig's fart for the author's intent, not am I even peripherally willing to put up...

Huh. I love the Middenheim book. To each his own I guess. Maybe you want to expand a little on what the actual features are in those examples that you like and don't?

So explain to me how encounter rolls are a setting truth (whatever that is). You need to step back from shizz like my desired setting truths too, that is some wonky and awkwardly pointed verbiage there my doode. My reading of your post is that you have some kind of fundamental misunderstanding...

You go to fancy dress balls? You rake, you.

@Pedantic - I wasn't trying to be dismissive. I just have trouble reconciling your very in-setting stance on the one hand with your statement that what the rules say is true when what the rules say is plainly counter to anything like in-setting logic in this case.

What an odd thing to say. Moving on I guess.

Staying in a group and not scouting or taking advantage of the opportunities afforded by splitting the group for things like ambush is also actively dangerous. It's nonsense to claim that staying together is simply a better in-setting option. That's plainly not the case. What's pushing back...

That is precisely the problem, yes. Teh best strategic choice is one that is penalized, quite severely in some cases, which is IMO a suboptimal outcome at the table.