Recent content by Umbran

This seems prescriptive, rather than empirical. Play, broadly, is an activity done for enjoyment. Sitting down at the table with the dice and sheets is, of course, play. But so is noodling over character builds you may never use. So is painting minis for use in game. So is discussing game...

So, I think that there's one point here that maybe doesn't fall over, but shows a crack or two... Not all "play" happens at the table, and not all play is necessarily with the other players.

Um... "most people" don't determine if you get a job. Corporate America is filled with executives who care more about the bottom line than quality. Our collected experience of "enbleepification" comes from that basic fact.

Mod note: Folks, this site has a no-real-world-politics rule. Please do not violate it. Thank you.

That's a "Have you stopped beating your wife?" phrasing that I'll skip right past. It was a more basic point of logic. I referred to a generalization - repeating one specific case does not address the generalization. If I had said that ALL tactical combat games use highly granular...

Okay, folks, per Morrus upthread, time to let it rest, and perhaps consider the rest of the topic. Thanks.

So, I used to say, "I don't care," and what I meant was that I want my game to be open and appealing to people of any race, color, creed, gender, or sexual orientation. None of those things are bars to being at my table - what matters is that you're a decent person, and that your playstyle...

Yeah. I think there's a bit of an old habit of thought that "combat" in a game means "tactical", but we are seeing games that buck that habit. We can look at something like Outgunned Adventure - by the name, you expect action adventure, with, well, guns. But the Outgunned engine is more...

"As a person"? Your sexual orientation and gender expression are part of who you are, as a person. Folks who are in the mainstream majority are used to others looking at their name or face, or hearing their voice, and being able to assume stuff, and be mostly right. Folks assuming incorrectly...

My premise was that Daggerheart isn't really designed for heavily tactical combat. Detailed, granular movement was expressly presented as an example of a design element that (I feel) is common in, and frequently is used to support tactical combat design. I was not claiming it was an absolute...

I think that it hasn't really been replaced. It no longer being quite so dominant is not the same as replacement. Because third party and homebrew content is of mixed quality. Because RPG play is high on interpersonal interaction, but online recruiting doesn't give you a great idea of what...

In tech, of all places, they should understand that clarity matters.

I AM NOT PICKING A FIGHT WITH 13TH AGE! This thread is about Daggerheart. I may have responded to a post that mentioned 13th Age, but my comparison was with D&D! My point is not about 13th Age! I didn't claim any comparison to 13th Age. I don't care about 13th Age.

Explicitly listed as a "Optional Rule", meaning those definitions are not central or required for play. And, the game's introduction has the following (bolding mine): "As a narrative-focused game, Daggerheart is not a place where technical, out-of-context interpretations of the rules are...

It is almost like the actual words I chose matter: I said TACTICAL combat focus. In a game like D&D 3E or later, combat is designed so you can show off how well you play the combat rules game - making specific decisions, round by round, to test your ability to play a tactical wargame...