Search results

Considering I actually want to talk about the subject at hand, I'm not really the one thats needs to stop replying here. But thats okay, because we can make this easy as you want to insist on the last word.

If you're going to cherry pick and not acknowledge everything I've said then I can't fathom why you keep responding. You clearly don't want to talk about this and now its become necessary to point out you're not really engaging what I'm saying. You don't have to reply.

It is. Lets try this: What do you believe that phrase means? To me, something being fundamental to a game means its an intrinsic part of the gameplay loop you engage in by playing the game. As noted, 5e is fullly designed around resource management. The adventuring day is rooted in it, as...

For one, your opinion is a massive straw man, as nobody was saying that (unless I missed it, but I'd be surprised if I did). And no, resource management is fundamental. Its how the classes are designed and its how everything is classified. 5e at the end of day is and always has been 4e with...

That doesn't have anything to do with resource management. And not caring about it is the same as what I said, fyi. So you do genuinely think resource management isn't fundamental to 5e, and yet you don't want to actually address what I and Micah said? Thats not a particularly sound...

That is what you said, but you're also missing the point of why I asked that. The only way a table can not care about it is by eliminating any restrictions on the use of anything. And the reason I say that is precisely because you are also saying this: Which implies that you don't believe...

I assume that your table just allows all abilities and consumables to be used infinitely as many times in a row as they like, then?

From a game design perspective, the thing that being too focused on achieving balance can do is make the idea of imbalances seem like a detriment rather than a new tool, which leads to the kind of balance thats just boring and samey. For example, one of the classic imbalances thats interesting...

And you'd be incorrect, because in context I'm making the point that there isn't a point in dwelling on where a decision originates; it is always the player making the decision. Which decision ought to be made is a different question altogether, and as OP states, there's no wrong answers to...

Again, you're not actually contradicting what I'm saying. You're arguing from a position of wanting to disagree, because you want the absolute that they are fully separated, but they are not, as you've now admitted.

Again, its not a matter of never being able to make choices that run counter to your sensibilities. That is completely besides the point, which is that doing that is still reflective of your personality.

Good thing I never said that. Words do matter, and I wasn't being loose in how I said what I said. Saying player and character aren't separate is not the same thing as saying they're the same.

I disagree, because the two ideas aren't in conflict. Recognizing that the character is never going to be truly separate from your personality isn't in conflict or contradictory to the idea that one is choosing actions in deliberate counter to their own sensibilities. And given I noted that...

Problem is, that's not really how it works. As i explained earlier, your capability to do that still reflects on you and in the character. This is why different actors can't actually deliver identical performances even with the same character, plot, etc. While roleplaying doesn't always get to...

One would have to explain what they mean by firewalling

An alternative set up for the Grid, this time using a cleaner Chess-like nomenclature for the Positions. The A's are still the Flanks and the Bs Ranged and Cs Support, but calling out specific Positions is less of a mouth full. And given all the empty space, I filled it with a cheat sheet with...

Well of course not. We're getting into the weeds of overthinking the nature of game protagonists and how we as players factor into that. There's not much use dwelling on it unless we're trying to do everything we can to justify just doing story telling without admitting it. In in all other...

That's still you though. When you're the one making the decision, your personality is being reflected in the choices of the character even if they're superficially contradictory; your willingness to differ to another person's preferences is a reflection of your personal capacity for empathy...

The thing about narrative improv is that it doesn't really matter if you go into it and act from your character's perspective or from your own, because the two aren't really separate.