Search results

Okay let's return to your original algebraic example: You give an example of a multipart resolution where a and x come into play, then proceed to state "we have a case where the outcome is not dependent on the rules of the game", as if A also didn't come into play? How can it not be dependent...

I literally gave a concrete case already. Just because my "death knights" weren't death knights, my Undead language "isn't a language", and "the DC should have been higher", that doesn't somehow cancel out how I used ability checks, set DCs, used a language that a character can speak, in order...

This isn't accounting for cases where a, b, and c are coming into play while x also has an influence, yet x doesn't somehow invalidate a through c just because x tweaks the way that a through c are applied.

Nope, I'm not saying that the individuals/individual involved in resolving the play cannot provide an account of how it was done. I'm saying it's entirely possible, and flat out true in practice, that there are scenarios where both are used to resolve the same play. I do know how I resolved the...

Are you going for more active definitions for attributes, as opposed to what can in some ways be defined as passive definitions? E.g. charisma is something a person passively has, and leadership is something that person actively cultivates?

Another troublesome false presupposition that you may or may not think but which seems an apparent conclusion from what you said: "it is always one rule which determines how something is resolved; there are not cases where multiple rules come into play when resolving something."

Focus on the keyword there, 'merely', I said that you "can't merely ask" that question. When you give a question that has an underlying false presupposition, that presupposition must be qualified or at least agreed upon for the sake of argument in order for the question to be valid (i.e...

Not exactly. I'm telling you that when it comes to that you can't have your cake and eat it too. You can't merely ask "how was it resolved" when BOTH homebrew and 5E came into play. Whether or not you're interested in that has no bearing on whether it's a real issue for your POV. What "given...

Mmmmm-mmmm-mmmm, this post goes down like fried chicken! Look I'm not interested in putting down folks who can't understand the appeal of playing like this, but you're explaining such a bog standard kind of campaign (at least in terms of my own experiences), and yet it's so "subversive" by many...

I completely understand you saying the parts that I homebrew aren't 5E. What I don't understand and you haven't explained is you telling me "that wasn't 5E" when given a scenario where both homebrew rules and 5E rules came into play. You never explained what took it over the edge, past the "51%"...

Oh, if there was a thread for Elden Ring I'd discuss it for sure. But I'd rather discuss Troika Games, Obsidian, how much better Bethesda games used to be in some ways, etc.

Please don't take this statement from me in an insulting or adversarial tone, but you weren't being terribly consistent or clear so far as I can tell in applying this line of thought. E.g. there have been instances in this thread where while interacting with me or others, you have said "that's...

It's not difficult enough to figure out that it's ever bothered me or made me wonder, overmuch, whether I wanted my NPCs to have all 6 attributes. Pst, pst, don't tell the players this but in practice I often just jot down fresh NPC attributes, combat stats, and whatnot in my notes during the...

Spending hundreds, thousands of hours making something and understanding that much of your blood, sweat, and tears will be scrutinized, excoriated, then sent to the chopping block so you can bury Ted, your old idea, and replace him with Fred, your new idea.

Naturally you should feel free to correct me if I have this wrong, but you're assigning neutral actions this constraint of "it must not have moral implications". The problem for that assumption is: one can choose not to act, not to support the proponents or agents of either side of an...

This! Double stamp and triple stamp it! Take a screenshot! Somebody online understands that there are neutral actions too, quick, get the president on the phone!

Hey, you! Over there actually making interesting references... Socrates said that city was a fever dream anyways, if it was ideal it wouldn't need a philosopher king, and Socrates first proposes a very different society.

Really? The last time I checked basically all of world history, the only reason something is illegal one time and legal another is a complete historical accident, a product of the times. They could chop your hand off in public for being a thief in medieval Europe, heck there was a guy in the...

I mean you could always try Nihilism and Absurdism, works pretty swell for accepting that these questions (what are good, evil, "beautiful", why does a cookie taste so dang good and a raw onion so dang bad) can't be answered because there are no answers 😉

Ugh... So it's just another debate over semantics.