Search results

I sort of hope this meta-talk becomes less part of the game as the players get more experienced. After all, Iron Man and Captain America doesn't have a 5 minute conversation before blasting. I would think it would be really cool if indeed we get to the sim where the player just calls out "I fire...

I have limited experience with PF2. But my impression from reading it was that there appeared to be no clear incentive to not specialise, and ample posibility to do so. If you spend about 90% of your feats into two actions that can be done togetter in a round you either are going to use this...

The entire paragraph can be read as making that one rule very clear. Let us break it down: The first short sentence introduces the topic by reiterating the main rule regarding 1 hp. The second sentence emphasizes that this rule is still in effect for auto damage (that is a "hit" is not required...

All the sentences would be redundant? The first 2 sentences describe in other words that it has 1 hp (what that means), while the third is a reformulation of the sentence written after the hp of every minion in the book (which clearly is spesific to the monster, and hence overrides the damage on...

There is a difference between "meaningless" and "redundant". The claim has been that the text in question is the latter.

I think you with this has convinced me that "destroyed" for minions indeed is meant to override the general 0 hp rule. However I still then maintain that while a vampire destroyed by sunlight is commonly understood to be a pile of dust, a destroyed god is commonly understood to be basically...

I just want to point out that all the examples you list are the designers putting in subsystems defining up structure and rules for things that previously was up to the game table to decide. That is they indeed are defining up details of what should happen at the table. That is they have defined...

I think this might be the big design lesson from 4ed. Trying to enforce narrative tropes via rules seem bound to get into conflict with the fiction. The PbtA branch seem to have had better success via the application of "principles" and reliance on player buy in instead. That is, it can be...

Why do a disoriented cube get a +2 defence against ranged attacks?

This is where we intepret differently. I think the intent really as to simulate storm troopers, hydra goons, Jackie chan punching bags, that is alloted a maximum of 5 second screen time to allow the hero to show off something cool before moving on to the real stuff. The hero never is seen...

From a game perspective the idea is that we do not want the players to interact with that individual ever again. From a narrative perspective this individual are supposed to no longer be interesting. The problem is that the simulation side come in and say - how are you going to acheive that...

So, what is a term for a thing that is rendered completely irrelevant for the rest of the narrative, while not implying anything about the level of "aliveness"? I suddenly realized that "taken out" is a formulation I think I have seen used in some game. Might this have been a term that could...

Yes, ref my previous comment. I think this is a situation with no really good answers. I think "destroyed" might have been chosen for gameplay reasons. That fits the overall feel I have of the 4ed ruleset that game trumphed fiction whenever there was any sign of dilemma.

There are some neuances here unfortunately. Defeated is likely a better "in fiction" term, but it opens up a can of worms in terms of gameplay. Prisoners, interrogations, healing, fleeing creatures alerting others. All of these (unfortunate) game implications are sort of made away with thanks to...

Yes, I think that is a nice way of formulating what I have been trying to say. "Destroyed" is the wrong term for the in fiction phenomenom the rule is supposed to represent. Neither the creature bleeding out from a stab, nor someone with a broken wrist matches the everyday meaning of the word...

And what make a soldier with a broken wrist not be an aproperiate narration of a minion destroyed by being hit by a mace?

I do not think we disagree on that point at all? The point of contention seem to be what the "state" of "destroyed" looks like in the fiction?

Vicious Mockery.

Ah I think I might have misread this point. I think you point toward a slightly different issue than what I had in mind. The tripping cube is an excellent example. Here we have a situation where not only the "language" is inappropriate; but that the mechanical effects involved make no sense...

I would rather abandon the narrow minded understanding of "destroyed" than abandon basic structural integrity of humans, yes. I think that seem like the most reasonable interpretation of the rules text. I accept the minion to be "destroyed" in a more gamey-sense, as I have outlined. I think...