Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Henry" data-source="post: 5303857" data-attributes="member: 158">That's why I stopped using terms like &quot;Reality&quot; a long time ago. A better fit is &quot;plausibility&quot; or &quot;suspension of disbelief&quot;. Suspension of disbelief always seems to be harder with subjects that you're intimately familiar with than subjects that you're marginally familiar with. An aerospace engineer might have to put more effort into believing that a plain glider built like some cool yet totally noinaerodynamic wing-shape could fly, but might not have much trouble with a dragon flying because &quot;it's magic.&quot; If I can't easily visualize an ooze-monster getting disadvantaged by a shove in such a way that it takes part of its action to &quot;right itself&quot; again, then it might be harder for me to visualize a power that knocks it prone. The important thing is: Can you get to suspension of disbelief. If you can't, then what you're looking at is going to be jarring for you.For me, someone mentioned that in 4E &quot;removed from play&quot; is a condition - for me, that bugs me to no end, because there's NO WAY it can't remind you that you're playing a game, and that your PC or monster is a &quot;playing piece.&quot; I'm fine with something &quot;creating an extradimensional prison&quot;,&nbsp; but &quot;removed from play&quot; is RIGHT OUT! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Leave it back in Magic the Gathering, where I'm fine with acknowledging I'm playing a card game...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Henry, post: 5303857, member: 158"] That's why I stopped using terms like "Reality" a long time ago. A better fit is "plausibility" or "suspension of disbelief". Suspension of disbelief always seems to be harder with subjects that you're intimately familiar with than subjects that you're marginally familiar with. An aerospace engineer might have to put more effort into believing that a plain glider built like some cool yet totally noinaerodynamic wing-shape could fly, but might not have much trouble with a dragon flying because "it's magic." If I can't easily visualize an ooze-monster getting disadvantaged by a shove in such a way that it takes part of its action to "right itself" again, then it might be harder for me to visualize a power that knocks it prone. The important thing is: Can you get to suspension of disbelief. If you can't, then what you're looking at is going to be jarring for you. For me, someone mentioned that in 4E "removed from play" is a condition - for me, that bugs me to no end, because there's NO WAY it can't remind you that you're playing a game, and that your PC or monster is a "playing piece." I'm fine with something "creating an extradimensional prison", but "removed from play" is RIGHT OUT! :) Leave it back in Magic the Gathering, where I'm fine with acknowledging I'm playing a card game... [/QUOTE]

Verification