Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="clearstream" data-source="post: 8524700" data-attributes="member: 71699">I literally nodded my head as I read that <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    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> Generally agree, for sure. I actually have some prep. I'm debating with myself for my next campaign. The themes are of colonialism, and I'm pondering if it can work to 'lock in' that the arc will land in the indigenous folk being overwhelmed by the settlers. We're playing to find out what lies between here and there, and what forms or on what terms that loss finally takes. These themes relate closely to my home country, and in a way it might fail to find out something true, to suppose there was a way to 'win'.Well, if we hit we roll damage, but I don't think of that as cubes-to-cubes. Because it's one encapsulated mechanic. Although damage is only rolled because we hit. And then if cubes constrain clouds too strongly, perhaps it's really cubes to cubes anyway? That may touch on what led some to see 4e as too gamey.</blockquote>