Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 7838075" data-attributes="member: 177">Laughable... only in the sense that we really are talking about a funny scene.  What's being described is a staple of slapstick comedy.  If you prefer physical modelling to leaning into genre tropes - this is an entirely believable scene in a game of rugby.Yes, the action order and initiative enables this.  But, the argument against it is the idea that a person moves a fixed distance per round, and that is also a game-rule artifact.  You are metagaming if you use the initiative artifact, but you are also metagaming to rely on fixed movement rates per unit time.  Ultimately, you cannot solve an issue of metagaming by pointing to the rules.  To stop metagaming, you have to step outside the rules to what "should" happen, regardless of what the rules say.The movement rules are a poor model for a chase scene, especially in cluttered terrain (like woodlands, or a busy market square), where someone who is not as fast on the straightaway can still get away if they corner well - a distinction the game rules don't account for at all.  If you don't believe me, ask any parent who has chased a soapy wet toddler through their home. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":p" title="Stick out tongue    :p"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":p" /></blockquote>