Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Felon" data-source="post: 1070110" data-attributes="member: 8158">Re: Re: Re: pay attention and learn to admit when you're wrong!Essentially, your rebuttal was exactly the one I predicted above in parentheses. Here's how I see this discussion going:"Your false expectations are your own fault. Monte didn't specifically say that death and disfigurement would be more than inconvenient.""No, Monte wasn't specific at all. Monte's assertions regarding death was that if characters never truly die that it diminishes the rewards of success and the consequences of failure, and that the whole game just becomes weird. Monte also stated that if players encountered a guy with a peg leg, they wouldn't wonder why he didn't get it fixed magically, and the implication there is that the guy simply is out of luck; he doesn't have the same option that he does in D&D.""Ah, but see that's still not specific. Can't him for what's implied or how your expectations develop. You drew your own inferences.""Of course I did; there was a lot of vagueness there. The design diary entry was designed to raise expectations, and my expectations sound pretty reasonable based off of what was said. If a person makes a vague claim to pique interest, shouldn't he consider what kind of conclusions people are going to naturally draw?""Nope, doesn't matter how reasonable or natural they are, he's blameless for anything he didn't directly advertise."This seems akin to grifter logic; if I, Felon, make a claim that's sufficiently vague, I can't be faulted for what people infer from it--even if the inferrence derived is the one that common sense would lead one to construe.For instance, by placing the relatively cheap prices on spells-for-hire (the same as in the PHB) there is a strong implication that the supply of 9th-level spells for hire probably isn't terribly low (because it's safe to say, cheap prices for awesomely powerful magic won't be due to poor demand). Any culture with a monetary system quickly grasps the straightforward concept of supply and demand. If Monte had intended for it to be extremely difficult to find someone to ressurect a player, common sense dictates that the hiring price would be much more severe than it is in the PHB (because you don't make things cheap if you want them to be hard to come by, see?). Thus, increasing the spell-level of a Raise Dead spell doesn't necessarily carry a heavy impact. But again, I'm using my own common sense to make an inferrence, so I can't fault AU for that eh?Ever see the Jeff Daniels/Michael Richards movie Trial and Error, where Rip Torn's character is on trial for selling engraved plates commemorating Abraham Lincoln at a nickel apiece...and it turns out what his customers get in the mail is a penny? According to the logic I'm being confronted with, there was no wrongdoing. A person can be taken to task for what he says, but not for what he omits.Now, I use a more extreme example there because that's what it may take to try open your eyes to my point of view, but just to be perfectly clear, I don't say that Monte is some sort of, uh...montebank, swindling people into buying AU with false promises. However, I do think the remarks about the significance of death and disfigurement are severly overstated, and could easily lead to false expectations like mine. I don't think my mind went off on some wild direction on its own. If these things weren't intended to have dire consequences for the PC (and being laid-up for one week is not all that dire) beyond the standard level loss, then that should've been made clear. If you don't agree, fine. But my position holds firm. As does yours no doubt.Yes! Hero points rock! Definitely one of the high points of AU. It gives the players a resource to keep them from dying in the first place, and a way to "self-defribulate" when they fail a saving throw against, say, a basilisk's gaze.</blockquote>

Verification