Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fusangite" data-source="post: 926910" data-attributes="member: 7240">These Monte Cook quotes are great!Hey! I have absoltuely no problem with these statments. They seem perfectly sound. The approach to the rules should be worked out with the PCs in episode 1 of any campaign, which is precisely what I did. I think the key thing is for one's campaign to have a consistent relationship to the rules rather than a variable one. But what that relationship is should be mutually agreed-upon at the outset; if one moves the goal posts once play has started, it's very different than them being re-positioned by mutual agreement at the start of the game.That stated, D'Karr, I really disagree with the idea of deactivating characters for 30 rounds while they "think." For me, this idea of paralysis-inducing thinking is problematic because it means that the DM can assess random penalties against people for demonstrating tactical competence. There is no standardized system for assessing how long it takes a person to "have a thought" in reality, never mind game terms. For me, this would not be a workable solution because it would introduce a random and arbitrary element into the game for which players could not plan in future because they could never know under what conditions time they would freeze in time. I've made the same argument against mmu1 and Tsyr in their suggestions about the game. ? To give you a sense of how long 30 rounds is, the average MTV music video is 35 rounds long. It takes 35 rounds for an Olympic athlete to run a mile. However, as you point out, it's about stylistic choice.NPC, your last post made me laugh out loud but it was excessively and unreasonably insulting; to quote Mike Myers, I do not know if for this you should be lauded or chided.</blockquote>

Verification