Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Crimson Binome" data-source="post: 6291296" data-attributes="member: 6775031">You could also be petrified with full hit points, or banished to limbo with full hit points. If you take hit points to represent the structural integrity of your meat (which, granted, not everybody does) then there are still a few ways to kill a person that don't involve damaging the meat whatsoever.Back to your previous question, I think the dismay over AEDU is mostly a matter of perception. Even if we don't have experience with a humanoid being able to take twenty arrows and stay standing, it's just an extension of something that we already understand (or think we do, at any rate); as long as we buy that one person can drop after taking a single arrow, but Conan can take an arrow without dropping, then it's just a logical extension of that. (People are really bad at intuitively scaling variables, for whatever reason.) It's the same reason why a +30 natural armor bonus seems okay - it's like something we already except, but just more of it.With AEDU, we don't really have a basis to extend that from. We don't have context for "you can do this once every five minutes, and it's guaranteed to work every time, but you can never do it twice within that period". Or maybe there is a good explanation somewhere in there about why you can't use one E power twice, even though you could use an E and then follow it up with three D powers in rapid succession, but people stop looking for an answer as soon as someone claims that you're using cinematic logic where you can only use that move once in order to make things more interesting; once they hear one explanation that they know they can disagree with - as any good simulationist will do when presented with that argument - then it's easier to just mark it down as "something dumb than doesn't make sense" than to try and extend your disbelief.Just this morning, I was reading an article about Supreme Court justices, and how people who feel very strongly about something are disinclined to change their minds in the face of evidence, to the extent that an argument against their beliefs is likely to push them even further toward how they already felt.</blockquote>

Verification