Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Ovinomancer" data-source="post: 7800311" data-attributes="member: 16814">Mine isn't, either.  I didn't say scientific theorem or mathematical formula.  I talked about being explicit with the stakes of a roll prior to the roll and how not doing this means that all at the table can think a roll is low stakes but that a great or bad roll might push the DM to introducing stakes after the roll.  This can lead to exciting new developments that everyone loves or resentment on the player's side because their high level fighter is now getting wedgied by random bar patron #4 (Old Guy), or something in between.  If it works for you, great.  I'm trying to discuss what it actually looks like in a more formal way because that way we can actually discuss play rather than bat back and forth at each other's strawmen.Again, if it works for your group, enjoyment is the only and last criterion for good play.  If you don't want to take apart how you play, examine the pieces, and figure out what it is you're doing moment to moment so you can maybe make some changes (or not, because you like it how it is) then I really don't understand why you keep participating in threads where this is the topic of the thread.  I've been frustrated a few times in these threads by people creating strawmen of my positions, but never once because you may or may not approve of my play.  You do you.</blockquote>