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="El Jefe" data-source="post: 3144111" data-attributes="member: 19990">Let me come back to this, for reasons that should become clear.This is where we disagree.  I genuinely didn't know what you (RA) were aware of and what you weren't aware of.  When I posted that there was a soldier on Hulgyr's horse, I thought that I'd posted everything that needed to be said.  I didn't think that it was necessary to post that there wasn't a soldier on Michael's horse and there wasn't a soldier on Eternity's horse and there wasn't a soldier on Almayce's horse.  Those were also obvious facts.  I also didn't think it necessary to post that no other soldiers beyond the original three had presented themselves, or that nobody had switched horses with anyone else, or any one of a number of other obvious facts.  I assumed that you, RA, had an understanding of the situation that was satisfactory to you.  I assumed that you'd decided that Zaeryl would not stop to take inventory, I assumed that you decided that he would either proceed with an imperfect knowledge of where all the soldiers were or that you had decided that he would flee even if he didn't have all three with him.  At the time, I didn't see that as inconsistant with anything you'd posted IC or OoC, and that includes Zaeryl's implied motivation.  I don't know what's inside your head, and because I don't know what's inside your head I don't know what's inside Zaeryl's head either.  All I can do is look at the posts, try to understand both the obvious and the subtly implied, and make my best guess.  I assumed that as a player, you were content to have your character arrive on the other side of the ridge either knowing that he left a soldier behind, or willing to be surprised to find that your character had left a soldier behind.  Obviously, my assumptions were wrong...your concept of the character's motivation and mindset was different than mine.And I still disagree that this is analgous to not-looking-at-the-ceiling.  It may be clear in your mind that this was important to Zaeryl and that you played him very consistantly to that effect, but looking back at the posts, it's still not obvious to me.  When (a couple of posts ago) you mentioned that "Zaeryl saw the other party members grabbing the soldier", my first thought was, "How could I have ever missed that?!  If that's the case, not only have I unfairly screwed RA/Zaeryl, but I've also unfairly screwed at least one of the other player/PCs as well."  So, I went off and read through all the appropriate posts, looking for either an oversight on my part, or some sort of miscommunication (like the "grabbed" thing).  Honestly, aside from the "grabbed" thing, I couldn't find one.  I honestly believe that you, RA, read the posts where Michael and Eternity approached prone Stander and thought, "Ok, they've got him, so now I have to have Zaeryl go off and chase Squatter before he gets away."  And I really believe that in your memory, you just sort of "attached" Squatter to one of those two, to the point where when I described the group as "all mounted, and Hulgyr has a soldier on the back of his horse", what you perceived was Squatter on the back of Hulgyr's horse and Stander on the back of Michael's or Eternity's (probably Michael's, since Eternity was the only one who was able to keep up with you).It just hit me.  Why am I lecturing to you about human memory?  You probably know more about this than I do.  Surely you can see how this was just a simple misunderstanding between us, compounded by the written nature of PbP.  I was as surprised to find several players adamant that the party had all three soldiers as they were to find that in my bookkeeping, the party didn't.  I really thought that every player had either made a conscious decision to have their chracter leave knowing that all three soldiers were not present or made a conscious decision to have their character leave not knowing whether all three were present or not.  And I genuinely did not know which of those two choices each player had made for their character.</blockquote>

Verification