Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="EzekielRaiden" data-source="post: 9383227" data-attributes="member: 6790260">It is designed game-mechanics-forward. This was, for example, why the &quot;prone&quot; condition was explicitly described as not being literally always a creature that has fallen down on its ventral or dorsal plane, but rather as a creature that has been discombobulated. This could manifest as having fallen on its face/back, but could also affect &quot;legless creatures, such as fish and snakes, as well as amorphous creatures, such as oozes&quot;, and that one should &quot;imagine such creatures as writhing or unsteady, rather than literally lying down. The game effect on that creature is the same as for other creatures.&quot; (Emphasis added.)This was extremely offensive to some of the &quot;process&quot; sim folks out there.What, exactly, defines a &quot;knowledgeable person&quot; about the differences in various kinds of woods? Because I'd be willing to bet that unless you are a carpenter, woodturner, builder, etc. yourself, the absolute most a typical person knows is that some woods are &quot;hard&quot; and others are &quot;soft&quot;, some smell nice (like sandalwood or cedar), and some are used for cooking (like mesquite).Wait, so you're saying you have a shared style expectation and it's helpful to keep everyone on the same page?You spent so long blasting the idea that everything has to be perfect, everyone has to be in mental lockstep. Now you're admitting that's something old school wants too. Seems kinda contradictory.Yeah, I'd never give my players homework for the game. I'll share my knowledge--during or after session--but I'd never assign them a bloody reading list. That would kill their interest faster than you can say Bob's your uncle.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="EzekielRaiden, post: 9383227, member: 6790260"] It is designed game-mechanics-forward. This was, for example, why the "prone" condition was explicitly described as not being [I]literally always[/I] a creature that has fallen down on its ventral or dorsal plane, but rather as a creature that has been discombobulated. This [I]could[/I] manifest as having fallen on its face/back, but could also affect "legless creatures, such as fish and snakes, as well as amorphous creatures, such as oozes", and that one should "imagine such creatures as writhing or unsteady, rather than literally lying down. [B]The game effect on that creature is the same as for other creatures.[/B]" (Emphasis added.) This was [I]extremely[/I] offensive to some of the "process" sim folks out there. What, exactly, defines a "knowledgeable person" about the differences in various kinds of woods? Because I'd be willing to bet that unless you are a carpenter, woodturner, builder, etc. yourself, the [I]absolute most[/I] a typical person knows is that some woods are "hard" and others are "soft", some smell nice (like sandalwood or cedar), and some are used for cooking (like mesquite). Wait, so you're saying you have a [I]shared style expectation[/I] and it's helpful to [I]keep everyone on the same page?[/I] You spent so long blasting the idea that everything has to be perfect, everyone has to be in mental lockstep. Now you're admitting that's something old school wants too. Seems kinda contradictory. Yeah, I'd never give my players [I]homework[/I] for the game. I'll share my knowledge--during or after session--but I'd never assign them a bloody reading list. That would kill their interest faster than you can say Bob's your uncle. [/QUOTE]

Verification