Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Do you plan to adopt D&D5.5One2024Redux?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Hriston" data-source="post: 9329973" data-attributes="member: 6787503"><p>This isn't true. I've advocated for no such thing. In a previous reply I believe was in response to one of your posts, I stated I don't know what you mean by "the feature always working" because that sounds like the criminal would be constantly sending messages, one after another, 24/7/365, and said that would be weird, which I believe you glossed over in your response, if you had one.</p><p></p><p>It's also unclear what you think the part of my post you quoted has to do with supporting your false claim. How exactly does my refutation of the idea, repeatedly and incorrectly put forward by [USER=6801845]@Oofta[/USER], that some of the features have an unstated prerequisite that it must be established at the table independently of the feature that the PC knows or is known by a specific person or people before the feature can be used by the player lead you to the erroneous conclusion that I "advocate for the feature always working"? My position on this is simply the language which it has been claimed the rules contain isn't there and that this claim has been made to mischaracterize the background features in an effort to disparage them. If you think I'm wrong, it should be a fairly easy task to show me where it says this.</p><p></p><p>I've argued about the Ravenloft example because I think it's a crap example, as I pretty much stated as soon as it was brought up by [USER=6801845]@Oofta[/USER], because it posits a situation in which the PCs know nothing, which puts it too far outside the bounds of usual D&D play to be useful as an example for discussion and of which I'm highly skeptical. This is why I've asked for actual play examples of the problems with the background features that have been claimed to exist, but no one seems to have any.</p><p></p><p>What I have tried to advocate for is the features working when, and only when, the players use them by making action declarations that invoke their features, as long as the described actions fall within the game's genre considerations and their PCs have the fictional positioning to take the described actions. If both conditions aren't met, something has gone wrong with the table's consensus on the established fiction and a discussion needs to take place to get everyone imagining pretty much the same thing. Hypothetical examples of dysfunctional play where this step is not being taken don't show there's anything wrong with these features.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hriston, post: 9329973, member: 6787503"] This isn't true. I've advocated for no such thing. In a previous reply I believe was in response to one of your posts, I stated I don't know what you mean by "the feature always working" because that sounds like the criminal would be constantly sending messages, one after another, 24/7/365, and said that would be weird, which I believe you glossed over in your response, if you had one. It's also unclear what you think the part of my post you quoted has to do with supporting your false claim. How exactly does my refutation of the idea, repeatedly and incorrectly put forward by [USER=6801845]@Oofta[/USER], that some of the features have an unstated prerequisite that it must be established at the table independently of the feature that the PC knows or is known by a specific person or people before the feature can be used by the player lead you to the erroneous conclusion that I "advocate for the feature always working"? My position on this is simply the language which it has been claimed the rules contain isn't there and that this claim has been made to mischaracterize the background features in an effort to disparage them. If you think I'm wrong, it should be a fairly easy task to show me where it says this. I've argued about the Ravenloft example because I think it's a crap example, as I pretty much stated as soon as it was brought up by [USER=6801845]@Oofta[/USER], because it posits a situation in which the PCs know nothing, which puts it too far outside the bounds of usual D&D play to be useful as an example for discussion and of which I'm highly skeptical. This is why I've asked for actual play examples of the problems with the background features that have been claimed to exist, but no one seems to have any. What I have tried to advocate for is the features working when, and only when, the players use them by making action declarations that invoke their features, as long as the described actions fall within the game's genre considerations and their PCs have the fictional positioning to take the described actions. If both conditions aren't met, something has gone wrong with the table's consensus on the established fiction and a discussion needs to take place to get everyone imagining pretty much the same thing. Hypothetical examples of dysfunctional play where this step is not being taken don't show there's anything wrong with these features. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Do you plan to adopt D&D5.5One2024Redux?
Top