Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="5ekyu" data-source="post: 7285830" data-attributes="member: 6919838">Kurotowa. In your "otherwise" comment, that is where i feelyou miss a best. Its not a binary choice. You can do both.A GM can provide THE PLAYER the mechanical info they need for decision making and assessment. They can also provide DESCRIPTIVE info that the character experiences. It happens all the time out of combat where search rolls, perception rolls , traps rolls, persuasion rolls etc etc  are made but still plenty of description and narrative occurs both before and after the roll.If a GM replaces the mechanical parts of his combat description with a consistent lexicon, he really has not stepped away from HP calling, just changed the language and muddied the waters to some degree.As i have stated before, since this game at many levels hinges on major differences in just a few points and the players have to spend significant time crunching numbers in chargen and the build system intends to reward those who "put work into their build" to me deciding to yank that precision from their in combat decisions is not a mive i would support.Quite a few games i have seen take a middle approach. They dont try and make every swing a narrative exposition. The basic "you hit and score tyical damage" in the mid combat stages are mostly just the stats rather than an exercise in thesaurus-fu.Early hits and misses where info is being gained - more narrative added with mechanics results.Later hits and misses where we are hitting the stuff can hapoen - more narrative added with mechanics results.Critical hits and some special combos - more narrative added with mechanics results.I think a significant aspect of mystery results is it makes the adversaries no more mysterious. The player already does not know how many HP the adversary has. So not knowing how much of a mystery resource is lost does not help make ot more unknown.What it does do when the PCs dont know how much damage they have taken is to reduce their ability to "know" their character. Maybe you think your narratiob skills are enough to convey in a sentence or two as much about the character's health as the experienced combat character knows... But i know i dont. My own exoerience in trying to convey accrate meaningful descriptions of medical situations has shown me that.However any group chooses to play is for them... But its not often accurate to describe things in as binary a choice as you seem to see.I have played plenty of fluffy narrative system games but they did not require, enforce and hinge major results on crunchy bits. So to me, removing knowledge of the crnchy bits when it matters is not a route i choose when running such a system.Sent from my VS995 using <a href="http://r.tapatalk.com/byo?rid=93205" target="_blank">EN World mobile app</a></blockquote>

Verification