Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ezo" data-source="post: 9288734" data-attributes="member: 7037866">I agree.Well, you're entitled to think it is dead wrong, but it isn't &quot;wrong&quot;. There is no right or wrong, just opinions. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />So, since you decided to respond to someone else concerning I a conversation involving me, I'll take the liberty to respond to this.Survival isn't an issue. It is simply whether infrequent, occassional use of a skill, even when given &quot;pointers&quot;, would make me appreciably better at that skill (by that, I mean a +1 improvement). Of course, it won't IMO.Golf was a covient example. I've been playing for decades, but only have time to get out for a round a couple times a year. When I do get to play, I play with people who are definitely proficient, who do give me frequent pointers, which help a little, but don't really make me better in the long run.This is why I mentioned I prefer using group checks in such instances. The better PCs in the group can &quot;help&quot; (via those pointers) the worse one by carrying the group check to success. And if the worse PC happens to get lucky, so much the better.There, done.Yep! <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile&nbsp; &nbsp; :)"&nbsp; data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="ezo, post: 9288734, member: 7037866"] I agree. Well, you're entitled to think it is dead wrong, but it isn't "wrong". There is no right or wrong, just opinions. :) So, since you decided to respond to someone else concerning I a conversation involving me, I'll take the liberty to respond to this. Survival isn't an issue. It is simply whether infrequent, occassional use of a skill, even when given "pointers", would make me appreciably better at that skill (by that, I mean a +1 improvement). Of course, it won't IMO. Golf was a covient example. I've been playing for decades, but only have time to get out for a round a couple times a year. When I do get to play, I play with people who are definitely proficient, who do give me frequent pointers, which help a little, but don't really make me better in the long run. This is why I mentioned I prefer using group checks in such instances. The better PCs in the group can "help" (via those pointers) the worse one by carrying the group check to success. And if the worse PC happens to get lucky, so much the better. There, done. Yep! :) [/QUOTE]

Verification