Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Fanaelialae" data-source="post: 5053706" data-attributes="member: 53980">They're different kinds of creativity.Imagine that the goal is to build a functional bookcase, and Joe has access to a carpenter's workshop while all Bob has is a kitchen (filled with cooking supplies).  Joe, obviously, is enabled to be far more creative as to what type of case he builds (will he use nails or screws, should he engrave frolicking wood nymphs on the panels, etc).  Bob, on the other hand, is forced to be far more creative in order to build a functional bookcase in the first place (can he McGuyver the blender into a functioning screwdriver, can he cook some of the contents of the fridge into a binding glue, etc).  Suggesting that Bob is not as creative as Joe is, IMO, incorrect.  Bob's case will almost certainly not be of the same quality as that which Joe built, but Bob likely had to draw on every last shred of ingenuity he had to build a bookcase that wouldn't fall to pieces at the first stiff breeze.  Both guys display creativity, just in different ways.Did (pre 4e) D&D really limit creativity by imposing an 8 hour casting time on Identify?  Really?  Or did player's generally come up with any assortment of ways to test the new mystic trinket that they'd found and were eager to understand?  (Let's ignore for the moment your opinion as to whether or not that sort of activity gets old fast.)I disagree with the idea that the ritual system limits player creativity.  It won't satisfy the player's sense of instant gratification as often as the Vancian system did, and may require a different sort of creativity (McGuyver rather than artist), but to say that it limits creativity is, IMO, a mistake.</blockquote>

Verification