Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Bumbles" data-source="post: 4855337" data-attributes="member: 83457">It's an analogy.  Not a strawman.  It's mean to illustrate what I mean so that we can understand each other more clearly, rather than to advance an argument.Please examine it under those terms, thank you.  See if it helps you better to look it like that.  If it doesn't, then please tell me what you think I can do instead, since I don't think you understood what I said, and I would really like to be sure that you understand me clearly.Do you realize that it seems to me that you're dismissing the possibility that people may be the real issue?  I'm willing to say that there may be some real issues with some settings, but in the absence of a specific issue to discuss, I decline to assume it's an issue intrinsic to the setting as opposed to an issue of preference regarding the person.  In this case, I see the issue as being that of adhering to canon such as it is, while difficult is not one I would consider to be an issue with the setting, any more than it's an issue with any other setting.  That it may be difficult, is itself, an issue intrinsic to all developed settings where players may have expectations that exceed the GM's abilities to present.  As I said in a prior posting, if your game has any connection to reality, somebody might well argue with it.  This has been my experience, coming from cases involving the color of carrots and minor details of two short stories that were corrected because I got them backwards, and they weren't internally consistent.   To me, it seems you think that the Realms is somehow exceptional in the problems of remaining canonical, whereas I see it as nothing more than the expected trend I see all the time.   That's my experience.  Has yours been different?Anyway, I go over that again, when I do want to ask this:Are you willing to say that some people's issues may just be a matter of preference, and that it may simply not be possible to reconcile them, let alone desirable, that the source of the conflict as it were, may not be in the thing being conflicted over, but the persons having the conflict?That's what I'm saying, at least in regards to the game causing it.  I see nothing I disagree with here.  Choice is good.  Yet your prior words seem to declare the choice of choosing the canon to be less than desirable.That is why I prefer to address the problem as one of personal interaction, as opposed to a flaw in the Realms.Indeed.  Rocket Science is in concrete terms.  This is philosophy, which is considerably more subjective to being variably defined.  (Quantum Mechanics I leave for another day.  <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/glasses.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt="B-)" title="Glasses    B-)" data-shortname="B-)" />)That seems to be a different tact than what we've discussing before now.  Would you prefer to discuss it in its own thread or continue it here?  I would prefer to break it out on its own, since I don't even agree with the premise as of now.I'm declining further response till I see your preferences.   Apologies in advance for being so long-winded.</blockquote>

Verification