Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TildenThorne" data-source="post: 6763328" data-attributes="member: 6781228">You actually seem to understand my point rather well, maybe the description of my solution messed things up. My solution for adding a line to an offending bit of text is a "quick" solution for a problem that exists, it would be better had the situation never existed (i.e. as in the offending bit of fluff was never penned).A real life example from a current game is this (maybe it will help): In a certain game system, animism is one of the main magic systems offered. The animism system centers around two skills: 1) The first skill exists to help you see, communicate and interact with the spirit world, 2) The second actually allows you to make spirits do your bidding. In these rules, skill #1 (the perception based one) takes time: between 1 hour and 1 action (depending on organization level) to see spirits and 1 hour and 1 round to converse with them. This is all fine! Great in fact as it keeps animism feeling like... Well, animism. The problem begins here. The designers of the game put out a supplement (as game designers do), this supplement had a character background option which allows one who has it... The ability to see AND speak with spirits AT-WILL. Which really creates some questions with the skill process I outlined above... Like... It circumvents a vast majority of one of the skills use! When I approached the developer, they told me this was not intended to be used as such and that there was no problem. I found this answer a bit odd considering my entire game group saw the same issue without coaching (thus they found it on their own). In the above mentioned supplement, the training of the characters as an animist, initially brings those times to 1 round to observe and 1 minute to speak... Which is far slower the instantly and whenever you wish.In the above example, a bit of fluff offered what truly seems as a benefit... As part of a sub-system which can (though not always) provide a statistical benefit. My players (myself included) found the wording to be "clearly" misleading when compared to the expressed opinion by the designers. Now, the above example is but a recent find in a long history of these issues, so please do not just focus on the example offered. I have been purposefully obscure about system names and exact wordings because I am after no ones ire here.I hope this may have helped... If not ask more questions and I will use my own limited skills to try and explain myself better <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification