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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5164141" data-attributes="member: 4937">And, as I said, or not.  The choises could be trivial, and indeed the assumptions I've always made have implied that the conscious character's player had trivial choices.  I'm not even sure why people felt the need to point any of that out to me the first time, much less the second or third.  As I've said again and again, I'm not comparing the general case of not being stunned to the general case of being stunned.  I'm comparing the level of player participation in a round where you tried to roll for recovery (and failed) to the level of participation when you were slogging it out in a static fight and missed your attacks.  It's not necessary for my point that every case of not being stunned is as bad as every case of being stunned.But as for this particular attempt to point out something to me, it fails harder than most of them because things like 'occupied a crucial square' and 'granted an ally a flank' don't in themselves increase the level of participation of the player.  Granting an ally a flanking bonus implies that the character is participating in the fight (ei, the character is not bored and is getting immediate feedback and drama), but it doesn't imply that the player is participating in the fight.  There are times when I feel I'm failing to communicate my ideas well, and that's the reason people aren't understanding me.  But after a certain point, especially when I have people who understand (but may or may not fully agree), it becomes clear that explaining myself yet again is pointless.This particular subthread, which was never even central to my discussion, has become an unamusing joke.  At first I found rather humorous the audacity of claiming that this experience I offhandedly mentioned had never happened to you and you couldn't relate to what I was saying.  What, you've never failed all of your attacks in a round, and passed your turn with a feeling of impotence?  Or, you've never cast a spell, had it fail to spell resistance, a successful saving throw, or some unknown immunity, and passed your turn with a feeling of impotence?  You've honestly never had a round were you felt that because of the dice you were missing out on the combat?  Don't give me this crap about, "Well I play 4e and that never happens.".   Even if I ignore the many threads about 4e that speak to the contrary and grant you that 4e is all awesome sauce, what about earlier editions?  You never experienced a turn which was effectively over and pointless when you failed an attack roll?  Really?</blockquote>

Verification