Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Professor Phobos" data-source="post: 4034925" data-attributes="member: 18883">Maybe, but I think the real problem is I'm not explaining what exactly I refer to by fiat and the like here.Well, two things. First: I don't break the rules often, though I'm entirely willing to do so any time I deem it necessary. Second: I don't consider the 20th level neck-snap a break in the rules, because I am interpreting the rules to not apply to that situation already. Any arguments from me that levels are an abstract template for game play purposes and not factored into the world are not a house-rule or fiat advocacy argument, but a statement of my interpretation of the RAW.Nah. You rarely &quot;know&quot; exactly what will happen when you do anything as a GM. If it wasn't fun and your players tell you so, you just don't do it again. No one is entitled to a flawless GM.&nbsp;Well, the thing is- I have stuff to do. If a game requires too much work to &quot;do it right&quot;, then to hell with that game, you know? If the players expect more work than I can put into a game just because they refuse to allow me shortcuts, then to hell with them. They only have one character to manage. All they have to do is show up and contribute to the pizza fund. Yes! This is right. Say yes, or roll the dice. Our high-level knight has nothing to do with the PCs. There's nothing at stake for them. The rules do not apply.Basically, the rules have a specific purpose- to resolve conflicts between the PCs and the game world with some fun tactical gameplay and resource management elements. The rules are not designed to simulate the wider world, just conflict involving the PCs.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Professor Phobos, post: 4034925, member: 18883"] Maybe, but I think the real problem is I'm not explaining what exactly I refer to by fiat and the like here. Well, two things. First: I don't break the rules often, though I'm entirely willing to do so any time I deem it necessary. Second: I don't consider the 20th level neck-snap a break in the rules, because I am interpreting the rules to not apply to that situation [I]already[/I]. Any arguments from me that levels are an abstract template for game play purposes and not factored into the world are not a house-rule or fiat advocacy argument, but a statement of my interpretation of the RAW. Nah. You rarely "know" exactly what will happen when you do anything as a GM. If it wasn't fun and your players tell you so, you just don't do it again. No one is entitled to a flawless GM. Well, the thing is- I have stuff to do. If a game requires too much work to "do it right", then to hell with that game, you know? If the players expect more work than I can put into a game just because they refuse to allow me shortcuts, then to hell with them. They only have one character to manage. All they have to do is show up and contribute to the pizza fund. Yes! This is right. Say yes, or roll the dice. Our high-level knight has nothing to do with the PCs. There's nothing at stake for them. The rules [I]do not apply[/I]. Basically, the rules have a specific purpose- to resolve conflicts between the PCs and the game world with some fun tactical gameplay and resource management elements. The rules are not designed to simulate the wider world, just conflict involving the PCs. [/QUOTE]

Verification