Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Cap'n Kobold" data-source="post: 6869005" data-attributes="member: 6802951">It doesn't even have to be based around a hostile action. I just picked the ZoT situation as something that people were currently discussing that was easy to illustrate the point by changing just one of the parameters.I'm just going to call the cleric's player &quot;Bob&quot; for the moment.The issue is not that Bob's cleric used an offensive spell which would interact with your houserules in a way that a non-hostile act wouldn't. The point you were making about Eloelle's player's narrative latitude doesn't require a hostile act to be committed, nor to have those houserules.The issue is that Eloelle's player narrates the fiction as Eloelle (or her patron) being able to subvert Bob's character's spells and control Bob's character. Even though the &quot;mechanical fiction&quot; is as if it was by the rules, Bob may not like that narrative.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Cap'n Kobold, post: 6869005, member: 6802951"] It doesn't even have to be based around a hostile action. I just picked the ZoT situation as something that people were currently discussing that was easy to illustrate the point by changing just one of the parameters. I'm just going to call the cleric's player "Bob" for the moment. The issue is not that Bob's cleric used an offensive spell which would interact with your houserules in a way that a non-hostile act wouldn't. The point you were making about Eloelle's player's narrative latitude doesn't require a hostile act to be committed, nor to have those houserules. The issue is that Eloelle's player narrates the fiction as Eloelle (or her patron) being able to [i]subvert Bob's character's spells and control Bob's character[/i]. Even though the "mechanical fiction" is as if it was by the rules, Bob may not like that narrative. [/QUOTE]

Verification