Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Guest 6801328" data-source="post: 6873243">EDIT: Regarding the general in the woods thing, with my unicorn cavalry story I'm not trying to alter the fiction without the DMs permission, I'm showing how your insistence on the story's implausibility is based on assumptions which may not be true. To invalidate another player's narration because it doesn't align with irrelevant historical realism is as much...or more...interfering with another player's roleplaying as anything you're accusing me of.&nbsp; Where in the D&amp;D rules does it say that heavy cavalry are what you're envisioning?&nbsp; Or that forests...*all* forests, apparently...impose certain disadvantages on them?&nbsp; Sure, it may be realistic.&nbsp; But to insist that it applies in D&amp;D is....house ruling. Re-read it.&nbsp; I said &quot;I can imagine you...&quot;&nbsp; Not, &quot;In other words you are saying...&quot;&nbsp; In a discussion where the trite phrase &quot;words have meaning&quot; keeps popping up, I'll posit that &quot;imagine&quot; does in fact have some meaning.Then I'll ask you: do you think it's houseruling to allow an Oath Paladin to not describe his character as having angelic wings on his helm or shield?If so, then that's a valid interpretation of the PHB, but only one of many.&nbsp; We would definitely be interpreting &quot;rule&quot; vs. &quot;flavor&quot; very differently.Even if you take the &quot;definition&quot; of the words as a literal rule, it is so vaguely worded that my Eloelle description is within bounds. The official text does not offer any way to convert units, or guidance on how to measure. (Which by itself should suggest it's not a &quot;rule&quot;.) And I am in fact using Int to &quot;measure&quot; her ability in those areas.&nbsp; Perhaps in a non-linear way, but it's measurement. I agree with most of this, too.&nbsp; Except that the Eloelle/ZoT example doesn't interfere with mechanics because no mechanical outcomes are ever changed.&nbsp; Whether you narrate as her as too dumb to solve the Riddle, and then truthfully telling the evil Cleric and her suspicious friend that she doesn't know the answer, or you narrate it as she solves the answer and then deceives everyone about it, either way nobody (PC or NPC) ever finds out the answer to the Riddle.&nbsp; Which is the only mechanical outcome at stake in this story.&nbsp; If you allow Eloelle to narrate her failed Int check and then insist that Insight or ZoT extracts the answer to the Riddle you are creating a paradox, and letting her narration affect mechanics.Curiously, you define D&amp;D as cooperative/adversarial narration, but then you seem to ascribe to the DM the powers of a sole author.&nbsp; Some of us play RPGs a bit differently, where players have a lot more authority to contribute to the fiction.&nbsp; That's not playing by different rules; it's a stylistic difference. Again, I didn't.&nbsp; Sorry it seems that way.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Guest 6801328, post: 6873243"] EDIT: Regarding the general in the woods thing, with my unicorn cavalry story I'm not trying to alter the fiction without the DMs permission, I'm showing how your insistence on the story's implausibility is based on assumptions which may not be true. To invalidate another player's narration because it doesn't align with irrelevant historical realism is as much...or more...interfering with another player's roleplaying as anything you're accusing me of. Where in the D&D rules does it say that heavy cavalry are what you're envisioning? Or that forests...*all* forests, apparently...impose certain disadvantages on them? Sure, it may be realistic. But to insist that it applies in D&D is....house ruling. Re-read it. I said "I can imagine you..." Not, "In other words you are saying..." In a discussion where the trite phrase "words have meaning" keeps popping up, I'll posit that "imagine" does in fact have some meaning. Then I'll ask you: do you think it's houseruling to allow an Oath Paladin to not describe his character as having angelic wings on his helm or shield? If so, then that's a valid interpretation of the PHB, but only one of many. We would definitely be interpreting "rule" vs. "flavor" very differently. Even if you take the "definition" of the words as a literal rule, it is so vaguely worded that my Eloelle description is within bounds. The official text does not offer any way to convert units, or guidance on how to measure. (Which by itself should suggest it's not a "rule".) And I am in fact using Int to "measure" her ability in those areas. Perhaps in a non-linear way, but it's measurement. I agree with most of this, too. Except that the Eloelle/ZoT example doesn't interfere with mechanics because no mechanical outcomes are ever changed. Whether you narrate as her as too dumb to solve the Riddle, and then truthfully telling the evil Cleric and her suspicious friend that she doesn't know the answer, or you narrate it as she solves the answer and then deceives everyone about it, either way nobody (PC or NPC) ever finds out the answer to the Riddle. Which is the only mechanical outcome at stake in this story. If you allow Eloelle to narrate her failed Int check and then insist that Insight or ZoT extracts the answer to the Riddle you are creating a paradox, and letting her narration affect mechanics. Curiously, you define D&D as cooperative/adversarial narration, but then you seem to ascribe to the DM the powers of a sole author. Some of us play RPGs a bit differently, where players have a lot more authority to contribute to the fiction. That's not playing by different rules; it's a stylistic difference. Again, I didn't. Sorry it seems that way. [/QUOTE]

Verification