Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 3922840" data-attributes="member: 3192">Right, you are playing another person to the best of your ability.&nbsp; You cannot portray a person you are incapable of portraying.&nbsp; This seems a truism.Right.&nbsp; What's wrong with this?&nbsp; I can be good at combat.&nbsp; The Wizard can be good at Magic.&nbsp; The rogue at thieving.&nbsp; The Cleric at a little combat, magic, and more.Okay. This is all about acting in character.&nbsp; If you do so, you can be better or worse than others at the table.&nbsp; Incentive is to win combat is a given.&nbsp; So is acting in character.&nbsp; And Getting XP.&nbsp; Which you get for your acting within your role.&nbsp; Casting spells.&nbsp; Stealing.&nbsp; Raising temples.&nbsp; Etc.We do this regularly and it's the best way to play.&nbsp; (IMO of course).&nbsp; In our case the players actually get to learn and improve at being silver-tongued, knowing wilderness survival, and dealing with dungeoneering features.&nbsp; This is a bit more enjoyable than glossing over all the fun stuff.You're right here. If only the game didn't force one to think out of character to use the feat, but instead never told the Player what the rules were in teh first place.&nbsp; Simply said, &quot;you can attack a 2nd person, if you kill someone standing in front of them on your round.&quot;&nbsp; It's a bit overcomplicated too.&nbsp; It places places hours of time on combat, which is perfectly legitimate if that's all the focus you want.&nbsp; Me, I want more than 90% skirmish wargame play.I did that so you could understand very clearly.&nbsp; This isn't crackpot thinking.&nbsp; Or biased diatribe.&nbsp; I'm trying to as accurately as possible express to you something that really exists and has existed.&nbsp; It may be something of a gestalt shift in thinking though for those who missed the early years.&nbsp; If you didn't experience it earlier, the current style of play is not the only way D&amp;D is or has been played.&nbsp; Options, as the thread introduces, are about allowing all types of D&amp;D play, especially ones traditional to the game. (like mine and others like me.)By choosing to ignore my other answers what am I left to think but that you aren't seeing a clearly different opinion.&nbsp; How can I better explain this to you?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="howandwhy99, post: 3922840, member: 3192"] Right, you are playing another person to the best of your ability. You cannot portray a person you are incapable of portraying. This seems a truism. Right. What's wrong with this? I can be good at combat. The Wizard can be good at Magic. The rogue at thieving. The Cleric at a little combat, magic, and more. Okay. This is all about acting in character. If you do so, you can be better or worse than others at the table. Incentive is to win combat is a given. So is acting in character. And Getting XP. Which you get for your acting within your role. Casting spells. Stealing. Raising temples. Etc. We do this regularly and it's the best way to play. (IMO of course). In our case the [I]players[/I] actually get to learn and improve at being silver-tongued, knowing wilderness survival, and dealing with dungeoneering features. This is a bit more enjoyable than glossing over all the fun stuff. You're right here. If only the game didn't force one to think out of character to use the feat, but instead never told the Player what the rules were in teh first place. Simply said, "you can attack a 2nd person, if you kill someone standing in front of them on your round." It's a bit overcomplicated too. It places places hours of time on combat, which is perfectly legitimate if that's all the focus you want. Me, I want more than 90% skirmish wargame play. I did that so you could understand very clearly. This isn't crackpot thinking. Or biased diatribe. I'm trying to as accurately as possible express to you something that really exists and has existed. It may be something of a gestalt shift in thinking though for those who missed the early years. If you didn't experience it earlier, the current style of play is not the only way D&D is or has been played. Options, as the thread introduces, are about allowing all types of D&D play, especially ones traditional to the game. (like mine and others like me.) By choosing to ignore my other answers what am I left to think but that you aren't seeing a clearly different opinion. How can I better explain this to you? [/QUOTE]

Verification