Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hungry Like The Wolf" data-source="post: 5720292" data-attributes="member: 93238">No, I didn't. I said which part of setting trumps another after I gave an example of how setting is more than a map. It also, does not break internal consistency. I know that. It's implied but explicitly stating it makes your argument arbitrary. How is anybody going to reply when you just keep repeating your mantra while making your points? It's pretty futile when you just clam up and keep chanting "my taste, my taste, my taste" in response to criticism of your points.Not at all. There is nothing unheroic about hitting armour (DR) or getting parried. "You miss, next" is very unheroic however.Okay player. Perhaps if you want to have a conservation you should stop opting out every other point. It really is quite confusing.It doesn't have to be the only way. It's the way that a player has suggested. Your argument is about boxing the player into paths you have predetermined.Perhaps you are drawing a blank because this is a strawman argument designed to discredit the "hero's are not incompetent" argument.  We are not talking about a setback. We are talking about a player with a suggestion that they evidently think will be fun and allow their character to contribute. Boxing them in to distinct paths of failure is robbing them of that ability.</blockquote>