Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="loverdrive" data-source="post: 9751651" data-attributes="member: 7027139">Ah, right, I think I got distracted when writing, or maybe short-circuited. He wins against me fairly regularly, but loses hard to people who lose hard to me.Hiiii! Missed you!I think there's a big difference between being good at some part of the game, and being good at the game as a whole.And even then, sure, you can have a very clear best player and a very clear worst player, but what about everyone in between? I'm not sure if it's possible to have a journey of improvement in the game when you don't have a way to measure it.I wouldn't say that's a self-imposed rule, given how it must be against the rules, if not the game itself, then at least the tournament."Self-imposed rules" in a sense that they don't actually exist in the game and no one is going to enforce them. They are about honor, not the game. Before Elder Scrolls: Legends, a TCG I used to play, shutdown, I played a thematically coherent tribal deck of House Redoran when I wanted to feel smug even if I lose — after all, I'm playing an enlightened lore-accurate deck, and my opponent is a sweaty try hard! That was a self-imposed rule, and that is very akin to very much "skilled play" proponents often being concerned with verisimilitude and/or realism.I will agree that looking up the adventure was a bad example (although, it can be argued that if it's trivial to look up the adventure, GM should do a better job of concealing it /j)As a tangent, there's a traditional russian card game, Durak, where it's explicitly allowed to cheat in any way, because it's presumed to be the opponent's job to be vigilant for trickery. That actually sounds like an interesting approach to skilled play in RPGs.</blockquote>

Verification