Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 6292495" data-attributes="member: 27160">I see what you are driving at, here, but I'm going to express an alternate view. I do not want a system to dictate to me exactly how a power or manoeuvre works, in general.Partly, this is because I find it unnecessarily restrictive on how a home-game world works, but the more serious objection I have is actually a verisimilitude one. Very often I find that roleplaying systems state explicitly how a particular spell, manoeuvre or skill works and my brain simply rebels. Maybe I have some personal experience of the skill or technique being evoked that clashes with the description given, or maybe what is described simply clashes with my world-model assumptions. Either way, I find that, while I could happily believe a way of doing the described act, I simply can't imagine it being done as described. I'm in the crazy (it seems to me) position of having my "suspension of disbelief" broken by the fluff, but not the crunch.From this point of view, I love 4E's method of describing the crunch/mechanics of what happens, maybe an example of how it might look in the game world, and some keywords that are at once mechanical "pegs" and in-game clues as to the general nature of the effect. With those, I can make up my own vision of how the effect works that works for me. And, I assume, everyone else can do likelwise.Now, it's possible that my vision of what is happening is different to others' visions - but here's the thing: it doesn't matter, as long as we all accept that the rules are what the rules are. In other words, the rules are the "facts" that tie our different visions of what is happening together. Just like in real life, really...</blockquote>

Verification