Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="BryonD" data-source="post: 5718309" data-attributes="member: 957">I don't think you are considering both sides of the coin.I don't have an argument with your analysis of HP mechanically.But again, months ago I was debating with you about the concept of whether the story follows the mechanics or the mechanics follow the story.You are saying: here is what the mechanics say, now I will make up a story to fit that.I want to say: here is what the story says, now I want to mechanics to model the results.&nbsp; When you put the mechanics first, elements of the narrative become ruled out. That isn't to say that you can't still create a valid narrative omitting those parts.&nbsp; But, at least to some of us, simply being a valid narrative doe not make it the most enjoyable possible experience.Before I sit down at the table I already know that the character are going to be in battles and, sometimes, they are going to receive wounds that require medical care.&nbsp; Some fights they will get out of without needing any care.&nbsp; And I can happily describe those in the same style that you are advocating.&nbsp; But what you are saying is that because you can always describe why no care is needed, the fact that care is never needed isn't a problem.&nbsp; To me this missed the point.&nbsp; And I'm not speaking of the point of this debate, I'm speaking of the point of why *I* play the game.&nbsp; I want that complete range of narrative.&nbsp; If the game doesn't include the need for actual care at certain points, I'm going to find that game to be very unsatisfactory for my desires.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="BryonD, post: 5718309, member: 957"] I don't think you are considering both sides of the coin. I don't have an argument with your analysis of HP mechanically. But again, months ago I was debating with you about the concept of whether the story follows the mechanics or the mechanics follow the story. You are saying: here is what the mechanics say, now I will make up a story to fit that. I want to say: here is what the story says, now I want to mechanics to model the results. When you put the mechanics first, elements of the narrative become ruled out. That isn't to say that you can't still create a valid narrative omitting those parts. But, at least to some of us, simply being a valid narrative doe not make it the most enjoyable possible experience. Before I sit down at the table I already know that the character are going to be in battles and, sometimes, they are going to receive wounds that require medical care. Some fights they will get out of without needing any care. And I can happily describe those in the same style that you are advocating. But what you are saying is that because you can always describe why no care is needed, the fact that care is never needed isn't a problem. To me this missed the point. And I'm not speaking of the point of this debate, I'm speaking of the point of why *I* play the game. I want that complete range of narrative. If the game doesn't include the need for actual care at certain points, I'm going to find that game to be very unsatisfactory for my desires. [/QUOTE]

Verification