Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="mamba" data-source="post: 9169027" data-attributes="member: 7034611">Since you keep referring to your 'summary' as if this is what I claimed, I will address this after all...no, I said they should find a coherent alternative, not such nonsense as believing in yourself. No gods is perfectly fine.The rules I was referring to in that post are physics, logic, etc. Just writing nonsense down and calling it a rule is not the same thing.there were explanations for what is nonsensical. For one believing in yourself gives you powers, for another believing in an abstract idea gives you powers.No, there are plenty of options, filtering out the incoherent ones leaves plenty of options for all kinds of stuff stilland they are no longer regular mortals at that time, so there is no inconsistency thereI did not see consistency in the sense that the setting had an explanation for why believing in a concept grants powers, it just states that it does. I was looking for an explanation and never got one.yes, fiction and the game mechanics should not contradict each other, and if you can do anything if you only manage to convince yourself of it, then classes are by definition not a good fit. To be clear, I do not want any system with this 'believe in yourself' approach, so no system 'must' use skill buy.yes, I stand by that</blockquote>