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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gantros" data-source="post: 5619077" data-attributes="member: 15836">I think you're still missing the distinction between abstraction and association.  Certainly HP, saves, and besieged foe all involve a fair amount of abstraction.  The difference is that the mechanics for the latter are not associated with a description of the in-game actions they are supposed to be modeling.Consider this - if besieged foe is meant to work by directing subordinates against dangerous foes, as the description states, then why is the actual effect that allies get a bonus to hit the target?  Why does it still grant a bonus to an ally that was already engaging the target before any direction was given to do so?  The mechanic could be adjusted to have a direct association with the description (e.g. the war devil forces its allies to stop whatever else they were doing and attack the target), or a description could be provided that better associates with the mechanic (e.g. the war devil sends telepathic guidance to allies on how to exploit the target's weaknesses).  But as the essay points out, these would have to be house rules with their own new implications, and besieged foe is far from being an isolated example.In 3.5e, the description of hit points is clear - they represent both the ability to take physical punishment and keep going, and the ability to turn a serious blow into a less serious one.  It's easy to see how a character would at any given time be aware of how much physical punishment they had taken, and also how much longer they think they can avoid taking a serious blow.  The description is also well supported by other rules that modify max HP according to character class, level, and Constitution scores.Now try to do the same thing with 4e daily martial powers.  They are described only as, "reaching into your deepest reserves of energy to pull off an amazing exploit."  Except no matter how powerful a character gets, they will never be able to use one more than once per day.  It doesn't matter if it's a Level 1 power and they've got a bunch of other higher level daily powers remaining.  It doesn't matter if they just woke up from a good night's sleep, or they're exhausted after a long day of brutal combat.  It doesn't matter what any of their ability scores are.  So while the description does point to something the character would be aware of in-game, there's really almost nothing associating the mechanics with that description.This is once again confusing abstraction with association.  The justification you quoted explains why it's okay to assume that both gold and XP come from adventuring and therefore gold = XP, which could be considered an excessive level of abstraction (I always felt it was and therefore never liked the rule myself).  But the association between the mechanic and the behavior is still clear, unlike with besieged foe.The design process used to create a game's mechanics and descriptions aren't as important as the final product.</blockquote>

Verification