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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Umbran" data-source="post: 9616421" data-attributes="member: 177">From my perspective you were the one missing points by overlooking what I had said.  So, I needed to be very direct and clear to prevent that.So... your character stays home and becomes a baker, and hopes the sourdough starter doesn't get any ideas?It isn't like the player has a choice to never get attacked, except by never going adventuring at all.  The game has combat rules, so we ought to concern ourselves with how they turn out when they are used.  Except I had specifically noted the issue of repetition arose in situation in which the player lacked useful choices.  Cosmetic solutions do not change that situation.Which is why I brought up games where you have cosmetically colorful things you can add to the scene that also have mechanical benefit, relieving the "I can't find anything else do to" situation.  This as a contrast to D&D, in which the player is stepping outside the rules when they try such.While we talk a lot about how D&D is a game in which you can try anything, it has never had good guidance for GMs on how to handle it when players do, in fact, try anything.  Lacking that guidance, many GMs say no, or their spur-of-the-moment rulings on them make them difficult or ineffective, leaving the player in the space where it seems the optimal choice is just repeating the basic attack.Fate took the step of making a standard rule for much of "try anything".  In doing so, they actually limited the explicit tactical depth of the ruleset, moving tactical choices more into the narrative aspects of the game.  You have to tell the story of a tactically interesting situation, rather than look at the rules to give you tactical choices.  It is hard to see how telling me what I want is not personal, nor intentional, but having made that point I can let it go.</blockquote>

Verification