Alzrius
The EN World kitten
In short your problem isn't that you aren't restricted - it's that you're not restricted enough
Not particularly - though I suppose you could impose that indictment if you wanted fatigue to be an omnipresent system with regards to any combat action.
There is no way in which hit points model reality. Unless we're in action movie physics and cosmetic damage land.
That's exactly what we're talking about, with regards to fatigue and injury-debilitation.
1E lent strongly one way. 4e lent the same way. 2E, 3.0, and 3.5 weren't specific and have hit points as a complete mess. Accept it and move on.
1E did not lean strongly in any particular direction, every edition prior to 4E lent in the direction of hit point loss as physical damage, which was intuitive. I have accepted that; why can't you?
I repeat, try and CAGI in 2E.
I repeat, the GM would laugh at the player who attempted that, and be right to do so.
I can do more in Fate than with non-magical characters in AD&D.
You have the same degree of character agency, though you may have greater player agency.
That's because it's no simulation of injury at all. It's trying to simulate Eroll Flynn style swashbuckling.
It's not trying to simulate the effects of injury.
So your problem is that AEDU isn't restrictive enough. That's the opposite issue to what you were claiming.
That's because you've misstated my problem with AEDU - if you want to claim that it works because you fatigue, then you need to abide by how lopsided that explanation is, since you aren't applying that restriction elsewhere. In other words, you're the one who doesn't find it restrictive enough.