Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Crazy Jerome" data-source="post: 5747476" data-attributes="member: 54877">Yes, I think we do agree. By the "contained in the text", I mean how the fictional elements are described compared to the mechanics. For example, in RQ, if you've got an NPC blacksmith described somewhat as the stereotypical big guy good with a hammer, he will act like that guy in the mechanics. But this isn't about realism. The same thing would apply to the keets, the broo, a typical shaman, etc. The shamans really do take chances interacting with spirits, and gain their power largely from that.  This is what I think leads that immersive effect you described. There is a sense in which the mechanics and descriptive text are interchangable. The DM describes an enemy doing spirit magic, and you know what this means.  My contention about 3E/PF is that it does about as well on this front as can be done in D&D, but there is still that hard limit that causes it to fall well short of other games like RQ. 3E does a whole lot better in this respect than, for example, 2E.  But then, that is a low bar on this particular discussion, when 2E is about the descriptive text getting you to miss the flaws in the mechanics. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /></blockquote>