Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Faolyn" data-source="post: 9622791" data-attributes="member: 6915329">Yes, it's quite self-explanatory that he thinks that the GM and system should be working to defeat the players. Because I read the rest of that post and actually took that line in context.Ah, so here I learn that you're the type who takes only tiny parts of a greater whole and nitpicks about them. For instance, here you are trying to highlight "disinterested mechanic" while ignoring what he said the GM's goal should be and everything else I wrote in my prior posts. I'll copypaste again. So assume a disinterested mechanic, and the only GM fiat is giving a foe three attacks per round and an instakill weapon.None of these things are evidence of a disinterested mechanic (unless, as I said, the system allowed for a dodge or save against decapitation). They're all either luck or GM fiat. And most importantly of all, none of this has anything to do with the fact that he feels that the GM's job should be to defeat the players. Which is only acceptable in some types of games--and there's a very good chance that he feels that games that don't do this are wastes of time. They're slop.Not that these games are not to his taste, not that he actively hates those types of games; that they are objectively bad.And as someone who is a professional writer, he should know the difference between those two things and be able to write that difference within the confines of a tweet or forum post. "I feel that" only adds 9 characters, or 11 if tweets count spaces as characters. I wouldn't know.I don't like the idea of instakilling a PC, even if the rules say so. I find that to be unfun. That is not a type of game I want to play. See? That's easy to write.I also feel it safe to say that the only reason he wants a disinterested mechanic here to help him defeat the players is because he feels GM fiat is cheating. But if the rules say that he instakills a player, then it's all good. No, you feel that reading a few words in a sentence and ignoring the rest of the text is reading them in context. I do not. Therefore, there's really no reason to continue this conversation--it's clear you can't look at the entire picture for some reason when it comes to defending Mearls.</blockquote>

Verification