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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 7695553" data-attributes="member: 48965">He isn't saying that... and you've provided no quotes where he does.Or you're so hung up on supporting your own view you're incorrectly reading intent that hasn't been stated.  External does not equate to not causally linked to the character's actions...No... again external circumstances does not necessarily equate to "not causally linked".  The external circumstances could wholly have come about because of your actions and that, IMO, is the flaw in your argument.Oh, and I haven't given you the benefit of the doubt because you've continually chosen to attribute your own conclusion to Monte and Charles when nothing they've said equates to what you are claiming.First time I've seen you state that it's your conjectured answer without invoking Monte's name...If you're interested in that fine but then why keep claiming it's what Monte and Charles are stating/concluding? When you have no proof of that?  Because internal circumstances are the fault of something within the character and that has the potential to makes players feel bad, embarrassed and/or the game less fun...  What you're missing is that external does not equate to non-causal.  it just means something internal to the character didn't cause it...See my answer above...He (Monte) never used the words non-causal... see how you do that, you are mis-stating what he said... he used the word external... not non-causal.To complicate things... doesn't mean it has to be "bigger" than missing and not killing your opponent this round (which would win the fight and make you a hero!!),  just different from not causing damage... In what language are big and different synonyms... it's not semantics it's being unclear in what you are expressing... but yes now that we've established you use different and big interchangeably we can move on...It is self-evident and pretty simple if you don't equate the word  "external" to mean "non-causal"... as you have continuously done, or is this more examples of semantics and these two words actually have the same meaning (like big and different apparently do) <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm    :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" />? And I still believe you are mis-stating his stance in confusing something being external having to be the same as non-causal...  It;s not semantics and words matter, especially when your whole argument rests on equating two words that don't mean the same thing with each other.That's great and I would have happily conversed about it if it hadn't been prefaced with your own interjections on why Monte believes something that you've not yet proven to be true.  If instead you had said hey... I pemerton think there aren't enough... X to accomplish Y... we'd have been discussing it already.  Instead you tried to draw on Cook for support of your argument, and when you do that I'm going to ask you to back your assertion up with proof.One of the "world" conceits of Numenera is that technology is poorly understood, scavenged from a mostly unknown past (along with aliens, other dimensions, etc.), haphazardly rejiggered for purposes it wasn't originally intended for and often dangerous in unknown ways. The difference is that in choosing to play Numenera you have already accepted the conceit that unknowable (to your character) causes can affect technology and equipment in weird and dangerous ways.  You haven't by default accepted the conceit that random, totally undetectable creatures (assuming they don't have some weird power to justify this) can appear out of thin air... IMO the second example strains credibility alot because it's too vague and too broad.  Also what is the actual in-game reason here?... there is an in-game reason for why the technology in Numenera is poorly understood and at times dangerous...what would be the in-game reason for the fact that enemies hold back their forces and perfectly hide them?</blockquote>

Verification