Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Balesir" data-source="post: 5677282" data-attributes="member: 27160">Coming up with an imaginative solution to an in-game problem is, if I understand it, the aim of your &quot;challenge the player&quot; brand of play, right?&nbsp; What would coming up with the same &quot;imaginative solution&quot; to five or six encounters in a row be?&nbsp; Praiseworthy play?&nbsp; Or spamming crap that the DM needs to step on?Coming up with tactics that work for a specific situation is good play; finding a sequence of actions that provide the same benefits for any given situation is skillful enough, but also represents a flaw in the rules that needs to be &quot;patched&quot;.&nbsp; If the DM is simply making justifications for decisions up, the rules modification is easy - none of the players could be sure what the rule was to begin with, so if it changes they can be none the wiser.&nbsp; When the players are explicitly allowed to know what rules they are playing to, on the other hand, the change must necessarily be made public.&nbsp;The first time it's found, it's good play - excellent, even.&nbsp; The sixth, tenth, twentieth or fiftieth time it's used, it's just exploiting a flaw in the rules that hasn't been fixed yet.Excellent tactics are, by their nature, situational; they require both a coup d'oueil and a coup de main.&nbsp; Repeated coup de main alone is a pretty good description of &quot;hacking&quot;, in actual fact <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />&nbsp;Except that one is published to be read between game sessions, the other is announced after the player has already committed their character to an action.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Balesir, post: 5677282, member: 27160"] Coming up with an imaginative solution to an in-game problem is, if I understand it, the aim of your "challenge the player" brand of play, right? What would coming up with the [U]same[/U] "imaginative solution" to five or six encounters in a row be? Praiseworthy play? Or spamming crap that the DM needs to step on? Coming up with tactics that work for a specific situation is good play; finding a sequence of actions that provide the same benefits for any given situation is skillful enough, but also represents a flaw in the rules that needs to be "patched". If the DM is simply making justifications for decisions up, the rules modification is easy - none of the players could be sure what the rule was to begin with, so if it changes they can be none the wiser. When the players are explicitly allowed to know what rules they are playing to, on the other hand, the change must necessarily be made public. The first time it's found, it's good play - excellent, even. The sixth, tenth, twentieth or fiftieth time it's used, it's just exploiting a flaw in the rules that hasn't been fixed yet. Excellent tactics are, by their nature, situational; they require both a [I]coup d'oueil[/I] and a [I]coup de main[/I]. Repeated [I]coup de main[/I] alone is a pretty good description of "hacking", in actual fact ;) Except that one is published to be read between game sessions, the other is announced after the player has already committed their character to an action. [/QUOTE]

Verification