Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Neonchameleon" data-source="post: 7950213" data-attributes="member: 87792">I had no idea whether I was quoting you or someone you agreed with. Merely something relevant. If you had bothered to actually link to the post you were quoting with a context as the default quote function does then I would have quoted that.Words do not mean what you want them to mean simply because you pay them extra. If you want to talk about constraints then talk about constraints. Talk about things that prevent you or get in the way of you doing things. Not one thing you were talking about was about &quot;being compelled to avoid or perform a certain action&quot;. Also you specificially talked about &quot;in normal play&quot; - which means at the actual tabletop.Meanwhile I gave some examples of how the compulsions are lowest and 4e is thus the least constraining. And one of its advantages, contrary to your claims, is that 4e literally constrains me less than any other edition especially in normal play.&quot;In normal play&quot; also actually means in normal play - i.e. at the tabletop when the rules are working as intended. Not &quot;sitting at home kitbashing&quot; or even &quot;world building before the campaign starts&quot; - world building is a part of play but it is outside the timing of normal play.If we use what I think you mean - other editions provide more encouragement and that outside normal play - then I'd disagree but you actually have a case to answer if you say that. When you talk about constraints, and especially constraints in normal play you are making counter-factual claims.Repeating what you said on a previous occasion is not engagement. You decided to quote, I can only assume, yourself (a link again would have been nice) in the apparent belief that your post was flawless. Now as you are actually replying to my comment rather than letting off a pre-canned reply that I believe has already been rebutted engagement is practical.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Neonchameleon, post: 7950213, member: 87792"] I had no idea whether I was quoting you or someone you agreed with. Merely something relevant. If you had bothered to actually link to the post you were quoting with a context as the default quote function does then I would have quoted that. Words do not mean what you want them to mean simply because you pay them extra. If you want to talk about [I]constraints [/I]then talk about [I]constraints. [/I]Talk about things that prevent you or get in the way of you doing things. Not one thing you were talking about was about "being compelled to avoid or perform a certain action". Also you specificially talked about "in normal play" - which means at the actual tabletop. Meanwhile I gave some examples of how the compulsions are lowest and 4e is thus the least constraining. And one of its advantages, contrary to your claims, is that 4e literally constrains me less than any other edition especially in normal play. "In normal play" also actually means in normal play - i.e. at the tabletop when the rules are working as intended. Not "sitting at home kitbashing" or even "world building before the campaign starts" - world building is a part of play but it is outside the timing of normal play. If we use what I think you mean - other editions provide more [I]encouragement [/I]and that [I]outside normal play - [/I]then I'd disagree but you actually have a case to answer if you say that. When you talk about constraints, and [I]especially [/I]constraints in normal play you are making counter-factual claims. Repeating what you said on a previous occasion [I]is not engagement. [/I]You decided to quote, I can only assume, yourself (a link again would have been nice) in the apparent belief that your post was flawless. Now as you are actually replying to my comment rather than letting off a pre-canned reply that I believe has already been rebutted engagement is practical. [/QUOTE]

Verification