Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Evenglare" data-source="post: 6243250" data-attributes="member: 63245">What is this.. I don't even... You completely and utterly disregarded my pre-empt argument and said the exact thing that I rebutted. You aren't changing the rules or making them different, you are limiting them. I guess I should specify what I mean by change. I mean, alter the way a mechanic works in the game. When you disallow a spell or class or race or whatever you aren't changing anything about the rules regarding those races because they simply don't exist assuming you are to ban them. It's like lighting something on fire, then you reduce the fire. You haven't changed how fire works, you have simply made less of it. I agree with you on most other parts, but again you say X material is or should be easy to come by. Perhaps, but it's still reading the rules in a vacuum. In almost every thread discussing what is OP people seems to not take into account what players are doing in the world, or what the world is. It's just a nebulous void of theory. You know what? Butter probably is going to be hard to come by especially when it's made by hand. Where are you going to find butter when you are days deep into a dungeon? What about on the plane of fire, butter there? Again assuming butter IS easy to come by, is the wizard going to really say "screw it, let's get out of this dungeon", walk however many miles it is to the nearest town, buy butter then walk all the way back? I know most of this is anecdotal, and normally is not good evidence when trying to prove something, but the fact of the matter is that anecdotal evidence is REQUIRED while playing a roleplaying game. The whole damn thing is contingent on what the players experience in the world, not just a nebulous void of abstract numbers relating to mechanics. While I concede the is the best way of comparison in theory, never in any game, are you going to be looking specifically at numbers and nothing else in that context. The GM simply must use common sense on what is allowed and is not. I believe this is what you were trying to get at anyway and again, I agree. I guess I must be a narrativist rather than a gamist or simulationist.... /shrug</blockquote>

Verification